Transitional spaces: geographies of copresence and collaboration in Open Labs

Abstract

From the text:

Micro-spaces of altered work and production have popped up worldwide in the context of urban, economic and societal transformation. Scholars have so far addressed them as Open Labs, FabLabs, Urban Laboratories and Coworking Spaces (Herrle et al., 2015; Wolfram and Frantzeskaki, 2016). They have also become recognized by a larger public. One indicator is that calls for the purposeful establishment of Open Labs in schools and other educational institutions have been made (Assaf, 2014).

In 2016, almost 500 Open Labs were counted in Germany (Lange et. al, 2016), ranging from bike kitchens, FabLabs, printing studios, and other open places engaged in prototyping, crafting and fixing artefacts. Due to an enormous increase of Open Labs by almost 50% over the last 2 years (ibid.), the necessity now arises to conceptualize these Labs in more detail.

In our understanding, Open Labs are an important part of the new scenery of open innovation. They comprise craft elements as diverse as highly innovative production technologies, such as prototyping technologies, 3D printing, screen printing, traditional crafts, bicycle repairing, and others. These phenomena have been considered sites of ‘collaborative coworking’ (Bender, 2013), ‘alternative economies’ (Lange, 2017) or ‘experimental fabbing labs’ (Fleischmann et al., 2016). They have in common that their internal structures and practices substantially differ from the routines of commercial production patterns.

In the past few years, the academic and policy-oriented debate has raised attention on these spaces for various reasons: While some scholars address them as topical niches in the context of sustainability and transformation (Liedtke et al., 2015; Liedtke et al., 2012; McCormick et al., 2013; Nevens et al., 2013), others have taken a closer look at their role as small breeding places of innovative practices within multi-level-governance and urban transition (Gavin et al., 2013; North and Longhurst, 2013; Schirmer, 2010; Seyfang and Haxeltine, 2012). Urban studies scholars have perceived these micro grassroots spaces as a counter movement against the backdrop of financial and austerity effects at the local level (Färber, 2014; Tonkiss, 2013; Vathakou, 2015). Others have started to shed light on collaborative practices within peer production networks (Hemetsberger and Reinhardt, 2009).

An additional strand of conceptualization emerged from studies on recent shifts in the organization of work, including actual work practices, in contemporary processes of economic transformation. A crucial role for the restructuring of how, when and where people work has been played by the technology-driven deregulation of labour markets (changes in labour markets mean more self-employment but also new job profiles due to internet and communication technologies; more freelance work) as well as by ICT-induced re-organization of work and workplaces (Kostakis and Bauwens, 2014; Smith et al., 2017).