Design- & Innovation Activism for Social Change - 2015

DESIGN- & INNOVATION ACTIVISM FOR SOCIAL CHANGE

Morten Grønning NielsenMarch 2nd 2015

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION 4

DEFINING SOCIAL DESIGN 5

UNDERSTANDING DESIGN ACTIVISM 7

EXAMPLES OF DESIGN FOR SOCIAL CHANGE 14

INTRODUCING INNOVATION ACTIVISM 19

SOCIAL CHANGE IN THE FUTURE 22

BIBLIOGRAPHY 24

APPENDIX 1 25

2 | D&IASC | contents

D&DIASC | list of illustrations | 3

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

FIG. 1 MORTEN GRØNNING NIELSEN AESTHETIC ACTIVISM MAP, APRIL 2014

FIG. 2 MILLION DOLLAR BLOCKS PROJECT. LAUREN KURGAN, 2003

FIG. 3 CRAMER-KRASSELT, “SLOWER IS BETTER” FOR ELM GROOVE POLICE, APRIL 2009.

FIG. 4 NICK O’DWYER, “LITTER WARS” DOCUMENTARY FOR BBC, FEBRUARY, 2013.

FIG. 5 LARS KRISTIANSEN, FEBRUARY, 2011.

FIG. 6 MICHAEL LODBERG OLSEN, “DE FRIVILLIGE” 2012.

FIG. 7 UIWE, MORTEN GRØNNING NIELSEN, “STREETPEE” SEPTEMBER 2012.

FIG. 8 UIWE, CHRISTIAN PAGH, “STREETPEE AT DISTORTION” JUNE 2012.



FIG. 11 MIND-LAB, “NY NORDISK SKOLE – FORANDRING NEDEFRA” 2014.

FIG. 12 CRAMER-KRASSELT, “SLOWER IS BETTER” FOR ELM GROOVE POLICE, APRIL 2009..

FIG. 13 NICK O’DWYER, “LITTER WARS” DOCUMENTARY FOR BBC, FEBRUARY, 2013.

FIG. 14 MORTEN GRØNNING NIELSEN, “STREETPEE” 2012.

4 | D&IASC | defining social design

INTRODUCTION

Design is often understood as a meaningful product

or a system that provides a service. Design however,

can also be used as a tool to make people change

their behaviour, their mindset or social values. The

argument put forward in this text is that anyone can

use design instrumentally to promote social change.

This is done every day by governments, organisations

and individuals. This statement brings with it many

questions: is there is a methodology for doing this? If

not can we make one? Are initiators always designing

their approach with intentions of changing things, or

does it happen as a by-product for problem solving?

How powerful is design when trying to change social

issues? And is it ethical to use design as an instrument

to try and force change? These are the questions, which

will be debated throughout this text.

Several authors1 have already described the use of

design, art and architecture as a way of changing our

world, and we know that design takes many different

forms and the word can be used to describe almost any

kind of action or creation. Trying to involve all design

disciplines in this text would therefore result in a very

broad analysis, without any real substance. Therefore,

one of the aims of this text is to narrow down the thinking

around physical design, as in products, installations and

objects in public space.

When looking into various design projects for social

change, the term ‘design activism’ quickly appear in

the literature. This text suggests that design activism is

a type of ‘design for social change’, as the two share

the same ambition. However, it would be inaccurate to

say ‘design for social change’ is also ‘design activism’.

As a consensus of the definition ‘design activism’ has

not been fully reached by current research, the start of

this text will try to analyse the differences between social

1 Alistair Fuad-Luke, Ann Thorpe, Jacques Ranciére, Thomas Markussen, Carl DiSalvo, David Berman

design and design activism, then, look at what current

researchers are proposing design activism to be, and

finally present a definition.

The text proceeds to analyse and critique the way the

term ‘design activism’ is used to describe projects, which

does not have any particular disruptive social elements

to it, or is missing clear statements that challenge the

status quo. Then, concrete examples of design for social

change will be introduced, and used throughout the rest

of the text to back up the statements presented.

A main viewpoint of the text is that design has the

power to actively change the current status, and design

activism should seek to do this, rather than to comment

on it. As a way of identifying projects that does this, the

proposition of a new term, ‘Innovation Activism’, will be

presented and described as a type of design activism

which involves physical objects that plays an active role

in change. To distinguish between social design, design

activism and innovation activism, five parameters - that

any social project can be evaluated by - will be presented.

