Deterministic theory and discourse on sociotechnical progress ignore the existence of multiple and equally viable pathways towards progress, obscure socioeconomic and environmental conflicting interests and values, and overshadow socially inclusive deliberative choices about policy strategies. Demystifying techno-determinism, by incorporating a plurality of understandings to policy appraisal, becomes a matter of not only democratic accountability but also of analytical rigour. This article analyses the normative and ontological understandings on scientific and technological pathways among a group of experts interviewed at one key Directorate of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, using Q-methodology. The three main framings detected do not correspond exclusively to any single innovation and development theoretical framework - namely Innovation Systems, Learning Systems, Catch-Up models or the science, technology and society approach. Each narrative organizes an array of policy understandings based upon different theories and practices. As these forms of discourse highly influence global policy recommendations, their plurality should be made explicit, negotiated and integrated into policymaking.
Keywords: OECD; Q-methodology; innovation; policymaking; public understanding of science; sociotechnical progress; sustainable development.