Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
A Zambian Prototype
Lynn Ilon
lynnilon@snu.ac.kr
Seoul National University
M’zizi Kantini
Chief Learning Officer
Global Knowledge Institute, Zambia
This paper centers around the growing importance of learning and its
economics for development. Yet, the parameters for such learning are
rapidly changing and being redefined. This paper first describes these
changing learning environments: knowledge is being redefined in a world
of Knowledge Economics and accumulating digital knowledge; societal
well-being is being rethought away from industrial output; networks of
knowledge redefine the nexus of local and global knowledge; and
collective learning expands the possibilities of innovation and
creativity. Second, this new learning environment raises questions about
old education assumptions which are explored: sustainability in light of
networks and social capital, local knowledge in view of linked global
knowledge networks, expert knowledge in view of collaborative and
contextual knowledge and educational resources in light of networks and
the decreased need for physical campuses. Finally, the paper describes a
learning ecosystem which is being prototyped in Zambia which is
designed around the new parameters and usurps many of old
frameworks for a sustainable, locally relevant, world-class research and
learning environment built around a local, national and international
network.
1
Old suppositions of how learning does and should occur are being substantially
are now giving way to networks of learning that are driven by the laws of social
such a world, it is possible to rethink the role of “local knowledge” and to imagine a
communities and countries where existing education systems are poorly funded, of
little relevance to their communities, or where members cannot access systems that
establishing the changing parameters of learning and then presents the case of the
Much has been written about an emerging knowledge economy, but a linked
learning (Araya & Peters, 2010; Archibugi & Lundvall, 2013). Several trends and
lines of research inquiry are converging with respect to learning. The notion of
knowledge is rapidly changing from the simple notion of the accumulation of facts
2
and procedures to the notion of knowledge as dynamic and contextual (Allen, 2001;
Pu, Lin, Song, & Liu, 2011). The role of technology has opened up the ways in
which knowledge is built collaboratively (Downes, 2010; Royal Society [The], 2011).
This, in turn, is giving ways to new thinking about how people learn both in the
networks (Davidson-Hunt, 2006; Nieves & Osorio, 2013). While much of this
appears to involve innovation from, about and for wealthy countries, a close
examination of their characteristics and attributes reveals just how profoundly they
change the development environment and prospects for poorly resourced countries.
This section reviews several of these changing environments and their most salient
characteristics.
Notions of who can be educated, whose knowledge “counts,” and how valuable
one’s knowledge is are largely based on an older view of knowledge – as (1) a scarce
these views are quickly being replaced by a view that knowledge is a cheap, ever-
This shift in the concept of knowledge creates a substantial new environment for
thinking about knowledge as a resource – who owns it, who controls, who has access
3
to it and who can use it to better their lives and the lives of those around them.
There are several characteristics of knowledge that stand in sharp contrast to either
reproduced, it can be spread with little cost and used widely by lots of people
without denying anyone else the use of the (knowledge) resource. It accumulates
(rather than depletes), thus creates its own supply (more knowledge from which to
inherently difficult to own and control and, if one tries to own and control
knowledge, it tends to lose its value unless a strict set of laws and regulations can be
built around it to protect it – also increasingly difficult to enforce (Blakeley, Lewis, &
accessible to growing numbers of people around the world and because it is the
basis upon which new ideas, creativity and innovations are built, the chance to build
such new ideas is widening away from those who had rather exclusive access to the
reports) and to the wider world. Facts and procedures are now made widely
available soon after their discovery and a diverse set of people are free to evaluate
4
Rethinking Societal Well-Being
in poor communities and countries, the value that can be made from this knowledge
toward societal welfare is now a focus of much research (Fitoussi, Sen, & Stiglitz,
2010; Fleurbaey, 2009; Giovannini, Hall, Morrone, & Giulia, 2009; Stiglitz, Sen, &
Fitoussi, 2009). This is because the shift in thinking that societal well-being was
routed in the accumulation of wealth and goods (industrial output) has shifted to the
notion that it is created through the ability to be innovative on how people think
about how to use their energies – including how to use material resources.
