DGML – P2P Foundation https://blog.p2pfoundation.net Researching, documenting and promoting peer to peer practices Mon, 11 Feb 2019 09:54:02 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.5.14 62076519 Emergence of Open Construction Systems https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/emergence-of-open-construction-systems/2019/02/10 https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/emergence-of-open-construction-systems/2019/02/10#respond Sun, 10 Feb 2019 09:00:00 +0000 https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=74451 Article: The Emergence of Open Construction Systems: A Sustainable Paradigm in the Construction Sector? By Christina Priavolou. Journal of Futures Studies, December 2018, 23(2): 67–84 Abstract This paper discusses how emerging issues in housing construction could revolutionise the building industry. It focuses on commons-based networks of organisations, technologies and users that form a niche practice... Continue reading

The post Emergence of Open Construction Systems appeared first on P2P Foundation.

]]>
Article: The Emergence of Open Construction Systems: A Sustainable Paradigm in the Construction Sector? By Christina Priavolou. Journal of Futures Studies, December 2018, 23(2): 67–84

Abstract

This paper discusses how emerging issues in housing construction could revolutionise the building industry. It focuses on commons-based networks of organisations, technologies and users that form a niche practice on the margins of the dominant paradigm. This practice can be understood as “Design Global, Manufacture Local” and is exemplified by the Hexayurt, the Open Source Ecology Microhouse and the WikiHouse. Using these descriptive case studies, light is shed on the challenges and opportunities of open construction systems with regard to technological, institutional and social perspectives. Notwithstanding the positive dynamics, certain issues need to be addressed, so that a sustainable built environment could flourish.

Excerpts

The DGML Approach

As a form of CBPP, the DGML approach introduces a shift from mass-produced solutions to customised ones. It describes the convergence of global digital commons with local manufacturing technologies (including 3D printers, CNC machines, laser cutters, etc.), as well as simple tools (like saws, drills, etc.). It emerged as a promising model of distributed production within the dominant capitalist system (Giotitsas & Ramos, 2017). Further, extensive discussions have triggered about the impact of DGML on culture through the idea of cosmo-localism (Ramos, 2017).

Echoing Kostakis, Latoufis Liarokapis, & Bauwens (2016a), three genuine components of the DGML paradigm include: the removal of planned obsolescence that describes the deliberate production of goods with a limited lifetime towards profit maximisation (BBC, 2017; Guiltinan, 2009); on-demand production, considering that the manufacturing process takes place in local makerspaces, hence transportation and environmental impacts are expected to be lower (Kohtala & Hyysalo, 2015; Kostakis, Fountouklis, & Drechsler, 2013); sharing practices and mutualisation of both digital (such as software and designs) and material infrastructures (such as makerspaces and shared machinery).

Considering recent concerns for sustainability (Taranic, Behrens, & Topi, 2016; Whicher, Harris, Beverley, & Swiatek, 2018), the DGML model could pave the way for sustainable practices in the built environment. This model entails the concept of modular design through the use of recyclable elements that could be deconstructed without damage and reused. Hence, repairability, recyclability, disassemblability, and upgradability of the manufactured components can be achieved (Bonvoisin, 2016).

The DGML approach is also characterised by flexibility in the design of objects via the use of parametric design tools. Digital 3D designs stimulate an ongoing interaction between the participants in the design process since they represent information easily grasped even from amateurs (Yap, Ngwenyama, & Osei-Bryson, 2003). More dimensions, such as financial data, material properties or energy characteristics, can be added to the building geometry through the concept of Building Information Modelling (BIM). The latter allows for advanced simulations— including structural tests, energy analyses, etc.—which enable a life-cycle management of buildings by increasing predictability levels.”

Technological, institutional and social aspects of Open Construction Systems

The prefigurative examples of change presented through the three case studies have significant implications for the future of the construction sector and societal development. The focus is placed on the identification of opportunities and problems faced by these communities to expand the use of open construction systems. Relevant issues are analysed with regard to three interrelated aspects: technological, institutional and social.

