Fostering a new field of integrated global STEM

2.1 Overcoming historical legacies and addressing new challenges

In the early 1950s, the US shared its scientific and technological expertise globally. Designed to promote global modernization, these socio-technical projects imported technical and scientific support from US experts and transfers of US technology to “developing” countries.

The established norm was a design process that focused on the universal transferability of technology and quantifiable benefits narrowly defined in terms of GNP (now GDP). Government experts deployed these interventions without consideration for culture or context and, as such, produced few improvements for those they were intended to help. A generation later, academics, policymakers, and practitioners acknowledge the problems inherent to “universal” development approaches. Most recently, efforts have been underway to change course and advance new goals that promote self-sufficiency, peer-to-peer co-creation, and sustainability.

Today, the fourth industrial revolution presents significant economic advantages for certain sectors and individuals, but also introduces a new form of marginalization for many others.

The operation of AI systems requires vast amounts of electricity, which, in the context of our current carbon-based energy systems, often means a greater dependence on fossil fuels. This reliance not only impacts energy consumption, but also raises concerns about the environmental consequences of continued fossil fuel extraction.

Moreover, the production of AI technology relies heavily on specific raw materials. Key among these is coltan, a mineral used in capacitors for electronic devices. Additionally, “rare earth elements,” which are essential for various high-tech applications, are predominantly sourced from regions such as sub-Saharan Africa. The extraction of these materials frequently involves unethical practices, including poor labor conditions and significant environmental degradation. Consequently, while the fourth industrial revolution advances technology and innovation, it also perpetuates systems of inequality and exploitation that must be critically examined.

The extractive nature of our interactions extends beyond traditional measures. Many of us in the Global North have grown increasingly accustomed to relinquishing our personal information, biometrics, images, and behavioral data. This “voluntary” exchange of our private data does not imply that individuals in other regions, particularly in the Global South, should be expected to make similar compromises. As information increasingly transforms into a valuable currency in the digital economy, it raises significant ethical questions about ownership, privacy, and consent. We must recognize that the implications of sharing our data are far-reaching and should not become a universal expectation placed upon all individuals around the world.

2.2 Valorizing different forms of innovation: ordinary and endogenous innovation

Innovation is often understood in reference to ‘frontier technologies’. Rwanda and Kenya are exemplars of African states vying for position as leaders in technological innovation on the regional if not global stage. Rwanda as a tech/life science hub has deployed the physical and policy infrastructures required to support these growth areas. In Kenya, the ‘Silicone Savannah’ is by some indicators, Africa’s fastest growing fintech hub. Companies such as Microsoft, Google, Visa, and Amazon Web Services are all investing funds for product development in the tech sector. None of this would happen without investment and supporting policies, especially around migration and taxes. There are reasons for optimism and concern for the emergent high-tech sector on the sub-continent.

STEM education faces significant limitations that hinder its effectiveness. One of the issues is the insufficient supply of homegrown talent, which is crucial for fulfilling the workforce demands in the high-tech and life sciences sectors. As these industries continue to grow and evolve, the gap between the available skilled workers and the job opportunities increases, leaving companies struggling to find qualified candidates. This shortage not only affects the economic potential of these fields, but also impacts innovation and growth within the industry. Addressing these challenges in STEM education is essential to ensure a robust pipeline of talent that can meet the future needs of the labor market.

Moreover, there is a significant lack of emphasis on fostering innovation within traditional sectors such as industry and agriculture. These areas often receive far less attention compared to emerging technologies associated with the fourth industrial revolution. Experts emphasize the urgent need for policymakers to broaden their scope and develop strategies that not only harness advancements in technology, but also create sustainable off-farm job opportunities for individuals in both urban and rural settings.

Not all innovations have to exist at the forefront of science and technology to yield significant economic, environmental, and social benefits at the local level. In recent research, scholars have delved into the potential of endogenous forms of innovation in sub-Saharan Africa. These traditional methods often reflect the unique cultural contexts and resource availability of the region, enabling communities to develop both practical and sustainable solutions.

By harnessing local knowledge, practices, and materials, these innovations decisively meet urgent challenges like food security, water management, and energy access. This approach significantly enhances the well-being and resilience of the communities involved.

2.3 Developing culturally appropriate STEM training

Over the past 30 years, many countries, particularly those in the Global South, have significantly expanded their educational systems to accommodate growing populations and enhance workforce skills. This expansion has increased access to education and improved literacy rates. However, a persistent challenge remains: balancing liberal arts and STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) education.

