DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY AND THE ENHANCEMENT OF SOCIAL MOBILITY

 New technologies can be great disruptors. Disruption is non-neutral in its impacts: it redistributes market, social and political power. This in turn shifts social values and interactions. Yet the risk is that technology and the change it induces is simply seen as an exogenous force which can’t be shaped. (Painter & Bamfield)

The argument of this report takes a different approach: the

i.       Degree to which benefits of change are distributed and costs

ii.      Mitigated depends on collective institution building and adaptive

iii.       Public policy. If the infrastructure and the institutional

iv.      Environment is right then an inclusive and social mobility-rich form of technological change could be available to us. Benefits of new technology are to be distributed more widely, we have to act smartly through the public sector centrally and locally, communities, and the commercial world. The goal should be an inclusive social mobility where all have the ability to pursue and accomplish their personal and creative goals. Propose a goal of inclusive social mobility.

 Four core elements of social mobility:

o   A greater level of upward inter-generational absolute social mobility to align the people more closely with the best international performers.

o   Within generations, progression is needed within classes and income intervals – especially at the lower end and middle of the class/income distribution.

o   Wide status and class distinctions undermine inclusive social mobility. This implies the need for a more democratic distribution of power, income and wider resources (including assets).

o   Greater access to beneficial networks, institutions, and opportunities to learn and acquire formal skills is important as a means to greater upward mobility and individual advancement.

Greater mobility is not enough alone. Inclusive social mobility means that the individual (in a community context) has constant access to the social, educational, and economic resources that enable them to pursue their creative potential. It also means that status and class distinctions in society are diminished as these ultimately hinder the open realization of creative capabilities.

Social mobility and inequality are knotty problems but they shouldn’t be put in the ‘too difficult box despite disappointing levels of change over the last few decades. Fragmented learning settings, from school and beyond, to online learning communities and workplaces, could be brought together in a way that better meets the frustrated ambitions of many.

The ultimate goal is to replace the desire to create we have identified with a Power to Create. New technology blended with adaptive public policy is one of the means complex and uncertain and by no means the only set of changes that will be necessary of securing the type of social change that would a socially inclusive and upwardly mobile nation expect to see.

Technological and economic changes must ultimately be anchored in beneficial social change. Technological and economic changes rely on evolutionary public policy and institution building if greater social inclusion, engagement and mobility are to be secured. The macro economic benefits of new technology rather than the distribution of those benefits. In reality, the economic and social are related in a series of complex feedback loops. There is a need now to add a stronger social dimension to the public policy as it responds to and harnesses new technology. This aligns with broader government objectives around enhancing social mobility.

   By Segesela Blandina

       BAPRM 42663