Are makers social in their endeavour?

Are makers social in their endeavour? This question is addressed in the paper “Makers’ ambitions to do socially valuable things” (Unterfrauner & Voigt, 2017), presented at the Design for the Next Conference in Rome and now published in The Design Journal (free copies are available here).

The study in based on a cross-case analysis of ten European maker initiatives and 30 semi-structured interviews, which have been analysed by qualitative methods. In the article we summarise aspects of social making and present examples of maker initiatives that prove to be social in one way or the other in the sense that the invention is beneficial for others or for the community.

We discuss in the paper the value of making and the role of openness and sharing and in more detail crucial social elements of making, i.e. education, inclusion and environmentalism. You can find the paper and the presentation we used in Rome down below.

Continue reading “Are makers social in their endeavour?” »

Read More ...

How can we understand collaborative behaviours in Maker projects on platforms?

Makers very often work in collaboration with other people, and several times they share their work online as open source (software, hardware, design, …). I’ve been researching how people work collaboratively especially in Open Design projects for several years, and now a bit also in MAKE-IT as well, especially in how these collaborative behaviours could be understood in connections with platforms and especially Collective Awareness Platforms (CAPS).

Makers (and designers and engineers and …) could engage in Open Design in several ways: designing projects, discussing projects, discussing Open Design itself, building platforms that host Open Design projects (like Fablabs.io, the open source platform of the global Fab Lab network)… and so on. These are among the many activities that could be done in the Open Design world and that have an influence on it, and platforms have an increasingly strong impact on these collaborative behaviours. Understanding collaborative processes by makers on such platforms is also an important steps towards understanding platforms in general. For these reasons I wrote a paper for the Design for Next conference (and published in The Design Journal) and a software library that tries to answer to this research question: how could the analysis of social interactions over time on such platforms improve the understanding of design-related collaborative processes?

Understanding this would enable us to advance our understanding of how platforms connects and influence makers and designers in their collaborative work on Open Design, and to provide support to the activity of Maker and Design researchers and of reflective practitioners as well. In this case I focused on analysing projects managed with the Git software and GitHub platform, which are very popular among software developers especially but also among makers. These tool and platform have been investigated with several approaches, papers and softwares, but not with makers, designers and Open Design as the main focus. Furthermore, it’s hard to find reusable software from these researches so that it would be easier to replicate them, especially for reflective practitioners (you would need to have some programming and data science skills, but several makers already have them!). For this reason I developed a software library in the Python language, since it is arguably the most popular language for data science, and therefore anybody can use the library for extracting data about collaborative behaviours on Git and GitHub; the analysis is up to you, with the tools that you prefer. This is therefore not only research, but also innovation as in disseminating research results and tools to make them available to everybody.

I called this library platform_analysis since its aim is to analyse interactions over time in several platforms; for the moment it works with Git and GitHub, but it will be soon extended to other platforms. The library extracts the data from projects and returns a graph of time-stamped interactions that can be then analysed with social network analysis: interactions can be then analysed for the project as a whole or as they happen through time, and we can see therefore how participants collaborated in a project, in which kind of interactions and when. This would enable researchers and practitioners to understand what is happening in such projects and platforms.

This is one of the software applications or libraries we are releasing from MAKE-IT (we will publish more of them soon!), available for discussion and development in a GitHub repository and for the installation as a Python module. This is based on a couple of previous experimentations and tests, now finally fully integrated and structured in a complete software library that is then much more structured, complete and easier to use for all the researchers and reflective practitioners (designers and makers) for analysing their projects!
Continue reading “How can we understand collaborative behaviours in Maker projects on platforms?” »

Read More ...

Other Horizon 2020 CAPS projects about Makers, and the OpenMaker call for projects

MAKE-IT is not the only Horizon 2020 CAPS project to work with the Maker movement, other projects are addressing it with different perspectives. For example, OpenCare empowers care receivers to design and prototype bottom-up solutions to specific care problems. The European network of makerspaces, Fab Labs, etc. makes these solutions distributed, as every prototype devised can be reproduced, tested and deployed anywhere in the world.

