What is a model for community-based technologies and arts? How can a place be structured to innovate for the local community within a community?

1. Appalachian School of Technologies & Arts
converging our yesterday, now & future
Proposed Steps & Structure

2. What is Community-based Innovation?
Very simply, invention + innovation to solve issues in the community. Other
drives for invention or innovation are secondary or not on the table.
For example:
Open Source Ecology
“Open Source Ecology is a network of
farmers, engineers, and supporters that
for the last two years has been creating
the Global Village Construction Set, an
open source, low-cost, high performance
technological platform that allows for the
easy, DIY fabrication of the 50 different
Industrial Machines that it takes to build
a sustainable civilization with modern
comforts. The GVCS lowers the barriers
to entry into farming, building, and
manufacturing and can be seen as a lifesize lego-like set of modular tools that
can create entire economies, whether in
rural Missouri, where the project was
founded, in urban redevelopment, or in
the developing world.”

3. Another model of community based innovation
Barefoot College
“Rural men and women irrespective of age, who are
barely literate or not at all, and have no hope of getting
even the lowest government job, are being trained to work
as day and night school teachers, doctors, midwives,
dentists, health workers, balsevikas, solar engineers, solar
cooker engineers, water drillers, hand pump mechanics,
architects, artisans, designers, masons, communicators,
water testers, phone operators, blacksmiths, carpenters,
computer instructors, accountants and kabaad-se-jugaad
professionals.”
“Barefoot College is a nongovernmental organization
that has been providing basic
services and solutions to
problems in rural
communities for more than
40 years, with the objective
of making them selfsufficient and sustainable.
These ‘Barefoot solutions’
can be broadly categorized
into the delivery of Solar
Electrification, Clean Water,
Education, Livelihood
Development, and Activism.
With a geographic focus on
the Least Developed
Countries (LDCs), we
believe strongly in
Empowering Women as
agents of sustainable
change.”

4. Another example (several slides):
Maker Lab
“Ownership
Avoid silos; federate data - don't try to own data. Be transparent. Foster an ecosystem where all
participants get rewarded, support all attempts at bettering communication
Triple Open: Open Data, Open Code, Open Participation
Allow ownership across all parties involved in all projects collectively, distribute work-load
collectively; let team members dictate and establish their own strengths on their own. License
free or open.
Design Practices
Brainstorming, sketching and iterative concept development are encouraged. Provide support for
ideation, respect and foster creativity and risk taking by taking smaller steps more often.
.

5. Wiki-Like
Everything should be a wiki. Everything should allow reverting. Deputize
participants to help. Disambiguate related content; duplicate persons and the like with
disambiguation pages.
Conversational
Encourage real time discourse, encourage collaboration and open-ended conversation.
Be humane. Be multi-modal and multi-gateway, multi-ligual and multi-faceted.
Velocity
Abide by agile development practices. Focus on one thing at a time, ship early and
often. Be your own most loyal users. Provide feedback mechanisms early on, for
team and stakeholders. Iterate quickly and often, take feedback and criticism and turn
good projects into great ones.
Courtesy of greenelement

6. Courtesy of Sifah
Community
Focus on caring for our own communities first, then and only
then do you grow outwards from our own community.
Remember to appreciate those around you, encourage and
validate the work of those around you.”
you.

7. How Can Community-Based
Innovation function?
A Proposal and Approach
1. Develop an instrument (method) or utilize a
pre-existing instrument to evaluate
community needs at the specific person,
place, or group level.
Courtesy of Collection
Agency

8. Who is the “community” that
needs assessed?
➔
➔
People or entity under $100k/year
(so small local businesses can get
included)
Top priority = lowest economic
third

9. What counts as a “need?”
The Basics

Other people

Food enough to get old enough to have more people

Clean enough water

Clean enough soil to plant

Stuff to plant to grow (or food from some other source)