Whereas the old idea of societal well-being was rooted in the notion that a society
should accumulate and grow "capital" resources largely through industrial output,
the new notion of how society builds its well-being is founded on the view that it is
human ideas and creativity that move societies forward (Aghion & Armendariz de
Aghion, 2006; Howkins, 2002; Romer, 1991). The invention of the printing press,
the idea of a wheel or sailing ships or the ability to navigate by reading the stars are
all ideas spawned from human creativity that moved the world forward. Some of
these ideas do build industrial output, but others simply improve lives on a daily
conference of the World Bank in 1990 (Romer, 1991). Although Romer could see that
ideas could substantially change the trajectory of a society, it was also the
5
"economic" characteristics of ideas that intrigued him. For the ways that knowledge
is built, exchanged, shared and distributed is wholly unlike that of physical products
or even services (such as getting one's car repaired or hair cut) (Cortright, 2001;
Thus, for low resourced communities, the chance to use what resources are
world, has raised the possibility of attracting value to such communities and
increasing value primarily through the resource of innovation, ideas and creativity.
But such value generation cannot occur unless the flow-through of ideas is
themselves, but unless they are linked to a broader world of financial transactions,
industrialized world to a poorer world (Arndt, 1987). But a newer idea comes from
the notion that the world is interlinked and the well-being of one part of the world is
linked to another part. Global movements of climate, disease and migration were the
first recognized links (Miller, 2000), added to this was the notion that weak states
posed a particular global threat (Rice, 2006; Woods, 2005). Increasingly, however,
6
there is a notion that the world is held together through other kinds of links such a
World Bank, 2013) and that these links can either have positive or negative
consequences.
theory (Barabási & Frangos, 2002). But the science of social networks is an off-shoot
that studies the ways that knowledge is being transmitted, built, sustained and
grown in an increasingly global manner (Benkler, 2007; Christakis & Fowler, 2009;
Nieves & Osorio, 2013). In this view, each node (community – whether physically,
does not disappear) whereas the province of contextual knowledge (many possible
applications and solutions depending upon the context) is rapidly growing and
becoming much more robust. In this instance, “local” quickly becomes relevant and
disease, terrorism, financial contagion, refugees, political instability, etc. are resolved
7
knowledge becomes global wisdom and local knowledge has value both locally and
globally.
Within this new context of knowledge, networks and societal well-being is the
the economics of knowledge is the study of how knowledge creates value – with or
characteristics of knowledge that set it far apart from the production of material and
Unlike physical items, ideas can be spread among people without much cost.
Whereas physical items always take nearly the same amount of resources to
duplicate1, ideas, once built, can be spread in vast networks at nearly no cost.
Physical goods (or services) can usually only be used by one person at a time (or are
consumed and never used again). But ideas can be used by millions of people
overall demand (at least for the moment) but the use of new knowledge creates
demand for new knowledge and also is the supply for the creation of new
1
And sometimes those resources come at increasing costs as those resources are either
depleted or more difficult to acquire. This is known as increasing returns to scale.
Knowledge, on the other hand, while often very expensive to build initially (lots of time
and brain power, often from highly skilled people), it is almost cost-free to duplicate.
Thus, knowledge has decreasing returns to scale.
8
knowledge - knowledge creates its own supply and demand. A physical resource
depletes natural resources and requires more resources to be used to replace what
has been used. But new knowledge just adds to existing knowledge in an endless
to build new ideas and innovations. Although knowledge, per se, is a far cry from
collective learning), it is, nevertheless, the building blocks upon which such
creativity is founded.
New Learning Sciences (Sawyer, 2006). The New Learning Sciences began in the
sociology, and other scientific disciplines. As they closely studied children's learning,
scientists discovered that instructionism was deeply flawed (Papert, 1993). By the
1990s, after about twenty years of research, researchers concluded that learning is
not the acquisition of a collection of facts about the world, and procedures for how to
solve problems. It is not memorizing and repeating facts and procedures beginning
from simpler to complex ones under the instruction of an all-knowing subject expert
2
Although this endless resource is not without its own challenges. See Weinberger (2011b)
for a good overview of how the accumulation and access to knowledge through networks
is reshaping how we manage knowledge and think about expertise.