Making Sense aims to explore how open source software, open source hardware, digital maker practices and open design can be effectively used by local communities to fabricate their own sensing tools, make sense of their environments and address pressing environmental problems in air, water, soil and sound pollution (beside MAKE-IT, IAACFab Lab Barcelona also participates in this project).

OpenMaker aims to create a transformational and collaborative ecosystem that fosters collective innovations within the European manufacturing sector by connecting makers and established companies and drives it towards more sustainable business models, production processes, products, and governance systems by bringing together manufacturers and makers. It is especially important to note now the call for the OpenMaker Pilot Support Scheme

Continue reading “Other Horizon 2020 CAPS projects about Makers, and the OpenMaker call for projects” »

Read More ...

Case study: Fab Lab Zagreb – the first FabLab in Croatia

Fab Lab Zagreb (FLZ) is one of the cases that we have explored to understand how maker initiatives are organized, how makers improve their skills and how they interact with each other and finally, which values are created by making.

Fab Lab Zagreb is the first Fab Lab that was established in Croatia. It is registered as an NGO and maintains close ties with the Faculty of Architecture at Zagreb University, where it is currently located. Fab Lab Zagreb’s main mission is to promote digital fabrication to a general public in cooperation with similar organizations on local level and internationally.

Fab Lab Zagreb is strongly connected to its current president and manager, Roberto Vdović, who also teaches at the Faculty of Architecture University of Zagreb. Being pioneers in 3D desktop printing in Croatia, Roberto and two colleagues established the first Fab Lab in Croatia in 2013 and registered it according to the Fab Lab charter.

Fab Lab Zagreb follows three core missions:

The first one is taking a leading role in educational aspect connected to the whole maker and DIY movement ([email protected]): how to engage general population to use new digital fabrication technologies to improve STEAM skills, by connecting different education levels, and experiences.

The second mission is highly relevant for the local community (Give-a-hand):  to be inspired by the local community problems and issues and find solutions using new technology, DIY (Do it yourself), DIWO (Do It With Others), find individual solutions and solutions for the community. Thus, Fab Lab Zagreb has a strong commitment to solving a wide range of social and other needs and moving towards contributing to meeting wider societal challenges in these areas. It addresses and involves children, unemployed people, people with disabilities, artists and students.

The third mission is supporting entrepreneurship (Do Local Go Global): it is related to the previous mission. If locally inspired solutions become interesting for global markets, they can be developed in the maker space (such as MakerBuino).

In addition, FLZ it is strictly following an open source ethos and promoting openness as part of their educational message. It serves as an entry space for their first experiences with digital fabrication. Fab Lab Zagreb puts a focus on interdisciplinarity in their activities and events, again, with a special focus on achieving educational goals and social goals.

For more detailed information please have a look at our report and the FLZ website (in Croatian).

 

Read More ...

Case study: Happylab – the first FabLab in Austria

Happylab is one of “our” cases that we have explored to understand how maker initiatives are organized, how makers improve their skills and how they interact with each other and finally, which values are created by making.

Happylab has around 2,000 members in Vienna (there are two more labs, in Salzburg and in Berlin) and is managed by two CEOs, additionally it is supported by 5 staff members, i.e. lab manager, technical support, PR and office support. It is a small-medium enterprise whose sustainability is enabled by membership fees (among other sources of income). The machines, Happylab hosts, are the following: lasercutter, CNC Milling machine, 3D Printer, and Vinylcutter.

One of the core missions of Happylab is to be accessible to the widest segments of population and does thus follow principles of empowerment and inclusion. Further, efforts are taken to reach out to pupils at different educational levels.

Accessibility is seen from a financial perspective as well as from a usability perspective. Financially the hurdle to use Happylab is rather low although only those who are paying members are allowed to use the infrastructure. The membership fee however is affordable for most people (from 9 to 49 Euro per month). From the usability point of view the mangers have tried to make the work flows as easy as possible to lower the hurdles for people without any technological background.