This issue involves various aspects, including theoretical perspectives on the value of education, practical considerations for curriculum development, and implications for resource allocation policies. As nations work to provide a well-rounded education that meets both individual and societal needs, the tension between promoting critical thinking and creativity through liberal arts and equipping students with technical skills in STEM fields continues to be an ongoing, complex debate.

In sub-Saharan Africa, there is a marked increase in student enrollment in Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) disciplines at tertiary educational institutions. This growth reflects a rising recognition of the value of these fields in shaping critical thinking, cultural awareness, and societal development.

This positive trend, however, is accompanied by a concerning shift in policy discourse. On one hand, governments and educational authorities stress the urgent need to increase enrollment and resources in STEM fields, considering these areas vital for technological progress and economic competitiveness. On the other hand, this same discourse often leads to significant funding cuts for SSH programs, which are perceived as less valuable or relevant to current job markets.

This bifurcation creates a misleading perception that SSH and STEM are in opposition to one another, suggesting that resources must be allocated exclusively to one area at the expense of the other. This false dichotomy indicates a fundamental misunderstanding of the educational landscape, where integrating SSH and STEM can enrich learning experiences and foster interdisciplinary approaches. For instance, understanding human behavior, cultural contexts, and ethical implications – core elements of SSH – are crucial for effective scientific research and technological innovation.

Furthermore, this situation highlights a broader issue within educational systems: the disconnect between theoretical learning and practical application. Many programs tend to focus heavily on theoretical concepts, neglecting the importance of practical experience that can enhance students’ understanding and skills. Bridging this gap is essential. By integrating curricular education with hands-on co-curricular activities, institutions can provide a more comprehensive and engaging educational experience, preparing students not only to excel academically, but also to navigate real-world challenges effectively. This integrated approach can help cultivate a generation of well-rounded individuals capable of contributing meaningfully to both their communities and the global economy.

3.1 Articles

The three articles in this issue relate how we can frame different forms of innovation. In the first article, Agyeman et al. report on their novel work to address affordable building materials in sub-Saharan Africa. By combining coconut fibers and plastics, both waste products combine to create affordable roof sheathing that can be manufactured in rural Africa (or anywhere else). Their paper examines the materials science of creating a composite with the strength and endurance for roofing materials, to developing a prototype press in the rural town of Akyem Dwenase, in Ghana’s Eastern Region.

While Agyeman et al. provide an example of ordinary innovation, Robinson et al. present their research on search engine algorithms that address critiques of social polarization, exclusion, and algorithmic social harm. In particular, they offer a different epistemological approach to including people more effectively in computational issues; in this case, developing a search engineer. They eschew top-down approaches, where experts define parameters, and employ a mixed-method approach to co-creating search engine criteria with a group of African and African American artisans in Detroit, Michigan. By deliberately focusing on groups with unmet needs, they could translate qualitative data into computationally accessible forms. The result was a valuable tool and approach to generating a participatory search engine.

Finally, Cruz et al. ask what do young people in Central and South America think of AI? Understanding the perceptions of Artificial Intelligence (AI) among university students is crucial if we are to expand our innovative capacities beyond North America and Europe. Like many places in the world, the team found that many youth, especially college students, were aware of AI and have a generally positive view of it. However, they also want to exercise their own agency on how it is developed and deployed. The authors make several policy recommendations for governments to engage youth.

3.2 Viewpoints

Barrick and Hoang return to the impact of plastics on the environment and humans. Here, they identify key scientific findings related to plastics waste, in general, and ocean pollution, in particular. Though there is much to be learned about the impact of plastics, from the visible to the invisible, there is a public call to address this ‘forever pollution’. The authors call for policymakers, industry, and the public to work toward solutions to deal with the current problems and mitigate future ones.

Picón reports on his efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion in a higher-ed environment that, while experiencing an increase in underrepresented students, has seen sustained issues that negatively impact minority students on college campuses. Picón’s point is to offer a holistic view of diversity that includes honoring the heterogeneity of students’ ways of thinking, doing, and learning. He makes recommendations for how strategies can be developed across the curriculum.

3.3 Case study

In their case study, York et al. describe an experimental initiative funded by a National Science Foundation that aimed to establish and nurture interdisciplinary collaborative pedagogical development related to Science, Technology, and Society (STS) with a particular focus on ethics and justice. Their focus was on communities of practice within humanities, social sciences, and STEM fields, to support the challenging and necessary work of developing integrated STS-informed pedagogies across the curriculum.