IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v8y2020i2p190-200.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Player for Tackling Inequalities? Framing the Social Value and Impact of the Maker Movement

Author

Listed:
  • Elisabeth Unterfrauner

    (Centre for Social Innovation, Austria)

  • Margit Hofer

    (Centre for Social Innovation, Austria)

  • Bastian Pelka

    (Social Research Centre, TU Dortmund, Germany)

  • Marthe Zirngiebl

    (Social Research Centre, TU Dortmund, Germany)

Abstract

The Maker Movement has raised great expectations towards its potential for tackling social inequalities by mediating technology-related skills to everybody. Are maker spaces new players for social inclusion in digital societies? How can this potential impact be framed? While scientific discourse has so far identified broad value and impact dimensions of the Maker Movement, this article adds empirical insight into the potential for tackling social inequalities. The study is based on 39 interviews with makers and managers of maker initiatives and ten self-reporting surveys filled in by maker initiative managers throughout Europe, which have been analyzed qualitatively. We found four main domains in which makers address social inclusion: First, by mediating skills and competences not only in the field of digital technologies but in the broader sense of empowering people to “make” solutions for encountered problems. Second, we found that makers actively strive to provide democratized access to digital fabrication and the knowledge on how to use them. Third and fourth, we found different ambitions articulated by makers to change society and social practices towards a society providing better opportunities for individuals. As an entry point for further research and actions, we derived a maker typology that reflects the diverse and various types of relationships to be found in the maker community. This typology could be used for exploring further collaborations between social actors and the Maker Movement. We conclude with an outlook on potential trajectories of the Maker Movement and specify which could influence the inclusion of marginalized persons.

Suggested Citation

  • Elisabeth Unterfrauner & Margit Hofer & Bastian Pelka & Marthe Zirngiebl, 2020. "A New Player for Tackling Inequalities? Framing the Social Value and Impact of the Maker Movement," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 190-200.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:190-200
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/2590
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Langley, David J. & Zirngiebl, Marthe & Sbeih, Janosch & Devoldere, Bart, 2017. "Trajectories to reconcile sharing and commercialization in the maker movement," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 60(6), pages 783-794.
    2. Hans-Werner Franz & Josef Hochgerner & Jürgen Howaldt, 2012. "Challenge Social Innovation: An Introduction," Springer Books, in: Hans-Werner Franz & Josef Hochgerner & Jürgen Howaldt (ed.), Challenge Social Innovation, edition 127, pages 1-16, Springer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sohail Ahmed Soomro & Hernan Casakin & Georgi V. Georgiev, 2021. "Sustainable Design and Prototyping Using Digital Fabrication Tools for Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Bianca Reisdorf & Colin Rhinesmith, 2020. "Digital Inclusion as a Core Component of Social Inclusion," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 132-137.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lawal Yesufu & Sami Alajlani, 2019. "Measuring Social Innovation for Education and Resource Development in Refugee Camps: A Conceptual Study," International Journal of Higher Education, Sciedu Press, vol. 8(4), pages 208-208, August.
    2. Sharma, Gautam, 2024. "‘Making’ in India: Understanding Makerspaces and Fablabs in the Indian Informal Innovation Context," Papers in Innovation Studies 2024/2, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    3. Beltagui, Ahmad & Sesis, Achilleas & Stylos, Nikolaos, 2021. "A bricolage perspective on democratising innovation: The case of 3D printing in makerspaces," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    4. Sandra Yesenia Pinzón-Castro & Gonzalo Maldonado-Guzmán & Rubén Michael Rodríguez-González, 2022. "The Relationship Between Innovation Management, Social Innovation and Sustainable Performance in Mexican SMEs," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 12(1), pages 1-5.
    5. Tabarés, Raúl & Kuittinen, Hanna, 2020. "A tale of two innovation cultures: Bridging the gap between makers and manufacturers," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    6. Hanna Saari & Maria Åkerman & Barbara Kieslinger & Jouko Myllyoja & Regina Sipos, 2021. "How Open Is the Maker Movement? Integrative Literature Review of the Openness Practices in the Global Maker Movement," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-20, December.
    7. Kim, Jangmin & Trahan, Mark & Bellamy, Jennifer & Hall, James A., 2019. "Advancing the innovation of family meeting models: The role of teamwork and parent engagement in improving permanency," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 147-155.
    8. Mikayla Novak, 2021. "Social innovation and Austrian economics: Exploring the gains from intellectual trade," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 34(1), pages 129-147, March.
    9. Anna Dimitrova & Katarina Hollan & Daphne Channa Laster & Andreas Reinstaller & Margit Schratzenstaller & Ewald Walterskirchen & Teresa Weiss, 2013. "Literature Review on Fundamental Concepts and Definitions, Objectives and Policy Goals as well as Instruments Relevant for Socio-ecological Transition. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 40," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47015, April.
    10. Bergman, Brian J. & McMullen, Jeffery S., 2020. "Entrepreneurs in the making: Six decisions for fostering entrepreneurship through maker spaces," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 63(6), pages 811-824.
    11. Qiu, Yixin & Bouncken, Ricarda B. & Arndt, Félix & Ng, Wilson, 2023. "Microfoundations and dynamics of do-it-yourself ecosystems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    12. Wu, Xiaojie & Tan, Xiaoxia & Wang, Xiuqiong, 2023. "The institutional logics perspective in management and organizational studies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    13. Niftiyev, Ibrahim, 2022. "The Role of Public Spending and The Quality of Public Services in E-government Development," EconStor Conference Papers 256899, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics.
    14. Huayan Shen & Kexin Bi & Yu Gao & Meisha Wang, 2020. "How does the Traditional Heavy Industry Use Ecotechnology to Achieve the Ecological Innovation Goal? Analysis Based on Expert Survey in China’s Shipbuilding Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    15. Marival Segarra‐Oña & Angel Peiró‐Signes & José Albors‐Garrigós & Blanca De Miguel‐Molina, 2017. "Testing the Social Innovation Construct: An Empirical Approach to Align Socially Oriented Objectives, Stakeholder Engagement, and Environmental Sustainability," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 15-27, January.
    16. Arena, Marika & Bengo, Irene & Calderini, Mario & Chiodo, Veronica, 2018. "Unlocking finance for social tech start-ups: Is there a new opportunity space?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 154-165.
    17. Diane E. Bailey, 2022. "Emerging Technologies at Work: Policy Ideas to Address Negative Consequences for Work, Workers, and Society," ILR Review, Cornell University, ILR School, vol. 75(3), pages 527-551, May.
    18. Patrick Gregori & Malgorzata A. Wdowiak & Erich J. Schwarz & Patrick Holzmann, 2019. "Exploring Value Creation in Sustainable Entrepreneurship: Insights from the Institutional Logics Perspective and the Business Model Lens," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-28, April.
    19. Michael H. Morris & Susana C. Santos & Donald F. Kuratko, 2021. "The great divides in social entrepreneurship and where they lead us," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(3), pages 1089-1106, October.
    20. Karl Aiginger & Kurt Kratena & Margit Schratzenstaller & Teresa Weiss, 2014. "Moving Towards a New Growth Model. WWWforEurope Deliverable No. 3," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 47247, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:190-200. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.