All the machines are professional machines which work more reliably and allow for a good user experience.

Members of Happylab are not requested to respect a comprising code of conduct when using the infrastructure but there are a few rules that are taken seriously. For instance, membership cards are personal and it is strictly forbidden to pass it to another person. This way, Happylab has control over whether a person is allowed to use a certain machine or not (depending on whether he or she has completed the free training for that particular machine in order to protect the machine from damage).

The Happylab members learn and acquire skills, necessary to operate the machines, trough free trainings and additional specific courses (to pay) offered by Happylab formally and more informally in exchange with other members. Courses comprise trainings that are dedicated to children between 10 and 15 years, the Fab Lab Bootcamp that is a week of training on digital design and fabrication, Fab Academy that lasts for half a year, and the Ideas2Product course that aims at supporting entrepreneurs from prototyping to a product on the market.

Happylab creates economic value in the region of Vienna in the sense that it is a nutshell for start-up entrepreneurs and quite some enterprises have been born in Happylab or due to the use of Happylab. Happylab is set up in a way that is ideal for start-ups. Without any risk they can experiment around with professional machines, which would certainly exceed the financial capability of a young start-up.

Happylab creates social value among its members. Users of the lab appreciate the networking aspect that they feel among likeminded people who share similar interests. Many projects that have been realised in Happylab, besides its commercial aspect, bear social value.

For more detailed information please have a look at our report and the Happylab website www.happylab.at

 

Read More ...

Lessons learnt from our in-depth cross-case analysis of 10 maker initiatives in Europe

We have distilled 10 lessons learnt from our in-depth cross-case analysis of 10 maker initiatives in Europe.

Here comes lesson 1:

Although currently we hardly see a major shift in the production of products in general, i.e. from centralised to de-centralised production, we recognise that maker products have a unique selling proposition since products serve niche markets.

Lesson 2:

Maker products have the advantage to responsively take into account individual user needs. Thus personalised and customised products can be developed effectively and fast.

Lesson 3:

 

Maker initiatives but also makers themselves have a dense network of links to different stakeholder groups, especially to educational institutions. These networks seem to be key for achieving sustainability.

Continue reading “Lessons learnt from our in-depth cross-case analysis of 10 maker initiatives in Europe” »

Read More ...

Notes for future research on the impact of the Fab Lab network

For more than 10 years, the global Fab Lab network gathers each year in a conference/symposium/meeting where its members can meet, discuss and share ideas, projects, knowledge and collaboration. This year FAB13, the 13th edition, was held in Santiago de Chile with “Fabricating Society” as its central topic during July 31 – August 6 2017. Unfortunately I could not attend it, so I’m not going to discuss the event, but here you can find pictures and videos of the event and here a complete overview of what happened during FAB13.

What I’d like to talk about here is that these FAB events usually have a small research track where members of the community present scientific papers about their activities and research, and this year its topic followed closely the topic of the main conference: “Fab Labs and Society” (and I was part of the program committee and reviewed some contributions). You can read the complete book of the proceedings here and download it here, and since some papers were only available as abstracts for the conference you can find the final version of all papers here. Beside the papers, the editors of the proceedings kindly invited me and other researchers to provide an article for the proceedings without a peer review evaluation (more like a book chapter), and I wrote a short chapter with notes for future research on the impact of the Fab Lab network. This short contribution aims at proposing a set of research questions for the Fab Lab network, that should be considered more as notes shared among members of the community than as a structured research proposal. Furthermore, this was the opportunity to reflect about how to improve our understanding of the impact of the Fab Lab network and of the Maker movement, a very strategic issue that I think it is still under researched. Luckily, MAKE-IT is one of the first contributions towards exploring this dimension, and in the article I also explains why I think MAKE-IT could be useful for researchers and the Fab Lab network in this direction.

You can read the article in the book of proceedings or its draft here below, under the Publication page, or on Academia.edu here and on ResearchGate here.
Continue reading “Notes for future research on the impact of the Fab Lab network” »

Read More ...