IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v5y2013i8p3382-3425d27916.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Design Methodology for Appropriate Technology: Engineering as if People Mattered

Author

Listed:
  • Corinthias P. M. Sianipar

    (School of Business and Management (SBM), Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB), Jl. Ganeca 10, Kota Bandung, Jawa Barat 40132, Indonesia
    Department of Industrial Administration (IA), Tokyo University of Science (TUS), 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japan)

  • Gatot Yudoko

    (School of Business and Management (SBM), Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB), Jl. Ganeca 10, Kota Bandung, Jawa Barat 40132, Indonesia
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Kiyoshi Dowaki

    (Department of Industrial Administration (IA), Tokyo University of Science (TUS), 2641 Yamazaki, Noda, Chiba 278-8510, Japan
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Akbar Adhiutama

    (School of Business and Management (SBM), Institut Teknologi Bandung (ITB), Jl. Ganeca 10, Kota Bandung, Jawa Barat 40132, Indonesia)

Abstract

Since the emerging of its idea circa four decades ago, Appropriate Technology (AT) had been proven as a comprehensive solution in a limited condition. However, practitioners & academia have different opinions with engineers on how an AT must be designed. Researchers had noted the crucial factors in the issue as such, and they gave a notion of the urgency for a dedicated design methodology for AT. This study, therefore, aims to provide it. Such methodology is developed by incorporating AT characteristics, fundamental issues in community empowerment, and the principles of existing design methodologies. The methodology emphasizes combination between bottom-up and top-down design approaches. It means that an AT must be started purely from local conditions rather than given technical specifications, and be given back to local people to be seamlessly integrated into their routines. It also underlines the crucial importance of community involvement throughout design stages. By looking at previous design methodologies that were developed based on pure Engineering Problem Solving (EPS), this study delivers a fresh and comprehensive one that covers surrounding issues and concepts to produce an AT based on the real meaning of technological appropriateness.

Suggested Citation

  • Corinthias P. M. Sianipar & Gatot Yudoko & Kiyoshi Dowaki & Akbar Adhiutama, 2013. "Design Methodology for Appropriate Technology: Engineering as if People Mattered," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-44, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:5:y:2013:i:8:p:3382-3425:d:27916
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/8/3382/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/5/8/3382/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Susanto Basu & David N. Weil, 1998. "Appropriate Technology and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1025-1054.
    2. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    3. Joshua Pearce, 2012. "The case for open source appropriate technology," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 14(3), pages 425-431, June.
    4. Barnett, Andrew, 1990. "The diffusion of energy technology in the rural areas of developing countries: A synthesis of recent experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 539-553, April.
    5. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    6. Los, Bart & Timmer, Marcel P., 2005. "The 'appropriate technology' explanation of productivity growth differentials: An empirical approach," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 77(2), pages 517-531, August.
    7. Morawetz, David, 1974. "Employment Implications of Industrialisation in Developing Countries: A Survey," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 84(335), pages 491-542, September.
    8. Williams, Robin & Edge, David, 1996. "The social shaping of technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(6), pages 865-899, September.
    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. Pin, Lantos A. & Pennink, Bartjan J.W. & Balsters, Herman & Sianipar, Corinthias P.M., 2021. "Technological appropriateness of biomass production in rural settings: Addressing water hyacinths (E. crassipes) problem in Lake Tondano, Indonesia," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    2. Junmin Lee & Keungoui Kim & Hyunha Shin & Junseok Hwang, 2018. "Acceptance Factors of Appropriate Technology: Case of Water Purification Systems in Binh Dinh, Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-20, June.
    3. Luis Bernardo López-Sosa & José Núñez-González & Alberto Beltrán & Mario Morales-Máximo & Mario Morales-Sánchez & Montserrat Serrano-Medrano & Carlos A. García, 2019. "A New Methodology for the Development of Appropriate Technology: A Case Study for the Development of a Wood Solar Dryer," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-20, October.
    4. Kathleen Mallard & Vincent Debusschere & Lauric Garbuio, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Method for Sustainable Design of Energy Conversion Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Younghwan Moon & Junseok Hwang, 2018. "Crowdfunding as an Alternative Means for Funding Sustainable Appropriate Technology: Acceptance Determinants of Backers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Hyun Gyu Hwang & Min Seo Kim & Soo Min Shin & Cher Won Hwang, 2014. "Risk Assessment of the Schmutzdecke of Biosand Filters: Identification of an Opportunistic Pathogen in Schmutzdecke Developed by an Unsafe Water Source," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-16, February.
    7. Patnaik, Jayshree & Bhowmick, Bhaskar, 2019. "Revisiting appropriate technology with changing socio-technical landscape in emerging countries," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 8-19.
    8. Venis, Robbie A. & Taylor, Virginia & Sumayani, Paulina & Laizer, Marie & Anderson, Troy & Basu, Onita D., 2022. "Towards a participatory framework for improving water & health outcomes: A case study with Maasai women in rural Tanzania," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 301(C).