Technological aspect

Parametric design tools can support the propagation of open construction systems, given that one-size-fits-all solutions of housing supply cannot work (WikiHouse, 2018a). The complexity of buildings together with a variety of regional contexts (with regard to climate, soil, regulations, etc.) renders the existence of parameters indispensable. Investment in information management through the use of BIM technology can support long-term decision-making processes, while robust planning could address quality and risk-related issues identified by self-build communities (Open Source Ecology, 2018).

Furthermore, communication protocols are necessary so that different stakeholders can address responsibility issues and cooperate harmoniously during the construction process. To facilitate transnational cooperation through BIM, national classification systems should be combined in international scale through the commitment on open standards (such as the Industry Foundation Classes). This would enable the participation of engineering firms in the research and development of open construction systems by offering technical support to communities across the building supply chain.

As far as the design part is concerned, a crucial element for the creation of an international, collaborative puzzle of structures via the use of open construction systems is standardisation. This term refers to the existence of a global dimensional framework to ensure common design guidelines (Open Structures, 2018). In this way, dimensions of the parts that compose a structure could be chosen according to a common global grid. These parts could then be assembled into components, which, in turn, could be combined into flexible structures and superstructures. The construction of a building could, thus, be analogised to the formation of an organism (Open Structures, 2018).

Another integral part of the process is the existence of detailed open-source documentation, as well as its ongoing update. Architectural data (e.g. digital drawings and calculations), construction data (e.g. model tests and building methods), technical, chemical and biophysical details (e.g. weather conditions and subsoil), costs (e.g. materials and equipment) and environmental requirements (e.g. recycling, water and depletion) should be extensively documented, facilitating the widespread replicability of open hardware solutions through easy-to-follow manuals (Bonvoisin, 2016).

Experimentations with new materials could improve open construction systems. Instead of monolithic materials (such as plywood, cardboard, etc.) mainly used during the introduction of these buildings, advanced materials, such as nanotechnology, bioplastics, and composites, could also be tested. However, given the difficulty of distinction between organic and industrial materials included in biocomposites, special care should be taken to ensure the recyclability of the new materials. The goal is to attain energy savings, structural capacity, as well as higher resistance to heat and moisture in extreme weather conditions through the use of environmentally friendly materials towards future circularity.

Institutional aspect

Open construction systems are promising, but the regional variation of building regulations and zoning codes is challenging. Although the International Building Codes reflect the best practices based on construction experience and technology, local regulations vary from country to country and from context to context. For example, in parts of Missouri, USA, there are no building regulations (Open Building Institute, 2018), whereas in the UK building permissions can be evaded as specified by a set of laws (Knight & Williams, 2012).

The creation of simplified databases with regulation-related documents per country is believed to give prominence to the benefits of building open construction systems at local levels (Open Building Institute, 2018). Also, by taking advantage of the non-existence or ambiguity of regulations, loopholes in building codes allow communities to operate in a more restriction-free manner (Knight & Williams, 2012).

The embedded modularity of open construction systems allows for the mitigation of spatial barriers, which come from differences between strict building regulations. In that sense, modularity enables flexibility, which, in turn, facilitates compliance with the building codes: by replacing specific modules with others; by substituting materials; by adding or removing modules to meet geometric constraints. Moreover, modular design facilitates the disassembly of a structure into building modules, which can be modified, substituted and upgraded independently, as well as undergo physical tests in response to varying circumstances.

Despite their inability to address issues of inflated land prices and unequal access to resources, open construction systems seem to attract political support, like the case of the ongoing WikiHouse project in Almere. The reason for this could be the increasing demand for sustainable housing in the developing world and the mounting number of low-income groups in the developed countries.

Within oppressive austerity policies, it is possible that local authorities will start financing open construction systems as low-cost technological solutions. Otherwise, communities should keep struggling to raise funds, which come from donations or other sources (e.g., selling manuals and offering service-based support).