Protection from the elements
Okay, not many of us these days would be happy with that list “being enough,” yet those
form a fairly basic list of how to ensure community survival.
Here is what that seems to take in the current American context OR:
The Real Deal (see the last slide for a list of references to back this up)
✔ Something meaningful for people to do together with other people
✔ Geographic access to other communities with relative ease
✔ Diverse economic possibilities, one economic sector does not dominate
✔ Diverse knowledge and specializations
✔ Political will to support the basics of and the real deal of community survival
✔ Ways to solve the issues that go along with the basics & the real deal of community
survival including educational, technological, creative & social structures

10. 2. Determine process for
prioritizing needs in order of
urgency
Include many voices
• Include a variety of democratic processes
• Includes the voices of those in need
•
Courtesy of Shawn Haynes and Pablito_TR_Fabio_M

11. 3. Gather to address needs
through invention and
innovation
Suggested approach of the Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts =
CBTA
Community-Based
Technologies and Arts!

12. The Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts is the
physical space for the gathering of people to apply
CBTA (Community-Based Technologies and Arts) to
local Basic Needs and Real Deals
●
●
●
●
●
●
Develops or uses instrument to assess and prioritize needs
Assembles people from all backgrounds interested or versed in
traditional, proven, or emerging technologies and arts to design,
plan, create, communicate, brainstorm, test responses
Assembles donated or loaned or bought resources needed to
address that need
Tests and disperses innovation to address need
Evaluates the process, the production, the creation, and the
implementation of the community-based
solution/invention/innovation
Adjusts any step in the process, the creation, and the
implementation based on feedback

13. Solutions and steps to CBTA solutions at the Appalachian
School of Technologies and Arts are Open Source and
protected
under Creative Commons licenses
In brief, it is a term applied to everything from software to art
to mechanical inventions to politics.
What is Open Source?
In short, the goal of open source is to share blueprints, code,
creation widely and without copyright or patent.
One way to ensure that a community-based solution is not
picked up and patented is to place it under a Creative
Commons license. More on the next slide.

14. Creative Commons

15. Creative Commons Licenses
Many factors to consider in licensing, but the main factors are:
1. Attribution Attribution. You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform your
copyrighted work — and derivative works based upon it — but only if they give credit the way
you request.
2. Noncommercial Noncommercial. You let others copy, distribute, display, and perform
your work — and derivative works based upon it — but for noncommercial purposes
only.
3. No Derivative Works No Derivative Works. You let others copy, distribute, display, and
perform only verbatim copies of your work, not derivative works based upon it.
4. Share Alike Share Alike. You allow others to distribute derivative works only under a license
identical to the license that governs your work.
Point 2 is the suggested mode for the Appalachian School of
Technologies and Arts

16. You walk through the door or get involved with the
Appalachian School of Technologies and Arts, you
have agreed to Open Source Non-Commercial
Why?
Stay focused on addressing community
needs
● Don't get caught up in assigning or
litigating bylines or credit
●

17. But what if some corporation makes one
adjustment and steals “your” plans and uses
them?
Larry Summers (Harvard President, speaking to the Winklevoss brothers who said they
actually invented Facebook rather than Mark Zuckerberg): “Everyone at Harvard is
inventing something. Harvard undergraduates believe that inventing a job is better
than finding a job. So I suggest again that the two of you come up with a new
project.” – The Social Network, 2010.
Did the invention and/or innovation serve local community
Basic Needs or Real Deal?
If yes, then move on to working together
on inventing and innovating a new project for the
next Basic Need or Real Deal.
Stay focused on the mission!!
That is why we are here (positive)
You can't fight the people with big pockets so don't (you you you is not
why we are here; it's we we we. If that doesn't work for you, ASTA is not
the right place for you.)

18. But again, why free?!
●
●
●
●
●
Platitudes like people only value what they pay for...not TRUE!!!
People value going to church and they don't have to pay to do that.
Education is free in the United States from Kindergarten till 12th grade, because
in the 1950s and 1960s we as a society understood you needed at least a high
school education to make it in life as we know it.
People value libraries
People value free concerts, free art walks, free public art, “freeways” (no toll!),
etc.
Free is what it has to be for local people so everyone can be welcome
and everyone can participate.
Photos courtesy of: Dan Gore, CallieDel Boa in & out, SweeTee10_56

