Content deleted Content added
m Cleanup using AWB |
|||
Line 14:
===Differing terms===
In "Co-designing for Society", [[Deborah Szebeko]] and Lauren Tan list various precursors of co-design, starting with the Scandinavian participatory design movement and then state "Co-design differs from some of these areas as it includes all stakeholders of an issue not just the users, throughout the entire process from research to implementation."<ref>Szebeko, D., Tan, L. Co-designing for society. AMJ 2010, 3, 9, 580-590.
In contrast, Elizabeth Sanders and Pieter Stappers state that "the terminology used until the recent obsession with what is now called co-creation/co-design" was "participatory design".<ref>Sanders, E. and Stappers, P. J: "Co-creation and the new landscapes of design." CoDesign 2008. 4(1): 5-18.</ref>
Line 48:
==Discourses==
Discourses in the PD literature have been sculpted by three main concerns: (1) the politics of design, (2) the nature of participation, and (3) methods, tools and techniques for carrying out design projects. In the following section, we should explore the nature of participation. (Finn Kensing1 & Jeanette Blomberg, 1998, p. 168)
=== Politics of design ===
The politics of design have been the concern for many design researchers and practitioners. Kensing and Blomberg illustrate the main concerns which related to the introduction of new frameworks such as system design which related to the introduction of computer-based systems and power dynamics that emerge within the workspace. The automation introduced by system design has created concerns within unions and workers as it threatened their involvement in production and their ownership over their work situation.
=== Nature of participation ===
Line 57:
Using a method called Place Performance Evaluation or (Place Game), groups from the community are taken on the site of proposed development, where they use their knowledge to develop design strategies, which would benefit the community.
"Whether the participants are schoolchildren or professionals, the exercise produces dramatic results because it relies on the expertise of people who use the place every day, or who are the potential users of the place."<ref>Projects for Public Spaces http://www.pps.org/info/services/our_approach/building_the_vision ''Building The Vision'' May 15, 2009</ref> This successfully engages with the ultimate idea of participatory design, where various stakeholders who will be the users of the end product, are involved in the design process as a collective.
Similar projects have had success in Melbourne, Australia particularly in relation to contested sites, where design solutions are often harder to establish. The Talbot Reserve in the suburb of St. Kilda faced numerous problems of use, such as becoming a regular spot for [[sex workers]] and drug users to congregate. A Design In, which incorporated a variety of key users in the community about what they wanted for the future of the reserve allowed traditionally marginalised voices to participate in the design process. Participants described it as 'a transforming experience as they saw the world through different eyes.' (Press, 2003, p. 62). This is perhaps the key attribute of participatory design, a process which, allows multiple voices to be heard and involved in the design, resulting in outcomes which suite a wider range of users. It builds empathy within the system and users where it is implemented, which makes solving larger problems more holistically. As planning affects everyone it is believed that 'those whose livelihoods, environments and lives are at stake should be involved in the decisions which affect them' (Sarkissian and Perglut, 1986, p. 3)
Line 125:
* Grønbæk, K., Kyng, M. & P. Mogensen (1993). CSCW challenges: Cooperative Design in Engineering Projects, Communications of the ACM, 36, 6, pp. 67–77
* [[Kristo Ivanov|Ivanov, K.]] (1972). [http://www.informatik.umu.se/~kivanov/diss-avh.html Quality-control of information: On the concept of accuracy of information in data banks and in management information systems]. The University of Stockholm and The Royal Institute of Technology. Doctoral dissertation.
* [[Kristo Ivanov|Ivanov, K.]] (1995). A subsystem in the design of informatics: Recalling an archetypal engineer. In B. Dahlbom (Ed.), [http://www.informatik.umu.se/~kivanov/BLang80.html The infological equation: Essays in honor of Börje Langefors], (pp. 287–301). Gothenburg: Gothenburg University, Dept. of Informatics ({{ISSN
* Kensing, F. & Blomberg, J. 1998. Participatory Design: Issues and Concerns In Computer Supported Cooperative Work, Vol. 7, pp. 167–185.
* Kensing, F. 2003. Methods and Practices in Participatory Design. ITU Press, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Line 145:
* Wojahn, P. G., Neuwirth, C. M., Bullock, B. 1998. Effects of Interfaces for Annotation on Communication in a Collaborative Task. In Proceedings of CHI "98, LA, CA, April 18–23, ACM press: 456-463
* Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). General systems theory. New York: Braziller.
{{Design}}
| |||