9
who, in the end, measures the success of learning by finding out how many of these
facts and procedures students have put in their heads (Sawyer, 2006). This is not
relevance of, what UNESCO (2005) called, “the unjustified violence often imposed
by others (family, school and society) to ensure these cognitive efforts and the whole
set of punishments that has for too long accompanied learning.” Rigid divisions of
knowledge were rethought as were the evaluation methods which were based on the
the material nature of the environment within which this occurs such as print and
digital media. Accordingly, the new learning research has shown that in the current
order is required (Bereiter, 2002; Drucker, 1993). Field (2006) argues that the new
education order is lifelong learning rather than the one-off dose of school and college
10
capital. This is devaluing lifelong learning as a concept of reality (Field,
2006, p. 3).
learning creativity which builds on this learning research. The need to have people
who can build knowledge, be creative and innovative is consistent with the
and its rigid structures are giving way to a more informal networked view of
education (Chatti, Jarke, & Frosch-Wilke, 2007; Jarvela, Naykki, Laru, & Luokkanen,
2007).
These diverse new parameters of learning are converging from various fields of
Economics, Technology, and Learning but are all held together by the study of Social
Network Theory. In a world where knowledge can easily be digitized and spread
around the world using electronic networks, the building, diffusing and access to
knowledge is networked and the means by which this is done is social. This, in turn,
raises new questions about the old precepts about development and learning
systems. The old view of development as poor countries patterning the model of
wealthy countries (Arndt, 1987) is giving way to a view of ideas as the building
block of social progress (Romer, 1993). The explosion of access to knowledge and its
attendant growth explained by social network theory (Tapscott & Williams, 2012;
11
Weinberger, 2011b) provides us with alternative means of viewing learning. Both
Social networks are not exclusively technological – they exist in all groupings of
people. But their unique characteristics give some ideas of how knowledge is
creating a new way of sustaining a valuable resource – the ability to innovate, create
emerging from at least three theories, namely, the social network, social capital and
complexity theories.
community that affects beliefs or behaviors – the causal pressures inherent in a social
themselves to being sustainable. Individuals can join such networks and make
contributions with little effort and without substantial managerial effort. This makes
rewarding as such networks are efficiently organized by their nature (Barabasi, 2005;
designed, social networks can be complex, collective and adaptive. That is, they
adapt to emerging knowledge and that new knowledge effects a total “eco-system.”
12
The knowledge changes the environment of knowledge. The entire system of
environment – the very essence of sustainability. This very characteristics means that
such systems can be self-organizing – adding and dropping members, growing and
spontaneously emerge, without being designed from the outside. Many such
systems exist on the web and, for cultures that thrive and adapt as the world
globalizes, it could be said that they successfully adopt aspects of complex systems
Social Capital theory is the study of norms and networks that enable collective
action and facilitate mutual benefits (Woolcock, 1988). This is also a concept of social
networks. The idea is that people who work together using some collective cohesion,
build collective norms, values and identities and thus, benefit from this collective
action and meaning. Since collective building and collective benefits are linked, the
actions contribute to sustainability. The World Bank identifies five key dimensions
of social capital: Groups and Networks - collections of individuals that promote and
elements of interpersonal behavior which fosters greater cohesion and more robust
13
development by enhancing participation of the marginalized; and Information and
Communication - breaks down negative social capital and also enables positive
that is social in nature and continuously creates, evaluates and adapts new
sustainability is about reconciling ideas and practices at local and global level, within
a given social context. Second, it suggests that social capacity is central - social
contexts have varying capacities of trust, reciprocity, relationships, and norms and
the participation and engagement of everyone’s behavior and ideas to have freedom
14
coexistence and plurality of ideas. Adaptive Organic Growth means that the learning
with the same endemic social patterns found in all complex adaptive systems.
