Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-17T09:51:47.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE ARISTOTELIAN CAUSALITIES IN LOCALISED DISTRIBUTED MANUFACTURING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 June 2023

Esben Bala Skouboe  and
Mário Barros
Esben Bala Skouboe*
Affiliation:
Aalborg University
Mário Barros
Affiliation:
Aalborg University
*
Skouboe, Esben Bala, Aalborg University, Denmark, ebsk@create.aau.dk

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Half of the total greenhouse gas emissions and 90% of biodiversity loss come from resource extraction and processing. (EC 2020). To counter this, we must switch to sustainable, long-lasting products and slow down the use of resources. It is clear that these systems will not be fixed by incremental changes but by a series of disruptions. This article uses the Aristotelian causalities as a vehicle to break down the concept of “why” industrial design and discuss the underlying value propositions of distributed manufacturing. This critical perspective allows designers and engineers to bridge the knowledge-siloes and rewire the way a product is designed, sourced, built and consumed in relation to the four Aristotelian causalities. The paper discusses the limitations and potentialities for each causality in relation to a distributed manufacturing paradigm and argues for a new sustainable design concept: The Local Limited Edition. A site-specific product design, realised by brands to enrich brand value on local markets, improve market fit and increase attachment, ultimately improving the products' longevity and value of the products.

