A Te ac hi ng & L earn ing r esour ce t o he lp ma ins tre am susta ina bi li ty i nt o ev er yda y des ign te ach ing a nd pro fess ion al prac ti ce
Karen Blincoe1, Alastair Fuad Luke1, Joachim Spangenberg2, Michael Thomson3, Dag Holmgren3, Karin Jaschke4, Tom Ainsworth4, Bogumila Jung5, and Karolina Tylka5
The DEEDS ( DEsign EDuc ation & Sustainability) project, funded by the European Union Leon ardo da Vinci Progra m me, co mprises a part nership of five institutions from the Europe an design and sustainable develop ment co m munities, embr acing Higher Education, resear ch and pra ctice. This pap er outlines the ba ckgrou nd, evolution and outcom es f rom the project which cu rrently include a set of core p rinciples, SC ALES, diverse resourc es available via a web site, an evolving Tea ching & Lea rning landscape of 'pods' (the Pod scap e), ne w student projects, and mor e. DEEDS h as e mbra ced a platfor m o f mutual l earning by engaging diverse me mbers o f the design co mmunities, with va rious actor s and stakeholders to cre ate a pa rticipatory platform for embeddiing 'sustainability into design and design into sustainability'
DEEDS proje ct, Design for Sustainability Df S, sustainable design principles, SC ALES, pod scape, teachning & le arning modules
1 ICI S, In ternation al Centr e for Innovation & Sus tainability, Hornbæk, Den mark
2 SE RI G ermany e V , Sus tainable Europe Res ear ch Ins titute, Cologne, G ermany
3 BEDA, Bur eau of European Des ign Asso ciations, Brussels, Belgium
4 Univers ity of Brighton, Brighton, UK
5 Acad emy of Fin e Ar ts, Poznan , Po land
The first post mode rn design manifestoes ref eren cing e cological imper atives e merged in the 1960s (Jencks and Kropf , 1997) Gre en and ecolog ical design in the late 1980s evolved into eco design and Design for the Environm ent ( Df E), with an emphasis on eco efficient ways of designing. By the late 1990s, the canon moved on as Design for Sustainability (Df S) g ained credenc e. Df S in this context is understood as co mprising a wider spectru m o f objectives, adding a social, institutional and ethical di mension to eco design Sustainability in this view is a complex concept involving four ax es or dimensions: en vironmental, economic , hu man/social and societal/institutional [Fig 1], making it prob ably the m ost difficult governance orientation eve r suggested (Spangenb erg et al , 2002). Little wonder the n, that Df S, 'sustainable design' , or 'sustainability design', still lingers on the outer boundar ies of design edu cation and p ractice (se e for ex ample in the UK, Otto 2003, Rich ardson et al 200 5; in Denm ark, IC IS/ University of Lund survey 2005).
Figur e 1: Fou r dimensions in t he Pris m of S ustaina bility
Observing this lack of p rogress led the Inte rnational C e ntre for Innovation and Sustainability (ICI S) in Den mark , to se e the need for a tr ansition solution and apply to and re ceive funding from the Eu ropean Co mmission Leonardo da Vinci co mmun ity Voc ational Training Progr am me to set up the DEEDS ( DEsign, EDu cation & Sustainability) project. DEEDS co mprises five partne rs: ICI S, S ERI (Sustainable Europ e Resea rch Institute Ge r many e.V.), B EDA, (Bur eau o f Europe an Design Associations), University of Brighton and the Acade my of Fine Arts, Poznan fro m five EU countries, Denm ark, UK, Ge rm any, Poland and B elgium. DEEDS prim ary aim is to 'Integrate Sustainability into Mainstrea m Design Edu ca tion and Design Pr actice in the EU Countries' by i mproving the skills and co mpetenc es of design educators and pra ctising designers, and the quality of, and ac cess to, continuing vocational training for the ta rget groups. The aspiration is that DfS can be inspired , inspiring and inn ovative in helping, through and with design, to deal with sustainability issues that figure pro minently in the public and political domains, and help the EU meet its strategic sustainability objectives expressed in the EU Tre aties
Indeed, DEEDs a ctivities are already influencing the EU policy agenda with the better integration of sustainability into BEDA’s lobbying role and its potential inclusion as a
fundamental component of the design policy for Europ e which B EDA is curr ently wo rking towards with the Europe an Com mission 6
The final outco mes of the DEEDS p roject will en comp ass an open source website and a case studies’ manual de monstrating the principles in pr actice, educ ational models and methods, tools and skills which will de monstrate and teach Df S t o the target groups
It is worth stressing that the resea rch did not s et out to ‘ re invent the wh eel’or nec essarily develop ne w kno wledge in the are a of sustainable desig n, but rathe r to com municate , edu cate and inspire mainstrea m educators and designers in ele menta ry aspects o f Df S. The previous ecological and sustainability imperatives o f the 60’s, 70 ’s and 80’s are all r elevant and e ach movem ent has added v alue and understanding to the pri nciples of Df S and to DEEDS r esear ch
Ho wev er, e arlier findings (Otto 2003, Rich ardson et al 2005; in Den ma rk, ICI S/Unive rsity of Lund survey 2005) and I CIS ’s o wn experience in co m municating and te aching Df S to educators and pr actising designers (se e I CI S we bsite: www i cis org) clearly indicat e, that so far only a fe w d edicated p ractitioners, acad emics an d design universities have taken Df S on board, which this paper sets out to de monstrate in the fi rst section belo w.