Ownership implies that the learning process has a community participation that
fairly benefits and is influenced by each member. Everyone has a rightful claim.
sustainability, old truths are now open to question. If a sustainable learning system
culture-specific areas.
specific, having value not far beyond the boundaries of a given community or region.
states:
15
international knowledge system generated by universities, research
institutions and private firms. It is the basis for local-level decision
making in agriculture, health care, food preparation, education,
natural-resource management, and a host of other activities in rural
communities (World Bank Group, n.d.).
and practices that pertains to the first known dwellers of a given geographical area
and such inhabitants are “usually small tribal people of non-European descent and
without elaborate political structures – who for decades, even centuries, have been
and rigid rather than dynamic and evolving, further perpetuating the fallacious
notion that local knowledge only belongs to tribal peoples with artless technologies,
with little economic sophistication and existing largely outside the world market
One way of viewing local knowledge at a global level has been through
commercial eyes. What has been produced or known locally sometimes has
(Barsh, 2001; McCorkle, 1989). In this view, local knowledge is “extractive” and
patented an Indian variety of wheat, “Nap Hal” and was assigned a patent number
in Munich by the European Patent Office in 2003. This patent was only revoked by
16
the same office because of the active Campaign against Patent on Life as well as
against Biopiracy in India. Shiva (n.d.) notes that this is part of the larger scheme of
corporations pirating the collective innovation of farmers in breeding crops that are
A more recent view has been to see the world as interconnected with flows of
trends, migration and technology moving across borders in a hub and nodes. The
interaction is bidirectional and what affects one, affects the entire system. Thus, what
is global is a combination of the various locals (Fischer, 2000). Grins et al. suggest
that this approach is part of viewing development through a systems lens rather
than a linear planning lens (2011). The system is globally linked. Thus, local is no
longer local, but part of a global network of resilience and solutions. Cornwall (2002)
suggests that at least part of the success of this approach lies with the participation of
the local community in developing solutions to the problems. This has called upon
In Too Big To Know, Weinberger (2011b) suggests that what the world was once
which is valuable within context. As an example, he explains that any fact was
considered factual as long as it remained the latest expert book in the library – until
replaced by a “new fact” (library book) at a future date. But, given the web, any “fact”
17
is immediately mediated by other facts which appear in varying levels of validating
for varying contexts. As he admits, there still are particular accepted facts (a moon
attached to the earth) and expertise (people who understand the findings of large
hadron colliders, for example). But, much of what we know involving complex,
While Weinberger and others (Boyd & Crawford, 2012; Mayer-Schönberger &
Cukier, 2013; Rheingold & Weeks, 2012) do not get into the underlying theories of
Complexity theory explains how large systems are composed of small systems that
have their own logic but which interact with the larger system in dynamic ways.
This is the theory that is being used to explain the interaction of local knowledge and
In this vein, numerous authors are beginning to frame how local contexts
respond to and also shape the larger ecosystem of natural, managerial, decision and
institutional systems of which they are a part using complexity theory (Innes &
Booher, 2010; Kay, Regier, Boyle, & Francis, 1999; Klijn, 2008; Morrison, 2008). Each
the whole.
18
A local action may directly affect those at a larger scale without moving
through intermediary scales. Similarly, local action, instead of being
dampened out, may become amplified through the non-linear interactions
between components across scales. The impact of individual currency
speculators on the economies of entire countries exemplifies this interaction,
as individual actions are quickly scaled up through financial networks to have
profound effects on large-scale phenomena (Manson, 2001, p. 408).
In such a complex, interlinked world, new learning skills are necessary and
solving problems within a particular context is the subject of new learning theories
(Sawyer, 2006). Greeno (1998), for example, suggests that this kind of learning can
only occur in context. Thus, in designing the Zambia prototype which will be
explained later, local and global professionals got together, originally, to bring high
quality content to poor countries that is flexible and can be adapted to the local
Within the field of International Development, the field of Security Studies was
global flows of ecology, people, political and social movements and disease cause
instability and insecurity far from the source country and the solutions are by and
responsibility and ownership to deal with their problems (Rice, 2006; Lynn-Jones &
Miller, 1995; Miller, 2000). Such logic has been substantially expanded in the last
decade and has now included the policy imperative to consider global equity as a
financial and global stabilizing imperative (UNCTAD, 2012; World Bank, 2013).
19
What are the salient resources for higher education?
Traditionally, higher education has been planned around its capital resources –
technology) and, of course, its faculty. It had to be planned this way. Access to the
sources of knowledge was scarce and expensive. It had to be amassed in one location
and students had to be shipped to that location to access the professor, books and
technology that could deliver the knowledge. This required that campuses the size of
small towns be built – usually with great capital and ongoing huge expenses.
