Appropriate and intermediate technology with examples

Appropriate technology

Appropriate technology (AT) is technology designed for the specific economic, social, cultural and environmental conditions of the community that uses it. The idea was popularised by E. F. Schumacher in Small Is Beautiful (1973).

Features:

• Low capital cost; affordable to local people
• Small-scale and decentralised
• Labour-intensive; creates local employment
• Uses local materials, energy and skills
• Simple to operate, repair and maintain locally
• Environmentally friendly, often using renewable energy
• Culturally acceptable and meets a felt need of the community

Examples:

• Micro-hydro plants for lighting and agro-processing in remote hill villages of Nepal
• Biogas plants using cattle dung for cooking gas and slurry fertiliser
• Improved cooking stoves reducing smoke and firewood use
• Solar home systems and solar dryers
• Rainwater harvesting and gravity-flow drinking water schemes
• Drip irrigation and treadle pumps for small farmers

AT is relative: a large thermal power plant may be appropriate for an industrial country, while a micro-hydro plant is appropriate for a remote Nepali village.

Intermediate technology

Intermediate technology is technology that lies between simple traditional technology and expensive modern, capital-intensive technology. Schumacher explained it with the idea that if a traditional tool costs £1 and a modern one £1000, an intermediate tool costing about £100 is far more productive than the first but affordable for poor people. The Intermediate Technology Development Group (1966, now Practical Action) works on this, including in Nepal.

Features: more productive than traditional tools, cheaper and simpler than modern machines, can be made or repaired locally.

Examples:

Relation between the two

In LDCs like Nepal, intermediate technology is usually the most appropriate technology because it matches scarce capital, plentiful labour and local skills.