A STUDY ON UNDERSTANDING THE INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT DESIGN APPROACHES TO DESIGN DEMOCRATIZATION

Öz

Since their emergence, design disciplines have been working to offer better living conditions to the masses. Their contexts, processes, and outcomes are shaped according to the social, economic, and political movements and issues. This situation has paved the way for the inclusion of various user groups in the design process. Mainly, enabling open-source environments and developing technology have strengthened the involvement of diverse user groups in the design and have provided continuous development in design democratization. The paper aims to understand better how researchers discuss the concept of democratization within a design context. In order to do this, the paper first explores the meaning and origin of design democratization. Then it examines the related approaches that have emerged over the years in different geographies. As a conclusion of these explorations, the paper emphasizes the importance of social inclusion, diversity, and empowerment in design democratization.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Design Democratization
• Design Approaches
• Social Inclusion
• Diversity in Design
• Empowerment in Design

FARKLI TASARIM YAKLAŞIMLARININ TASARIM DEMOKRATİKLEŞMESİNE ETKİSİNİN ANLAŞILMASI ÜZERİNE BİR ARAŞTIRMA

Öz

Tasarım disiplinleri ortaya çıktıkları andan itibaren büyük kitlelere daha iyi yaşam koşulları sunmak için çalışmaktadır. Bağlamları, süreçleri ve sonuçları sosyal, ekonomik ve politik hareketlere ve konulara göre şekillenir. Bu durum, kullanıcı çeşitli gruplarının tasarım sürecine dahil edilmesinin önünü açmıştır. Temel olarak, açık kaynaklı ortamların etkinleştirilmesi ve gelişen teknoloji, farklı kullanıcı gruplarının tasarıma dahil olmasını güçlendirmiş ve tasarımın demokratikleşmesi açısından sürekli gelişmeyi sağlamıştır. Bu makale, araştırmacıların genel olarak tasarımın demokratikleşmesi kavramını nasıl tartıştıkları konusunda daha iyi bir anlayış geliştirmeyi amaçlamaktadır. Bunu yapmak için, makale öncelikle tasarımın demokratikleşmesinin anlamını ve kökenini incelemektedir. Daha sonra yıllar içinde farklı coğrafyalarda ortaya çıkan ilgili yaklaşımları analiz etmektedir. Bu araştırmaların sonucu olarak, makale, tasarımın demokratikleşmesi sürecinde toplumsal kapsayıcılık, tasarımda çeşitlilik ve tasarımda yetkilendirmenin önemini vurgulamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tasarım Demokratikleşmesi
• Tasarım Yaklaşımları
• Toplumsal Kaplayıcılık
• Tasarımda Çeşitlilik
• Tasarımda Yetkinlendirmek

Kaynakça

1. [1] Ambole, A. (2020). Rethinking Design Making and Design Thinking in Africa. Design and Culture, 12(3), 331-350.
2. [2] Armstrong, L., Bailey, J., Julier, G., & Kimbell, L. (2014). Social design futures: HEI research and the AHRC. Project Report. Brighton, London, UK: University of Brighton/Victoria and Albert Museum. Retrieved November 9, 2021, from http://eprints.brighton.ac.uk/13364/1/Social-Design-Report.pdf
3. [3] Asaro, P. M. (2000). Transforming society by transforming technology: the science and politics of participatory design. Accounting, Management and Information Technologies, 10(4), 257-290.
4. [4] Ashcroft, B., Griffiths, G., & Tiffin, H. (Eds.). (2006). The post-colonial studies reader. Taylor & Francis.
5. [5] Aslaksen, F., Bergh, S., Bringa, O. R., & Heggem, E. K. (1997, December). Universal design: Planning and design for all. The Norwegian State Council on Disability. https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/76583
6. [6] Baker, S. E. (2020). Putting the trans* into design for transition: reflections on gender, technology and natureculture. In Boess, S., Cheung, M. & Cain, R. (eds.), Synergy - DRS International Conference 2020, 11-14 August, Held online.
7. [7] Bannon, L., Bardzell, J., & Bødker, S. (2018). Reimagining participatory design. Interactions, 26(1), 26-32.