Finally, the institutionalisation of such dispersed informal teams or individuals is vital for the expansion of these initiatives. These groups strive to advance their initial ideas and engage professional groups in the actualisation of their projects. As more professionals and organisations get involved over time, institutional constraints will be eliminated (Molitor, 1977).

Social aspect

Enabled by information technologies, open construction systems attempt to provision housing in a creative, socialising and convivial way. People enjoy greater potential when working within collectives, leading to the renaissance of pre-industrial architecture through community-based building. In this context, citizen-driven initiatives try to provide affordable and sustainable housing.

Digital fabrication technologies may be helpful tools towards this goal, given that they translate digital data into physical objects. Consequently, the thresholds of skills, cost and time needed for the construction are lowered together with the relevant transportation and socio-environmental costs(Kostakis, Fountouklis, & Drechsler, 2013).

Moving beyond market economy systems, low-cost, adaptable and sustainable solutions can be produced in localised settings. The soil nourishing the shared infrastructure of the global digital commons can continuously be expanded by contributors around the world. Beyond that, the availability of various building types under open-source licences fosters experimentation and the ability to develop combinations of the best or most appropriate elements for each situation.

The implementation of the DGML model in the construction sector introduces a radically different approach from that of the dominant model. In cases like the building process, where stakeholders with various interests are involved, conflicts are unavoidable. For instance, open construction systems may seem as a long-term sustainable solution to global issues for the opensource communities. On the other hand, the sharing of infrastructures may threaten the short-term profit-oriented goals of the construction companies.

A redefinition of roles and responsibilities of all parties involved in the construction process—including governments, self-build communities, engineers, and asset-owners—is required. Thus, we need to witness behavioural change towards resource efficiency and sustainability. For example, supporting services and consultancy could be purchased instead of tangible objects and systems could be developed and monitored in collaborative environments instead of competitive ones.

Considering the newly-published information around open construction, the scalability of such emerging initiatives and their future ability to outcompete the dominant construction model in terms of quality or safety may be questionable. However, the success of open-source initiatives in the past has given prominence to the importance of human participation. The latter may be increased by promoting global awareness of the sustainability features of the open-source movement, as well as of the circular economy features embedded in the use of open construction systems. By empowering proactive and knowledgeable citizens globally, more individuals, collectives, and firms would be contributing to the improvement of open construction systems and the related policy making. In this way, the development of flexible modular structures via a common dimensional framework could prompt the completion of the universal building puzzle. Yet no one could question the role of education to prepare the participants for new building practices and build resilience at a global scale.

Despite the efforts of these open-source communities to solve pressing future challenges, form new business strategies and become institutionalised, these projects remain marginal. However, their momentum to provide affordable and sustainable housing affects many. Their mounting social impacts increase the chances for these innovative initiatives to evolve into an important issue.

Especially by intensifying the testing of solutions with the aid of a global network of contributors, these communities could be integrated into the mainstream and challenge the status quo.

Given the current global credit crisis and sustainability concerns, the DGML model creates new ecosystems with the potential to grow more widely. The key systemic factors that enable this proliferation include: the broad diffusion of low-cost ICT and internet connectivity, the development of the relevant culture around openness and sharing intensified by the widespread means of information sharing, and the ecological crisis that creates higher demand for more sustainable and circular economy-based models.

Finally, the DGML model has the flexibility to adjust to different needs and contexts, as well as provide solutions to various issues, which may correlate to market failures in the global North or the inexistence of relevant infrastructure in the global South. Thus, it may fill the gaps of marketbased solutions for sustainable housing through the development of alternative systems of housing provision, while providing affordable housing to the people in need.”

Conclusion

“This article contributes to the understanding of how individuals, companies, and governments could come together to promote a sustainable built environment. It represents an attempt to shed light on the dynamics of the emerging open construction systems implemented through DGML approaches. The entire debate regarding open construction systems has gained momentum in light of the growing concern about global pressing issues.