D&IASC | defining social design | 5

This enables us to dissect and analyse a project in detail,

and to some extent classify what type of project we are

dealing with. As there is no fixed borderline between

social design, design activism and innovation activism,

the purpose of the parameters, rather than classifying,

is to bring out examples, discuss them and understand

which ones are comparable, which are exemplary and

which fall in between definitions.

Finally the text will take a look at social change through

the activist lens, and briefly discuss how we can expect

design activism and design for social change to

develop in the future. We finally look at two initiatives

by Scandinavian governments, which suggests that the

future democracy of some countries, will include new

opportunities for individuals to propose- and contribute

to the social change they want.

DEFINING SOCIAL DESIGNStarting in the 1960s the western world became

increasingly aware of its path towards an unsustainable

future scenario. In the seventies movements for

sustainability, equality for all and ethical consumption

developed both independently and together with other

movements, who basically rejected unsustainable living.

In 1971 when Victor Papanek published his book Design

for the real world - now a classic in design reading - a

droplet spread rings in the water and a new attitude

spread in the world of design. He wrote that:

In an age of mass production when everything

must be planned and designed, design has

become the most powerful tool with which man

shapes his tools and environments (and, by

extension, society and himself). This demands

high social and moral responsibility from the

designer. It also demands greater understanding

6 | D&IASC | understanding design activism

of the people by those who practise design and

more insight into the design process by the

public.2

Today, Papanek’s observation serves as an integrated

part of design education, Designers and product

developers have an obligation to consider the full

lifecycle of their work. Changing from one material to

another might result in a considerable reduction the

ecological impact of the product. It might also increase

its recyclability and support a local community in a

third world country. More than ever, designers have a

responsibility, as David Berman (Canadian designer and

former board member of the International Council of

Communication Design), writes in his recent book Do

Good from 2009:

2 Victor Papanek, Design for the Real World; Human Ecology and Social Change (New York: Pantheon Books, 1972), p. ix

Designers have an essential social responsibility

because design is at the core of the world’s

largest challenges… and solutions. Designers

create so much of the world we live in, the things

we consume, and the expectations we seek to

fulfil. They shape what we see, what we use, and

what we waste.3

Based on this information we have some broad ideas

of what social design covers; sustainability, ethics,

responsibility and a sympathetic relationship to current

and future generations. However, an agreed upon

definition remains to be decided by scholars. At the

moment social design is still a vague and far reaching

term, but David Berman and IDEO4 agree that one of

the most essential parts of a socially responsible design

project is the ‘Triple Bottom Line’. This is an accounting

framework created by John Elkington in 1994 which

3 David Berman, Do Good: How Designers Can Change the World (Berkeley, California: AIGA, 2009), page 1.4 Tim Brown, Design for Social Impact (Palo Alto: IDEO & The Rockefeller Foundation, 2008) page 7 http://www.ideo.com/images/uploads/news/pdfs/ IDEO_RF_Guide.pdf (accessed 12 June 2014)

includes the traditional economical bottom line, as well

as a social and an environmental bottom line, making a

business able to evaluate its performance on the three

P’s: profit, people and planet5. This ideal framework

seems viable for us to use as an important reference to

a preliminary understanding of social design, and think

of it, as a design activity that responsibly accounts for

its own economical, environmental and social impact. In

reality the three P’s will not have an equal distribution of

positive outcome, as especially small social projects are

focused on bringing an either environmental or social

impact, and not so much on economical profit.

5 Tim Hindle, “Triple Bottom Line,” The Economist, November 17, 2009, http://www.economist.com/ node/14301663 (accessed 10 August 2014)

D&IASC | understanding design activism | 7

UNDERSTANDING DESIGN ACTIVISM

There are designers who are conscious of how they can

use their design skills to do social work and actively

try and raise awareness and promote change, through

design. This phenomenon is called design activism and

is relatively new as a research topic, only described by a

few authors6 within the past decade. In most literature

design activism is described as an intervention in the

public space, typically a building, a service, an awareness

campaign or a temporary installation.The challenge with

the term ‘design activism’ is that it has not yet been fully

discussed and the term seems to cover projects all the

way from art activism and advertising to projects such

as green urban spaces and architecture. At this point

we don’t fully understand who the design activists are,

except for those who are self-proclaimed. We don’t

know how to separate design activism from other broad

6 Including Alistair Fuad-Luke, Ann Thorpe, Jacque Ranciére, Thomas Markussen, Carl DiSalvo, David Berman

terms; like social design, eco-design, political- and

critical design. Ann Thorpe, one of the first to properly

address design activism and author of Architecture &

Design Versus Consumerism7 describes an example

from the Centre of Urban Pedagogy (CUP), a non-profit

social movement in New York that use design to improve

civic engagement. The project highlighted as design

activism is a leaflet, that CUP produced, which clarifies

street vending rules so that vendors understand them,

as well as what rights they have if they are confronted by

locals, other business owners or authorities.