8. [8] Bannon, L. J. & Ehn, P. (2012). Design matters in participatory design. Routledge handbook of participatory design, 37-63.

9. [9] Beck, E. E. (2002). P for political: Participation is not enough. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 77-92.
10. [10] Bendixen, K. & Benktzon, M. (2015). Design for All in Scandinavia–A strong concept. Applied ergonomics, 46, 248-257.
11. [11] Binder, T., Löwgren, J., & Malmborg, L. (Eds.). (2008). (Re) Searching The Digital Bauhaus. Springer Science & Business Media.
12. [12] Björgvinsson, E., Ehn, P., & Hillgren, P. A. (2010, November). Participatory design and democratizing innovation. Proceedings of the 11th Biennial participatory design conference. ACM, 41-50.
13. [13] Bødker, S. (1996). Creating conditions for participation: conflicts and resources in systems design. Human–computer interaction, 11(3), 215–236.
14. [14] Bonilla-Silva, E. (2018). Racism Without Racists: Color-blind racism and the persistence of racial inequality in the United States. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
15. [15] Bonsiepe, G. (2006). Design and democracy. Design Issues, 22(2), 27-34.
16. [16] Burkett, I. (2012). An introduction to co-design. Knode: Sydney, Australia.
17. [17] Carey, H. (2020) Anti-Oppression Mindsets for Collaborative Design, in Boess, S., Cheung, M. & Cain, R. (eds.), Synergy - DRS International Conference 2020, 11-14 August, Held online.
18. [18] Casali, E. F. (2013). Co-design and participatory design: a solid process primer. Retrieved in April 3, 2021; from https://intenseminimalism.com/2013/codesign-and-participatory-design-a-solid-process-primer/
19. [19] Catanese, L. (2012). Thomas Lamb, Marc Harrison, Richard Hollerith and the origins of universal design. Journal of Design History, 25(2), 206-217.
20. [20] Chen, D. S., Cheng, L. L., Hummels, C., & Koskinen, I. (2016). Social design: An introduction. International Journal of Design, 10(1), 1-5.
21. [21] Clarkson, P. J. & Coleman, R. (2015). History of Inclusive Design in the UK. Applied ergonomics, 46, 235-247.
22. [22] Clarkson, P. J., Coleman, R., Keates, S., & Lebbon, C. (2013). Inclusive design: Design for the whole population. Springer.
23. [23] Cooke, B. & Kothari, U. (Eds.) (2001). Participation: The new tyranny?. Zed books.
24. [24] Cross, N. (Ed.) (1972). Design participation. In the Proceedings of the design research society’s conference 1971, Academy editions, London, UK.
25. [25] David, S., Sabiescu, A. G., & Cantoni, L. (2013, November). Co-design with communities. A reflection on the literature. In Proceedings of the 7th International Development Informatics Association Conference (pp. 152- 166). Pretoria, South Africa: IDIA.
26. [26] De Couvreur, L., & Goossens, R. (2011). Design for (every) one: co-creation as a bridge between universal design and rehabilitation engineering. CoDesign, 7(2), 107-121.
27. [27] De Laet, M. & Mol, A. (2000). The Zimbabwe bush pump: Mechanics of a fluid technology. Social studies of science, 30(2), 225-263.
28. [28] Desmet, P. M. & Pohlmeyer, A. E. (2013). Positive design: An introduction to design for subjective well-being. International Journal of Design, 7(3), 5-19.
29. [29] De Sousa Santos, B. (2007). Beyond abyssal thinking: From global lines to ecologies of knowledges. Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 45-89.
30. [30] Dorst, K. (2015) Frame Innovation: Create New Thinking by Design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
31. [31] Dorst, K. & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem-solution. Design Studies, 22(5), 425–437.
32. [32] Dumas, A. (1996). From icon to beacon: the new British Design Council and the global economy. Design Management Journal (Former Series), 7(3), 10-14.
33. [33] Ehn, P., Nilsson, E. M., & Topgaard, R. (2014). Making futures: marginal notes on innovation, design, and democracy. The MIT Press.
