[Open Design + Hardware] opendesign Digest, Vol 44, Issue 2
braybrooke.k at gmail.com
Mon Mar 14 12:32:58 UTC 2016
Agreed with Irene -- thanks for sharing this with us, Cindy! Really great
to hear the defense went well (and that Adrian brought the critical
discussion!) and big congrats on this accomplishment. Is on my to-read list
@codekat <http://twitter.com/codekat> | codekat.net
On Mon, Mar 14, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Irene Maldini <irene.maldini at gmail.com>
> Thank you for sharing Cindy! It looks very interesting.
> 2016-03-12 13:00 GMT+01:00 <opendesign-request at lists.okfn.org>:
>> Send opendesign mailing list submissions to
>> opendesign at lists.okfn.org
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> opendesign-request at lists.okfn.org
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> opendesign-owner at lists.okfn.org
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of opendesign digest..."
>> Today's Topics:
>> 1. my dissertation! (Kohtala Cindy)
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 09:37:19 +0000
>> From: Kohtala Cindy <cindy.kohtala at aalto.fi>
>> To: Open Design and Hardware mailing list <opendesign at lists.okfn.org>
>> Subject: [Open Design + Hardware] my dissertation!
>> Message-ID: <CF41DD03-C7F3-4F93-9869-BB0011F6B60E at aalto.fi>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>> Hello all,
>> I?m proud to announce my dissertation is available to download!
>> scroll down a bit for the link to the pdf.
>> Prof Adrian Smith from SPRU, University of Sussex, was my opponent at
>> yesterday?s defence.
>> He was probing e.g. if Fab Labs are indeed a good observation unit and,
>> based on my findings, Fab Labs are actually conservative in how they work
>> with sustainability solutions, not to mention catering to a select elite,
>> and therefore perhaps not the ideal partners if we want sustainability
>> transition. He also wished for more discussion in my thesis on the wider
>> implications - setting the discussion within the broader societal context.
>> From my part, I argued that Fab Labs are worth specific study because
>> they differ from other makerspaces, being more in communication with each
>> other, having the Fab Academy and Fabx meetings, etc. They have potential,
>> therefore, to build and spread a more sustainability-oriented agenda if
>> this was done with more critical discussion and conscious reflection (than
>> is done now). (I suspect my answer was not as concise yesterday as when I?m
>> writing it now.) ;)
>> I do agree that the broader implications need to be articulated, but I
>> argued that I could not do that in the scope of my dissertation. I had
>> decided to limit my scope and especially focus on the task of describing
>> and interpreting the details of what actually goes on in Fab Labs on a
>> daily basis, as there is very little on this published yet. Based on this
>> detailed knowledge, we can go forward to discuss wider implications, how
>> this sits in the wider context of today (and yesterday), and what this
>> might mean in terms of policy.
>> I argued there is still great potential for Fab Labs to have a role in
>> pushing the discussion on *values* and the meaning of consumption and
>> post-consumption - this might be their greatest potential contribution. I
>> see Fab Labs as the potential gateway drug to other kinds of making,
>> encouraging participation not only in understanding and building
>> technologies for prototyping, but sustainable solutions of all kinds.
>> People see that it is possible and desireable to become more involved in
>> things. Openness and p2p dynamics play a key role in this.
>> I must admit - saying this is more me as an
>> activist-participant-researcher and less me as researcher-proper. As Adrian
>> pointed out, it is important to see where and how Fab Labs and makerspaces
>> *are* actually engaging people who might otherwise not have become involved.
>> I was able to point out a couple of promising examples where this has
>> occurred during my observations, but I have not yet examined this question
>> systematically. (thank dog for post-docs!) ;)
>> It was truly an engaging discussion, due to Adrian?s making it a relaxed
>> yet critical debate, and some audience members also said they found it
>> interesting. (I always wonder what people get out of dissertation defences
>> when they don?t have an invested interest in the topic. In Finland, these
>> defences are open to the public so all my colleagues were there, family
>> members, interested others.)
>> Feel free to browse through the pdf and make comments on anything you
>> find interesting or disagree with!
>> Regards from Helsinki
>> Aalto University
>> The full abstract:
>> Digital manufacturing technologies are proliferating and can enable
>> socially significant, innovative new forms of production and consumption.
>> This thesis examines the environmental sustainability issues in peer
>> production and how they are addressed in Fab Labs (fabrication
>> laboratories): shared spaces where users can design and make their own
>> artefacts outside of conventional mass production channels, using, for
>> example, laser cutters, 3D printers and electronics stations. Fab Labs are
>> open to members of the general public, who learn to use the equipment
>> themselves and are encouraged (or required) to document and openly share
>> their projects. ?Making? in Fab Labs and the ?maker movement? are often
>> endorsed by proponents as a better alternative to mass consumption and
>> consumerism, whether through enhancing skills to build and repair,
>> answering one?s own needs as opposed to ?satisficing? through passive
>> consumption, or distributing production within local networks as opposed to
>> long, tr
>> ansport-intensive and large-volume supply chains. However, Fab Labs and
>> makerspaces are contexts rife with paradox and complexity concerning
>> appropriate use of materials and energy. Little empirical research on
>> material peer production currently exists, and the environmental impacts,
>> and benefits, of digital fabrication are largely unknown.
>> Primarily through ethnographic research methods and Symbolic
>> Interactionist analysis, the thesis examines daily practices and discourses
>> in selected Fab Labs and how sustainability is represented in these
>> communities. The findings articulate how the actors? interactions,
>> expressed intents and contextual conditions serve to shape the Fab Lab. The
>> key finding is the conflict actors encounter between ? on the one hand ?
>> setting ambitions, promoting particular ideologies and espousing
>> sustainability-oriented values, and ? on the other hand ? realizing and
>> enacting these values in the mundane and constraining routines of everyday
>> practice. Even actors with a clear ecological mandate struggle to engage
>> with emerging sustainability issues in a rapidly changing sociotechnical
>> environment. Present topics of concern and everyday tasks overshadow future
>> strategy and vision work as well as engagement with environmental issues
>> and rapid technology developments. However, actors who consciously and
>> visibly strive to enact the espoused Fab Lab ideology, i.e. offering
>> access to empowering, distributed technologies that enable people to meet
>> their own local needs by design, appear better able to identify and tackle
>> the environmental sustainability issues as they arise. Environmental issues
>> are also intertwined with and embedded in other ideological concerns, but
>> they are rarely promoted in their own right.
>> The thesis also details the current landscape of research literature on
>> distributed production, who is studying these environmental issues and how,
>> and the potential opportunities and threats in this new mode of production.
>> The thesis thereby contributes to research on peer production communities,
>> social shaping of technology and sustainable design. Knowledge of current
>> maker practices and their sustainability implications have value for the
>> peer communities studied, but also potentially technology developers and
>> policy makers. As Fab Labs are experimental spaces for new digital
>> manufacturing capabilities and activities, the wider implications of the
>> findings may indicate how increasing digitalization and citizen involvement
>> in production will transform design and production ? and the sustainability
>> implications therein.
>> Keywords: Fab Labs, environmental sustainability, digital fabrication,
>> distributed production, peer production
>> Subject: Digest Footer
>> opendesign mailing list
>> opendesign at lists.okfn.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/opendesign
>> End of opendesign Digest, Vol 44, Issue 2
> *Irene Maldini*
> +31 0650451478
> opendesign mailing list
> opendesign at lists.okfn.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.okfn.org/mailman/options/opendesign
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the opendesign