Frugal innovations aim to bring products, services and systems within the reach of billions of poor and emerging middle-class consumers. Through significantly cutting costs while safeguarding user value, frugal innovations open opportunities for new business models and may well disrupt innovation processes in entire economies. The debate on the developmental implications of frugal innovation is ideologically polarized. Whereas advocates suggest a business view of 'win-win' in which companies can earn profits while simultaneously alleviating poverty, critics argue that frugal innovation will merely exacerbate capitalist exploitation and inequality. In this contribution we argue that an empirical approach is needed to assess where and when frugal innovation is more likely to enhance inclusive development.Les innovations frugales portent des produits, des services, et des systèmes à la portée de billions de consommateurs pauvres et de l'aspirante classe moyenne. Les innovations frugales baissent les couts et préservent la valeur pour les consommateurs, et créent des nouveaux modèles économiques qui ont le potentiel de perturber les processus d'innovation dans plusieurs économies. Le débat sur les implications développementales de l'innovation frugale est idéologiquement polarisé. Les défenseurs des innovations frugales suggèrent un scenario d'affaires bénéfique pour toutes les parties, ou les entreprises peuvent réaliser des profits simultanément soulageant la pauvreté. Les critiques des innovations frugales soutiennent qu'elles vont simplement augmenter l'exploitation capitale et l'inégalité. Dans cet article, on soutien qu'un approche empirique est nécessaire pour établir où et quand une innovation frugale est plus susceptible de soutenir le développement inclusif.
Agricultural production has historically been integral to the central African Copperbelt's urban growth. None the less, urban agriculture has rarely received attention in the otherwise rich Copperbelt historiography. Government and mine officials, as well as social scientists, have persistently framed urban agriculture as an informal, subsistence and feminised activity. Growing maize or vegetables has, in such views, been interpreted as a sign of rurality that is 'out of place' in urban areas, at best a response to poverty and crisis or a practice engaged in only by 'thrifty housewives'. Such narratives have distorted a proper understanding of urban agriculture. Drawing on new archival sources and oral history, this article presents a different view. It compares the Zambian and the Congolese Copperbelt from 1950 until 2000 to re-evaluate urban agriculture as a normal part of everyday life, an activity central to urban livelihood, identity and belonging. Growing crops has evolved over time in response to socio-economic change, but it has always been vital to the urban life of the diverse Copperbelt population. Considering agricultural production thus contributes to debates on urbanism in central Africa and beyond.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.