34. [34] EIDD (2004). The EIDD Stockholm Declaration 2004. Retrieved in April 2, 2021; from; https://dfaeurope.eu/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2014/05/stockholm - declaration_english.pdf
35. [35] EIDD (n.d.). EIDD Design for All Europe. Retrieved in April 3, 2021; from http://www.universaldesignresource.com/eidddesignforalleurope/
36. [36] Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
37. [37] Escobar, A. (2020). Pluriversal Politics: the real and the possible. Duke University Press.
38. [38] Findlay, L. (2000). Always Indigenize! The Radical Humanities in the Postcolonial Candian University. ARIEL: A review of International English Literature, 31(1-2), 307-326.
39. [39] Fleischmann, K. (2015). The democratisation of design and design learning–how do we educate the next–generation designer. International Journal of Arts & Sciences, 8, 101-108.
40. [40] Frascara, J. (Ed.). (2002). Design and the social sciences: making connections (Vol. 2). CRC Press.
41. [41] Freeman, J. (2013). The tyranny of structurelessness. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 41(3/4), 231-246.
42. [42] Gera, K. & Hasdell, P. (2020). The context and experience of mobility among urban marginalized women in New Delhi, India. In Boess, S., Cheung, M. and Cain, R. (eds.), Synergy - DRS International Conference 2020, 11-14 August, Held online.
43. [43] Gioia, S. (2015). A Brief History of Co-Creation. Retrieved in April 3, 2021; from https://medium.com/future-work-design/a-brief-history-of-co-creation-2e4d615189e8
44. [44] Gregory, J. (2003). Scandinavian approaches to participatory design. International Journal of Engineering Education, 19(1), 62-74.
45. [45] Gutiérrez, K. D., & Jurow, A. S. (2016). Social design experiments: Toward equity by design. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 25(4), 565-598.
46. [46] Hartson, R. & Pyla, P. (2019). Background: Design. UX Book (2nd Ed.). Morgan Kaufmann, Boston, MA, USA, 397-401.
47. [47] Heylighen, A., Van der Linden, V., & Van Steenwinkel, I. (2017). Ten questions concerning inclusive design of the built environment. Building and environment, 114, 507-517.
48. [48] Iwabuchi, M. (July 3, 2020). Emerging Design Attitudes: Speculative, Transitional, and Pluriversal Design. Retrieved in April 7, 2021; from https://uxplanet.org/design-attitudes-for-this- century-speculativetransitional-and-pluriversal-design-fb55c9d401e6
49. [49] Janzer, C. L., & Weinstein, L. S. (2014). Social design and neocolonialism. Design and Culture, 6(3), 327-343.
50. [50] Jégou, F., & Manzini, E. (2008). Collaborative services. Milano: Edizioni Poli.design.
51. [51] Kelly, M. (2020) Whiteness in design practice: the need to prioritize process over artefact. In Boess, S., Cheung, M. & Cain, R. (eds.), Synergy - DRS International Conference 2020, 11-14 August, Held online.
52. [52] Kendi, I. X. (2017). Stamped from the Beginning: The definitive history of racist ideas in America. Random House.
53. [53] Kennedy, R. (2015). Designing with Indigenous Knowledge: Policy and protocols for respectful and authentic cross-cultural representation in communication design practice. PhD Thesis, Faculty of Design, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
54. [54] Kennedy, R., & Kelly, M. (2018). International Indigenous Design Charter. Resources: International Council of Design. Retrieved 13.12.19 from https://www.ico-d.org/database/files/library/
55. [55] Klironomos, I., Antona, M., Basdekis, I., & Stephanidis, C. (2006). White paper: Promoting design for all and e-accessibility in Europe. Universal Access in the Information Society, 5(1), 105-119.
56. [56] Koskinen, I., & Hush, G. (2016). Utopian, molecular and sociological social design. International Journal of Design, 10(1), 65-71.
57. [57] Kothari, A., Salleh, A., Escobar, A., Demaria, F., & Acosta, A. (Eds.). (2019) Pluriverse: A Post- development Dictionary. New Delhi: Tulika Books.
