Changing the change

I would like to add a few words to the discussion about what terms might be most appropriate to express the social orientation that we would like Changing the Change to address. I have been using the term “social design” quite a lot and am more or less satisfied with it. In English, it has a reference to the profession of social work and suggests design with an explicit social agenda. It also relates to the term “social action,” which in the United States suggests social concern. On the other hand, it is evident that from a semantic view, all design is social, a point that should not be overlooked.

I have problems with the term “innovation,” which has now been adopted as a corporate buzzword and some folks are even interested in substituting it for the word “design.” “Innovation” is also related to the industrialized cultures and with its corporate connotations may not be appropriate for discussing design in developing country situations or design for a small scale. As many know, there is a movement which argues that bringing capitalism and entrepreneurship to poor people is the best way to lift them out of poverty. I don’t disagree with that possibility but am against making it the principal model of development as some wish to do. In a paper on social design that I wrote with my wife, we distinguished the terms “market design” and “social design,” saying that social design could be design for the means.

We also wrote about design for special needs such as old age, disabled people, and really poor people. but that is too limited in the sense we are considering Changing the Change. I think we do need to indicate that the kind of design that will be discussed at the Changing the Change conference is design directed specifically at improving the quality of life. It is accountable to social results and not simply to successful market exchange. We should understand these results to be environmental, economic, and cultural.
I am still satisfied with the term “social design” which is growing in use and interest. If we choose another term, it should have the same connotation of “improving social welfare”.

“Things will develop in the opposite direction when they become extreme.” (Laozi, B.C. 500)
This is a simple dialectic idea of Laozi, a great ancient ideologist 2500 years ago. However, the philosophy still holds today and it has been widely indicated in the recent history of China.

No doubts, the modern production and consumption, as an expression of industrial society, which have been developed in the last two centuries is still the mainstream of change today, and it has been reaching the limit of resource on the earth (Extreme). Therefore, it has to be recognized to change the change, changing the direction of the development of society and human being towards sustainability as a rebound from the extreme (Opposite direction).

In this transition China is supposed to make a big contribution to the world. It’s not only because we could always discover some helpful thoughts and inspirations from Chinese ancient or traditional ideology and philosophy that are disappearing from everyday life, but also in the last 30 years China has transited from an impoverished country into a world factory, which helps in providing China the opportunity to steer its direction.

Fortunately, China is being in action! A new movement has been launched by the central government of China—Harmonious Society, which came into picture after the big decision of the shift from economic development to sustainable development. For example, on 31st December 2007, a new regulation was announced by the central government, “It will be forbidden to produce and consume the super-flimsy plastic shopping bags after June, 2008”. Then something interesting happened recently: the traditional bamboo shopping baskets came back to the urban life even before this June. It means people are very open to sustainable lifestyle. Besides the top-down policies, the bottom-up social innovations are emerging and promoted in China. Many diffused social enterprises (Creative Communities) and sustainable lifestyles have been observed such as Car Sharing, PinKe, Group Purchase, Community Supporting Agriculture and etc. Those promising cases implicate the initiatives and anticipation of sustainable lifestyles from general people in everyday life spontaneously.

What could design and design research contribute when “things will develop in the opposite direction” in the approaches of top-down and bottom-up? Laozi provides a big universal vision for the future. However, more indicated visions, proposals and tools have to be investigated and developed to realize the sustainable society.

Certainly, we are still facing paradox realities: On one hand, we understand that design and designers are supposed to provide more contributions for sustainable development; on the other hand, we still get excited on continuous development of market oriented tools and designs. Design is recognized to be an important program and profession to impact the development of society in positive way with social responsibility. However, designers in China are facing a difficult employment situation as design departments are often subordinate to others. Though the innovations and creativities (it’s the nature of design) as a top down policy are promoted all over China, the value of design (budget of design project) during the last 10 years has still been on the decrease. China has a long history and culture in “Making Goods” and philosophy of “Usage”, but the design education system was mainly imported from western countries where modern design had been born out of industrialization. For one thing, “Harmonious Society” and sustainable society has been a big vision of society in China; for another, Design seems part of problem more than part of solution for this vision.

