The process of innovation can be divided between the classical development and newer development models.
The classic development model is the progressive model where innovation is a new solution which builds upon and supersedes what came before.
The newer development model is the adaptive model where an innovation is adapted from the existing process to resolve an existing issue.
The biggest proponents of this newer approach are environmentalists, but I don't think that this newer approach is the result of environmentalism. I think the opposite is true.
The big picture here is that there might be social evolution of which environmentalism might be a product. But the evolution of innovation itself is not dependent on social movements. Just like everything else innovation itself is evolving, developing, into a more streamlined process. In short innovation innovates itself.
Currently it is trending away from the classic approach to the adaptive model. I think this is because whereas the progressive approach yields faster results, the adaptive approach has a smoother implementation cycle and ultimately a longer shelf life.
The progressive approach is faster because it is less contemplative. I don't think Gutenberg put too much thought about the implication mass producing bibles would have on the church.
Would Gutenberg chosen the bible if he could see that a mass produced bible would lead to a massive schism in the catholic church? Maybe he would have started with a cook book.
The best reason we would consider an adaptive approach is that it is the more stable approach. This is because we have the data and know-how to analyze in ways we have never be able to do in history.
On a personal level I think a contemplative approach is more satisfying on a personal level.
