[Design Commun] Design as common good

###### tags: `design commun` # [Design Commun] Design as common good ## Informations clés ### Document de l'appel : * https://www.designascommongood.ch/ ### Proposition envoyée : * "Reorienting design practices by and towards the commons : the case of the design↔commun collective" * [Format PDF](https://cloud.lamyne.org/s/p4ZwxmAP8pccmPF) * [Format Indesign](https://cloud.lamyne.org/s/rQqo6YrXHPpX63G) ### Autres : * Adresse mail utilisée : design.commun@protonmail.com mdp : D3signC0mm1 * Création du compte pour soumettre la proposition via EasyChair : https://easychair.org/my/conference?conf=designascommongood2021# log : design↔commun mdp : D3signC0mm1 ## Texte de l'appel (ENG) CALL FOR PAPERS AND WORKSHOPS **Design as common good** Framing design through pluralism and social values https://www.designascommongood.ch/ 25 - 26 MARCH 2021 In light of social, economic, technological and environmental challenges, design researchers, practitioners as well as communities constantly critically address and question the contribution of design to the common good. The common good as conceptualized by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Zalta et al., 2018) “benefits society as a whole – in contrast to the private good of individuals and sections of society.” Design as a discipline has long been positioned from the context of developing and catering to the private good, focusing on individual and smaller sections of society - largely leaving its contributions to the common good under explored. A range of frameworks currently situate design as a common good among them the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG, sustainabledevelopment.un.org) and the Quadruple Helix (Carayannis & Campbell, 2009). The SDG calls for new approaches of design to address 17 areas identified by the UN as elements of a sustainable world concerned with human well-being. Design, refers to much more than the active verb to design meaning "creation of objects, famous buildings, functional social services, or ecologically minded production. What the notion of design signals […] is diverse forms of life, and often, contrasting notions of sociability and the world” (Escobar, 2018 p.3). The second, the Quadruple Helix, emphasizes the need for co-creation and co-design among governments, industries, academia and civil society in order to achieve socially desirable innovations. With our conference Design as common good, the Swiss Design Network invites everyone interested in reflecting upon what constitutes a common good and specifically what constitutes a common good in and through design. The conference aims to develop new and relevant points of entry for research, education and practise around this topic. Professional responses to matters of inclusion, sustainability, safety, accessibility, health, well-being, equity, or education are central to these endeavours. They are pushed to the foreground by disruptive events, such as the financial crisis 2008 or the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the fast-paced and omnipresent digital transformation. We want to collaboratively explore what common good can entail, critically thinking and learning from each other. We welcome papers and projects from researchers and scholars addressing the issue of the common good through, with and within design in the hopes of encouraging others from domains outside the academic design discipline to join our discussion and conference. We are looking for papers that convey the contributions of design to the common good from a multitude of theoretical perspectives and professional practices. Particularly desirable are research projects targeting new models of knowledge production and innovation that address social, environmental and economic issues to enhance human living. The research focuses on the needs of society – be that at a local, national or global level – and so makes a valuable contribution to policies, the economies, and societies. We are aiming for high quality contributions that will form the foundations for a book, a special journal issue or another publication and also engaging workshops. Research questions could be but are not limited to **Discipline:** * Is design a common good? If so, what are the implications and why? * Does design contribute to the common good? If so, how and when? * How are design theories, methods and practices evolving to contribute or challenge the common good **Education:** * What impact does the common good have on education? * Can we develop curricula based on the premise of designing for the common good? * Are there relevant experiences in education models and programs that encompass the common good? **Research:** * How is ongoing research addressing the topic of design as common good? * How might we develop approaches and methods to face societal, economical, political