International development and design: an exploration of design principles
Posted on December 15, 2016Designers are increasingly designing products, services, strategies and systems (hereafter referred to as solutions) that are responsive to an ever more complicated range of circumstances and constraints. Designers are no longer simply trying to solve problems, they are often solving “wicked problems” – problems whose solutions sit at the cross-section of social, technological, economic, environmental and political systems.
Moreover, design as a discipline is undergoing a transformation. Designers are no longer confined to the outputs and artifacts that used to define them. Yes, fashion designers, architects, product designers among others continue to thrive in their respective fields, however perhaps as a result of the wicked problems discussed above the practice of design is becoming increasingly transdisciplinary. “More frequently now, designers find themselves engaging with entities that range from government agencies and universities to food systems and public health organizations.”
The existence of these wicked problems has contributed to an avalanche of solutions created, each solving a problem or addressing a pain point in a slightly different (and in some cases better) way. As such, our society is now characterized by an over abundance of things. Increased production of material goods at the current rate is unsustainable given resource scarcity and the averse environmental effects that in some cases are the result of that production.
My personal design ethos therefore focuses not on the creation of more solutions, but on the creation of fewer, better solutions. This in turn requires me to become a better designer.
The remainder of this blog explores principles I believe are required to create these types of create critical designs. The exploration is grounded in my previous design practice and continued interest in designing products, services and socioeconomic strategies for low income communities in the developing world. I have also been inspired by Dieter Rams, who expressed the fundamental tenants of the design process when he stated that; “Indifference towards people and the reality in which they live is actually the one and only cardinal sin in design.” This is especially important with regards to international development and humanitarian design where end users are resource constrained, and purchasing decisions have great impact. The 5 principles below express my current thinking:
Good design, creates products, services and systems that are thoughtful and holistic. Designers must embrace complexity. Solutions should be created that are responsive to system dynamics, and designers should be prepared to take the time to explore these systems. Donella Meadows shows us that thinking in systems can be complex and frustrating, and George Box expands on the fact that “all models are wrong”, however the second half of that quote is that “some are useful”. Attempting to think in systems, and create useful models will help guide thoughtful exploration of the systems dynamics that impact design interventions.
Good design is inherently useful. Products, services and strategies are developed to be used or interacted with, and the design of them “should emphasize the usefulness of the product and disregard anything that could possibly detract from it.” Designers must conduct research to understand the needs, motivations and aspirations of users prior to designing solutions. Solutions should flow from actual, articulated needs, rather than created to solve assumed needs, this is particularly important in humanitarian design, where the user group is very often different from the designer. Investing time to contextualize solutions to the end user group is expensive and many believe it to be burdensome, however I do not believe we can be truly human centered designers without a commitment to this effort.
Good design balances future thinking and realism creating solutions that are long lasting. My nascent understanding of speculative design has filled me with curiosity but also skepticism. My personal practice is deeply grounded in the needs and realities of actual communities. I believe speculative design principles can be used as a tool to uncover innovative solutions if the output is once again grounded in reality. I am however interested to learn more about how speculating in isolation is of value my personal practice and to resource constrained communities. At present, I believe that good design, should carefully consider the current situation. Designers should ensure that solutions can be feasibly used in the short term, while considering future contexts to ensure solution longevity – this is a tricky balance and an ambitious task.
Good design is conscious of its impact on its users and the environment. Designers must be conscious of the potential negative externalities that may be a byproduct of either the solution or the design research. Design research currently lives in a grey area that is not stringently regulated and therefore designers must determine their own ethical boundaries and be responsive to them. Furthermore and perhaps most importantly, designers must consider the impact the solution will have on the environment. This principle includes its contribution to climate change, but also relates to negative impact the solution may have to the community and other elements of the ecosystem that it comes into contact with.
Good design is responsive to the realities of implementation. Design should not be created in isolation, nor is design the magical potion that can be sprinkled on every problem. Through my experience to date I have found that an enhanced understanding of business strategy, economics, politics and environmental science (to name a few) will enable us to become better designers. Holding all of this information is almost impossible at an individual level, and so designers should seek to be truly transdiciplinary in their approach, and embrace the limits of their own abilities. I believe that current design practice, especially in the comfortable bubble of academia, rewards extreme innovation and places comparatively minimal emphasis on implementation and use. Transdiciplinary collaboration should occur early in the design process, while not aimed at limiting creativity, this collaboration ensures that designed solutions are grounded in the realities of implementation.
Finally, while I believe that following these principles will enable me to become a better, more thoughtful designer, I am aware that it is not enough to create this document in isolation and never challenge, or wrestle with the principles presented above. This type of critical exploration into my own practice is a continuous process and I therefore expect that many of the principles may be reshaped through additional academic and practical experience.
– Emma Eriksson