IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-01555978.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

FabLab – a new space for commons-based peer production

Author

Listed:
  • Isabelle Liotard

    (CEPN - Centre d'Economie de l'Université Paris Nord - UP13 - Université Paris 13 - USPC - Université Sorbonne Paris Cité - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, companies' innovation practices have been revolutionised with the emergence of Web 2.0 and the possibilities offered by digital technology. Having paved the way with the concepts of open innovation (OI), Chesbrough (2003, 2006) and Von Hippel (2006) have conceptualised a trend that radically alters our classic design and research model. Challenging the traditional principle of innovation, which is internal and "closed", the concept of OI has shed light on brand new practices that aim to boost a company's innovative capacity through its relations and exchanges with the exterior. Even though this concept alone does not cover completely new tools (licence agreements or partnerships and networks are well-known mechanisms), it nonetheless remains that Open Innovation promotes new mechanisms that enable companies to open up to the outside world (in the widest sense of the term). Internet-based digital tools make it possible to create intermediation platforms and websites for companies whose aim is to seek out knowledge, skills and expertise beyond their own borders and beyond their well-identified circles of more or less direct partners (Liotard & Revest, 2017). The great strength of Web 2.0 is, then, to open the company up to the exterior, in the broadest sense because the "the exterior" now includes everyone (Internauts, students, employees, etc.), with the unprecedented characteristic of their having no previous connection with the company in question. Crowdsourcing now gives access to a great number of innovative proposals , and contributes to bottom-up forms of innovation. However, these new practices are not the only ones to emerge, and other formats are now radically transforming innovation's traditional foundations. In particular, spaces known as FabLabs (FL) are currently springing up all over the world. This wave, instigated in 1998 by MIT professor Neil Gerhenfeld, has become widespread, and has led to the constitution of a network of FabLabs in both developed countries and the Global South . Notably, these collaboration spaces, stemming from a desire to share knowledge and openings, call into question production (which becomes local), intellectual property (more open, based on open source files and pooling material), hierarchy (peer communities enable projects to be carried out and FabLabs are emerging as non-hierarchical, horizontal spaces), and lastly, the role of the individual in a certain number of initiatives. These digital manufacturing spaces make digitally-controlled machines and 3D printers available, representing not only a possibility for decentralised production and design for individuals but also offering open production spaces for both small and large companies, which also go there to seek training. The aim of this paper is to shed light on this new type of space and to define the different business models. It is based on a series of interviews we conducted between January and April 2017 with FabManagers from the Paris area and other regions in France

Suggested Citation

  • Isabelle Liotard, 2017. "FabLab – a new space for commons-based peer production," Post-Print hal-01555978, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-01555978
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-01555978
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-01555978/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Bouvier-Patron, 2015. "FabLab et extension de la forme réseau : vers une nouvelle dynamique industrielle ?," Innovations, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 165-188.
    2. Rajagopal, 2014. "Organizations and Innovation," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Architecting Enterprise, chapter 3, pages 58-86, Palgrave Macmillan.
    3. Elizabeth J. Altman & Frank Nagle & Michael L. Tushman, 2013. "Innovating Without Information Constraints: Organizations, Communities, and Innovation When Information Costs Approach Zero," Harvard Business School Working Papers 14-043, Harvard Business School, revised Sep 2014.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Frank Nagle, 2019. "Open Source Software and Firm Productivity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(3), pages 1191-1215, March.
    2. Božič, Katerina & Dimovski, Vlado, 2019. "Business intelligence and analytics for value creation: The role of absorptive capacity," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 93-103.
    3. Parente, Ronaldo C. & Geleilate, José-Mauricio G. & Rong, Ke, 2018. "The Sharing Economy Globalization Phenomenon: A Research Agenda," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 52-64.
    4. Frank Nagle & Florenta Teodoridis, 2020. "Jack of all trades and master of knowledge: The role of diversification in new distant knowledge integration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(1), pages 55-85, January.
    5. Vitaliy Roud & Thomas Wolfgang Thurner, 2018. "The Influence of State‐Ownership on Eco‐Innovations in Russian Manufacturing Firms," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 22(5), pages 1213-1227, October.
    6. Valeriy Makarov & Albert Bakhtizin, 2014. "The Estimation Of The Regions’ Efficiency Of The Russian Federation Including The Intellectual Capital, The Characteristics Of Readiness For Innovation, Level Of Well-Being, And Quality Of Life," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(4), pages 9-30.
    7. Tobias Knabke & Sebastian Olbrich, 2018. "Building novel capabilities to enable business intelligence agility: results from a quantitative study," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 493-546, August.
    8. Adamou, Pr. Rabani & Ibrahim, Boubacar & Bonkaney, Abdou Latif & Seyni, Abdoul Aziz & Idrissa, Mamoudou, 2021. "Niger - Land, climate, energy, agriculture and development: A study in the Sudano-Sahel Initiative for Regional Development, Jobs, and Food Security," Working Papers 308806, University of Bonn, Center for Development Research (ZEF).
    9. LametK.Maika & Kevin Wachira, 2020. "Effects of organizational culture on strategy implementation in water boards in Kenya," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 9(4), pages 15-28, July.
    10. White, Gareth R.T. & Samuel, Anthony, 2019. "Programmatic Advertising: Forewarning and avoiding hype-cycle failure," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 157-168.
    11. Justus Baron & Jorge Contreras & Martin Husovec & Pierre Larouche, 2019. "Making the Rules: The Governance of Standard Development Organizations and their Policies on Intellectual Property Rights," JRC Research Reports JRC115004, Joint Research Centre.
    12. Samuel Facanha Camara & Brenno Buarque de Lima & Teresa Lenice Nogueira da Gama Mota & Alanna Lima e Silva & Pablo Padilha, 2018. "Gender The Management of Innovation Networks: Possibilities of Collaboration in Light of Game Theory," Business and Management Studies, Redfame publishing, vol. 4(2), pages 24-34, June.
    13. Caroline Buts & Ellen Van Droogenbroeck & Michaël R. J. Dooms & Kim Willems, 2020. "The Economic Impact of Standards in Belgium," International Journal of Standardization Research (IJSR), IGI Global, vol. 18(1), pages 44-64, January.
    14. Lanu Kim, 2021. "Geographical Locations of Occupations and Information and Communication Technology: Do Online Tools Impact Where People in the United States Live and Work?," SAGE Open, , vol. 11(3), pages 21582440211, August.
    15. Dario Blanco-Fernandez & Stephan Leitner & Alexandra Rausch, 2022. "Interactions between the individual and the group level in organizations: The case of learning and autonomous group adaptation," Papers 2203.09162, arXiv.org.
    16. Daniel Béland & Michael Howlett & Philip Rocco & Alex Waddan, 2020. "Designing policy resilience: lessons from the Affordable Care Act," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 269-289, June.
    17. Emil Lucian Crișan & Irina Iulia Salanță & Ioana Natalia Beleiu & Ovidiu Niculae Bordean & Raluca Bunduchi, 2021. "A systematic literature review on accelerators," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 62-89, February.
    18. Glenn Dutcher & Cortney S. Rodet, 2022. "Which two heads are better than one? Uncovering the positive effects of diversity in creative teams," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(4), pages 884-897, November.
    19. Prince Destiny Ugo, 2017. "Project Quality Management Performance: An Insight to Sustainable Development Initiatives in Oil and Gas Host Communities," Journal of Management and Sustainability, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 7(4), pages 76-88, December.
    20. repec:ipg:wpaper:2014-488 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Joern H. Block & Christian O. Fisch & Mirjam van Praag, 2017. "The Schumpeterian entrepreneur: a review of the empirical evidence on the antecedents, behaviour and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 61-95, January.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    FabLab; innovation; collaborative economy; Do It Yourself;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:hal:journl:hal-01555978. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.