But the sources of raw knowledge are increasingly cheap and do not require a
bus or car ride to access anymore – even in poor countries. Perhaps, especially in
poor countries where the cost of transportation and access to these campuses is often
prohibitively expensive but access to cell phone data networks is being driven down
by competition (and new underwater fiber optic sea cables (Song, 2014)). As with the
customization of products throughout the world, technology can now allow for the
customization of curriculum. Global experts can put together the materials that are
considered to be widely applicable throughout the world and local resources can be
Further, recent research has shown that students learn better when the
classroom is “flipped” – that is when students learn the materials (often through
technology delivery) before arriving in the classroom and then use collective
20
Other research shows that learning occurs best when it can be applied within a
situated (socially defined) context (Wegerif, 1998; Wenger, 2000) . These two insights
learning processes into the community. There is no reason why the general
knowledge that can be culled from experts (accessed through the web) cannot be
their physical resources, their expertise, working on their problems and integrated
into their local circumstance. This learning system is formed organically from
The focus is thus shifted from physical capital to social capital. Learning is no
longer about the transmittal of (often static) knowledge from expert sources (often
organizations. This shift solves the problem of physical infrastructure and enrolment
becomes placed and content generated from community networks of the real lived
experiences.
21
The Zambia Prototype
professionals. The system is built around the precepts of Knowledge Economics (two
of the professors working on the design are knowledge economists), the clear value
of local knowledge, the emerging principles of New Learning Theories and Learning
(GKA)(Global Knowledge Alliance, n.d.). The first component to be put in place was
a higher education system known as the Global Knowledge Institute (GKI) (Global
Knowledge Institute, n.d.). The GKI is now a legally constituted NGO in Zambia
with enrolled master’s degree students. Students receive some learning modules
through web links (initially through hard drives sent down from Seoul) but also
have classes where they meet and talk with local experts and have assignments
which take them into communities to apply their knowledge. The sustainability of
the knowledge flow involves linking global and local knowledge together as shown
in Figure 1.
22
Figure 1: GKI Learning Flow
it up to global research centers. The flow of local knowledge can be turned into
instability and terrorism all have some components that can be addressed globally,
all also have local manifestation that require local knowledge and local-specific
treatments. Thus, the ability to gather local information and relate it to global issues
23
sustainable, valid manner. Three challenges were faced. First, residents of most
communities in Zambia are tired of being surveyed from outsiders and have become
used to giving stock answers that simply get information back to the interviewer
quickly and without additional questions. Second, in order to make the system
developed such that its validity could be assessed using globally acceptable norms.
Project Empower
three challenges. It is working with two high schools in the country – one in a rural
area and one that is on the outskirts of the main city, Lusaka. In each school, five
teachers have been enrolled in a new undergraduate program that will allow
within their schools. Since most cannot remain teachers and upgrade their degrees
(they would, generally, have to quit teaching and go to a main city for three years to
At the same time, the program gives them the latest methods of pedagogy
curriculum in the community and raise its relevance and effectiveness. This is
24
motivating to the school since the pedagogy will be raised in the school. It also raises
the attractiveness of the school for prospective teachers since it means that there is a
chance that, in teaching at that school, one could also raise one’s qualifications.
While teaching, each of the GKI teachers will use an electronic tablet to
receive course material through a network which is built to link the school with the
GKI headquarters in the main city, the research center at Seoul National University
(SNU) and the pedagogical center at Georgia State University. Course materials have
been sent through this link. But, each teacher will also ask each of their students to
complete a survey once a week of about three minutes duration. The survey asks
simple questions about the student and family health (one week) and student and
sibling’s school attendance (second week). Thus, longitudinal data will be gathered
for some period of time. The data will be transmitted, once a week, up to a
trends. When a particular student, classroom, grade level or school falls out of a
trend line for a snapshot (one particular data period) or over time, the anomaly will
be captured by the SNU student network and sent back to the GKI master’s students
in Lusaka for further investigation. This can generate a validity index and provides
25
Figure 2: Resource Flows: Project Empower
This initial test-run is limited in several ways. First, the initial data is simple and
is only designed to test the system, but future data should be linked to situations that
are identified by the community as current challenges. For example, the rural
community faces changing weather patterns that cause them to be uncertain about
crop timing and types of crops. Longitudinal data could be about rain patterns, crop
Second, much of the information that comes out of communities is not in the
also needs to be tested. Using the teachers, the GKI will also begin to understand
how to do this in a sustainable way. The teachers live in the community and, given
that the curriculum training will involve having them get their students back into
26
the community to work on social, political, environmental and health problems there,
it is likely that a means of gathering high quality qualitative data can also be found.