19. How will you fund it then?
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
Like the places listed on this presentation fund theirs
ASTA will be a non-profit
ASTA will not take any money from government agencies and will be
free of party politics
ASTA will engage active fundraising
ASTA will partner with willing partners as a block for non-gov't grants
and proposals
ASTA will be funded largely by large donors
ASTA will not compete with local groups for funds—it will not pilfer
your sources
A mix of volunteer labor and paid labor
Community involvement

20. Who's gonna start??
More about me here:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/crystalallenecook
Committed to:
Community assessment research
Planning
Friendraising and fundraising
Implementation
Stewardship

21. Next Steps:
1. Developing an instrument for or utilizing a community needs
assessment at the individual household and business level
2. Conducting the assessment
3. Developing an instrument or utilizing an instrument to prioritize
community needs
4. Assembling people with an interest in or involved in traditional,
proven, or emerging technologies and arts to invent and innovate based
on these needs and documenting this process
5. Procurring a place, funds, and resources for these people to work in
and documenting this process (including community reactions, funder
reactions, etc.)
6. Developing or utilizing a workshare model for people to work from
(the Maker Lab model comes quickly to mind)
7. Assessing what progress or success or failure would mean in terms of
this project
8. Evaluating steps and the process along the way
9. Assessing this pilot of community based technologies and arts as a
replicable model

22. Are you in?
Go to
AppalachianSchoolofTechnologiesandArts.org
to learn more and
to get involved!

23. References: Innovation, and Innovation & the Case for Physical Proximity
Ahlstrom, D. (2010). Innovation and Growth: How Business Contributes to Society. Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(3), 11-24.
Barczak, G., & McDonough, E. F. (2003). Leading Global Product Development Teams. Research Technology Management, 46(6), 14-18.
Bernstein, Radosevich, Clesca, Masco. (2008). Personality Predictors of Teamwork Behaviors and Decision-Making Style. Review of Business
Research, Vol. 8 Issue 6, 205-210.
Clason, D., & Dormody, T. (1994). Analyzing Data Measured by Individual Likert-Type Items. Journal of Agricultural Education, 35(4), 3135.
Coyle-Shapiro, J. A., & Conway, N. (2005). Exchange Relationships: Examining Psychological Contracts and Perceived Organizational
Support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(4), 774-781. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.90.4.774
Ferrin, D. L., Dirks, K. T., & Shah, P. P. (2006). Direct and indirect effects of third-party relationships on interpersonal trust. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 91(4), 870-883. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.91.4.870
Gibson, C. B., & Gibbs, J. L. (2006). Unpacking the Concept of Virtuality: The Effects of Geographic Dispersion, Electronic Dependence,
Dynamic Structure, and National Diversity on Team Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 51(3), 451-495.
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B., Jr. (2003). A Very Brief Measure of the Big Five Personality Domains. Journal of Research in
Personality, 37, 504-528.
Jan de Leede, Karolus O. Kraan, den Hengst, M., & van Hooff, M. L. M. (2008). Conditions for innovation behaviour of virtual team
members: a 'high-road' for internationally dispersed virtual teams. Journal of eWorking, 2(1), 22-46.
Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Leidner, D. E. (1999). Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams. Organization Science, 10(6), 791-815.
Langfred, C. W., & Moye, N. A. (2004). Effects of Task Autonomy on Performance: An Extended Model Considering Motivational,
Informational, and Structural Mechanisms. Journal of Applied Psychology, 89(6), 934-945. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.89.6.934
Sobel Lojeski, K. (2006). Virtual Distance: A Proposed Model for the Study of Virtual Work. Dissertation.
Lojeski, K., Reilly, R., & Dominick, P. (2006). The Role of Virtual Distance in Innovation and Success. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06) (pp. 25c-25c). Presented at the Proceedings of the 39th Annual
Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS'06), Kauia, HI, USA. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2006.484
Lynn, G., & Reilly, R. (2002). How to build a blockbuster. Harvard Business Review, 80(10), 18.
McCarthy, I. P., Tsinopoulos, C., Allen, P., & Rose-Anderssen, C. (2006). New Product Development as a Complex Adaptive System of
Decisions. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 23(5), 437-456. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2006.00215.x
Medcof, J. W. (2009). Managing Global Innovation. Edited by R. Boutellier, O. Gassmann and M. von Zedtwitz. R&D Management, 39(2),
225-226. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2009.00551.x
Milton, F. Innovation Survey 52. London, Price WaterHouse. (2003).