and environmental issues for the common good? * What are methods to design the common good? Have specific methods emerged? **Practice:** * Is the practice of design being reoriented? If yes, how? * Which are the design outcomes of the common good? Are there specific outcomes? * What is the most obvious impact on design practice? * Are design agencies reorganizing their structures, competences, and skills? * Who is involved in designing the common good? **References:** * Zalta, Edward N, Uri Nodelman, Colin Allen, and R Lanier Anderson. “Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy,” 2018, 29. * Carayannis, Elias G., and David F.J. Campbell. “‘Mode 3’ and ‘Quadruple Helix’: Toward a 21st Century Fractal Innovation Ecosystem.” International Journal of Technology Management 46, no. 3/4 (2009): 201. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374. * Escobar, Arturo. Designs for the Pluriverse: Radical Interdependence, Autonomy, and the Making of Worlds. New Ecologies for the Twenty-First Century. Durham: Duke University Press, 2018. * “Sustainable Development Goals .:. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform.” Accessed April 27, 2020. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300 . Submissions procedure and online conference format **Submitting a Paper** Applicants are invited to submit a 500-word abstract by july 15, 2020. Following acceptance of the abstract, authors will be notified by September 10, 2020 to submit their full paper (4000 words) by November 15, 2020, which will also be undergoing a double-blind review. Submissions must be written in English, should not exceed 4000 words (excluding references), and should be submitted as a single PDF. **Submitting a Workshop Proposal** Applicants are invited to submit a 500-word proposal for an online workshop at the conference. The proposal needs to include title, topic, method, length, format and number of participants. Submission is due July 15, 2020. Following acceptance of the proposal authors will be notified by September 10, 2020 to submit their detailed agenda and structure by November 15, 2020. In addition to the 500 words, authors need to share how they plan to present their paper and workshop online. We encourage the creative exploration of the online conference format and want to support authors to go beyond 'reading' their paper, doing the 'old PowerPoint', or run an in-presence workshop. By sharing your idea with us, we can also work with you on any technical requirements. All abstracts and workshop proposals must be sent via the Easychair Platform. For more information about the content of the conference please contact: coordinator@swissdesignnetwork.ch **Submissions:** https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=designascommongood2021 **Conference proceedings** All accepted papers will be published in the Conference Proceedings online as a PDF. We plan to make the proceedings available with the conference. In addition, select authors of high quality conference papers will be invited to expand their papers into a book chapter during a physical workshop that we plan for October 2021. **Key dates** * Deadline for Abstract Submission 15 July 2020 * Notification of Acceptance 10 September 2020 * Deadline for Full Paper 15 November 2020 * Feedback of Reviewers 15 December 2020 * Registration open for conference 15 January 2021 * Final Paper 29 January 2021 Submissions: https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=designascommongood2021 ## Texte de l'appel (FR) Le design comme bien commun Cadrer le design à travers le pluralisme et les valeurs sociales À la lumière des défis sociaux, économiques, technologiques et environnementaux, les chercheurs en design, les praticiens ainsi que les communautés abordent et remettent constamment en question de manière critique la contribution du design au bien commun. Le bien commun tel que conceptualisé par la Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Zalta et al., 2018) «profite à la société dans son ensemble - contrairement au bien privé des individus et des couches de la société». Le design en tant que discipline a longtemps été positionné dans le contexte du développement et de la restauration du bien privé, en se concentrant sur les segments individuels et les plus petits de la société - laissant largement ses contributions au bien commun sous-explorées. Une série de cadres situent actuellement la conception comme un bien commun parmi eux, les 17 objectifs de développement durable des Nations Unies (ODD, sustainabledevelopment.un.org) et la Quadruple Helix (Carayannis et Campbell, 2009). L'ODD appelle à de nouvelles approches de conception pour traiter 17 domaines identifiés par l'ONU comme des éléments d'un monde durable soucieux du bien-être humain. Le design fait référence à bien plus que le verbe actif qui signifie «créer des objets, des bâtiments célèbres, des services sociaux fonctionnels ou une production respectueuse de l'environnement». Ce que la notion de “design signals” […], ce sont des formes de vie diverses et souvent des notions contrastées. de la sociabilité et du monde "(Escobar, 2018 p.3). La seconde, la Quadruple Helix, souligne la nécessité de la co-création et de la co-conception entre les gouvernements, les industries, le monde universitaire et la société civile afin de réaliser des innovations socialement souhaitables. Avec notre conférence Le design comme bien commun, le Swiss Design Network invite toutes les personnes intéressées à réfléchir à ce qui constitue un bien commun et en particulier à ce qui constitue un bien commun dans et par le design. La conférence vise à développer de nouveaux points d'entrée pertinents pour la recherche, l'éducation et la pratique autour de ce sujet. Les réponses professionnelles aux questions d'inclusion, de durabilité, de sécurité, d'accessibilité, de santé, de bien-être, d'équité ou d'éducation sont au cœur de ces efforts. Ils sont poussés au premier plan par des événements perturbateurs, comme la crise financière de 2008 ou la pandémie COVID-19 ainsi que la transformation numérique rapide et omniprésente. Nous voulons explorer en collaboration ce que le bien commun peut impliquer, penser de manière critique et apprendre les uns des autres. Nous accueillons les articles et projets de chercheurs et d'universitaires traitant de la question du bien commun à travers, avec et dans la conception dans l'espoir d'encourager d'autres personnes de domaines en dehors de la discipline de conception académique à se joindre à notre discussion et conférence. Nous recherchons des articles qui transmettent les contributions du design au bien commun à partir d'une multitude de perspectives théoriques et de pratiques professionnelles. Les projets de recherche ciblant de nouveaux modèles de production de connaissances et d'innovation qui répondent aux problèmes sociaux, environnementaux et économiques pour améliorer la vie humaine sont particulièrement souhaitables. La recherche se concentre sur les besoins de la société - que ce soit au niveau local, national ou mondial - et apporte ainsi une contribution précieuse aux politiques, aux économies et aux sociétés. Nous visons des contributions de haute qualité qui formeront les fondations d'un livre, d'un numéro de revue spéciale ou d'une autre publication, ainsi que d'ateliers intéressants. Les questions de recherche pourraient être, mais ne sont pas limitées à La discipline: - Le design est-il un bien commun ? Si oui, quelles sont les implications et pourquoi ? - Le design contribue-t-il au bien commun ? Si oui, comment et quand? - Comment les théories, méthodes et pratiques de conception évoluent-elles pour contribuer ou remettre en question le bien commun ? Éducation: - Quel impact le bien commun a-t-il sur l'éducation? - Pouvons-nous développer des programmes basés sur la prémisse de la conception pour le bien commun? - Existe-t-il des expériences pertinentes dans les modèles et programmes d'éducation qui englobent le bien commun? Recherche: - Comment la recherche en cours aborde-t-elle le thème du design comme bien commun? - Comment développer des approches et des méthodes pour faire face aux enjeux sociétaux, économiques, politiques et environnementaux pour le bien commun? - Quelles sont les méthodes pour concevoir le bien commun? Des méthodes spécifiques ont-elles émergé? Pratiques : - La pratique du design est-elle réorientée ? Si oui, comment? - Quels sont les résultats de conception du bien commun ? Y a-t-il des résultats spécifiques? - Quel est l'impact le plus évident sur les pratiques de conception? - Les agences de design réorganisent-elles leurs structures, leurs compétences et leurs compétences? - Qui participe à la conception du bien commun? Références: Zalta, Edward N, Uri Nodelman, Colin Allen et R Lanier Anderson. «Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy», 2018, 29. Carayannis, Elias G. et David F.J. Campbell. "" Mode 3 "et" Quadruple Helix ": vers un écosystème d'innovation fractale du 21e siècle." International Journal of Technology Management 46, no. 3/4 (2009): 201. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTM.2009.023374. Escobar, Arturo. Conceptions pour le Plurivers: Interdépendance Radicale, Autonomie et Création de Mondes. De nouvelles écologies pour le XXIe siècle. Durham: Duke University Press, 2018. «Objectifs de développement durable.:. Plateforme de connaissances sur le développement durable. ” Consulté le 27 avril 2020. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/?menu=1300. ## Commentaires préliminaires **Sylvia :** À ce moment précis où se situe le groupe, je ne pense pas que l'on soit en mesure (1) ni de décrire ce que fait le groupe (2) ni de développer autour d'un ou plusieurs concepts tant qu'ils ne sont pas éprouvés collectivement. Il me semble possible : - soit d'expliquer et de mettre en critique les cadres qui nous tiennent / retiennent et l'hypothèse des cadres qui pourraient nous soutenir - soit proposer un workshop ## Réponse (Draft) **Pauline** Après une rapide discussion avec Sylvia, je propose un premier jet autour de l'idée des cadres à inventer et à faire valoir pour permettre des pratiques de design commun. *Remarques et retouches are welcome ;)* • • • [BEGINNING] Current settings of design activities, i.e., the legal, social and economic arrangements in which they occur, leave little room to jointly experiment forms of practice that could effectively pivot design's role and effects. In a context where designers are very precarious, working mainly as independants without collective organizations or political representation, forced to strategize and compete (ref ? or examples ?) in order to survive, it is risky for them to draw common alternatives and to imagine different business models that allow for new solidarities. But in order to re-direct (re-orient?) design practices in the Anthropocene era (ref / Monnin, Allard ? autre ?), it seems more than necessary and urgent for designers to start this *boring innovation* (ref ?) work. This premise led to the creation of "design↔commun", an association of French speaking design practitioners and researchers. This paper presents the grounds on which the association is built as well as its first experiments. After situating the term "Commun" (*commons/commoning*, ref ?), especially in its differences with the expression "common good", it aims to make visible and discuss legal, social and economic aspects that have been identified as barriers for design practices that seek to create, maintain or care about Commons. With the overwhelming spreading of *design thinking* or other *social design* practices (Keshavarz, 2019), we face powerful and resourceful forces, mobilising and advertising certain forms of design that serve neo-managenerial logics and tend to depoliticize it. Although often dressed with critical and political discourses, these forms contribute to favour a design "hors-sol" (traduction?) and harmful, without attachements (Hennion, 2013) and techo-solutionist. But, it makes the designers look good. "Socially responsable" (ex?), "creative", "trans-" or "a-disciplanary", the figure of the designer is one of a needed heroïc *chef d'orchestre* (ref?). Opposite that vision, our account of designers' work conditions enables a recognition of designers' lack of agency and ownership over projects, with little saying about the frames within which these projects are formed: their motives, goals, effects, assumptions, participation modalities, etc. We will highlight some of the difficulties one can face when trying to design within other frameworks, and emphasize the political potential of collective actions. Surely, it may stain the golden figure of the designer as a creative savior and reveal its vulnerabilities and interdependancies. But, we believe this descriptive step is broadly needed in order to reclaim the term design and lead its developments towards its political roots. This first step aims at inventing other frames, with new solid(ar)ity modalities, to enable a plurality of design practices oriented towards commoning. [THE END] ## Proposition Gauthier depuis réponse de Pauline (Draft) • • • [BEGINNING] Current settings of design activities, i.e., the legal, social and economic arrangements in which they occur, leave little room to jointly experiment forms of practice that could effectively reorient design's role and effects. Designers are often in precarious situations, working mainly as independants without collective organizations, political representation, little knowledge of their rights, or alternative legal or economic models to follow. This lack of alternatives, or "illiteracy", might lock designers in common ideas of private property, such as intellectual property, or common idea of competitiveness. Therefore, it is risky for them to imagine different business models that will allow new solidarities. But in order to reorient design practices in the Anthropocene era (Monnin & Allard, 2020)[^1], it seems more than necessary and urgent for designers to start this *boring[^2] innovation* work. This premise led to the creation of "design↔commun"[^3], an association of French speaking design practitioners and researchers. This paper presents the grounds on which the association is built as well as its first experiments. After situating the term "Commun" (*commons/commoning* proposed by Bollier & Helfrich, 2017)[^4] *undercommons* theorized by Harney & Moten, 2013)[^5], especially in its differences with the expression "common good", it aims to make visible and discuss legal, social and economic aspects that