Keywords

SustainabilityIndustrial designdistributed manufacturingphilosophyDesign theory
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 3: ICED23 , July 2023 , pp. 3335 - 3344
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Adeleye, E.O. & Yusuf, Y.Y. (2006) “Towards agile manufacturing: models of competition and performance outcomes”, International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 93–110. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijasm.2006.008861CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adisorn, A., Tholen, L., Götz, T. (2021) “Towards a Digital Product Passport Fit for Contributing to a Circular Economy”, Energies, Vol. 14, No. 8.. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14082289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aristotle (1990 [1934]), Nicomachean Ethics (H. Rackham, Trans.), Harvard University Press, London, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Bessière, D., Charnley, F., Tiwari, A. & Moreno, M.A. (2019) “A vision of re-distributed manufacturing for the UK's consumer goods industry”, Production Planning & Control, Vol. 30, No. 7, pp. 555–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2018.1540053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, P.H. (1995), “Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response”, Journal of Marketing, Vol.59, No. 3, pp. 16–29. https://doi.org/10.2307/1252116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruccoleri, M., Nigro, G.L., Perrone, G., Renna, P. & La Diega, S.N. (2005) “Production planning in reconfigurable enterprises and reconfigurable production systems”, CIRP annals, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 433–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-8506(07)60138-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, N. 1982, “Designerly ways of knowing”, Design Studies, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(82)90040-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Halton, E. (1981), The Meaning of Things: Domestic Symbols and the Self, Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6357(85)90166-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deif, A.M. (2015) “A system dynamic approach to manage changeability in manufacturing systems”, Procedia Manufacturing, Vol. 2, pp. https://doi.org/543-549.10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.094CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forty, A. & Cameron, I. (1986) Objects of Desire: Design and Society Since 1750, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
EC (2021) Industry 5.0: human-centric, sustainable and resilient, Publications Office of the European Union. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2777/073781Google Scholar
Gehl, J. (2003) Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. Danish Architectural Press, Copenhagen.Google Scholar
Gershenfeld, N.A. (2005) Fab: the coming revolution on your desktop--from personal computers to personal fabrication, Basic Books, New York.Google Scholar
Hankinson, R.J. (2001) Cause and explanation in ancient Greek thought, Oxford University Press, New York. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199246564.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heathcote, E. (2022), “Architect Indy Johar: ‘The scale of what we're about to face is completely underestimated’”, Financial Times, 5 November, available at: https://www.ft.com/content/b1604232-bfcd-49a5-99eb-9ac540d22748 (accessed 20 November 2022).Google Scholar
Heidegger, M. (1977) “The Question Concerning Technology”. In: Krell, D. (Ed.). Martin Heidgger: Basic Writings. Harper & Row, New York, pp. 287–317.Google Scholar
Hosale, M. (2018) Worldmaking as Techné; Participatory Art, Music, and Architecture, Riverside Architectural Press.Google Scholar
Kamptner, N.L. (1991) “Personal possessions and their meanings: A life-span perspective”, Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, Vol. 6, No. 6, pp. 209–228.Google Scholar
Kleine, S.S., Kleine, R.E. III & Allen, C.T. (1995) “How is a possession “me” or “not me”? Characterizing types and an antecedent of material possession attachment”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 327- 343. https://doi.org/10.1086/209454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuehnle, H. (2015) “Distributed manufacturing (dm)-smart units and collaborative processes”, International Journal of Computer and Systems Engineering, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 1246–1257. http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1100454Google Scholar
Lindtner, S., Bardzell, S. & Bardzell, J. (2016) “Reconstituting the utopian vision of making: HCI after technosolutionism”, Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1390. http://doi.org/10.1145/2858036.2858506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, G.E.R. (1996) Adversaries and Authorities; Investigations into Ancient Greek and Chinese Science. University of Cambridge, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lynch, K. 1984, Good City Form, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.Google Scholar
Lombardi, M. 2003, “The evolution of local production systems: the emergence of the “invisible mind” and the evolutionary pressures towards more visible “minds””, Research Policy, Vol. 32, No. 8, pp. 1443–1462. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(02)00157-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mano, H. & Oliver, R.L. (1993) “Assessing the dimensionality and structure of the consumption experience: evaluation, feeling, and satisfaction”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp. 451–466. https://doi.org/10.1086/209361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mugge, R., Schoormans, J.P. & Schifferstein, H.N. (2005) “Design strategies to postpone consumers' product replacement: The value of a strong person-product relationship”, The Design Journal, Vol. 8, No. 2, pp. 38–48. https://doi.org/10.2752/146069205789331637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mugge, R., Schifferstein, H.N. & Schoormans, J.P. (2010) “Product attachment and satisfaction: understanding consumers' post-purchase behavior”, Journal of Consumer Marketing, Vol.27, No.3, pp.271–282. https://doi.org/10.1108/07363761011038347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MÅLBAR (2022) https://www.maalbar.dk/ (25.11.2022)Google Scholar
Norberg-Schulz, C. 2019. “Genius Loci: Towards a Phenomenology of Architecture (1979).” In Cody, J., Siravo, F. (Eds.), Historic Cities: Issues in Urban Conservation, Vol. 8, p. 31. Getty Publications.Google Scholar
Nylund, H., Salminen, K., Andersson, P.H. (2012). Framework for Distributed Manufacturing Systems. In: ElMaraghy, H. (eds) Enabling Manufacturing Competitiveness and Economic Sustainability. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-23860-4_28Google Scholar
O'Neil, M. & Pentzold, C. (2021) The Handbook of Peer Production. Wiley-Blackwell, United Kingdom.Google Scholar
Page, T. (2014) “Product attachment and replacement: implications for sustainable design”, International Journal of Sustainable Design, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 265–282. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSDES.2014.065057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parley (2020) PARLEY AIR STATION / BLUEPRINT MODULE. Available: https://www.parley.tv/air-station-blueprint-module [2020, 22.11.].Google Scholar
Pine, B.J. (1999) Mass customization: the new frontier in business competition, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Mass. https://doi.org/10.1177/03128962930170020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pullan, T.T. (2014) “Decision support tool using concurrent engineering framework for agile manufacturing”, International Journal of Agile Systems and Management, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 132–154. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJASM.2014.061445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauch, E., Dallinger, M., Dallasega, P. and Matt, D.T. (2015) ‘Sustainability in manufacturing through distributed manufacturing systems (DMS)’, Procedia CIRP, Vol. 29, pp.544–549. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2015.01.069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rauch, E., Dallasega, P. & Matt, D.T. (2016) “Sustainable production in emerging markets through Distributed Manufacturing Systems (DMS)”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 135, pp. 127–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.06.106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Redzepi, R. (2018) A Work in Progress: A Journal, Phaidon Press Inc.Google Scholar
Richins, M.L. (1994) “Valuing things: The public and private meanings of possessions”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 504–521. https://doi.org/10.1086/209414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steffen, D. (2009) “Meaning and narration in product design”, DPPI'09 Proceedings, pp. 1–9.Google Scholar
Vezzoli, C., Garcia Parra, B. & Kohtala, C. (2021) Designing Sustainability for All: The Design of Sustainable Product-Service Systems Applied to Distributed Economies, Springer International Publishing AG, Cham.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vilhena, D.A. & Antonelli, A. (2015) “A network approach for identifying and delimiting biogeographical regions”, Nature Communications, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 6848. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms7848CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waddington, D.I. (2005) “A field guide to Heidegger: Understanding ‘the question concerning technology’”, Educational Philosophy and Theory, Vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 567–583. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2005.00141.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wallendorf, M. & Arnould, E.J. (1988) ““My favorite things”: A cross-cultural inquiry into object attachment, possessiveness, and social linkage”, Journal of Consumer Research, Vol. 14, No. 4, pp. 531–547. https://doi.org/10.1086/209134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
UN. (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development A/RES/70/1, United Nations, New York. available at: https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publication [2022. 04.11.].Google Scholar
UNIDO (2014), Emerging Green Technologies, For the Manufacturing Sector, United Nations Industrial Development organization.Google Scholar
Zanetti, C., Seregni, M., Bianchini, M. & Taisch, M. (2015) “A production system model for Mini-Factories and last mile production approach”, 2015 IEEE 1st International Forum on Research and Technologies for Society and Industry Leveraging a better tomorrow (RTSI), pp. 451. http://doi.org/10.1109/RTSI.2015.7325139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zäh, M.F. & Wagner, W. (2003) “Planning mini-factory structures for the close-to-market manufacture of individualized products”, Proceedings of the MCPC, Vol. 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44733-8_71Google Scholar