24. Molina-Morales, F. X., & Martínez-Fernández, M. T. (2009). Too much love in the neighborhood can hurt: how an excess of
intensity and trust in relationships may produce negative effects on firms. Strategic Management Journal, 30(9), 10131023.
Pauleen, D. J. (2003). An Inductively Derived Model of Leader-Initiated Relationship Building with Virtual Team Members.
Journal of Management Information Systems, 20(3), 227-256.
Ruppel, C. P., & Harrington, S. J. (2000). The Relationship of Communication, Ethical Work Climate, and Trust to Commitment
and Innovation. Journal of Business Ethics, 25(4), 313-328.
Salkind, N. J. (2010). Encyclopedia of Research Design. SAGE.
Santos, J., Doz, Y., & Williamson, P. (2004). Is Your Innovation Process Global? MIT Sloan Management Review, 45(4), 31-37.
Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (2005). Managing Innovation, 3rd Edition, John Wiley & sons Ltd, UK.
Vargas-Hernández, J. G., Noruzi, M. R., & Narges Sariolghalam. (2010). Risk or Innovation, Which One Is Far more Preferable in
Innovation Projects? International Journal of Marketing Studies, 2(1), 233-244.
Bechtoldt MN, De Dreu CK, Nijstad BA, Choi HS. Motivated information processing, social tuning, and group creativity. J Pers
Social Psychology. 2010 Oct;99(4):622-37.
Garcia, R. and Calantone, R. (2002) A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a
literature review. The Journal of Product Innovation Management. 19: 110-132.
Hamel, G. (2000). Waking Up IBM: how a gang of unlikely rebels transformed big blue. Harvard Business Review. 78 (4): 137 144
Jenkins, R. V. (1987). Images and Enterprise: Technology and the American Photographic Industry, 1839-1925. The Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Krause, Peter. Fifty Years of Kodachrome, Modern Photography, 49:11, 47 – 114, October, 1985.
Anderson, P & Tushman, M.L. (1990). Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A
Cyclical Model of Technological Change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(4), 604-633.
Blu Buhs, J. (2010). Wildmen on the Cyberfrontier: The Computer Geek as an Iteration in the
American Wildman Lore Cycle. Folklore, 121(1), 61-80.
Brubach, Holly. ‘‘Fear and Clothing: How the Cold War Sent Fashion into the Stratosphere.’’
New York Times Magazine Fall 2008, Style: Women’s Fashion: 214–15.
Downes, Lawrence. "A New Magazine's Rebellious Credo: Void the Warranty! - New York
Times." The New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 12 June 2005. Web. 8 May 2011.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/12/opinion/12sun3.html>.
Fueller F., Muehlbacher H., Matzler K., Jawecki G., “Consumer Empowerment through Internet
Based Co-creation.” Journal of Management Information Systems. Winter 2009–10, Vol. 26, No. 3, pp. 71–102.
Gelber, Steven M. Hobbies: Leisure and the Culture of Work in America. New York: Columbia
UP, 1999.

25. Headlee, Celeste. "Are You Sure You Own Your Stuff? : NPR." NPR : National Public Radio :
News & Analysis, World, US, Music & Arts : NPR. Web. 3 May 2011. <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92508461>.
Honey, M., Siegel, E. “The Maker Movement.” Education Week. 2/2/2011, Vol. 30 Issue 19, p32
25, 2p.
Jalopy, Mister. "Makezine.com: Owner's Manifesto." DIY Projects, Inspiration, How-tos, Hacks,
Mods & More @ Makezine.com - Tweak Technology to Your Will. Web. 3 May 2011. <http://makezine.com/04/ownyourown/>.
"O'Reilly Media: About O'Reilly." O'Reilly Media - Technology Books, Tech Conferences, IT
Courses, News. Web. 10 May 2011. <http://oreilly.com/about/>.
Smith, Rochelle. “Antislick to Postslick: DIY Books and Youth Culture Then and Now.” The
Journal of American Culture. Volume 33, Number 3, September 2010.
Von Hippel, Eric. “Horizontal Innovation Networks-By and For Users” Industrial & Corporate
Change, Apr2007, Vol. 16 Issue 2, p293-315, 23p
Wosniak, Steve. IWoz: Computer Geek to Cult Icon. W.W. Norton, 2007.

