Advanced digital technologies have already revolutionised mass production. The next step is to change where things are built—and by whom. Cutting edge machines such as 3D printers, combined with growing connectivity and open source software, have enabled a growing band of entrepreneurs to build things themselves and share designs and ideas freely online. For the first time in centuries, it seems possible that a significant proportion of manufacturing might return from giant, far-flung factories to local communities.
Markus Böhm of the Fraunhofer Institute for Manufacturing, Engineering and Automation IPA, argues that this trend is underpinned by demand for personalised products. “We have always favoured customisation, but personalised products have not been economically efficient,” he says. “Automation makes it possible to produce a personalised product with a short lead-time to the customer.”
Finbarr Livesey, a senior lecturer in public policy at the University of Cambridge, sees other factors at work. “The pressures of automation, environmental regulation and the changing costs of transportation all point to shorter supply chains,” he says.
The rise of additive manufacturing
3D printing has already shown its potential in localised production. The technologies under this umbrella, now reaching maturity after years of hype, allow a product to be designed on a computer and then “printed” as a solid object by building up layers of material. Changes are easily made on a printer’s software, so they have become a popular way to produce low-volume, personalised products. “You can do this extraordinary thing of moving towards mass customisation,” explains Professor Tim Minshall, head of University of Cambridge’s Institute of Manufacturing.
Hearing aid buds and tooth crowns are already being made in their millions using 3D printers. Sportswear giant Adidas recently starting printing shoe soles using the technology in its home nation: Germany. Since the machines are good at making light, strong parts, they also have a role to play in the manufacture of high-value products such as cars and aircraft. Aircraft manufacturer Airbus, for instance, found that the plastic wire-holders that are used throughout its airplanes can be made 70 per cent faster and 80 per cent cheaper using 3D printing.
Additive technology, as 3D printing is formally known, might prove particularly useful in the production of spare or replacement components. That, in turn, would keep products such as cars and electronics out of landfill for longer. “The part you want can be replaced, where you want it, and when you want it,” Minshall says. “It changes the whole idea of production and consumption. Instead of being 10,000 miles apart, from London to Beijing, it may be more efficient to make it right here, right now. It starts to mess up the whole economics of manufacturing.”
He thinks 3D printing will be particularly useful in industries confronting tricky supply chains. The International Space Station was recently equipped with a 3D printer, which can replace tools and parts rather than relying on deliveries from Earth. At sea, vessels owned by Maersk use the technology to produce replacements that can see a crew to harbour. Armed forces can use additive technology to produce spare parts in war zones, Minshall notes. In refugee camps, it has been used to patch up water pipes and replenish hospitals supplies, saving agencies from long waits as their imports clear customs.
Such advanced fabrication technologies were once controlled by big businesses. But a proliferation of makerspaces, machine shops and fabrication laboratories, or “fab labs”, are now opening up access to them. Entrepreneurs can make use of those technologies thanks to another defining development: creative licensing and open source software promotes the sharing of designs and manufacturing software across the world.
“Digital technologies, both in fabrication and communication, have made this mode of manufacturing accessible to smaller players,” notes Elizabeth Corbin, a doctoral researcher at the London-based Institute of Making. “That means innovation can now be driven not only by the monetary interests of large corporations and their shareholders, but by the social and environmental ambitions of social enterprises and communities.”
These spaces cannot compete with overseas assembly lines. But evangelists argue that they provide a space for dialogue and prototyping solutions. Across the world makerspaces are developing solar and wind-powered turbines, wireless data networks, and analytical tools for agriculture and healthcare. They have drawn involvement from major companies such as General Electric.
Minshall, once a sceptic, now sees their potential. “Makerspaces and fab labs started as a very hobbyist activity but have the potential to develop into local manufacturing hubs,” he says. “They are not going to replace how big businesses manufacture products, but they can supplement them in interesting ways.”
The big shift
As technologies advance and localised manufacturing hubs expand, consumers should benefit from reduced costs. “There are no logistics from raw material to end-product. It is information that travels, not resources,” Böhm at the Fraunhofer Institute explains. “Autonomous systems make it possible to produce personalised products at the costs of mass production,” adds his colleague Susann Kärcher.
By installing 3D printing hubs or production lines capable of mass customisation, rich countries have an opportunity to restore industrial jobs and become more self-sufficient. Böhm and Kärcher anticipate a rise of “micro-factories” as hardware shrinks and costs decline. In photography, for example, dark rooms have been replaced by printing booths that churn out instant images.
“Britain lost its manufacturing dominance because companies that can operate across borders will always try to find the cheapest place for production, which is closest to the human and material resources it needs,” notes James Tooze, a senior tutor in design products at the Royal College of Art. “Digital manufacturing technologies have the potential to disrupt that.”
Most of the experts The Economist Intelligence Unit spoke to agreed that redistributed manufacturing would supplement rather than replace global supply chains. Simple mass-produced products such as biros are better made in economies of scale. Complicated ones like smartphones use elements from mines across the world. Yet "so many of our common materials and domestic furnishings could be made locally,” Corbin argues. “The most important thing is that we find a better calibration for what gets manufactured globally and what gets done at home.”
Manufacturing a better society
Distributed and democratised manufacturing could make some expensive, particularly niche products much cheaper for those that need them—such as custom-made prosthetics. But the most important benefits could be environmental. Real-time information and digital fabrication technologies like 3D printing allow manufacturers to produce precisely what is needed, without waste. A product made close to the person who needs it will emit less carbon from transport. If radios and fridges can be patched up locally, they will have a longer lifetime.
Local manufacturing can also generate a more circular economy, in which parts can be repurposed and recycled. “Much of the environmental impact of a product is influenced at the design stage,” Corbin notes. By using smart joining mechanisms, simpler designs that enable fixing and repair and materials that can be locally recycled as well as biodegraded, she says that making can become more sustainable: “It’s about choosing materials from what is locally abundant and manufacturing products in ways that mean materials can be recovered and recycled."
Tooze agrees. “We can better calibrate design and production to locally-available resources, and to the recycling infrastructure that is available,” he says. “The key is managing the relationship between place and product. If you can do that, the likelihood of mitigating environmental damage will increase.”
This article was produced by The Economist Intelligence Unit. It originally appeared on:
https://innovationmatters.economist.com