In this context, three case studies were used to elucidate the ways and means by which the DGML model can further sustainability in the construction sector by sharing physical and digital infrastructures. These case studies see the construction process as a community-driven procedure that unfolds outside the market economy. The relevant challenges and opportunities were elaborated upon.

It is concluded that the implementation of the DGML approach in constructions calls for drastic changes in current practices, in the role of various stakeholders and the scale of the processes.

Especially new business strategies surface with the involvement of advisers, developers, business and organisational experts in citizen-driven projects, providing expertise on all stages of the building supply chain. The necessity for institutionalisation of the communities involved, as well as the existence of a standard design grid to enable large-scale constructions, could boost the potential of open construction systems, maximising their social impact.

A limitation of this paper is that the problems and opportunities that accompany the implementation of the DGML model in the construction sector were identified but not directly addressed. Technical evaluations of open construction systems could estimate the degree of sustainability of these structures. Hopefully, this article will prompt discussions among industry practitioners and trigger explorations worldwide.”

More information

Contact author via

  • Christina Priavolou. Ragnar Nurkse Department of Innovation and Governance, Tallinn University of Technology, Akadeemia street 3, 12618, Tallinn, Estonia.
  • P2P Lab, Kougkiou 3A, 45221, Ioannina, Greece.

Photo by *m22

The post Emergence of Open Construction Systems appeared first on P2P Foundation.

]]>
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/emergence-of-open-construction-systems/2019/02/10/feed 0 74451
New Technologies Won’t Reduce Scarcity, but Here’s Something That Might https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/new-technologies-wont-reduce-scarcity-but-heres-something-that-might/2018/09/14 https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/new-technologies-wont-reduce-scarcity-but-heres-something-that-might/2018/09/14#respond Fri, 14 Sep 2018 08:00:00 +0000 https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=72620 Vasilis Kostakis, Andreas Roos:  In a book titled Why Can’t We All Just Get Along?, MIT scientists Henry Lieberman and Christopher Fry discuss why we have wars, mass poverty, and other social ills. They argue that we cannot cooperate with each other to solve our major problems because our institutions and businesses are saturated with... Continue reading

The post New Technologies Won’t Reduce Scarcity, but Here’s Something That Might appeared first on P2P Foundation.

]]>
Vasilis Kostakis, Andreas Roos:  In a book titled Why Can’t We All Just Get Along?, MIT scientists Henry Lieberman and Christopher Fry discuss why we have wars, mass poverty, and other social ills. They argue that we cannot cooperate with each other to solve our major problems because our institutions and businesses are saturated with a competitive spirit. But Lieberman and Fry have some good news: modern technology can address the root of the problem. They believe that we compete when there is scarcity, and that recent technological advances, such as 3D printing and artificial intelligence, will end widespread scarcity. Thus, a post-scarcity world, premised on cooperation, would emerge.

But can we really end scarcity?

We believe that the post-scarcity vision of the future is problematic because it reflects an understanding of technology and the economy that could worsen the problems it seeks to address. This is the bad news. Here’s why:

New technologies come to consumers as finished products that can be exchanged for money. What consumers often don’t understand is that the monetary exchange hides the fact that many of these technologies exist at the expense of other humans and local environments elsewhere in the global economy. The intuitive belief that technology can manifest from money alone, anthropologists tell us, is a culturally rooted notion which hides the fact that the scarcity experienced by some is linked to the abundance enjoyed only by a few.

Many people believe that issues of scarcity can be solved by using more efficient production methods. But this may overlook some of the unintended consequences of efficiency improvements. The Jevons Paradox, a key finding attributed to the 19th century British economist Stanley Jevons, illustrates how efficiency improvements can lead to an absolute increase of consumption due to lower prices per unit and a subsequent increase in demand. For example, the invention of more efficient train engines allowed for cheaper transportation that catalyzed the industrial revolution. However, this did not reduce the rate of fossil fuel use; rather, it increased it.  When more efficient machines use less energy, they cost less, which often encourages us to use them more—resulting in a net increase in energy consumption.