Is that design activism? Probably not at its strongest, but

we cant really say that it isn’t, because a social movement

saw a need to educate and acted upon it - and it is not

inaccurate to say that they are campaigning for change.

At the moment there is no a way to dismiss a project as

‘not design activism’, because no-one has established

an accepted set of parameters.

7 Ann Thorpe, Architecture and Design versus Consumerism: How Design Activism Confronts Growth (Abingdon, Oxon: Earthscan, 2012), p. 140

Before entering too deep into the discussion of what

design activism is, or isn’t, it seems useful to try and map

out where it belongs in relation to other disciplines.

The French philosopher Jacques Ranciére describes how

art and politics are interlinked and that both disciplines

share the ‘distribution of the sensible’ that:

Establishes at one and the same time

something common that is shared and

exclusive parts. This appointment of parts

is and positions is based on a distribution

of space, times and forms of activity that

determines the very manner in which

something in common lends itself to

participation and in what way various

individuals have a part in this distribution8

8 Jacques Ranciére, The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible (London: Continuum, 2006), p. 7.


Using this and Ranciére’s term ‘Aesthetic Activism’

as a starting point the map (FIG. 1) branches out into

three major directions, Art-, Design- and Performance

Activism. There are more directions which could be

integrated in the map, such as internet activism although

this seems to be on the peripheral of the aesthetic

activism spectrum, and therefore left out.

As stated, design activism is vaguely defined in current

research and often compared with Art Activism and

Political Activism9. Therefore the frameworks are based

on sociology (Thorpe), political theory (Disalvo) or

sustainability; ‘The five capitals’ framework (Fuad-luke).

Thorpe’s starting point is that design activism is a

reaction to consumerism, and argues that a typological

activist framework from sociology studies can be helpful

for classifying design activism techniques as either (i) a

protest artefact that confronts and put out a statement

questioning the current status (ii) a demonstration

artefact that reveals positive alternatives that are

better that the current situation; (iii) a service artefact

that provides humanitarian aid for victims or groups

in need. Thorpe lists nine other tactics10, which are

based on information sharing such as communication,

9 Thomas Markussen, “The Disruptive Aesthetics of Design Activism: Enacting Design Between Art and Politics.” Design Issues: 1. (2011): p. 1. http://www.nordes.org/opj/ index.php/n13/article/viewFile/102/86. (accessed 13 September 2014)10 Ann Thorpe, Architecture & Design versus Consumerism, how design activism confronts growth (London: Earthscan, 2012), p. 138.

FIG. 1 Morten G. Nielsen - Aesthetic Activism Map. 2014.


competitions, exhibitions, research, events and so on,

which seems to be conventional political actions with a

hint of design, rather than design activism at its core.

Markussen and Fuad-Luke argues that the typology is

insufficient as it does not reveal much in terms of method,

goals or techniques, and secondly it is considered to

be too vague, and projects seem to fall under several

categories.

DiSalvo examines areas where design and politics

intersect and starts by making a distinction between

‘Design for politics’, and ‘Political design’. Basically,

he calls projects that has a place in a political setting,

such as a voting booths ‘design for politics’, and as an

example of ‘political design’ he uses a project called

the Million Dollar Blocks project by Laura Kurgan (FIG.

2). Her project analysed the geographical history of

inmates in prison, and made a map of specific street

blocks, of which the government now spend more

than a million dollar per year, to incarcerate residents

of these blocks. Her approach was new compared to

conventional analysis of where crime occurs, who the

victims are etc., and it invited for many new speculations

of why this happens and how to react to this kind of

development. Even though DiSalvo’s statement is

not entirely substantiated by evidence, as he base his

statement on one example, his key argument; that

the project opens a space of conflict, and is therefore

political design11, resonates with the thinking behind

this text. On the base of this, it seems logical to argue

that design activism is a form of political design, it is

always politically opinionated at some level, and we

could use that ‘space of conflict’ as one criteria for any

project being design activism. Before looking at our

final understanding of design activism, it seems useful

to look at who the initiators of these activities are.