26. References on Place, Appalachia, Economics, Technologies, Single Sector Economies, etc
Callon, Michel. The Law of the Markets. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, 1998.
Mirowski, Philip. Science-Mart: Privatizing American Science. Cambridge: Harvard, 2011.
Porter, Theodore. “Quantification and the Accounting Ideal in Science.” Social Studies of Science 22 (1992): 633-652.
Ravetz, Jerome R. Scientific Knowledge and its Social Problems. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971.
Winner, Langdon. The Whale and the Reactor: a Search for Limits in an Age of High Technology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1986.
Breslau, Daniel. “Economics Invents the Economy: Mathematics, Statistics, and Models in the Work of Irving Fisher and Wesley Mitchell.”
Theory and Society 32, no. 3 (2003): 379-411.
Callon, Michel. “What Does it Mean to Say That Economics is Performative?” In Do Economists Make Markets? On the Performativity of
Economics, edited by Donald MacKenzie, Fabian Muniesa and Lucia Siu, 311-357. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2007.
Desrosieres, Alain. “How to Make Things Which Hold Together: Social Science, Statistics and the State.” Sociology of the Sciences 15 (1990):
195-218.
Douglas, Mary and Aaron Wildavsky. Risk and Culture. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984.
Elam, Mark and Margareta Bertilsson. “Consuming, Engaging and Confronting Science: The Emerging Dimensions of Scientific Citizenship.”
European Journal of Social Theory 6, no. 2 (2003): 233- 251.
Feenberg, Andrew. Questioning Technology. New York: Routledge, 1999.
Gieryn, Thomas. “Boundary-Work and the Demarcation of Science from Non-Science: Strains and Interests in Professional Ideologies of
Scientists.” American Sociological Review 48, no. 6 (1983): 781-95.
Hines, Lawrence G. “Precursors to Cost-Benefit Analysis in Early United States Public Investment Projects.” Land Economics 49 (1973): 310317.
Jasanoff, Sheila, ed. States of Knowledge: Science, Power, and Political Culture. New York: Routledge, 2005.
Jasanoff, Sheila. The Fifth Branch: Science Advisers as Policymakers. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994.
May, Bruce E., Jeng-Chung V. Chen, and Kuang-Wei Wen. “The Differences of Regulatory Models and Internet Regulation in the European
Union and the United States,” Information & Communications Technology Law 13, no. 3 (2004): 259.
Porter, Theodore M. Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. 2nd ed.
Princeton: Princeton University Press,
1995.
Scott, James. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press,
1998.
Stone, Deborah. Policy Paradox: the Art of Political Decision Making. New York: Norton, 2001.
Vaughan, Diane. “The Role of the Organization in the Production of Techno-Scientific Knowledge.” Social Studies of Science 29, no. 6 (1999):
913-943.
Bell, Shannon. “‘There Ain’t No Bond in Town Like There Used to Be’: The Destruction of Social Capital in the West Virginia Coal Fields.”
Sociological Forum 24, no. 3 (Sept 2009): 631-657.
Cunningham-Sabot, Emmanuele. “Shrinking Cities in France and Great Britain: A Silent Process?” In The Future of Shrinking Cities:
Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Berkeley, CA, February 2007, by the Center for Global
Metropolitan Studies, 17-28. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development and the Shrinking Cities
International Research
Network, 2009.

