H. Alpay Er Development Patterns of Industrial Design in the Third World: A Conceptual Model for Newly Industrialized Countries This article frst critically examines the early literature on the role of industrial design in the Third World and subsequently sts out to explain the dynamics behind the development of industrial design in a group of Third World countries categorized as Newly Industrialized Countries (NICs). For the development of industrial design activity in NICs, the vital ingredient appears to be competition. This is also conditioned by the market orientation of economicfindustral activity, which itself is largely determined by the governmental development strategies in the context of a globally organized world economy, The article concludes with a new theoretical model forthe development patterns of industrial design in NICs. Introduction In today’s global market industrial design is recognized as a powerful corporate tool, and it plays an increasingly critical role in competitive- ness. In an increasing number of design studies,” the link between a properly co-ordinated design activity and the competitive performance of com- panies is widely acknowledged in the industria- lized market economies of the West and Japan. In most of these studies, design has been defined as an activity in which market information is trans- formed into initial ideas—design concepts—and then into a specific configuration of materials and components—technical specifications—to manu- facture a new product. In other words, indus- trial/product design may be defined as a strategic process containing that knowledge about a product from which it can be materialized and positioned in the marketplace, the answers to the basic ‘why’ and ‘how’ questions about a product. However, little is known about the develop- ment of this strategic industrial activity outside the core countries of the global economic system Journal of Design History Vol. 20 No. 3 © 1997 The Design History Society Since industrial design has been usually asso- ciated with the product innovation activities of the industrialized market economies, the lack of literature regarding the design issues of the Third World may not be surprising to many. Never- theless, a growing number of peripheral countries have begun to play an increasingly active role in the international economy over the last two dec- ades. Yet, despite the academic attention given to the development of those countries in the eco- nomics literature, the development of industrial/ product design capabilities in the Third World has long remained under-researched. As Bonsiepe stated in 1977: Industrial design has advanced considerably in depen- dent countries, whether for good or ill. Design organ- isations have been established. Design promotion Programmes have been sponsored by local govern- ments in semi-industrialised countries. But, we still lack a critical evaluation of these projects—their suc~ cess and failures? This statement remains true, twenty years later. ‘The subject has been largely marginalized in studies of design as much as in studies of techno- logical change and development in the Third 293World. Woudhuysen? and Madge‘ point out that the Third World is generally absent from contem- porary discussions of design. As Margolin® also states, little writing on the issue of industrial design in developing countries appeared in the design literature. This lack of interest seems to be related to the general trend that defines design only in the context of the industrialized market ecoriomies of the West and Japan. According to Bonsiepe,’ the apparent lack of study on design in the Third World fits into the ideological pattern and parochial self-interpretation of industrialized countries which claim to be on the forefront of history and see everything that happened—and happens—in the periphery as a second-hand history and not something original in its own right. In his own words: Its all too easy to look at industrial design in the per- iphery as a second-rate, resource poor and delayed replay of a process through which the industrialized countries have passed during the nine decades in the zoth century when industrial design was transformed into a social reality. However, such parochial vision— admittedly quite common in the center—would not permit to perceive the differentiated reality and achievements in the area of industrial design in the periphery.* However, the expanding scale of design activity and the level of concern for the development of industrial design education and practice by the governments of some countries in the Third World appear to have a growing impact on world mar- kets? and such developments have raised issues regarding the nature of industrial change in dif- ferent social, economic, and political contexts which can alter theoretical constructs of the role of design. In this respect, as a diverse reality which has been marginalized for a long time in the design literature, the emergence and development characteristics of industrial design in the Third World require investigation as an objective fact and deserve to be systematically explored. With the aim of initiating discussion in this emerging field, this article first critically examines the early literature on the role of industrial design in the Third World, and then sets out to explain the dynamics behind the development of indus- trial design in a group of countries categorized as 294 Newly Industrialized Countries. There is a great diversity among the countries of the so-called Third World, a general term that is not well defined, together with related terms such as "Developing Countries’, ‘Less Developed Coun- tries’, ‘Underdeveloped Countries’, and ‘Periph- ery’ or ‘Peripheral Countries’. The differences between these terms depend largely on different theoretical approaches. However, all of these terms refer to the same geographical parts of the world, including Latin America, South and South East Asia (except Japan), Africa (except South Africa), and the Middle East (except Israel). The study"® from which this article