11 Carl DiSalvo, “Design, democracy and agonistic pluralism.” (Proceedings of the Design Research Society Conference 2010). p. 2.

FIG. 2 Laura Kurgan “Prisoner migration patterns, Brooklyn, NY”, Million Dollar Blocks Project, 2003.


WHO ARE THE DESIGN ACTIVISTS?

We now have the opportunity to discuss the identities

of activists in detail, to figure out what makes a design

activist, and evaluate if a design activist is always self-

proclaimed or if anyone can fit within the term. All

activists have a passion for changing a specific political

or social issue, and they look for a method of achieving

this goal.

A reflection on strategy is inevitable for going forward,

and often activists take the easiest road, and turn to their

voices in a confrontational manner. Those who do not

seek confrontation find alternative ways, which can be

very powerful if executed in a strategic and meaningful

manner. Those who manage to do that through physical

installations and innovations, are then ones we are

interested in. Ranciére describes who these people are

by stating that:

the distribution of the sensible reveals

who can have a share in what is common

to the community based on what they do

and on the time and space in which this

activity is performed. Having a particular

‘occupation’ thereby determines the

ability or inability to take charge of what

is common to the community; it defines

what is visible or not in a common space,

endowed with a common language, etc.12

We could choose to understand the word ‘occupation’

in our activist context as ‘method of communication’.

Based on that interpretation it can be argued that

anyone, regardless of background or knowledge of

design activism methodology, can be considered as

a design activist. To challenge this argument it makes

sense to look at who the initiators and the beneficiaries

of design activism is. Fundamentally, individuals and

organisations are the ones we would expect to use

design activism in their approach, to change social

issues, and based on general history, governments are

more likely to be the target of activism. Therefore it

12 Jacques Ranciére, The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible (London: Continuum, 2006), p. 8.

could be interesting to consider if governments can be

design activists. Answering yes to this statement seems

contradicting, as activism implies a minority or a social

movement campaigning for change. However there are

many examples of governments campaigning for social

change. This could be anti-smoking campaigns, free city

bikes and road bumps. There are even projects which

looks like they could be called design activism.

Figure 3 shows a radar speed sign from Elm Grove police

district in U.S. which display the cost of the accident bill

one can expect, if having a crash at the current speed.

The same department also had a sign that showed

number of days one could expect in a hospital bed,

and one that showed the chance of a crash in percent,

based on the speed of the approaching cars. This

sign is disruptive in peoples daily commute, and the

information is not only suggestive, but also interactive,

and has a clear aim for drivers to reduce their speed. This

is not only design for social and behavioural change, but

because of its disruptiveness, we have an example that

looks a lot like government-initiated design activism.


Looking closer into how governments work with design

it quickly shows that many countries have institutions

who work actively with design for social- and behavioural

change. The UK has the ‘Behavioural Insights Unit’,

Finland has SITRA and Denmark has MindLab, which is

owned and shared by several institutions in the Danish

government. MindLab works primarily on analysing how

to innovate and improve in different places in the public

sector. An interesting example for our activist context

is their work on ‘New Nordic Schools’ (NNS) as they

are proposing that the schools should challenge the

assumption that change comes from the top. MindLab

propose a system where pupils, pedagogues, teachers

and parents are encouraged to initiate change at a

grassroots level, and where the proposals find their

way not only to the head of the schools, but extend

into municipal and regional basis. To do this, MindLab’s

study explore new frameworks that accommodate

interaction and change within NNS and municipal

developments. In other words; MindLab is working to

change the current system, so that it is more likely to

change by future initiatives and activism. On the basis

of these two examples it seems rational to conclude

that governments also adapt activist behaviour and

methods in their design thinking, to change social

norms.

FIG. 3 Cramer-Krasselt, “Slower is better” for Elm Groove Police, April 2009.