Past experience tells us that super-efficient technologies typically encourage increased throughput of raw materials and energy, rather than reducing them. Data on the global use of energy and raw materials indicate that absolute efficiency has never occurred: both global energy use and global material use have increased threefold since the 1970s. Therefore, efficiency is better understood as a rearranging of resources expenditures, such that efficiency improvements in one end of the world economy increase resource expenditures in the other end.

The good news is that there are alternatives. The wide availability of networked computers has allowed new community-driven and open-source business models to emerge. For example, consider Wikipedia, a free and open encyclopedia that has displaced the Encyclopedia Britannica and Microsoft Encarta. Wikipedia is produced and maintained by a community of dispersed enthusiasts primarily driven by other motives than profit maximization.  Furthermore, in the realm of software, see the case of GNU/Linux on which the top 500 supercomputers and the majority of websites run, or the example of the Apache Web Server, the leading software in the web-server market. Wikipedia, Apache and GNU/Linux demonstrate how non-coercive cooperation around globally-shared resources (i.e. a commons) can produce artifacts as innovative, if not more, as those produced by industrial capitalism.

In the same way, the emergence of networked micro-factories are giving rise to new open-source business models in the realm of design and manufacturing. Such spaces can either be makerspaces, fab labs, or other co-working spaces, equipped with local manufacturing technologies, such as 3D printing and CNC machines or traditional low-tech tools and crafts. Moreover, such spaces often offer collaborative environments where people can meet in person, socialize and co-create.

This is the context in which a new mode of production is emerging. This mode builds on the confluence of the digital commons of knowledge, software, and design with local manufacturing technologies.  It can be codified as “design global, manufacture local” following the logic that what is light (knowledge, design) becomes global, while what is heavy (machinery) is local, and ideally shared. Design global, manufacture local (DGML) demonstrates how a technology project can leverage the digital commons to engage the global community in its development, celebrating new forms of cooperation. Unlike large-scale industrial manufacturing, the DGML model emphasizes application that is small-scale, decentralized, resilient, and locally controlled. DGML could recognize the scarcities posed by finite resources and organize material activities accordingly. First, it minimizes the need to ship materials over long distances, because a considerable part of the manufacturing takes place locally. Local manufacturing also makes maintenance easier, and also encourages manufacturers to design products to last as long as possible. Last, DGML optimizes the sharing of knowledge and design as there are no patent costs to pay for.

There is already a rich tapestry of DGML initiatives happening in the global economy that do not need a unified physical basis because their members are located all over the world. For example, consider the L’Atelier Paysan  (France) and Farmhack (U.S.), communities that collaboratively build open-source agricultural machines for small-scale farming; or the Wikihouse project that democratizes the construction of sustainable, resource-light dwellings;  or the OpenBionics project that produces open source and low-cost designs for robotic and bionic devices; or the RepRap community that creates open-source designs for 3D printers that can be self-replicated.  Around these digital commons, new business opportunities are flourishing, while people engage in collaborative production driven by diverse motives.

So, what does this mean for the future of tomorrow’s businesses, the future of the global economy, and the future of the natural world?

First, it is important to acknowledge that within a single human being the “homo economicus”—the self-interested being programmed to maximize profits—will continue to co-exist with the “homo socialis”, a more altruistic being who loves to communicate, work for pleasure, and share. Our institutions are biased by design. They endorse certain behaviours over the others. In modern industrial capitalism, the foundation upon which our institutions have been established is that we are all homo economicus. Hence, for a “good” life, which is not always reflected in growth and other monetary indexes, we need to create institutions that would also harness and empower the homo socialis.