The outcomes of this exercise will include captured trends within local
linked, locally manifested issues. Over time, a system of how to make local
communities become their own researchers and mechanisms of validating such data
The entire system is actually more complex. At each step, all teachers, students,
and teachers. For example, the design of project “Empower” did not get solved (how
to make it valid, reliable and sustainable) until the global professors and researchers
actually walked out to the rural high school and spent most of the day talking with
the teachers. Essentially, on that day, the teachers became the teachers of the
researchers and professors. The students at SNU will also be the researchers as part
of their “reward” in being part of the global network. They will be part of the
research teams involving the global and local professors, researchers and teachers
that write up either the findings or processes. All research teams are vertically
freely add their knowledge (which they might otherwise get paid for) to a collective
27
The physical infrastructure of the GKI is quite small – requiring only a small
classroom in Lusaka where the graduate students occasionally meet. The high school
teachers will meet in their own classroom onsite during evenings and weekends.
Most materials will be delivered electronically using the flipped classroom model.
in global, regional and local researchers, professors and community members into a
dynamic knowledge eco-system from which all get new knowledge that suits their
particular needs.
Conclusion
through expanding systems of social networks, and where new systems of learning
adaptations to technology, the first steps is, inevitably, to do what has been done
previously, but with technology as a faster, more efficient tool. Thus, the first
iteration of learning with technology was to spread what was known more rapidly
and more accessible through existing networks – Wikipedia, online lectures, MOOCs,
But Marshall McLuhan’s often quoted and brilliant foresight is never more
relevant – “the media is the message” (McLuhan, 1964). The spreading of knowledge
28
through networks did not just change the way we receive knowledge, it changed the
entire environment through which it is known, built, organized, accessed and used
for innovation. Each time a new piece of knowledge is added to the network, it does
changes the environment – local knowledge becomes part of the global, but also
global changes as a result. Thus, the value in knowing and integrating what is local
is nothing less than knowing what the environment is for the entire world. This is
the essence of value by which a local learning eco-system can be built, sustained and
examined. Sustainability must be viewed from a local level but can also take
advantage of the new science of social networks which have inherent aspects of self-
organizing and the emerging theory of knowledge economics where knowledge can
be built by paying through knowledge growth and exchange rather than money
of complex systems. What is local or expert in one lens may have other effects or
notion when seen through another lens (or node or problem set). Finally, relevant
29
knowledge makers and innovators. Physical resources are rarely limiting and many
people can play the role of researchers, teachers, and learners at various times.
The Zambia prototype shows one design that has existed, now, for three years
and involves aspects of all these emerging trends. At the outset, it began as
collaboration between one of the world’s top research universities and top
build it one piece at a time and its higher education component is in place. Now its
global curriculum component – is being designed and will likely get its design
The fortunate news is that all this innovation no longer depends upon isolated
people all the way from community members to students to researchers and
professors throughout the world that are working on the problem. Each has their
to the process. As the GKA grows, the synergy is quite palpable. The data
coefficient it produces.
30
References
Aghion, P., & Armendariz de Aghion, B. (2006). A New Growth Approach to Poverty
Alleviation. In Understanding Poverty. Oxford University Press.
Araya, D., & Peters, M. (Eds.). (2010). Education in the Creative Economy: Knowledge and
Learning in the Age of Innovation. Peter Lang International.
Archibugi, D., & Lundvall, B.-Å. (2013). The Globalizing Learning Economy. Oxford
University Press.
Barabasi, A.-L. (2005). Science of Networks: From Society to the Web. In A Sense of Place:
The Global and the Local in Mobile Communication (pp. 415–429). Vienna: Passagen.
Barabási, A.-L., & Frangos, J. (2002). Linked: The New Science Of Networks Science Of
Networks. Basic Books.
Benkler, Y. (2007). The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets
and Freedom. Yale University Press.