FINAL DEFINITION OF DESIGN ACTIVISM

Earlier it was established that we want to adopt what

DiSalvo calls a ‘space of conflict’ in our understanding

of design activism, and use this as a necessary criteria

before calling a project design activism. There is an

element of disruption that seems to be missing in many

of the examples provided in todays literature. As we are

talking ‘activism’ we expect some level of provocation

or at least a strong and clear message. Fuad-Luke’s

preliminary definition of design activism, comes very

close to how we want to understand the term. He

defines it as:

Design thinking, imagination and practice applied

knowingly or unknowingly to create a counter-

narrative aimed at generating and balancing

positive social, institutional, environmental and/

or economic change.13

13 Alastair Fuad-Luke. Design Activism Beautiful Strangeness for a Sustainable World (London, UK: Earthscan, 2009). p. 27.

The ‘counter narrative’ is understood as the activist

response to the ‘space of conflict’, in other words, it

is the means of which the activist is using design to

change the current situation. This definition almost

fulfils the criteria we have set up so far, although, since

it is not mentioning any information on the sender, or

an element of disruption, there is enough incentive to

make our own definition as:

A disruptive activity signalling a clear

activist statement in a shared space, when

an individual, organisation or government

institution intentionally try and change a social,

environmental or economic situation, with

innovative solutions, smart thinking and/or

creative communication.

‘DESIGN ACTIVISM’ AS AN OVERLY USED TERM

In the opinion of this text, the various interpretations

of the word ‘activism’ is why design activism has not

yet established itself as a clear, commonly understood

term. Merriam-Webster14 defines activism as ‘a doctrine

or practice that emphasizes direct vigorous action

especially in support of or opposition to one side of a

controversial issue’. Oxford Dictionaries15 have a similar

definition: ‘The policy or action of using vigorous

campaigning to bring about political or social change’.

The two definitions are clear and bring associations

of strong and famous activists and organisations like

Gandhi, Aung San Suu Kyi, Pussy Riots and Greenpeace.

The two main authors on design activism have a

softer approach when understanding activism, Fuad-

Luke quotes Sidney Tarrow’s definition16 as ‘Collective

challenges (to elites, authorities, other groups, or cultural

codes) by people with common purposes and solidarity

in sustained interactions with elites, opponents and

14 “Activism.” Merriam-Webster.com. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/activism. (accessed 23 August 2014).15 “Activism”. Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ activism (accessed 23 August 2014).16 Sidney Tarrow, ‘Power in Movement: Collective Action, Social Movements and Politics’, 1994, quoted in Alastair Fuad-Luke. Design Activism Beautiful Strangeness for a Sustainable World (London, UK: Earthscan, 2009). p. 5.


authorities’. Thorpe poses a very interesting question

for this text, as she states that design is often defined

as an activity for the general improvement of peoples

lives, a statement I agree with, and then summarises Tim

Jordan’s definition17 of activism as an activity that seeks

to improve the conditions of peoples lives.

She then asks: ‘isn’t most design, in some senses, design

activism?’18. An insightful and correct observation,

however, it weakens the term, when design projects

suddenly become design activism without having any

activist behaviour or element to them. Thorpe continues

on the same page, describing that most design is not

initiated to help a neglected group, but is based on

consumerism and peoples ability to pay, for these life

improvements.

17 Tim Jordan, ‘Activism! Direct Action, Hacktivism and the Future of Society’, 2002, summarised in Ann Thorpe, Architecture & Design versus Consumerism, how design activism confronts growth (London: Earthscan, 2012), p. 4.18 Ann Thorpe, Architecture & Design versus Consumerism, how design activism confronts growth (London: Earthscan, 2012), p. 4.

We should choose to understand design activism as

a rare sight and a difficult discipline, motivated by a

fundamental passion for change, rather than an inclusive

term that is used to describe any project with a social or

environmental aspect to it.

14 | D&IASC | examples of design for social change

EXAMPLES OF DESIGN FOR SOCIAL CHANGE

Taking a step back from design activism, we now look

at three examples of design for social change, to help

discuss and support some of the claims that has been

put forward. A fantastic example of an individual using

design for her personal war on dog fouling was shown

in the BBC documentary “Litter Wars” in 2013. Here,

Jill from North Yorkshire skilfully use design to combat

careless dog owners.

On a pathway next to a school, she observed how much

dog waste was left on the grass, and how the warning

signs with a £1000 penalty fine for dog fouling had no

effect. She launched her own campaign and highlighted

all the dog waste with little pink flags to create a much

more visible representation of how much there actually

was. The message to the sinners was clear: “this does

not go unnoticed” and she approached them at a

reflective level, inducing bad conscience, and the results

were remarkable. Three months later the dog fouling

had decreased by 75%.