draws its data focuses on the particular sub-group frequently described in the literature of development eco- nomics as ‘Newly Industrialized Countries’. These are the same countries that have attempted to gain design capabilities in parallel to their industrial development for the last three decades, although industrial design is still an unknown industrial practice in many parts of the Third World. Industrial Design in the Third World: Early Literature The design literature on the Third World is limited to a small number of early studies in which the introduction of industrial design into the industrial, economic, and social contexts of the Third World countries is associated with ‘devel- opment! in these areas." In other words, indus- trial design was perceived as a ‘problem-solving activity’ directed towards the basic development problems of those countries. Some early and influential studies on the subject even suggested specific ‘developmentalist’ roles for industrial design to play in this new context? Of the texts which appeared during the early 19708, Victor Papanek’s influential Design for the Real World (3972) was the most popular. However, Papanek’s work was not primarily about the Third World. His main concern was much more with design in the ‘First’ world and consumerism, and his approach, which can be described as an idealized combination of the ‘basic needs’ and “appropriate technology’ concepts, emerged as a by-product of his radical criticism of the role of industrial design in the Western capitalist societ- H. Alpay Eries. According to Papanek, industrial design has, or should have a morally motivated idealist— anti-consumerist—role in the Third World on the basis of those countries’ own basic needs. Nevertheless, Papanek’s approach, however socially responsible, did not offer any explanation of the dynamics leading to the emergence and development of industrial design in those coun- tries. Neither did it explain the actual role of industrial design in this new context. Although Papanek revised some of his early arguments later, he still maintains that designers have a moral role to play in the development process of the Third World. Gui. Bonsiepe is the second Western designer who looked into industrial design in the Third World. He initially worked as one of the leading figures at the Hochschule fiir Gestaltung Ulm. After the closure of the school in 1968, he went to Chile to undertake a series of projects for the socialist government of Allende. For most of his profes- sional life, Bonsiepe has lived in Latin American countries where he has made his reputation as a designer/theoretician addressing the design pro- blems of Third World countries.'* His first signi- ficant contribution was a working paper prepared as a basis for discussion between representatives of the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) and the International Congress of Societies of Industrial Design (ICSID). This paper is the first document in which industrial design was clearly defined as a specific tool for the development process of the Third World. Industrial design should be used as a tool in the pro- cess of industrialisation of developing countries. As a matter of fact, industrial design constitutes an indis- pensable instrument for endeavours towards develop- ment.® According to Bonsiepe, the significance of industrial design was based on the argument that it could help in the development of those countries. He definitely shared, though in a specific context, the idea of a ‘developmentalist’ role for industrial design with Papanek, without referring to the capitalistic nature of industrial design activity.° However, the similarity between Bonsiepe and Papanek ends at that point. While ‘Development Pattern of Industrial Design in the Third World ol in Papanek the absence of a debate on the capitalistic nature of industrial design resulted from a rather naive and moralist approach, for Bonsiepe it was a result of an ideological perspec- tive. Bonsiepe's theoretical framework for indus- trial design in the periphery, in which the influence of neo-Marxist and Latin American- based Dependency Theory can easily be detracted, was mainly supported by material from the practical conditions of countries such as Chile, Argentina, and Brazil.” He defined industrial design in the periphery as ‘the dialec- tical counterpart of industrial’ design at the centre’, and from this perspective perceived industrial design as a technological variable in the development context of Third World coun- tries. As he pointed out, ‘the question of design in the periphery is linked to the problem of techno- logical dependence, and by implication, financial dependence.” In a typical dependency school fashion, Bonsiepe maintained that the technolo- gical and financial ‘dependency’ of national eco- nomies in Latin American NICs on the capitalist core through transnational corporations (TNCs) was the main reason for the failure of industrial design to root itself in the local industries.” Bonsiepe, by establishing the first theoretical link between industrial design and socio-eco- nomic dynamics in the context of peripheral countries, can be fairly acknowledged for being the founder of this new study field in the design domain. Nevertheless, his early theoretical ana- lysis of the subject, which often reproduced the general arguments of ‘technological underdeve- lopment’ of the Dependency Theory, falls short of providing an consistent explanation for the dynamics and development of industrial design in the Third World. Under the influence of Papanek and Bonsiepe’s arguments, the 1970s and the early 1980s wit- nessed a growing body of design literature with a strong ‘developmentalist’ tendency, mainly pro- duced by designers from the Third World coun- tries.” However, by ignoring the capitalistic, profit-motivated nature of industrial design activ- ity for moral or political reasons, this early liter- ature reduced industrial design to a ‘problem- solving methodology’, a ‘neutral’ planning tool that can be employed regardless of its social and 295