Appropriate technology
problem lies in what Stewart refers to as the ‘ software ’ aspect of AT, which involves factors that are just as important, if not more important, including the socio-economic state of where the AT would be employed. This is crucial in determining whether the AT will have success; for example, if the AT is too expensive or lacks features that the local population desires, such as an AT being unsuitable for the environment it would be employed in, or not being durable enough. Furthermore, it is crucially important that other economic factors rather than technological problems are considered because, if these are extreme enough, then no AT, no matter how much it catches on, will have any real success. One of AT’s main criticisms is that it is simply a ‘ colonial “ put down ”’ (Harvey, 1981, p.1) because developing countries are having their developmental potential limited to a level far below that of developed countries by being provided with primitive technology that only slightly raises them from their original position and often offers few long-term opportunities. This view is an important criticism of AT since it is the one most widely held by the general public, despite the fact that it ignores much of the reasoning behind AT. Public support is crucial for AT’s success because most AT projects are employed by government agencies that depend on public support. Detractors of AT believe that the economic criticisms of the approach greatly weaken AT’s case as a successful developmental tool. Eckaus makes a strong case against AT in his 1987 article (pp. 5-6), where he argues that AT lacks the proper economic analysis to be truly successful. Firstly, AT’s aim to allow the production of goods at such a small scale whilst also being affordable and efficient seems to be an almost impossible challenge. This is because large-scale production relies on economies of scale to reduce unit costs and be profitable. Economies of scale are the reduction in costs that companies benefit from when production is performed on a larger scale (Kenton, 2024). Therefore, small-scale production is inevitably going to have greater costs and not be competitive alongside any large-scale production. This also means that people who purchase goods produced with AT will be made worse off than if they could purchase the same item at a lower price due to modern production methods. Furthermore, AT’s a im to reduce spare capacity in an economy (when there are factors of production, such as labour, not being used) faces criticism since it seems to overlook the basic economic concept that development creates short-term unemployment as inefficient industries and workers are left behind. In the long run, the increases in growth and productivity will increase the demand for labour and new sectors will be created that offer many further opportunities for employment (Eckaus, 1987, pp. 5-6). This view is also supported by the economic theory of Kondratieff waves, which is that development tends to follow a period of recession or at the least economic downturn (CFI team, 2024), based on data from the development of modern economies. To conclude this section, while there are many criticisms of AT, especially those suggesting that the movement suffers from technological determinism and that small-scale production is going to struggle to be competitive in an economy, overall the concept does fundamentally have the opportunity for success as a developmental aid. This is because AT avoids the problems that traditional aid can cause; it offers an opportunity for widespread development and is focused not just on economic growth but on improving living conditions and not harming the environment. Therefore, the eventual lack of success of AT in the past was not predominantly to do with the concept itself, and other factors played a more important part.
124
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker