Digital commons, urban struggles and the role of Design

Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference on - PDC '10, 2010

The field of Strategic Design supports designers in researching and designing for the complexity of today's cities by embracing the idea of strategic dialogue, in which designers align with different actors and their interests. In this article, we discuss how democratic dialogues-foregrounded in the Participatory Design (PD) tradition-play a role in complex urban design processes (i.e. 'infrastructuring') and entail different types of dialogues of which strategic dialogue is merely one. After framing Strategic Design and PD, we describe five designer roles and their associated dialogues. This description forms the basis of an exploratory typology of democratic dialogues that was applied and exemplified in a case study about a Living Lab in the neighbourhood of Genk. The Lab attempts to design alternative futures for work in the city together with citizens, public and private organisations. We claim that engaging with this typology allows designers to understand and design infrastructuring processes in the urban context and to open up different design dialogues and roles for discussion.

Since the 1970s the sustainability movement has called on designers to address the ecological impact of the products they design. This reappraisal has led to a growing awareness amongst designers of the potential for design to engage in discourses concerned with global issues such resource depletion, large scale population movement, labour exploitation, threats to food and water sources, as well as more recently climate change. Some of the more prominent practices to emerge out of these debates have been political in nature. Guy Julier describes this renewed interest in politics as 'design activism.' Design activism is a meta-­‐discipline that has the capacity to transform the world by reshaping individual, social, and economic behaviour. One of the central tenets behind this heterogeneous movement is the certainty that people and objects actually inhabit complex relational assemblages that constitute particular environments and in themselves have designing agency. This is in direct contrast to earlier approaches such as eco design that remained largely subject-­‐centric, applying ever more sophisticated technologies that would lead to a reduction in the consumption of materials and energy. In recent times design has taken up a more critical and interrogatory whole-­‐systems approach to humans, materials and immaterial things. In this paper, we suggest that design can open up new forms of political representation and engagement, with a view to challenging dominant frameworks (habitus) that proliferate unsustainable practices. We will specifically draw on three case studies from Australia: 1) The Urmadic University 2) Natalie Jeremijenko and 3) Second Road to engage with future imaginings that adapt and mitigate potential possibilities through design. More specifically we have understood design activism as a political set of actions that materially and symbolically embody opportunities for change. These examples give rise to a multiplicity of affects, which include the emergence of new publics dedicated to critical and creative social imaginings; the creation of future scenarios that redistribute agency across non-­‐human things and recast the place of humans within ecological systems; and the co-­‐creation of new frameworks for equitable, transparent decision making within shared communities of interest.

DESIGNING SUSTAINABILITY FOR ALL, 2019

The present article proposes to investigate possible futures for the design through a proximal and dialogical ap- proach between design and democracy. In this way, we begin with the letter “Stand Up for Democracy”, written by Manzini and Margolin. Thus we seek to understand the foundations of the concept of Design as Democracy, pro- posed by the mentioned authors. We seek a relationship between the structures of democratic models and design practices. For these reasons, we have opened up a dialogue on codesign as a possible methodological alternative for a democratic design, more comprehensive, horizontal and open for all. Providing a fertile ground where collective creativity can be used as a form of collaboration and solving common problems is mirrored in design as democracy. For this resonates with the creation of a more inclusive and sustainable world for the future generation.

2014

This paper aims to discuss the potentials of novel modes of participatory design in relation to the latest developments in Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). The first part of the study involves the extraction of the basic principles from the extraordinary cases of the Medical Faculty Housing by Lucien Kroll (1976) and Cedric Price's Fun Place (1965) in which various forms of ICT-enabled participation were conceived. In the second part, we reframe the existing ICT tools and strategies and elaborate their potentials to support the modes of participation performed in these two cases. As a result, by distilling the created knowledge, we introduce a model of ICT-enabled design participation which exploits a set of collective action tools to support sustainable ways of self-organization and bottom-up design.

Proceedings of the 41st International Conference on Education and Research in Computer Aided Architectural Design in Europe (eCAADe) [Volume 1]

