Appropriate technology
particularly visible in modern agriculture, which receives £2.4billion in subsidies in the UK (Defrablogs, 2023). AT, on the other hand, is designed to operate independently of subsidies after its initial adoption phase – where subsidies may be necessary to increase the initial uptake of the AT by providing it at a low cost so people can learn how it works and then want to buy it at the full price themselves (Green, 2000, p.2). Even if it is conceded that AT is less efficient, it is a good compromise since, unlike costly modern technology, it can be cost-effectively deployed all over the world, where it will create at least some degree of development, which is hugely important as populations continue to rise, and inequality increases in many developing countries around the world. Finally, free market economists tend to oppose AT since they believe that the market already offers the best development opportunities and that AT is just ‘ some form of totalitarianism in which the subtly elitist preferences of the minorities are imposed on majorities ’ (Harvey, 1981, p.18). This view misses the point that the market is unable to take into account the non-economic benefits that AT provides, as I have outlined above. Additionally, Harvey later argues the so-called ‘ free ’ market is greatly influenced by political lobbying, monopolies, and advertising, which all promote the latest, most technologically advanced product that offers the most profit to corporations. Without these factors, and the government subsidies, it is likely AT would be selected over modern technology in many cases due to the many benefits it provides such as environmental sustainability and lower cost, suggesting it to be an effective developmental tool.
What are the criticisms of Appropriate Technology?
This is not to say that there are not any valid criticisms of AT. Many people hold the belief that there are numerous ethical and economic problems with the concept and that these are significant enough to make AT undesirable. The AT movement is often accused of being blinded by technological determinism, which is the naive belief that all that is needed to ensure the development of an economy is finding the perfect technology and that this will solve all the economy’s problems (Eckaus,1987, p.3). The problems with technological determinism are very significant; important developmental challenges, such as slow growth and urban crowding, will often be bundled together as being caused by the wrong technologies rather than other factors. Therefore, the root causes that are in fact to blame for these challenges remain unresolved and will continue to harm the economy in the future. Furthermore, there is very little coverage on what to do if the new technology is not adopted, meaning one failure will often end all further attempts at using AT in the area. These points are summarized very nicely by Frances Stewart (see Eckaus, 1987, p. 3): The AT movement of the past has suffered from two weaknesses. First, there has tended to be too much attention on the ‘ hardware ’ and too little attention on the ‘ software ’ aspects of introducing and disseminating improved technologies ... a great deal of effort has to be put into encouraging economic change, providing institutional back-up, and understanding interactions between technological and social.
The ‘ hardware ’ refers to the physical technologies that make up the backbone of the AT movement. This process is fairly refined (despite having some serious problems that I will explore later) and often an AT can be designed that could potentially offer some benefit in a developing economy. However, the
123
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker