[Paper Review] A New Classification of Technologies

Mario Coccia|arXiv (Cornell University)|Dec 11, 2017

Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting5 citations

TL;DR

This paper proposes a novel taxonomy of technologies based on their interaction dynamics within complex systems, drawing analogies from ecological relationships. It classifies technologies into four types—parasitism, commensalism, mutualism, and symbiosis—offering a theoretical framework to predict coevolutionary pathways and system-wide technological evolution.

ABSTRACT

This study here suggests a classification of technologies based on taxonomic characteristics of interaction between technologies in complex systems that is not a studied research field in economics of technical change. The proposed taxonomy here categorizes technologies in four typologies, in a broad analogy with the ecology: 1) technological parasitism is a relationship between two technologies T1 and T2 in a complex system S where one technology T1 benefits from the interaction with T2, whereas T2 has a negative side from interaction with T1; 2) technological commensalism is a relationship between two technologies in S where one technology benefits from the other without affecting it; 3) technological mutualism is a relationship in which each technology benefits from the activity of the other within complex systems; 4) technological symbiosis is a long-term interaction between two (or more) technologies that evolve together in complex systems. This taxonomy systematizes the typologies of interactive technologies within complex systems and predicts their evolutionary pathways that generate stepwise coevolutionary processes of complex systems of technology. This study here begins the process of generalizing, as far as possible, critical typologies of interactive technologies that explain the long-run evolution of technology. The theoretical framework developed here opens the black box of the interaction between technologies that affects, with different types of technologies, the evolutionary pathways of complex systems of technology over time and space. Overall, then, this new theoretical framework may be useful for bringing a new perspective to categorize the gradient of benefit to technologies from interaction with other technologies that can be a ground work for development of more sophisticated concepts to clarify technological and economic change in human society.

Motivation & Objective

• To address the lack of systematic classification of technology interactions in the economics of technical change.
• To develop a theoretical framework that explains how different interaction types influence long-term technological evolution.
• To systematize the typologies of interactive technologies within complex systems for improved understanding of coevolutionary processes.
• To generalize critical interaction types that shape the gradient of benefits technologies receive from one another.
• To open the 'black box' of technology interactions, clarifying their role in shaping technological and economic change over time and space.

Proposed method

• Adapts ecological concepts—parasitism, commensalism, mutualism, and symbiosis—to model interactions between technologies in complex systems.
• Defines four interaction types based on the net benefit or cost to each technology involved in a dyadic relationship.
• Applies the taxonomy to analyze evolutionary pathways in technology systems, emphasizing stepwise coevolution.
• Uses theoretical modeling to map how interaction types influence the long-term development of complex technological systems.
• Establishes a conceptual framework that links interaction types to observable patterns of technological change and system evolution.
• Draws analogies from biological ecosystems to formalize the dynamics of technology coevolution in socio-technical systems.

Experimental results

Research questions

• RQ1 How can technology interactions within complex systems be systematically classified based on their mutual effects?
• RQ2 What are the distinct evolutionary pathways generated by different types of technology interactions?
• RQ3 How do parasitic, commensal, mutualistic, and symbiotic relationships between technologies shape long-term system evolution?
• RQ4 In what ways do interaction types influence the gradient of benefits that technologies derive from one another?
• RQ5 How can ecological analogies improve the understanding of coevolutionary processes in technological systems?

Key findings

• The taxonomy identifies four distinct interaction types: parasitism, commensalism, mutualism, and symbiosis, each with unique impact on technological evolution.
• Technological parasitism occurs when one technology benefits at the expense of another, creating asymmetric dependency.
• Commensalism describes a relationship where one technology benefits without affecting the other, indicating non-disruptive integration.
• Mutualism involves reciprocal benefits between technologies, driving synergistic development and system-wide advancement.
• Symbiosis represents long-term, coevolving relationships where technologies evolve together, often leading to system stability and innovation.
• The framework enables prediction of coevolutionary trajectories by classifying interaction types, offering a tool for analyzing complex technological systems.