Second, the hidden social and environmental costs of technologies will have to be recognized. The so-called “digital society” is admittedly based on a material- and energy-intensive infrastructure. This is important to recognize so as not to further jeopardize the lives of current and future generations by unwittingly encouraging serious environmental instability and associated social problems.

Finally, a new network of interconnected commons-based businesses will continue to emerge, where sharing is not used to maximize profits, but to create new forms of businesses that would empower much more sharing, caring, and collaboration globally. As the global community becomes more aware of how their abundance is dependent on other human beings and the stability of environments, more and more will see commons-based businesses as the way of the future.


Vasilis Kostakis is a Senior Researcher at Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia, and he is affiliated with the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard University.

Andreas Roos is a PhD student in the interdisciplinary field of Human Ecology at Lund.

Originally published at HBR.org

Photo by longan drink

The post New Technologies Won’t Reduce Scarcity, but Here’s Something That Might appeared first on P2P Foundation.

]]>
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/new-technologies-wont-reduce-scarcity-but-heres-something-that-might/2018/09/14/feed 0 72620
Transforming Production: An Open Design Distributed Manufacturing Symposium https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/transforming-production-an-open-design-distributed-manufacturing-symposium/2017/04/24 https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/transforming-production-an-open-design-distributed-manufacturing-symposium/2017/04/24#respond Mon, 24 Apr 2017 08:23:13 +0000 https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=64965 A quiet revolution has been underway in material production, in agriculture, construction and manufacturing. A global design commons now provides people with opportunities to draw on a global legacy of human creativity. New technologies allow people to produce locally what was previously only possible by large companies. There is an emerging body of ideas and... Continue reading

The post Transforming Production: An Open Design Distributed Manufacturing Symposium appeared first on P2P Foundation.

]]>
A quiet revolution has been underway in material production, in agriculture, construction and manufacturing. A global design commons now provides people with opportunities to draw on a global legacy of human creativity. New technologies allow people to produce locally what was previously only possible by large companies.

There is an emerging body of ideas and practices around distributed manufacturing / production. P2P Foundation researchers recently articulated the “design global – manufacture local” (DGML) model. Last year I followed up with this essay for the P2P Foundation on “cosmo-localization“. Meanwhile Fab City launched its initiative to drive localized city based open design production. New communities like Farm HackL’Atelier Paysans and enterprises like OSvehicle are making practical strides.

To explore this further, I am organising an event in Melbourne, Australia, that will bring together experts in the areas of additive manufacturing, industrial design, the maker movement, and ecological economics. Together we will explore the emerging outline of this new economic model. Join us if you would like to find out what this revolution means for industry, for government policy and for society. You may discover opportunities to connect with the people driving and playing in this emerging space.

DATE AND TIME: Fri, May 12, 2017, 6:30 PM – 8:30 PM AES

LOCATION: Kelvin Club, 14-30 Melbourne Pl, Melbourne, VIC 3000, Australia

  • Five speakers will present, each for 10 minutes (descriptions below).
  • This will be followed by a Q&A for any guests to ask questions.
  • Food and drink can be ordered from the Kelvin Club before, during or after the event.

Tickets are available on Eventbrite – Book Now

Symposium Presenters and Topics 

Sharon Ede will present on Fab City, an example of ‘Design Global Manufacture Local’ based in Barcelona, which seeks to leverage the digital and traditional production infrastructure of Fab Labs (fabrication laboratories) and open source design to help bring production and making skills back to cities. Barcelona, Paris, Boston, Detroit, Santiago, San Francisco and Shenzhen are among the cities which have taken a pledge to relocalise 50% of their production of energy, food and manufacturing by 2054.

Rob Eales will discuss his current work including, developing tools for small acre and organic farmers, the farm hack model as a way to drive the development of new tools, the opportunities in the development of better internet access for Victorian rural and regional communities, the OSVehicle project and what it could mean for local production, the drivers and opportunities for his practice and current issues that exist for these approaches including scaling up or across, the funding and documenting of Open Source Hardware (OSHW) projects and R&D in the context of these projects.

