Makers Movement and Digital Fabrication — Potential Benefits for Developing Countries
The rise of alternative forms of fabrication has expanded the opportunities to modify traditional manufacturing production processes in the modern world. Nowadays, thanks to the multiple ways of creating and fabricating things, people have been able to stop relying on the complex production and supply line — that was once the only option to produce things — being able to develop a self sufficient form of production with the help of emerging technologies.
“The days of huge factories full of lots of people are not there any more.”
Cutting-edge technologies such as 3D printing usually develop in an open source basis, opening up opportunities to not only to explore creative processes but most importantly to bring ideas to reality. They allow people to develop and embody ideas such as 3d printed prototypes, cars, jewellery, clothing, orthopaedics and “almost anything” that can be imagined. By removing their quality of exclusivity, they propose a shared environment in which ideally everyone should be able to make and obtain anything from the click of a mouse.
3D printing is known as an additive form of manufacturing (AM) in which digital constructions materialise the use of a variety of materials that add up in layers that confine in the formation of a 3 dimensional object. Additive manufacturing technology has been explored since 1980’s with the creation of industrial 3D printers by 3D Systems and can reach prices above 80.000 USD. What is known as the third industrial revolution, has been highly influenced by the emerging of 3D printing technologies — such as the Maker Bot or Ultimaker machines — which are more affordable machines and user friendly. However, due to the relative novelty of digital fabrication tools, there is still improvement needed in order for them to be fully adapted worldwide.
In 1962 researcher and educator Everett M. Rogers released a book called Diffusion of Innovations in which he theorises the way in which technological innovations are spread and adapted throughout cultures over over a period of time. Rogers believes the diffusion process heavily relies in four fundamental variables: the main innovation, the channels in which it is communicated, the behaviour it has over time, and crucially the social environment in which the innovation intends to be spread. The success of the innovation’s adaption is given by its sustainability which is defined by its popularity and it is represented in the amount of “adapters” in relation to time (see graph below).
Notably, Rogers believes that the entire diffusion process is differently determined depending on the culture it develops, because it designates the type of adopters and their process of decision adoption.
The diffusion process is relevant to the adoption of digital fabrication tools such as 3D because through its understanding, one could be able to analyse the reach and the challenges of its overall adoption throughout different cultures. In developed countries with sufficient financial resources and the appropriate information and educational tools, 3D printing has already been able to settle in the early adopters scale of diffusion and gained public acceptance by raising people’s expectations of total disruption in the traditional manufacturing processes. IT entrepreneurs acknowledge the potential of such technologies, and have started to embrace the industry in all aspects. From new machines creation and investment, to the opening of hacker/maker spaces, 3D printing has gained popularity through its exploration often times taking place in the makers community.
“The spread of digital fabrication tools is now leading to a corresponding practice for open-source hardware.”
As digital fabrication technology develops, the need for spreading the related knowledge increases. In Rogers’ terms, in order to make the diffusion of the technology sustainable and reach a peak point in the scale of diffusion worldwide, the knowledge of the technology needs to appropriately penetrate the culture in which it is intended to spread. In the digital fabrication case, its diffusion becomes reliant on open-source platforms and the emergence of fabrication labs that together compose what is generally called “the makers community”.
“After all, the real strength of a fab lab is not technical; it is social.”
The concept of maker spaces or fabrication labs is based on the idea of a physical space that provides access to technological fabrication tools, in which common people interested in technology and fabrication gather with the propose of mutually collaborating and promoting the creation and invention of things. Things that could eventually be relevant for people’s lives, and oftentimes (ideally) with a shared goal creating social solutions for the community in which the spaces operate. The popularity of fab labs in developed countries such as the USA and Western Europe keeps accelerating, but the amount of such spaces in underdeveloped countries is comparatively low. (See graph below)
The obstacles for their spread in developing countries is not only given by the relative novelty and the low-cost digital fabrication tools but also because multiple infrastructure problems this communities hold. Emerging innovation hubs in developing countries usually lack in supply of production materials, qualified training, and promotion and spread of interest in such technologies.
“After all, the real strength of a fab lab is not technical; it is social.”
Among the few fabrication labs that have already been established in underdeveloped countries — specially in South America, Africa and South East Asia — it is perceivable that the potential of developing projects and end product could bring meaningful solutions to social issues affecting such communities. Environments with higher demands for common solutions are able to generate even more creative and helpful outcomes than those environments with an overall well-being, simply because they are motivated to improve their current circumstances.
A recent 3D Printing online forum report, displays the impact of a recently opened fabrication lab in Rwanda, not only encouraging the entrepreneurial spirit among rising professionals, but also promoting the exploration of social solutions through technology. Rwanda’s “makers” have been able to design and produce a wide variety of affordable 3D printed prosthetics that could be beneficial for amputees in the region, who otherwise would not have been able to afford them.
Another example on the possibilities for social solutions through 3D printing technology in unprivileged societies is Roy Ombatti’s project from Nairobi. He presents a project called “Happy Feet” about customised 3d printed shoes for peopled affected by jigger, a parasite that affects and deforms feet.
These examples suggest a hopeful future for the impact of digital fabrication tools, however there are still plenty of challenges to overcome before everyone witnesses the benefits of digital technologies. As Rogers mentions in his theory of diffusion, the goal for a successful technological innovation in any given community is sustainability. In order to achieve sustainable spread and adaption of digital fabrication tools world wide, and to obtain its full potential, it is necessary to upgrade certain aspects that until today represent crucial limitations. The quality of digital fabrication tools should increase, their price must significativelly decrease , and the methods used to spread their functioning knowledge should improve.
In a recent Wired magazine article called In the Next Industrial Revolution, Atoms Are the New Bits it’s mentioned that “ Transformative change happens when industries democratise, when they’re ripped from the sole domain of companies, governments, and other institutions and handed over to regular folks”. It is the transformative power of change of modern fabrication tools that makes them more fascinating. Besides changing the traditional manufacturing practices, besides giving us the ability to make parts, coffee cups, bikes and even cars at home, these technologies have the power of changing the world we live in. Their appropriate engagement and application gives us all the power to improve our lives and the lives of everyone around us. Educators, makers, students, eneterpeneurs need to start using technology in favour of those in need, having consciousness on how much their outcome can contribute to improve their lives.