The m ain purpose was ther efore to dev elop educational methodologies, tools and skills to aid implem entation and dissemination of sustainability in design education and d esign practic e across EU borders.
Ea rly rese arch sought to understand (by literature surv e y, questionnaires and workshops) the barrie rs and n eeds to i mplem enting sustainability beyond rhetoric for the t wo key audiences , design teachers in Higher Edu cation and d esigners in pr ofessional practice This process guided the early d evelopm ent of the web site, ( DEEDS, 2007 2008) generating a platfor m for pr esenting theory and T& L models. Concurrently, DEEDS set about determining the unde rlying principles that might guide the cre ation of a Tea ching and Learnin g resourc e for these audiences DEEDS believes that sustainability is complex and holistic requiring people to understand, imagine , design and solve proble ms together or in syne rgy, addr essing the differ ent aspects and interr elated levels of the contexts involved (see for exa mple Fuad Luke; Man zini; Walker; Wood in Ch apm an & Gant, 2007; Wood, 2006; M anzini and J égou, 2003)
The UK Design Council's report ( Richa rdson et al , 2005) highlights the typical barriers, real and per ceived, cited by design pra cticioners and ed ucationalists [Table 1]. Their findings for educationalists are supported by Da we et al (2005) who identified four major bar riers to the
6 Following BED A’s m eeting with EU Com miss ion Pr esid ent Barroso and Com mission V ice Pres ident Verheugen in O ctober 2007 and J anuary 2008 respectively, the Comm iss ion has ind icated th at it w ill produce a ‘ Com munication on D es ign’ in 2009.
successful e mbedding of Education for Sustainable De velopment, ES D: ove rcro wded cur riculum; perceived irrelevan ce by ac ade mic staf f; limited staf f a wa reness and exp ertise; and limited institutional drive and co mmitm ent Evidence fro m a rc hitectural design, fo r instance , noted various barriers & obstacles (Fo wles et al , 2003):
The professional bodies, AR B/R IB A, a ckno wledge sus tainability in their validation criteria but it is co mpa rtmentalized and relegated to tec hnology subjects rather than integrated into professional pra ctice and/or a cultural c ontext
Design tutors tend to have a d efensive attitude towa rds sustainability, especially in areas wher e they don’t have the expe rtise.
Ar chitectural design educational culture tends to en courage the expr ession of the ego through formal design, wh ereas mo re emph asis needs t o be plac ed on soci etal and global needs
Sustainable design is tangential to r ather than e mbedde d in mainstre am ar chitecture.
Table 1 . Perc eived and r eal bar riers to designe rs an d d esign ed ucationalists ap plying sustainable design , af ter Richa rdson et al (2005) .