Digital design has developed methods to address complex urban planning issues like the transformation of mobility using analytical tools and urban data. Simultaneously, such wicked problems require negotiation among involved stakeholders and situated knowledge. Even though contemporary City Digital Twin and urban data initiatives acknowledge this sociotechnical aspect (1&2), linking data analysis and participatory negotiations remains unresolved. In this paper, we bridge this gap by reconsidering digital design as a hybrid practice mediating between quantitative and qualitative approaches, between different stakeholders' perspectives, and urban strategies (3). We explore this approach in the EU-funded New-European-Bauhaus initiative project "NEBourhoods". Our action within this project addresses the mobility transformation of a car-centered late modernist housing estate in Munich. This initiative involves a digitally supported co-creation process, including a participatory platform, workshops, and two physical demonstrators for multifunctional mobility stations. Building upon earlier research in the context of design-decision support, collaborative design, and gamification, we discuss how these elements can be articulated as a hybrid strategy, mediating between heterogeneous aspects of urban mobility and different stakeholders' perspectives. Firstly, we introduce spatial data analysis tools in participatory workshops with local experts and multipliers. Hence, the participants contextualize geospatial data and augment analytical data with situated knowledge. Successively we define possible locations and functions for the prototypical demonstrators. Consecutively we delve into these selected areas: Using a gamified mobile phone app, we gather information on local mobility practices and facilitate a co-creation process on the configuration of the demonstrators. Finally, the participatory app allows discussing and monitoring the implemented demonstrators and thus fosters a broader discussion on mobility transformation. In conclusion, we discuss how digital design assembles and mediates this strategy for mobility transformation. Thus, we focus on how digital tools gather and reconfigure relevant perspectives, interactions, and elements in this hybrid co-creation process.

In her paper, "P for Political," Beck poses the question: "What constitutes political action through computing?" 1 Certainly, the history and range of contemporary projects in Participatory Design provide a rich and varied set of answers to that question. To those answers, we would like to propose two others: prompting critical engagements with technology and enabling people to use technology to produce creative expressions about issues of concern.

Technology in Society, 2023

This article aims at approaching urban design from a philosophical point of view, specifically through Andrew Feenberg's critical theory of technology. It attempts to present the politics of urban design, rejecting an urban-technological determinism that refers to a specific technical environment as the only one possible. If technology is an open process with social implications and consequences, the same holds for urban technologies and designs. This approach argues that contemporary cities are formed within a specific socio-technical context which is seemingly the most functional for the current social, political and economic world, but since environmental and urban crises rise, there seems to be a need for rethinking over the form of current cities. Thus, this article attempts to offer a theoretical contribution to the debate over alternative urban designs through Andrew Feenberg's insights. Drawing upon some of his most crucial notions, like the "technical code", the "interpretative flexibility" and the "operational autonomy" and presenting their role in a philosophy of the city, I attempt to highlight that current urban forms could be replaced by other functional alternatives. The choice over one or another urban design is political hence the need for the relation between the philosophy of the city and technical politics.

Journal of Urban Design, 2019

This paper aims to advance the development of participation in urban design from a substantive standpoint. It departs from a prevailing focus on ideals of participation and describing participatory methods and processes. Instead, the paper stresses the need to acknowledge ‘the political’ nature of public spaces and how this challenges participatory urban design processes. This leads to a substantive exploration of differences, conflicts and power in the planning and design of public spaces, i.e., unearthing the political. The case of a participatory process in a neighbourhgood of Barcelona illustrates the theoretical discussion. This helps bring forward a much-needed critical and reflective, rather than idealistic, theorization and practice of participation in urban design.

Strategic Design Research Journal, 2017

In recent years, a collaborative approach to solving socio-urban problems has become common. In some cases, organizational changes have been worked out in enterprises and governments to accommodate the collaborative process, and people started recognizing the already present collaborative aspect of the creative process. Nevertheless, a rigorous theoretical/conceptual background that can sustain continuous social innovation based on accountable experimentation is still majorly lacking in these contexts. The specific approach elaborated for Metadesign by the author can provide a bridge between these innovative intentions and a new epistemological framework that has emerged from contemporary philosophy, anthropology, and complexity theory. In the context of the so-called "Smart City", Metadesign could serve as an accessible approach to the democratic organization of communities so they can perform qualified and consequential creative work, including rethinking their own role in urban planning (meta-action). This approach is based on a new social interaction repertoire, partially derived from the popularization of digital interaction, but also from a new epistemic: complexity theory involves extreme shifts in the prevailing epistemological outlook, requiring new cognitive tools to cope with the increasing cognitive load in social interaction needed in collaborative creative work. This new epistemic also involves changing the way we frame objects of knowledge, recognizing new "objects of design", of particular interest to the Metadesign action, that can mediate social change in a concerted and conscious manner.

