2020
DOI: 10.1080/23299460.2020.1808151
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reducing inequality through technology diffusion: the case of 3D printing in public libraries

Abstract: 3D printers are hailed as the next revolutionary technology, but will they be responsible innovations and help decrease poverty and inequality? This paper determines the availability and accessibility of 3D printing technology in low-income communities through public libraries and gives insights on how libraries use 3D printers. By examining the 2013 Digital Inclusion Survey and conducting interviews, we find that libraries are quickly acquiring 3D printers; however, the technology is not being fully adopted b… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Institutional and organizational level empirical investigations and assessments include reducing inequality through 3D printing in US public libraries (Woodson, Telendii, and Tolliver 2020), embedding responsible innovation in a UK synthetic biology multi-disciplinary research center (Pansera et al 2020), researcher expectations and practices around open science in Australia (Lacey, Coates, and Herington 2020), the integration of policy-driven grand challenges into research agendas in German university settings (Kaltenbrunner 2020), and the problematic paradigm of 'social license to operate' as used within synthetic biology public engagement discourses (Delborne, Kokotovich, and Lunshof 2020).…”
Section: Closing Out Twenty-twenty On a Positive Notementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Institutional and organizational level empirical investigations and assessments include reducing inequality through 3D printing in US public libraries (Woodson, Telendii, and Tolliver 2020), embedding responsible innovation in a UK synthetic biology multi-disciplinary research center (Pansera et al 2020), researcher expectations and practices around open science in Australia (Lacey, Coates, and Herington 2020), the integration of policy-driven grand challenges into research agendas in German university settings (Kaltenbrunner 2020), and the problematic paradigm of 'social license to operate' as used within synthetic biology public engagement discourses (Delborne, Kokotovich, and Lunshof 2020).…”
Section: Closing Out Twenty-twenty On a Positive Notementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The last few years saw an increased availability of low-cost 3D printers and their growing diffusion among academic and hobbyist communities [ 1 ]. In medicine, these developers are capable of taking advantage of innovative technologies, including 3D printing [ 2 , 3 ], micro-soldering, and electronic circuit design, to create assistive technologies that improve clinical practice or increment cost-effectiveness.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%