Bereiter, C. (2002). Design research for sustained innovation. Cognitive Studies, Bulletin of
the Japanese Cognitive Science Society, 9(3), 321–327.
Bicker, A., Ellen, R., & Parkes, P. (2000). Indigenous Enviromental Knowledge and its
Transformations: Critical Anthropological Perspectives. Routledge.
Blakeley, N., Lewis, G., & Mills, D. (2005). The Economics of Knowledge: What Makes
Ideas Special for Economic Growth? (No. 05/05). Aukland, New Zealand. Retrieved
from http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/research-policy/ppp/2005/05-05
Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical Questions for Big Data. Information,
Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
Chatti, M. A., Jarke, M., & Frosch-Wilke, D. (2007). The future of e-learning: a shift to
knowledge networking and social software. International Journal of Knowledge and
Learning, 3(4), 404–420.
31
Christakis, N., & Fowler, J. (2009). Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives.
Little, Brown and Company.
Cortright, J. (2001). New Growth Theory, Technology and Learning: A Practitioner’s Guide
(No. 4). Washington, D.C.: U.S. Economic Development Administration.
Downes, S. (2010). Learning Networks and Connective Knowledge. In H. Yang & Yuen
(Eds.), Collective Intelligence and E-Learning 2.0: Implications of Web-Based
Communities and Networking. Hershey, PA: Information Science.
Ferenstein, G. (2012, May 9). Move Over Harvard And MIT, Stanford Has The Real
“Revolution In Education.” TechCrunch. Retrieved from
http://techcrunch.com/2012/05/09/move-over-harvard-and-mit-stanford-has-the-real-
revolution-in-education/
Field, J. (2006). The Learning Economy. In Lifelong Learning and the New Educational
Order. Stroke on Trent, UK: Trentham Books.
Fischer, F. (2000). Citizens, Experts, and the Environment: The Politics of Local Knowledge.
Duke University Press.
Fitoussi, J.-P., Sen, A., & Stiglitz, J. (2010). Mismeasuring Our Lives: Why GDP Doesn’t
Add Up. New York: The New Press.
Fleurbaey, M. (2009). Beyond GDP: The Quest for a Measure of Social Welfare. Journal of
Economic Literature, 47(4), 1029–1075.
Giovannini, E., Hall, J., Morrone, A., & Giulia, R. (2009). A framework to measure the
progress of societies. Paris: OECD Working Paper. OECD. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org
Global Knowledge Alliance. (n.d.). Global Knowledge Alliance. gkalinks. Retrieved April 18,
2014, from http://gkalinks.org/Home_Page.html
Global Knowledge Institute. (n.d.). Global Knowledge Institute. Retrieved April 18, 2014,
from http://www.gkinstitute.com/
32
Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. W. (2011). Transitions to sustainable development: new
directions in the study of long term transformative change. London: Routledge.
Howkins, J. (2002). The Creative Economy: How People Make Money from Ideas. Penguin
UK.
Ilon, L., & Altmann, J. (2012). Using Collective Adaptive Networks To Solve Education
Problems In Poor Countries. In Society for Design and Process Science. Berlin:
Omnibooks Online. Retrieved from http://sdps.omnibooksonline.com/2012/index.html
Jarvela, S., Naykki, P., Laru, J., & Luokkanen, T. (2007). Structuring and Regulating
Collaborative Learning in Higher Education with Wireless Networks and Mobile Tools.
Educational Technology & Society, 10(4), 71–79.
Kay, J. J., Regier, H. A., Boyle, M., & Francis, G. (1999). An ecosystem approach for
sustainability: addressing the challenge of complexity. Futures, 31(7), 721–742.
doi:10.1016/S0016-3287(99)00029-4
Klijn, E.-H. (2008). Complexity Theory and Public Administration: What’s New? Public
Management Review, 10(3), 299–317. doi:10.1080/14719030802002675
Kronholz, J. (2012). Can Khan Move the Bell Curve to the Right? Education Next, 12(2).