Barriers fo r design ers
• Requires larg er skill set
• Designers not in influ ential positions
• Unpopular/misunderstood
• ‘Tough sell’ to consumers/clients
• Perception of h igher cost o f Sustainable Product D esign (SPD)
• Lack o f appropriate tools/methods
• Lack o f governm ent support
• Lack o f consumer demand
•
Barriers fo r design educa tionalists
• Low lev el o f student dem and
• Low lev el o f HE institution interest, understanding &/or perceiv ed importan ce, th erefo re little support
• Low lev el o f busin ess d em and
• Low lev el o f governm ent support to en courag e d emand/curriculum change
• Broad and specialist skill set (30 listed skills)
• No or poor track record o f graduate employm ent as su stain able designers
• Lack o f stature for d esign in the marketp lace
• Sustainability currently not seen as p art of mainstream design education
• Lack o f appropriate tools/models and/or form al knowledge sharing network to aid students/p racticioners
• Lack o f skilled lectu rers/tuto rs
• Lack o f entrepreneurial know how
• SPD requires lifelong learn ing
• Knowledge exch ange n etwork poor b eyond specialist individuals and centres
• Poor eco literacy in school studen ts
Iball (2003) found that m any post graduate courses in a rchitecture emph asized te chnical and quantifiable environmental issues, but neglect ed a wide r, more holistic, educational response in environmental, social, economi c and cultural ter ms as n eeded for substantial sustainability. Th e same gener al observation was made during world wide (English speaking) surv ey of post graduate courses in e co design/sustainable design with a product orientated fo cus (I CI S/ University of Lund, 2005).
The authors of this paper have experien ced a va riety of responses when giving lectur es about DfS fro m well reno wned d esign colleagues, i e c omm ents like ‘tea ching DfS is a dogma which do es not furthe r c reativity’.
The re se ems to be a myth atta ched to ‘sustainability issues in a d esign context’ a mong many d esign students, teache rs as well as professional designers, which pla ces sustainability in a box of non cr eativity, restrictiveness, ‘old hat’ and othe r m etaphors f rom previous dec ades
An invited pan el of external critics, comp rising design practitioners and edu cationalists attended a wo rkshop in B righton, UK in May 2007 ( DEEDS, 2007) and with the P artner tea m, together defined the bar riers [ Table 2 ] under the socio cultural, political and e conomic catego ries of money , structur al/institutional, education, consu mers and cultural t empe rature/hu man values They also invoked the ‘silent witness' of the neglected environment, aka nature This collective perception of the bar riers clearly d emonstrates that the t ask of mainstrea ming sustainability into design will inevitably require professional a n d p ersonal transfor mations in thinking and behaviour.
• Ambition…
• Vision
• Growth (economic)
• Economic focu s on m ainstream/ideological ignorance
• Lack o f resource, time/money
• That it costs more
• Lack o f critical mechanism to id entify SD p riorities
• IP data methods, adend as, funding
• Economic political sy stem/structures/v alu es
• Perceived risk by busin ess and self regulation that pre emp ts legislation
• Producers and m anufactu rers have to invest
• Risk for the compan ies to invest and re think
• Synergy
• Process
• Limited cap acity to risk ‘out o f th e box (D esigners)
• Lack o f in stitutional support
• Lack o f (d emocratic) participation
• Vested interests, ‘silos’ w ih power
• Glass boxes
• No tim e (ICT ov erload?)
• Perception is fear/frustration not fun/fulfilm ent
• Too many fragm ented initiativ es
• Lack o f knowledge
• Quality and d issem ination of info rmation reg arding resources & im pacts
• Schooling vs education
• No knowledge about su stain able thinking/living
• Lack o f ‘confrontation’/’visceral aw aren ess’
• Lack o f feedback at th e point of consumption and hard to analyse remote impacts
This idea was further supported by the findings of the s urvey conducted by the Bure au of Europe an Design Associations ( B EDA) which was targ eted at pr acticing prof essional designers To rea ch this audienc e, (no survey was conducted of eit her design schools or client co mpanies) , B EDA survey ed its prof essional design association me mbers across Eu rope (20 m emb ers of a total of 39). The questionnaire comp rised only 4 key qu estions (being mindful of how difficult it is for pra ctising designers to find time to co mplete a qu estionnaire) and it was issued in Danish, Dutch, English, F rench , Ge rm an, Italian, Spanish and S lovenian to increase the response r ate. The questionnaire is set out in full at App endix 1 283 individual responses wer e r eceived fro m 14 Europe an countries (listed at Appendix 2) The b reakd own by design discipline is at Appendix 3 and some analyses of the questionnaire a re given in Ta ble 3
From the r esponses re ceived to the Question 3, “ As a p rofessional designer, what do you believe ar e the great est barrie rs to pr acticing sustainable design?” , ( wh ere a s core of 1 indicates no barrier and a sco re o f 10 indicates a significant b arri er), it could be inferr ed that the three key barriers to the application of Df S/Sustainable design set out in the question did indeed resonate with r espondents
Just under 50 % of all r espondents scored 6 and higher f or the ba rrier , ‘l a c k o f kn o wl ed g e o f d es i g n er s ’ with the largest nu mber scoring on 5 (22 3%) , p erhaps indicating that whilst designers feel their o wn kno wledg e to be insufficient, t hey ar e hesitant to be too critical of their own p ractice [ Table 3a] , Only 28 % suggested that designers have adequat e or sufficient knowledge , (sco ring bet ween 1 and 4).