    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. Costantini, Valeria & Liberati, Paolo, 2014. "Technology transfer, institutions and development," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 26-48.
    2. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Valeria Costantini & Susanna Mancinelli & Massimilano Corradini, 2011. "Environmental and Innovation Performance in a Dynamic Impure Public Good Framework," Working Papers 201117, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    3. Tero Kuusi, 2015. "The dynamics of ICT adaptation and the productivity gaps across advanced nations," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 175-188, October.
    4. Tylecote, Andrew, 2019. "Biotechnology as a new techno-economic paradigm that will help drive the world economy and mitigate climate change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 858-868.
    5. Fabian Unterlass, 2013. "The relationship between innovation, exports and economic performance. Empirical evidence for 21 EU countries," EcoMod2013 5655, EcoMod.
    6. repec:osf:osfxxx:ruyp3_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Bos, J.W.B. & Economidou, C. & Koetter, M. & Kolari, J.W., 2010. "Do all countries grow alike?," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(1), pages 113-127, January.
    8. Tuna Dinç, 2012. "The Two Sector Model of Learning-By Doing and Productivity Differences," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 59(5), pages 583-598, December.
    9. Fisher, Erik, 2019. "Governing with ambivalence: The tentative origins of socio-technical integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 1138-1149.
    10. Konstantinos Chatzimichael & Vangelis Tzouvelekas, 2014. "Human capital contributions to explain productivity differences," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 399-417, June.
    11. Martijn J. Burger & Kostas Kounetas & Oreste Napolitano & Spyridon Stavropoulos, 2022. "Do innovation and human capital actually narrow the technology gap? Champions and laggards of European regional productive performance," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(10), pages 1655-1670, October.
    12. Green, Ken & Hull, Richard & McMeekin, Andrew & Walsh, Vivien, 1999. "The construction of the techno-economic: networks vs. paradigms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(7), pages 777-792, September.
    13. Lahiri, Radhika & Ding, Juhong & Chinzara, Zivanemoyo, 2018. "Technology adoption, adaptation and growth," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 469-483.
    14. Areti Gkypali & Kostas Kounetas & Kostas Tsekouras, 2019. "European countries’ competitiveness and productive performance evolution: unraveling the complexity in a heterogeneity context," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 665-695, April.
    15. Fischer, Klara, 2016. "Why new crop technology is not scale-neutral—A critique of the expectations for a crop-based African Green Revolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1185-1194.
    16. Danish Ahmed SIDDIQUI & Qazi Masood AHMED, 2019. "Are institutions a crucial determinant of cross country economic efficiency? A two-stage double bootstrap data envelopment analysis," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(1(618), S), pages 89-114, Spring.
    17. Nin-Prat, Alejandro & Falconi, Cesar & Ludena, Carlos & Martel, Pedro, 2015. "Productivity and the Performance of Agriculture in Latin America and the Caribbean: From the Lost Decade to the Commodity Boom," 2015 Conference, August 9-14, 2015, Milan, Italy 211725, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    18. Daniel Gallardo‐Albarrán & Robert Inklaar, 2021. "The Role Of Capital And Productivity In Accounting For Income Differences Since 1913," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 952-974, July.
    19. repec:agr:journl:v:1(618):y:2019:i:1(618):p:89-114 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Vries, Gaaitzen J. de & Los, Bart & Castellacci, Fulvio, 2010. "Sectoral Productivity Trends:Convergence Islands in Oceans of Divergence," GGDC Research Memorandum GD-118, Groningen Growth and Development Centre, University of Groningen.
    21. Subal Kumbhakar & Raquel Ortega-Argilés & Lesley Potters & Marco Vivarelli & Peter Voigt, 2012. "Corporate R&D and firm efficiency: evidence from Europe’s top R&D investors," Journal of Productivity Analysis, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 125-140, April.
    22. Meijer, Ineke S.M. & Hekkert, Marko P. & Koppenjan, Joop F.M., 2007. "The influence of perceived uncertainty on entrepreneurial action in emerging renewable energy technology; biomass gasification projects in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 5836-5854, November.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:gam:jsusta:v:5:y:2013:i:8:p:3382-3425:d:27916. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.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.