The Rise and Fall of the Appropriate Technology Movement in the United States, 1965–1985

Abstract

Presidential Address THE RISE AND FALL OF THE APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY MOVEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES, 1965-1985 CARROLL PURS ELL Anchored in a period of social ferment and reform at one end, and in the Reagan years at the other, the two decades which saw the flourishing and the foundering of the Appropriate Technology movement in America encompassed also the end of the Vietnam War, a major energy crisis, and the first years of the environmental movement. The Appropriate Technology movement had its origins in perceived failings of the post-World War II technical aid efforts (by the United States and other northern hemispheric powers) in Third World countries but also quickly developed into a critique of American domestic technology. A welter of institutions were created: public and private; state, federal, and local; high-tech and low; aimed at underdevelopment overseas and overdevelopment at home. By the mid-1980s, however, most of these institutions had either disappeared or lost their momentum. The technologies themselves—solar energy, the generation of electricity by windmills, the utilization of abandoned dams for low-head hydroelectric generation, the development of methane gas and gasahol for fuel, a reemphasis on bicycles and mass transit, recycling and the use of natural materials, composting and sustainable (often organic) agriculture—survive, but without an ideological context which could give them political meaning.1 Dr. Plrsell is director of the Program in History of Technology and Science at Case Western Reserve University. He delivered this presidential address at the Society for the History of Technology meeting in Uppsala, Sweden, on August 19, 1992. 'For some recent expressions of a renewed interest in classic appropriate technolo­ gies, see “Neglected Agency May Get Vital Role in Energy Policy,” New York Times, November 23, 1992; “A New Era for Windmill Power,” New York Times, September 8, 1992; “Energy Efficiency—the Only Way Out,” Science 256 (June 12, 1992): 1515; “3 Utilities in California Plan Desert Solar Energy Project,” New York Times, August 29, 1992.© 1993 by the Society for the History of Technology. All rights reserved. 0040-165X/93/3403-0006$01.00 629 630 Carroll Pursell To explain the rise of Appropriate Technology, one must take into account the convergence of a broad countercultural movement, a reassertion of doubts about the role of technology in American life, and the burgeoning environmental movement. This rich nexus was easily labeled “antitechnology” but, in fact, embodied a critique of certain technologies and certain definitions of the word, rather than a rejection of technology as such. The decline of the movement can be attributed to a combination of political and cultural factors. On the one hand, despite initiatives at the state level and by PresidentJimmy Carter, there was a lack of political commitment to changing the economic subsidies (including federally funded research and devel­ opment budgets) that underwrote nuclear power, for example, but not the direct conversion of sunlight into electricity. Culturally, the campaign of the 1980s to “remasculinize” America after its defeat in Vietnam was profoundly antithetical to a movement that believed “Small Is Beautiful” and advocated “Soft Energy Paths,” to cite the titles of two of the most influential books in the literature of Appropriate Technology.2 It is difficult to imagine Rambo deliberately choosing to ride a bicycle, or recycle his cartridges, simply because such practices would be gentle on the earth. The debate over Appropriate Technology was rich in cultural meaning and ideological intent, as well as being a material and economic challenge to existing social interests. These interests were committed to a certain kind and understanding of technology which operated as a hegemonic culture, and to that privileged position the oppositional culture ofAppropriate Technology mounted a profound challenge. Since technological change can be understood in terms of not only social forces but also of cultural meanings, it pays to look especially at the contested definitions of words. In so doing one finds often enough that Appropriate Technology was represented as more feminine than the hegemonic technology and therefore seen by some as a threat to accepted notions of masculinity. The eclipse of Appro­ priate Technology in the 1980s became an important part of the so-called remasculinization of America. * * * Post-World...