Dr. Mark Richardson will discuss four core principles that tie together his practice-based design research – openness, modularity, design for reuse and making. He is interested in how tangible expressions of these help create the narratives that shift culture, inspire systems renewal, develop communities of practice and provide new and optimistic senses of self, space and place.

Alison Kershaw will talk about how makerspaces are places of opportunity and possibility. As local and global economies change makerspaces are going to play a vital part in providing low cost, low risk and supported access to new technologies and communities of people wanting to create, learn, share, solve both local and global problems. Current policy and thinking regarding makerspaces is short sighted. It predominantly focuses on makerspaces in educational institutions, to the exclusion of community makerspaces, which are more than educational but communities of makers exploring new ways of working, doing business and creating value.

Dr. Jose Ramos will talk about the transition to a design global, manufacture local approach to production, what he calls “cosmo-localization”. This shift includes a number of critical elements: the human right to produce from global designs, the elaboration of a circular economy to complement industrial micro-clusters, a “partner state” model where government will support both localized manufacturing, peer production communities and makerspaces, the development of anchor organizations that protect the design commons, and entrepreneurial coalitions capable of scaling production from niche to market.

BIOS

Sharon Ede

Sharon Ede is an urbanist and activist working to build the sharing and collaborative movement in Adelaide, Australia and beyond. In 2012, she set up Share Adelaide to document and inspire local sharing activity. In her public servant role, she initiated and collaborated on a project that maps community sharing assets, which was funded and open sourced by the State government.Sharon is a co founder of the Post Growth Institute and a catalyst for the FabCity Global Initiative.

Rob Eales

Rob Eales is an Industrial Designer working with Open Source Hardware and Software as a way to explore new approaches and methods for the development of products and services that seek to address critical societal issues such as climate change. He is interested in how the development and distribution of open source products could redefine the work that communities do and where they do it. Recently he has been working with small-acre, organic farmers to develop new tools, organising farm hack events and discussing the possibilities of open source vehicle design with his network.

Mark Richardson

Mark Richardson is formally a senior designer at Ford Motor Company, he was involved in both conceptual and global manufacturing projects, such as the R7 show car, Territory, European Mondeo and Asia Pacific Fiesta. Mark now lectures in Industrial Design at Monash University, having completed a PhD seeking evidence to support the advance of ecologically and socially sustainable mobility systems through hands-on practices of making. His research now investigates how we can transition from current design and production methods to more sustainable, resilient and accessible systems of creating, making, sharing and learning.

Alison Kershaw

Alison Kershaw likes to work at the edges and at the beginning of things. She relishes collaborating and working with others to find solutions to problems and making great things happen. Alison loves the interface of community development activities and technology to build inclusion, participation and change. Alison is happiest when she is brining ideas to life. Alison has produced large scale events, directed plays, set up an accessible internet café, designed and implemented policies and currently facilitates community development and engagement initiatives. Alison is the founding Chair of the volunteer not for profit SA Makers Inc, which promotes makers and making in South Australia. SA Makers manages Fab Lab Adelaide and produces Maker Faire Adelaide.

Jose Ramos

Jose Ramos is director of Action Foresight, a Melbourne-based business that focuses on bridging transformational futures with present-day action. He has taught foresight, public policy and social innovation at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, Swinburne University of Technology, the University of Sunshine Coast and Victoria University. He is senior consulting editor for the Journal of Future Studies, and has over 50 publications spanning economic, cultural and political change. He is an honorary fellow at the Centre for Cultural Diversity and Wellbeing in Melbourne.

The post Transforming Production: An Open Design Distributed Manufacturing Symposium appeared first on P2P Foundation.

]]>
https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/transforming-production-an-open-design-distributed-manufacturing-symposium/2017/04/24/feed 0 64965