58. [58] Kroemer, K. H. (2006). Designing for older people. Ergonomics in Design, 14(4), 25-31.
59. [59] Krona, M. & Adler, M. (2014). Emerging Publics and Interventions in Democracy. Making Futures: Marginal Notes on Innovation, Design, and Democracy, 323-343.
60. [60] Kuure, E., & Miettinen, S. (2017). Social Design for Service. Building a Framework for Designers Working in the Development Context. The Design Journal, 20(sup1), S3464-S3474.
61. [61] Lal, T. (2020). Democratization of Design. In Proceedings of Pivot 2020. Tulane University, DRS Pluriversal Design SIG, 238-245.
62. [62] Leitão, D., Renata, M., & Noel, D. (2020). DRS2020 Editorial: Pluriversal Design SIG.
63. [63] Lind, M., Seigerroth, U., Forsgren, O., & Hjalmarsson, A. (2008). Co-design as social constructive pragmatism. In Inaugural meeting of the AIS Special Interest Group on Pragmatist IS Research (SIGPrag 2008), Paris, 15-21.
64. [64] Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT press.
65. [65] Margolin, V. (2015). Social design: From utopia to the good society. In M. Bruinsma & I. van Zijl (Eds.), Design for the good society. Utrecht, the Netherlands: Stichting Utrecht Biennale, 28- 42.
66. [66] Markussen, T. (2017). Disentangling ‘the social’ in social design’s engagement with the public realm. CoDesign, 13(3), 160-174.
67. [67] McAdams, D. A. & Kostovich, V. (2011). A framework and representation for universal product design. International Journal of Design, 5(1), 29-42.
68. [68] Meroni, A. (2007). Creative Communities. People inventing sustainable ways of living. Milano: Polidesign.
69. [69] Merritt, S. & Stolterman, E. (2012, August). Cultural hybridity in participatory design. In Proceedings of the 12th Participatory Design Conference: Exploratory Papers, Workshop Descriptions, Industry Cases-Volume 2, ACM, 73-76.
70. [70] Micklethwaite, P. H. (2002). What is design?: an empirical investigation into conceptions of design in the community of design stakeholders (Doctoral dissertation, University of Huddersfield).
71. [71] Mortati, M. & Villari, B. (2014). Design for social innovation: Building a framework of connection between design and social innovation. In Proceedings of the fourth Service Design and Service Innovation Conference (pp. 79-88). Lancaster, England: Linköping University Electronic Press.
72. [72] NDA (n.d.). History of UD. Retrieved in July 10, 2022; from http://universaldesign.ie/what-is-universal- design/history-of-ud/
73. [73] Newell, A. F., Gregor, P., Morgan, M., Pullin, G., & Macaulay, C. (2011). Usersensitive inclusive design. Universal Access in the Information Society, 10(3), 235-243.
74. [74] Nicolle, C. & Maguire, M. (2003). Empathic modelling in teaching design for all. Loughborough University. https://hdl.handle.net/2134/722
75. [75] Ogbonnaya-Ogburu, I. F., Smith, A. D., To, A., & Toyama, K. (2020, April). Critical Race Theory for HCI. Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1-16.
76. [76] Ortiz Guzman, C. M. (2017). equityXdesign: Leveraging Identity Development in the Creation of an Anti-Racist Equitable Design Thinking Process. PhD diss. Retrieved from: http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:33774659
77. [77] Papanek, V. (1984). Design for the real world. New York, NY: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
78. [78] Peacock, A. (2020). Difference between co-design & Participatory design. Retrieved in April 4, 2021; from https://passio.co.uk/2020/09/10/differencebetween-co-design-participatory-design/
79. [79] Persson, H., Åhman, H., Yngling, A. A., & Gulliksen, J. (2015). Universal design, inclusive design, accessible design, design for all: different concepts — one 59 goal? On the concept of accessibility—historical, methodological and philosophical aspects. Universal Access in the Information Society, 14(4), 505-526.
