Changing the change

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…)

The term “social design” is relatively new in the design vocabulary. Of course, one could say that all design is social in one way or another since its products are introduced into society. But the term “social” as in “social work”, “social welfare”, or “social responsibility” also carries the connotation of serving a social good. Today, we understand “social good” to be a concept that is larger than the satisfaction of each member of society. In material terms, we now realize that it is not possible to satisfy everyone by providing the same level of goods and material consumption that is currently enjoyed by those in the most economically developed countries. We also know that consumption has its side effects. It pollutes the atmosphere and contributes to climate change; it produces waste material that is difficult to dispose of; and it absorbs resources that might be otherwise used for more beneficial purposes.

Thus, we can recognize social design as design that contributes to the social good. Recently, Archeworks, a one-year school in Chicago that focuses on social design projects, published a book called Design Denied. The book states that design which addresses social needs should be available to everyone though we know this not to be the case. So one aim of social design is to reach people who are currently not receiving the benefits of design. Another is to produce goods and services that avoid the negative effects of much that we currently produce.

Fortunately, the need to change our social habits has become more evident. Thoughtful people accept the reality of climate change. They also understand that the gap between wealthy and poor people is growing and needs to be narrowed. And they know that we cannot create infinite landfills. Many people are already addressing these problems, designers among them. The purpose of Changing the Change is to bring together people who are working in new directions that are intended to improve social wellbeing. Last June a group of designers and design educators met in Brighton, England, to discuss the future of design. The main point of their manifesto, Brighton 05/06/07, was that design’s principal purpose is human wellbeing. This is a fundamental shift from the traditional aim of putting market success first. It demands more thought about what should be designed and how. Listening to presentations of projects that are focused on these questions is a good start. From gatherings of people with shared objectives come social networks, new projects, and increased effects. That is what the organizers of Changing the Change are hoping for.