have been identified as barriers for design practices that seek to create, maintain or care about Commons. With the overwhelming spreading of *design thinking* or other *social design* practices (Keshavarz, 2019), we face powerful and resourceful forces, mobilising and advertising certain forms of design that serve neo-managenerial logics and tend to depoliticize it. Although often dressed with critical and political discourses, these forms contribute to favour a design "hors-sol" (traduction? -> Off-ground?) and harmful, without attachements (Hennion, 2013)[^6] and techno-solutionist (Morozov, 2013)[^7]. Contrary to that vision, our account of designers' work conditions enables a recognition of designers' lack of agency and ownership over projects, with little saying about the frames within which these projects are formed: their motives, goals, effects, assumptions, participation modalities, etc. We will highlight some of the difficulties one can face when trying to design within other frameworks, and emphasize the political potential of collective actions. Surely, it may stain the golden figure of the designer as a creative savior and reveal its vulnerabilities and interdependances. But we believe this descriptive step is broadly needed in order to reclaim the term design and lead its developments towards its political roots. This first step aims at inventing other frames, with new solid(ar)ity (Supiot, 2015) [^8] modalities, to enable a plurality of design practices oriented towards commoning. [THE END] **Mots clé** ??? * organisation / collective / association * frameworks * vulnerabilities * solidarity * commons * undercommons ?? * anthropocene **Résumé de l'abstract :** ?? This contribution offers a critique of the frameworks within which design is exercised. In response to this criticism, it describes a collective approach aimed at inventing other frames, with new solidarity modalities, to enable a plurality of design practices oriented towards commoning. **Références proposées (Gauthier & Sylvia) :** [^1]: Monnin Alexandre, Allard Laurence, « Ce que le design a fait à l’Anthropocène, ce que l’Anthropocène fait au design », Sciences du Design, 2020/1 (n° 11), p. 21-31. DOI : 10.3917/sdd.011.0021. URL : https://www.cairn.info/revue-sciences-du-design-2020-1-page-21.htm [^2]: Johar Indy, "The Necessity of a Boring Revolution", Provocations/Dark Matter Laboratories, Medium, 13 février 2018. URL : https://provocations.darkmatterlabs.org/the-necessity-of-a-boring-revolution-a71b1ae6f956 [^3]: design↔commun, www.designcommun.fr [^4]: **[FR]** Pour David Bollier et Silke Helfrich, "le *commoning* s’assimile à un processus de “création du monde” – une création collective d’un système social à travers l’expérience. Il établit un cadre ontologique qui est relationnel, ce qui implique d’être ouvert et capable de mutation. De plus, un tel cadre est pluriverse, en ce que les participants, malgré leurs grandes différences, se retrouvent pour collaborer ; et finalement, il est préfigurateur d’un nouveau type de système politique (Hollender, 2016)." Source : Bollier David et Helfrich Silke, « commoning ». Notice pour le Dictionnaire des communs, PUF, coord. Par Marie Cornu, Fabienne Orsi et Judith Rochfeld, 2017 **[ENG]** : *For David Bollier and Silke Helfrich, "* commoning * is a process of 'creating the world' - a collective creation of a social system through experience. It establishes an ontological framework that is relational, which implies being open and capable of change. Moreover, such a framework is multiverse, in that the participants, despite their great differences, come together to collaborate; and finally, it is foreshadowing of a new type of political system ( Hollender, 2016)."* Source: Bollier David and Helfrich Silke, “commoning”. Notice for the Dictionary of the commons, PUF, coord. By Marie Cornu, Fabienne Orsi and Judith Rochfeld, 2017 [^5]: Citton Yves, Rasmi Jacopo, « Le Plantationocène dans la perspective des undercommons », Multitudes, 2019/3 (n° 76), p. 76-84. DOI : 10.3917/mult.076.0076. URL : https://www.cairn.info/revue-multitudes-2019-3-page-76.htm [^6]: Antoine Hennion, « D’une sociologie de la médiation à une pragmatique des attachements », SociologieS [En ligne], Théories et recherches, mis en ligne le 25 juin 2013, consulté le 31 juillet 2020. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/sociologies/4353 [^7]: Morozov Evgeny, "To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism", PublicAffairs, 2013. [^8]: Alain Supiot (dir.), *La solidarité. Enquête sur un principe juridique*, Odile Jacob, Collection « Collège de France », 2015 Autres refs possibles : Design and Social Innovation at the Margins: Finding and Making Cultures of Plurality, Ann Light Design in the Age of Climate Change, Bonnie Nardi The Co-Constitutive Nature of Neoliberalism, Design, and Racism, Lauren Williams