Retrieved from http://educationnext.org/can-khan-move-the-bell-curve-to-the-right/
Lynn-Jones, S., & Miller, S. (Eds.). (1995). Global Dangers: Changing Dimensions of
International Security. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Mayer-Schönberger, V., & Cukier, K. (2013). Big Data: A Revolution that Will Transform
how We Live, Work, and Think. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
McCorkle, C. M. (1989). Toward a knowledge of local knowledge and its importance for
agricultural RD&E. Agriculture and Human Values, 6(3), 4–12.
doi:10.1007/BF02217664
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw-
Hill.
33
Morrison, K. (2008). Educational Philosophy and the Challenge of Complexity Theory.
Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40(1), 19–34. doi:10.1111/j.1469-
5812.2007.00394.x
Nieves, J., & Osorio, J. (2013). The role of social networks in knowledge creation.
Knowledge Management Research & Practice, 11(1), 62–77. doi:10.1057/kmrp.2012.28
Papert, S. (1993). The children’s machine: rethinleing school in the age of the computer.
New York: Basic Books.
Pu, H., Lin, J., Song, Y., & Liu, F. (2011). Adaptive Device Context Based Mobile Learning
Systems. International Journal of Distance Education Technologies, 9(1), 44–56.
Rheingold, H., & Weeks, A. (2012). Net Smart: How to Thrive Online. MIT Press.
Rice, S. (2006). Global Poverty, Weak States and Insecurity. Presented at the The Brookings
Blum Roundtable: Session I; Poverty, Insecurity and Conflict, Washington, D.C.:
Brookings Blum Roundtable. Retrieved from
http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/papers/2006/8/globaleconomics%20ric
e/08globaleconomics_rice.pdf
Romer, P. (1991). Endogenous Technological Change (Working Paper No. 3210). National
Bureau of Economic Research. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w3210
Romer, P. (1993). Two strategies for economic development: using ideas and producing ideas.
In L. Summers & S. Shekhar (Eds.), Proceedings of the World Bank annual conference
on development economics 1992 (pp. 63–92). Washington, D.C.: World Bank. Retrieved
from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/1993/03/699081/proceedings-world-
bank-annual-conference-development-economics-1992
Royal Society [The]. (2011). Knowledge, networks and nations: Global scientific
collaboration in the 21st century. London: The Royal Society. Retrieved from
http://royalsociety.org
Sawyer, K. (2006). The New Science of Learning. In K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook
of the Learning Sciences (pp. 1–16). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 1(1), 41–48.
doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2005.08.001
Shirky, C. (2009). Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations.
Penguin Books.
Shiva, V. (n.d.). Biopiracy Campaign. Navdanya. Retrieved December 10, 2013, from
http://www.navdanya.org/campaigns/biopiracy
34
Song, S. (2014, March). African Undersea Cables. Many Possibilities. Retrieved from
http://manypossibilities.net/african-undersea-cables/
Stiglitz, J., Sen, A., & Fitoussi, J.-P. (2009). Report by the Commission on the Measurement
of Economic Performance and Social Progress. Retrieved from http://www.stiglitz-sen-
fitoussi.fr/documents/rapport_anglais.pdf
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. (2012). Macrowikinomics: New Solutions for a Connected
Planet. Portfolio Trade.
UNCTAD. (2012). UNCTAD Trade and Development Report, 2012: Policies for Inclusive
and Balanced Growth. New York: United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development. Retrieved from http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/tdr2012_en.pdf
UNESCO. (2005). Toward Knowledge Societies: UNESCO World Report. Paris: UNESCO.
Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-
information/resources/publications-and-communication-materials/publications/full-
list/towards-knowledge-societies-unesco-world-report/
Warsh, D. (2007). Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations: A Story of Economic Discovery. W.
W. Norton & Company.
Weinberger, D. (2011a). The Expertise of Clouds. In Too Big to Know (pp. 47–68). New
York, New York: Basic Books.
Woods, N. (2005). The shifting politics of foreign aid. International Affairs, 81(2), 393–409.
doi:10.1111/j.1468-2346.2005.00457.x
World Bank. (2013). World Bank Group Strategy. Washington, D.C. Retrieved from
http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer
/WDSP/IB/2013/10/09/000456286_20131009170003/Rendered/PDF/816970WP0REPL
A00Box379842B00PUBLIC0.pdf
World Bank. (n.d.). Overview : Social Capital. Social Capital. Retrieved from
http://go.worldbank.org/C0QTRW4QF0
35