80. [80] Reynolds-Cuéllar, P., & Chong Lu Ming, R. (2020) Coffee Farms as Design Labs: Manifesting Equity x Design Principles in Practice. In Boess, S., Cheung, M. & Cain, R. (eds.), Synergy – DR International Conference 2020, 11-14 August, Held online.
81. [81] Roto, V., Law, E. L.-C., Vermeeren, A., & Hoonhout, J. (2010). Demarcating user eXperience. In Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 10373, 1-26.
82. [82] Roy, A. (2017). Participatory Design. Design-Led Research Toolkit by Parsons the Parsons Transdisciplinary Design Program. Retrieved in November 8, 2021; from http://dlrtoolkit.com/participatory-design/
83. [83] Sanders, E. B. N. & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-design, 4(1), 5-18.
84. [84] Sanoff, H. (1999) Community participation methods in design and planning. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
85. [85] Shaughnessy, A. (2013). The State of Design Education. Retrieved in April 9, 2021; from http://www.creativebloq.com/statedesign-education-8133968.
86. [86] Smith, R. C., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., Kambunga, A. P., & Krishnamurthy, S. (2020a). Decolonising Participatory Design: Memory Making in Namibia. Participatory Design Conference 2020 - Participation(s) Otherwise (Vol. 1), 96-106.
87. [87] Smith, R. C., Winschiers-Theophilus, H., Loi, D., Kambunga, A. P., Samuel, M. M., & de Paula, R. A. (2020b). Decolonising Participatory Design Practices: Towards Participations Otherwise. Participatory Design Conference 2020 - Association for Computing Machinery, 206-208.
88. [88] Steen, M., Manschot, M., & De Koning, N. (2011). Benefits of co-design in service design projects. International Journal of Design, 5(2), 53-60.
89. [89] Steinfeld, E. & Smith, R. O. (2012). Universal design for quality of life technologies. Proceedings of the IEEE, 100(8), 2539-2554.
90. [90] Stephanidis, C. (2014). Design for All. In M. Soegaard, & R. F. Dam (Eds.). The Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction (2nd Ed.). The Interaction Design Foundation.
91. [91] Story, M. F., Mueller, J. L., & Mace, R. L. (1998). The universal design file: Designing for people of all ages and abilities. North Carolina State University.
92. [92] Subaşı, O. & Fitzpatrick, G. (2012, October). HODI: habitus of design inspiration. In the Proceedings of the 7th Nordic Conference on Human-Computer Interaction: Making Sense Through Design, 813-814.
93. [93] Sue, D. W., Sue, D., Neville, H. A. & Smith, L. (2015). Counseling the Culturally Diverse: Theory and Practice. John Wiley & Sons.
94. [94] Süngü, A. T. (2019). Designing transitions towards integration: entrepreneurial capacity development for Syrians in Turkey (Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University).
95. [95] Szebeko, D. & Tan, L. (2010). Co-designing for Society. Australasian Medical Journal, 3(9), 580-590.
96. [96] UOC (n.d.) Inclusive Design Toolkit: What is inclusive design? Retrieved in March 28, 2021; from http://www.inclusivedesigntoolkit.com/whatis/whatis.html
97. [97] Vatan, D. (2019). Design for Social Innovation for Rural Development in Turkey: Actor Relationships in the Smart Village Project (Master's Thesis, Middle East Technical University).
98. [98] Veiga, I., & Almendra, R. (2014). Social Design Principles and Practices. In Lim, Y., Niedderer, K., Redström, J., Stolterman, E. and Valtonen, A. (eds.), Design's Big Debates - DRS International Conference 2014, 16-19 June, Umeå, Sweden.
99. [99] West, P., & Akama, Y. (2018). Designing with Indigenous Nations Studio. Communication Design, School of Design: RMIT University, 1-37.
100. [100] Whiteley, N. (1993). Design for society. London, UK: Reaktion.
101. [101] Zamenopoulos, T. & Alexiou, K. (2018). Co-design as collaborative research. Bristol University/AHRC Connected Communities Programme.
102. [102] Zöller, S. G. & Wartzack, S. (2017). Universal Design—An Old-Fashioned Paradigm? In Emotional Engineering, Vol. 5 (pp. 55-67). Springer, Cham.