Table 3a BE DA surv ey of design associations' me mbers S cores against, ‘La ck of kno wle dge of d esigners’
Score 1 = no bar rier; Score 10 = considerable b arrie r R esponse Expressed as per centage
On the other hand, for the bar rier, ‘l a ck o f kn o wl ed g e o f cl i en t s ’ , [ Table 3b] , 75 % of respondents scored 6 and higher with just over 24 % scoring 8 and 2 1% scoring 10, perhaps indicating that the profession as a whole p erceives the client’s knowledg e of sustainability issues to be inferior to its own and the clients’ lack of kno wledge to be a g reate r barrier to sustainable design pra ctice than their own lack of kno wledge .
Regarding the bar rier, ‘l a ck o f t r a i n i n g a t d es i g n s ch o o l ’ [ Table 3c] , just under 63 % scor ed 6 and above with the la rgest per centage (ne arly 19 %) again si tting on the fence and s coring 5. These two sco res combined total 81 .5 % of the r espondents sc oring 5 and above thus expressing their perception of the ne ed for better training of sustainability issues at design school, (inde ed just over 16 5 % scored 10 quite a la rge p erc entage thus p erceiving design school training to be inadequate).
Regarding the bar rier, ‘l a ck o f t r a i n i n g a t d es i g n s ch o o l ’ [ Table 3c] , just under 63 % scor ed 6 and above with the la rgest per centage (ne arly 19 %) again si tting on the fence and s coring 5 These two sco res combined total 81 .5 % of the r espondents sc oring 5 and above thus expressing their perception of the ne ed for better training of sustainability issues at design school, (inde ed just over 16.5 % scored 10 quite a la rge p erc entage thus p erceiving design school training to be inadequate). Table 3 b - BE DA su rvey of d esign associations' me mbers S cores against, ‘La ck of kno wle dge of clie nts’
Score 1 = no bar rier; Score 10 = considerable b arrie r. R esponse Expressed as per centage
Table 3 c B E DA surv ey of design associations' me mbers S cores against, ‘La ck of t raining in d esign sc hools’
Lack Training %
Score 1 = no bar rier; Score 10 = considerable b arrie r R esponse Expressed as per centage
The questionnaire also provided some insight on the pr ofession’s view of its own ac cess to tools and process to support the imple mentation of sustainable design pra ctice, ( Question 2) , whe re a score of 1 r epresents, ‘ we hav e no tools and p rocesses’ , and a scor e of 10, ‘ we alre ady have sophisticated and proven tools and pro cesses’ , only 3 8 3% scored 10 Indeed, only 36 % o f the respondents scored 6 and higher with the la rgest group (24 4 %) s coring 5 Nea rly 28 % scor ed betwe en 1 and 3 with a total of just over 64 % scoring b etween 1 and 5 This infers that whilst designers believe they have some kno wledge o f design for sustainability, they ar e both less confident about developing tools and pro cesses to facilitate the imple mentation of that knowledge , or do not kno w wh ere to find the m, (or that their per ception is that the tools a re fe w and/or simply do not exist).