27. Turning Nonrenewable Natural Resources into Sustainable Wealth for West Virginia. West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy. January 2012.
Feenberg, Andrew. “From Essentialism to Constructivism: Philosophy of Technology at the Crossroads,” adapted from Questioning Technology.
London: Routledge, 1999, 183 – 236.
Gordon, Tia. NSF Brings More Minorities to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics—STEM Fields. http://www.ihep.org/pressroom/news_release-detail.cfm?id=96 (accessed
October 30, 2013)
Ravetz, Jerry (Jerome). “The Post-normal Sciences of Precaution.” Conference on Uncertainty and Precaution in Environmental Management.
Water Science & Technology, 52, no. 6 (2005): 11- 17.
The World Bank, Europe and Central Asia Unit. Monotowns: Paths to Resilience: A Brief Review of International Experiences with Urban
Regeneration, 2010.Di John, Jonathan. “Is There Really a Resource Curse? A Critical Survey of Theory and Evidence.” Global Governance 17,
no. 2 (2011): 167-184.
Duncan, Cynthia. Worlds Apart: Why Poverty Persists in Rural America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1999.
Einsiedel, E., E. Jelsøe and T. Breck. “Publics at the Technology Table: The Consensus Conference in Denmark, Canada, and Australia.” Public
Understanding of Science 10, no. 1 (2001): 83-98.
Fisher, Stephen L., and Barbara Ellen Smith. Eds. Transforming Places: Lessons from Appalachia. Champaign-Urbana: University of Illinois
Press, 2012.
Freudenburg, William. “Addictive Economies: Extractive Industries and Vulnerable Localities in a Changing World Economy.” Rural Sociology
57, no. 5 (1991): 305-332.
Hughes, Thomas P. “The Evolution of Large Technological Systems.” In The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the
Sociology and History of Technology. Edited by Wiebe Bijker, Thomas Hughes, and Trevor Pinch, 51-82. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1987.
Leadbetter, David. “Single-Industry Resource Communities: 'Shrinking,' and the New Crisis of Hinterland Economic Development.” In The
Future of Shrinking Cities: Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Berkeley, CA, February 2007, by the
Center for Global Metropolitan Studies, 89-100. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development and the Shrinking Cities
International Research Network, 2009.
Ledet, Richard. “Correlates of Corruption.” Public Integrity 13, no. 2 (2011): 149-162.
Mitchell, Timothy. Carbon Democracy: Political Power in the Age of Oil. New York: Verso, 2011.
Nelkin, Dorothy. Dangerous Diagnostics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994.
Nelkin, Dorothy. “The Political Impact of Technical Expertise.” Social Studies of Science 5, no. 1 (1975): 35-54.
Nowotny, Helga. “Dilemma of Expertise: Democratizing Expertise and Socially Robust Knowledge” Science and Public Policy 30, no. 3 (June
2003).
Pallagst, Karina. “Shrinking Cities in the United States of America: Three Cases, Three Planning Stories.” In The Future of Shrinking Cities:
Problems, Patterns and Strategies of Urban Transformation in a Global Context, Berkeley, CA, February 2007, by the Center for Global
Metropolitan Studies, 81-90. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and Regional Development and the Shrinking Cities International Research
Network, 2009.
Popper, Karl R. The Open Society and Its Enemies: The Spell of Plato. Vol. 1. New Jersey: Princeton UP, 1966.
Popper, Karl. The Open Society and Its Enemies: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx, and the Aftermath. Vol. 2. New Jersey: Princeton UP,
1966.

28. Creating an Economic Diversification Trust Fund: Turning Nonrenewable Natural Resources into Sustainable Wealth for West
Virginia. West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy. January 2012.
Feenberg, Andrew. “From Essentialism to Constructivism: Philosophy of Technology at the Crossroads,” adapted from Questioning
Technology. London: Routledge, 1999, 183 – 236.
Gordon, Tia. NSF Brings More Minorities to Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics—STEM Fields.
http://www.ihep.org/press-room/news_release-detail.cfm?id=96 (accessed October 30, 2013)
Ravetz, Jerry (Jerome). “The Post-normal Sciences of Precaution.” Conference on Uncertainty and Precaution in Environmental
Management. Water Science & Technology, 52, no. 6 (2005): 11- 17.
The World Bank, Europe and Central Asia Unit. Monotowns: Paths to Resilience: A Brief Review of International Experiences with
Urban Regeneration, 2010.