In the emergence of socio-technological studies, the notion of 'design hierarchies' (Disco, 1992) or of 'technical hierachies' (Geels and Kemp, 2000) played a role in arriving at a multi-level approach to technology.

The actual design hierarchy from which this was arrived was, however, very much an industrial mechanically oriented approach. Distinguished were: components, devices, functional artifacts and systems. Although digital technology was on the rise, given the predominance of non-digital technology, this was certainly logical.

Nowadays however, the notion of an underlying technical hierarchy that does not recognize local and could storage, software and operating system, connectivity and interoperability, field upgradeabiity etc. etc. seems rather odd.

My questions are:

* does the notion of 'technical hierarchy' still play a role in socio-technical studies today?

* has it ever been updated to refer to digital technologies?

* does it matter that the precedent in thinking about technologies has not been founded on a futureproof technology perspective? (this could e.g. be the case when innovation in niches does not take interoperability into account or even is completely unaware of how digital dynamics are very different from mechanic and automation dynamics)

The concrete question is: do 'technical hierarchies' still matter in socio-technology today?

The more abstract question is: how important is it that the foundations of socio-technical studies were not based on any notion of digital technologies nor may bave been updated to include those?

I am curious as to what you're thinking. Thank you very much for letting me know!

Best regards,

CJ