MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7134999190

What limits the greater adoption of 3D printing in Canada? Identifying the Barriers to the Adoption of 3D printing in Canada

2025· other· en· W7134999190 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nicholas Di Scipio

Bibliographic record

VenueYork University Digital Library (York University) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcess (computing)Product (mathematics)3D printingMaturity (psychological)ManufacturingNew product developmentRisk perceptionEmpirical researchPerceptionDiffusion of innovations
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite significant advances in materials, equipment, and applications, the adoption of 3D printing in Canadian manufacturing remains limited, with most firms restricting its use to prototyping rather than full-scale production. This thesis investigates why this gap persists by examining the economic, technical, organizational, and cultural factors shaping adoption decisions. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with industry stakeholders across manufacturing firms, suppliers, and supporting organizations, the study combines empirical insights with established technology adoption theories, including the Technology Acceptance Model, Diffusion of Innovation, and the Product Adoption Process. The findings show that slow adoption is not driven by technical limitations alone. Instead, adoption is influenced by interconnected perceptions of risk, cost, capability, and organizational readiness, reinforced by conservative decision-making cultures, limited internal expertise, and uncertainty around qualification and certification. Customer expectations related to lead time, customization, and reliability further shape adoption behavior, either accelerating experimentation or reinforcing risk aversion. Regional infrastructure differences and ecosystem maturity also affect firms’ ability to progress beyond trial use. Based on these findings, the thesis proposes a synthesized adoption framework that captures adoption as an iterative, feedback-driven process rather than a linear sequence. The framework integrates individual perceptions, organizational conditions, and external pressures to better reflect real-world adoption dynamics. This research contributes a practical and theoretically grounded lens for understanding 3D printing adoption in Canada and provides a foundation for future research, policy development, and industry strategies aimed at supporting broader and more sustained adoption.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.153 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYork University Digital Library (York University)→French-language works237,207→