In a word, China is a paradox focus between traditional philosophy, rapid industrialization and the ideal of harmonious society. Reality is complex and it is a part of reason why we need research work. Fortunately, Design is complex as well and that’s why design is expected to face the reality in advance. With the strong support from the local partner of China, Tongji University, there are active reactions in the academic and professional fields of design, architecture and civil society. Experiences from China would be expected to exchange and discuss in the conference.

This paper was presented at the Design Research Society ‘WonderGround’ Conference in Lisbon, Portugal, November 2006.

Design for development is not a new concept. Since the 1960s, it has been introduced sporadically to the development process, although it is yet to earn itself a permanent place in that process. The idea of development has a relatively short history. The tripartite structure of First World, Second World, and Third World, which dominated development thought after World War II, was based on a Cold War ideology that identified capitalism as the favoured economic system. The First World consisted of the Western industrialized capitalist nations; the Second World comprised the centralized command economies in the Communist countries, while the Third World was made up mainly of new nations that had previously been colonies of First World countries and had achieved independence often through revolutions and wars of liberation. The ideological underpinnings of this asymmetric structure politicized the three groups, tainting the transfer of aid and technical assistance with propagandistic overtones.

(more…)

Changing the change is a very “Chinese” theme as China is experiencing such sweeping changes, covering almost all aspects of society, which can hardly be seen in most other countries.

Chinese people are optimistic, most of them believe that the future will be better than today. Local designers also think that they are experiencing a historical era marked by a leap from “Manufacturing China” to “Creative China”. The whole society is being driven by a huge engine called “development”. As a result, people don’t always have enough time to think and rethink in-depth, but such introspection is so necessary when seeking a sustainable future.

This Changing the change conference offers an opportunity for Chinese designers: to rethink and re-evaluate the changes that are happening or have happened in our life-world, no matter whether huge or tiny; to rethink and compare the present physical spaces, social-culture and life styles with what they used to be; to rethink the position, values, trends and possible social responsibilities of design education, design practice and design research.

In this era of globalization, eastern designers are duty-bound to put forward their views on these questions as critical regionalists. Today, sustainable development may be the only universal ethic. To realize this ideal, not only are science and technology needed at product level, but also at the system and the ethical level. We Chinese have to admit in shame that our ancestors lived a far more sustainable life style than we do today. This fact is constantly reminding us that many aspects and changes in our life-world should be re-evaluated and re-designed.

In Chinese, the word “she ji” stands for “design”, and its original meaning was “establish a strategy”. It originated from military affairs. The Chinese “she ji” design system has already been running successfully for thousands of years, long before Le Corbusiers began to teach us what design is and how to design. The most interesting thing is that the softer Chinese “she ji” concept exactly coincides with certain tendencies in today’s design, such as “vision”, “system” or “strategic” design, etc.

In traditional Chinese ideology, human and nature have always been regarded as a whole, the human body and the outside world are both complicated systems sharing many common characteristics. This kind of understanding together with respect and love of nature leads to a world of balance and harmony (the Chinese meaning of “sustainable”). Actually, the traditional philosophy, ways of thinking and life styles which were once rashly abandoned, may exactly meet the needs of sustainable development. Chinese designers should think about this and let the other part of this planet know what and how they are thinking and doing. On this level, “design research” is not only a tool for designers to think, explore and solve problems, not only a tool to criticize and introspect, but also more of a language to communicate with other worldwide designers.

China is experiencing the most rapid change in the world, and at the same time, China may also be the ideal place to realize any strategies for change. All we have to do now is to find and to “she (set up )” a right and good “ji” “vision and strategy”, not only for the design discipline itself but also for the whole human world?