A picture was gradu ally em erging conc erning the n eeds of the DEEDS target audiences
The importanc e of understanding the motivation and in centives was p ara mount [ Table 4], as was the importanc e of ‘value addedness’ of sustainability in the design context While ther e were varying lexicons to describe the diff erent target audienc es, the promise of so mething ne w, inspiring and innovative that improved futur e job prosp ects see med com mon b enchm ark incentives
For Design ers:
‘Beauty’
The other shoe (insight)
A new aesthetic fo r th e 21st century
All at once: 'B eau tifu l, sm art, functional, sustainable'
The busin ess case
From product to service relationships
Deep b reath s h appily taken happier p ractice
Competitive adv antag e
CV points
Additional tran sferable skills
Origin al, insp ired, innovativ e A new space to p lay in
For Tea chers & stud ents:
Education v schooling
Raising awaren ess
Creative expression w ithout harm
Guide for the future
Design=art= architecture for society
Greater employability
Fairn ess, equity
Improve skills + increase knowledge > good life Chance fo r better education=ch ance fo r a better life
For Studen ts:
Education v schooling
Teaching th e young
Trigger sy stemic chang e
Raising quality o f design
Greater employability Co operation and rationality Refram e the status quo
Most users o f the DEEDS web site and r esources want something they can im mediately use to create ‘positive impa ct’ ( answers; tools; solutions; examples). They also want to be empo wered with ne w co mpetenc es a serious challenge, as this oft en neglects the learning n eed associated with developing a broade r, sustainability based approac h
Design educationalists/teachers c an be motivated and at tracted to sustainable d esign by helping them to r educe their workload , giving them ne w m ethods and T& L lea rning models while enhancing their status and job satisfaction by adding ne w dimensions and challenges to their intrinsic assessment and evaluation criteria
For design pr actitioners to be motivated to le arn about and imple ment sustainable design practices they need to see a clear conne ction to an inc re ased potential for business gro wth Design companies n eed to b e able to de monstrate greate r add e d value for their clients, as well as g aining benefits for their o wn companies in ter ms of better qual ity projects and outcom es They ne ed to see the link to the incre ased turnover (pr efe rably with i mproved p rofit m argins). Wher e they s ee a powe rful additional; ingredient to their of fer , (supporti ng distinctiveness in a very comp etitive marketpla ce and /or aligning with the p rocure ment poli cy require ments o f sustainability aware clients), designers will be mo re easily attract ed to integ rating sustainable design into their eve ry day practic e.
Design students c an be motivated and attra cted to susta inable design by sho wing them how it i mproves their e mployability and challenges thei r cr eativity by widening their horizons
Two hypothetical exa mples de monstrate ho w needs can be met by understanding the barriers and motivation:
Tea ch er s & s t u d en t s
Motivation: HEIs ( Higher Edu cational Institutions) are often cash poor. Te achers need to look for extern al funding and yet a re also trying to get work experien ce/place ments for their students.
Means to overco me bar rier: By finding an external clie nt that would p artner in setting a competition for the students, gene rating positive outcomes for the teach er and the client
Des i g n er s
Motivation: Materials, choice of mat erials a re central to how a designer ope rates
Means to overco me bar rier: By re positioning and re e ducating about ‘sustainable materials’ whe re aesthetic, for m, properties, and cost can be set ag ainst environmental & social costs; wher e it can be de monstrated that choice o f a ‘su stainable mate rial’ sav es their clients money and is an important task d em anding a wa reness o f a wider context.
DEEDS de rived a gene ric system atique of the mes re fle cting the complexity and multi dimensionality of the sustainable dev elopment concept, 'S C ALES ' , that need to be addressed when considering ho w d esign can positively impact on sustainability (DEEDS, 2007; Spangenberg et al., 2007).
SC ALES is a co mplem entary s et of 24 principles based on:
− Skills (S nine principles = 3 x 3 principles)
− Cr eating chang e ag ents (C 3 principles)
− Awareness systemic and context ( A 3 principles)
− Lea rning together ( L 3 p rinciples)
SC ALES was co mpar ed with other syste matiques for e cological and sustainable design published since 1968 [ Table 5 ]. Th e fo ci for m anifest oes up to 1992 was largely around a holistic approach, a war eness of system and context, an d eco efficient p roduction and r esource use. Post 1992 more e mphasis was given to ethical res ponsibilities, ideas of le arning together, and synergy and co cre ation. The DEEDS principles e mbrac ed additional focal a reas the importance of com munication and le adership, user emp owe rm ent, social aspects and the cre ation of change agents and appear to be the most co mprehe nsive set of guiding principles addr essing the challenge o f designing for a sustainable future(s) . Late r SC ALES was exposed to critique in workshops by d esign teache rs, and their students, and d esign professionals leading to their current iteration on the DEEDS web site. ( DEEDS , 2007 2008) :
DEEDS points to diffe rent skill sets:
Special skills the holistic approa ch: Vital for the DfS process is the context, the interrelatedness of the diff erent lev els and aspects of the design proble m and processes . It is important there fore to define and analyse proble ms f ro m multiple perspectives including the four dimensions: economic , social, institutional and environmental.
