Lindsey Nelson June 2012

45
Design for the Other 90% and Appropriate Technology: The Legacies of Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher Lindsey Nelson June 2012

description

Design for the Other 90% and Appropriate Technology: The Legacies of Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher. Lindsey Nelson June 2012. How can we tell a story about the legacies of these two men?. whywhathowwho. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Transcript of Lindsey Nelson June 2012

Page 1: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Design for the Other 90% and Appropriate Technology:The Legacies of Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher

Lindsey NelsonJune 2012

Page 2: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

How can we tell a story about the legacies of these two men?

why what how who

Page 3: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

How can we tell a story about the legacies of these two men?Why does understanding this story matter?

why what how who

Page 4: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher:

why what how who

Page 5: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher:

why what how who

Page 6: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher:

why what how who

Page 7: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher:

why what how who

Design for the Other 90%

Page 8: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher:

why what how who

Design for the Other 90%

Appropriate Technology

Page 9: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Some Methodological Challenges

• Posthumous • Extensive timeframe • Diverse geographies• Differing technological profile• Limited personnel access

why what how who

Page 10: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Some Methodological Challenges

• Posthumous • Extensive timeframe • Diverse geographies• Differing technological profile• Limited personnel access

Research Goals• Understand practical consequences of discourse• Compare two discursive approaches critically• Analyze engineering activities• Identify implications for engineering education

why what how who

Page 11: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Some Methodological Challenges

• Posthumous • Extensive timeframe • Diverse geographies• Differing technological profile• Limited personnel access

Research Goals• Understand practical consequences of discourse• Compare two discursive approaches critically• Analyze engineering activities• Identify implications for engineering education

why what how who

Page 12: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

why what how who

Page 13: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

SEMIOTIC RESOURCES

language, images, space,

technology, models, time

why what how who

Page 14: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

SEMIOTIC RESOURCES

language, images, space,

technology, models, time

SEMIOTIC FORMS

workspaces, prototypes,

film, assembly drawings,

reports, charts

why what how who

Page 15: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

HUMAN BEINGS

SOCIAL PRACTICES

why what how who

Page 16: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

SEMIOTIC RESOURCES

language, images, space,

technology, models, time

SEMIOTIC FORMS

workspaces, prototypes,

film, assembly drawings,

reports, charts

SOCIAL PRACTICES

HUMAN BEINGS

NON-HUMAN ACTORS

why what how who

Page 17: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

SEMIOTIC RESOURCES

language, images, space,

technology, models, time

SEMIOTIC FORMS

workspaces, prototypes,

film, assembly drawings,

reports, charts

SOCIAL PRACTICES

HUMAN BEINGS

NON-HUMAN ACTORS

NARRATIVES

why what how who

Page 18: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

SEMIOTIC RESOURCES

language, images, space,

technology, models, time

SEMIOTIC FORMS

workspaces, prototypes,

film, assembly drawings,

reports, charts

SOCIAL PRACTICES

HUMAN BEINGS

NON-HUMAN ACTORS

MULTIMODAL DISCOURSE

NARRATIVES

why what how who

Page 19: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Multimodal Discourse Analysis

SEMIOTIC RESOURCES

language, images, space,

technology, models, time

SEMIOTIC FORMS

workspaces, prototypes,

film, assembly drawings,

reports, charts

SOCIAL PRACTICES

HUMAN BEINGS

NON-HUMAN ACTORS

MULTIMODAL DISCOURSE

NARRATIVES

Design for the Other 90%

AppropriateTechnology

why what how who

Page 20: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 21: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 22: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 23: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 24: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 25: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 26: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 27: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 28: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 29: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

why what how who

Page 30: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: IDE

• We listen to customers ignored by other engineers.

Strategy Developing market-led solutions for people living in poverty

Communities Potentially viable marketsFocus Leveraging assets already

held by people living in poverty

Engagement Approach Expand market capabilities through IDE’s technical expertise

why what how who

Page 31: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 32: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 33: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 34: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 35: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 36: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 37: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 38: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 39: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

why what how who

Page 40: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Organizational Claims: Practical Action

• We develop technologies that challenge world division.

Strategy Reducing vulnerability to climate change

Communities Concentrations of inequality in active rural communities

Focus Reducing vulnerability of marginalized populations

Engagement Approach Address key issues through both global political structures and targeted community projects

why what how who

Page 41: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Lessons for Engineering Educators

• Build long-standing community partnerships.

why what how who

Page 42: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Lessons for Engineering Educators

• Build long-standing community partnerships.• Present students with holistic models of poverty.

why what how who

Page 43: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Lessons for Engineering Educators

• Build long-standing community partnerships.• Present students with holistic models of poverty.• Develop informed frameworks for innovation success.

why what how who

Page 44: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Lessons for Engineering Educators

• Build long-standing community partnerships.• Present students with holistic models of poverty.• Develop informed frameworks for innovation success.• Create case studies from real engineering initiatives.

why what how who

Page 45: Lindsey Nelson June  2012

Design for the Other 90% and Appropriate Technology:The Legacies of Paul Polak and E.F. Schumacher

Lindsey [email protected]

Scaffolding Undergraduate Design Education with the Wellbeing Framework

Wednesday, 2:15pm, room 005