Architectural Research Quarterly, 2020

Over the last decade, we have witnessed renewed interest in design as a socially engaged practice. Much of the debates around ‘social design’ point towards myriad approaches and disciplinary fields interwoven with grass-roots initiatives and social movements. Among these, design activism has gained traction as critical spatial practice that operates on the fringes of commercial and institutional spheres.The temporal, spatial and experimental nature of design activism is well delineated in scholarship but its long-term effect on everyday urban environments remains elusive. Moreover, the influence of design activism on socio-spatial dynamics is indeed largely under researched. By mobilising social practice theory, this paper proposes a novel theorisation of design activism that sheds light on the social formations and collective practices catalysed through the activist impulse. This ontological shift embraces an understanding of the socio-material world through practice. Such characte...

e-flux journal, 2010

Rethinking Digital Citizenship: Control, Contest and Culture, 2016

Makerspaces have helped frame processes of design, adaptation, and the repair of things and systems—hardware, software, networks, tools, food, currencies, energy, bacteria—as social activities (Sleigh et al., 2015). Makerspaces have also been revealed as sites that encourage self-directed civic practices and the assembling of new civic identities, or DIY citizenship (Nascimento, 2014; Toombs et al., 2014; Kubitschko, 2015; Shea, 2015; Hunsinger and Schrock, 2016). This chapter offers an additional contextual review and further evidence of emergent civic practices linked to makerspaces, focusing attention on peace-building projects in Northern Ireland. It specifically examines the role of design and material engagement in the performance of these ethical and social interventions. The study elucidates how the propagation of alternative thinking and responsible action in Northern Ireland’s makerspaces is challenging normative understandings of civic participation.

2016

What are the limits of design in addressing the political and/or when has design not been enough? This question lies at the heart of Designing Politics, an ongoing project at Theatrum Mundi. Now in its third year of organising ideas challenges in cities around the world, Theatrum Mundi gathered a group of architects, academics, artists and activists in May 2016 to reflect on the questions it asks, and the fundamental relationship between design and politics. Below is a short introduction to the broader programme of work that emerged from 2012 and so far has produced three challenges: New York (2014), London (2015) and Rio de Janeiro ( ). This provides a background to the reflections that follow. 'movement' in different ways: dancers and choreographers, transport planners, and people involved in social movements and activism. Fresh on the heels of the Occupy Movement that spread around the globe, this group wondered what it might look like for a design challenge to address major political questions. Two years later, that idea formed the basis for the first in Theatrum Mundi's series of ideas challenges on 'Designing Politics': 'Designing for Free Speech' based in New York. This was a purposefully provocative consideration of the intensification of the privatisation and securitisation of urban space, against the politics of the Occupy Movement and similar long-standing counter-publics. The challenge asked, Can we design for free speech? What are the limits of formal design in relationship to the USA Constitution's Second Amendment? What was exciting as an organisation was to see the responses. Some took up the notion that to design for free speech was to literally enhance the voice -that is to design physical elements that would make someone's voice louder in a public space so that they could share what was on their mind. Others suggested there is no space for free speech anymore in New York, and so proposed in satirical fashion the construction of a floating agora in the Hudson river: free speech in exile. Still others suggested that proposing the idea that one could 'design' for 'free speech' is preposterous to begin with -suggesting it amounted to social engineering. For this group, free speech was a legal or constitutional issue, not one related to physical design or performative or visual cultures. For Theatrum Mundi, the breadth and explosive imagination put into the challenge was as exciting as it was a sign that thinking the relationship of design to politics remains an important task. The fact that there were people offering critique of the very question Theatrum Mundi was asking is a signal of the importance in putting it out there for debate. In 2015, Theatrum Mundi organised the second ideas challenge 'Designing the Urban Commons' in London. This iteration followed the same method as in New York. However, it asked a question about ownership, stewardship and collective practice in relationship to the historic question of the What can the 'street' learn from the 'stage'?

Participatory Design, 2004

As computer technologies start to permeate the everyday activities of a continuously growing population, social and technical as well as political and legal issues will surface. Participatory design is asked to take a more critical view of participation, design, technology, and the arenas in which the network of actors and artifacts dialectically construct the social orders. This paper has a

CoDesign, 2020

In this paper we draw upon the articles included in this special issue to question how to re-politicise co-design and participatory design (PD). Many authors in these fields have recently made a plea to reengage with 'big issues' as a way to address this concern. At the same time, there is an increased attention into the micro-politics of the relations that are built-in co-design and PD. These two approaches are sometimes presented as working against each other with a depoliticising dynamic as a result. The editorial hypothesis of this issue is that designing visions can turn the tension between addressing the big issues and close attention to the particularity of relations into a motor for re-politicising design. Through engaging with literature, the articles presented in this issue, and two fieldwork cases that explore this dynamic, we discovered that paying careful attention to the activity of designing visions can support re-politicisation. While visions enable us to develop relations with close attention to their politics, building relations supports a more political approach to designing visions on issues. We argue that vision-making can particularly support re-politicisation when it enables the articulation of the political by relating its situated reality to how it unfolds in space and time.