Special skills related to eco ef ficient and eco eff ective production and resourc e use by developing LC T, LC A and cradle to cradle skills, beco me fa miliar with technological advance ment, de materialisation, z ero carbon considerat ions, ne w and sustainable m aterials, and, waste considerations. Of equal i mportanc e is the integr ation of ef ficient servic e provision by designing Product Se rvice Systems (P SS) and maxi mising consumer satisfaction by app ropriate material/de materialised option that expands user experi ence, e motion, r elation, pride, self estee m and a wa reness.
Finally special skills related to com munication issues a s well as le adership, are vital for the advanc em ent and integration of sustainability practices in societies. Designers to beco me leaders, cap able of co mmunicating and pres enting the c ontexts, the considerations, the pros and cons, working with clients, custome rs and othe r r elevan t disciplines such as engineers or economists. Making a r eal imp act by und erstanding the context and culture of the stakeholders , and be able to de monstrate and com municate the impor tance and advantages of sustainability.
This principle encomp asses the unde rstanding of the ex panded field of design and its processes when imple menting sustainability The desig ner, in particular by using the net works (s)he co m mands and by fully understanding and co mm unicating the value added outcom es of Df S, beco mes the ch ange agent and also equips the client to becom e a ch ange agent, yielding first mover benefits. This can be achieved by using app roaches which provide significant, immediate and visible ben efits for the client and consu mers/society through CS R, ethical consumer behaviour, cost cutting, competitive edg e, wa ste and en ergy r eduction.
Awareness systemic and context
Awareness is step one in DfS Conscious choices re des ign concepts, produ ction processes, m aterials, energy usage, gene ration of waste and end of life sc enarios a re the first r eal steps a designer can take. To d esign in context, b e a war e of connections and consequenc es is a precondition for providing m aximum consum er satisfac tion with a minimu m of negative environmental i mpacts ( even in mass production) and a positive balance o f social eff ects For this behalf, positive and negative i mpacts, fe edback loops a nd side eff ects must be t aken into a ccount
Sustainable design is based on co cre ation, co d esign, s ynergistic learning Social innovation practiced and p romoted mor e and mo re by d esigners is only possible through mutual learning, tea m working, inter and trans disciplinary thi nking and practice Re ciprocity, T& L through participation involving stakeholders, form the f oundation of sustainable solutions More and mor e design companies engag e in this way of desig ning, wh ere the designer be comes the facilitator rather than the cr eator o f design solutions a challenge to design's collaboration and com munication capabilities
An ethical design co mpany cr eates design solutions that do no har m (responsible design, with integrity), but contribute to a sustainable way o f a “good life”.
An ethical design co mpany offe rs design that enhances personal standing and a cceptan ce, and thus social sustainability and encourag es user involvement (consume r empo we rm ent It develops practical , functional and fun d esign (expe rien ces not objects)
The ethically r esponsible design company is no longer a figm ent of the im agination of design visionaries, but a concept which design co mpani es will have to d ecide to e mbark on sooner rather than late r. As CS R ( Corporat e Social Res ponsibility) is becoming an integral pa rt of company’s culture and business in gener al, the design c ompany will have to follo w suit in mo re than wo rding or could loose potential clients/market
The professional design associations have the opportunity to promote sustainable design practice through their individual me mbers ac ross Europ e. Indeed the re is evidence that som e a re already incorpo rating sustainability criteria as a r equire ment of m emb ership and it is hoped that this trend will continue to g ro w
The impe rative is to engage in synergistic collaboration. Co mpeten ce clusters ar e practiced with gr eat suc cess by a nu mber of comp anies in the EU. Pa rtnerships, collaboration, sharing and including stakeholders in dev elopment o f d esign solutions are essential ele ments in the implem entation of sustainability and Df S. Th ere for e, it is ne cessary to engag e the client, the suppliers, the consum ers and the com munity.