Jill’s work shows how someone can change the behaviour

of a local community with small effort and more

importantly; no bad vibes, no threats or surveillance and

no hostility towards anyone.

FIG. 4 Nick O’Dwyer, “Litter Wars” Documentary for BBC, February, 2013.

D&IASC | examples of design for social change | 15

An example of an organisation that saw a need and took

action was ‘Fixerum’, who are based in Copenhagen.

The word Fixerum is a Danish word for a consumption

room, where substance abusers can inject their drugs

in a hygienic setting, while being monitored by nurses.

In Vesterbro, a part of Copenhagen where there is

a high concentration of drug users, Fixerum wanted

the government to open a consumption room, as the

addicts of Vesterbro found it increasingly difficult to

‘be’. In other words, users would have nowhere to inject

heroin, so they did it in the streets and some left their

used syringes on the ground, thereby endangering

others. Sometimes even dead bodies from addicts

who had suffered a fatal overdose would be found

the next morning. As the government were not taking

much action, Fixerum decided to raise enough funds to

buy an old German ambulance, and repurpose it as a

mobile consumption room, a ‘Fixelance’, where addicts

could go an inject their drugs, while being monitored

by volunteering nurses and social workers. The made-

shift solution rolled into the streets of Vesterbro in 2011

and proved very successful and had up to a 100 injecting

visitors a day, none of whom suffered overdoses with a

deadly outcome19.

A second Fixelance was later added to the project,

which ran for about a year before the government

recognised its social contribution and its indispensability.

In 2012 the government adopted the two Fixelances

and funded two additional permanent consumption

rooms in Vesterbro. Today Denmark has 4 permanent

consumption rooms and in march 2014 one of the

original Fixelances was acquired and exhibited by the

Danish National Museum. This is not only the story

about a great social project, it is also a story about a

local community that decided to react. They designed

and ran a service that accommodated the need and

in the end they were successful in making the social

change they wanted.

19 Steen Andersen, Fixerummet Der Fik Hjul: En Historie Om Værdighed. (Copenhagen: Forlaget PB43, 2012). p. 103.

FIG. 5 Lars Kristiansen, February, 2011.

FIG. 6 Michael Lodberg Olsen, “De frivillige” 2012.

16 | D&IASC | examples of design for social change

A recent example of a government communicating

through design happened in Copenhagen in the

summer of 2013. For many years a specific bench area,

has been occupied by local alcoholics, who meet up

and drink together. They sit here because most of them

doesn’t have anywhere else to go. In general no-one

in Copenhagen wants this group of people around

because they make the neighbourhood look bad,

The local community had been tolerant, because for

the most part the group didn’t bother anyone, and had

become an integrated part of the area. It was a problem

though, that people from the group would go and

urinate against bushes close to apartment buildings,

thereby upsetting some of the families who lives there.

Like many other places in the world, in Denmark it is

generally shameful to pee in public, and disrespectful

towards whomever owns the premises. Local families

complained about odours and that kids would get

scared, and the City of Copenhagen had to figure

out a way that would solve the issue. They eventually

commissioned and installed an open-air street urinal.

Designed for the urban aesthetics, this object didn’t

look bad in its surroundings. The group at the bench

area loved the installation and immediately started

using it, and the families weren’t bothered as much any

more.

The case seem like many other design cases where a

problem is solved and everyone is happy - but this

particular case has an extra dimension to it. First, the

City of Copenhagen communicated that modesty is

not the same as it was 10 or 20 years ago, and society

can now tolerate looking at a guy using a urinal in the

open. Second, it was a way of saying that it is fine that

this bench is used by this group and the municipality

support their need for a place to be, and a place to pee.

Two social conventions were challenged in one product.

Now, the successful strategy has been repeated in other

parts of the city, where more urinals have been installed.

FIG. 7 UiWE, Morten Grønning Nielsen, “StreetPee” 2012.

D&IASC | examples of design for social change | 17

To be fair, the process of installing the urinals did not

happen from one day to the other. First, some were

temporarily installed in Copenhagen because of an

annual street party called Distortion. This event changes

everything in the area, like Rio de Janeiro during

Carnival. It is three days of partying, open mindedness

and experimentation. Three days where different rules

apply. The City of Copenhagen saw this as a good

opportunity to introduce the urinals to the urban

environment, and six urinals where installed on different

street corners. Soon after, the urinals were also installed

on a more permanent basis were they would stay the

same place for days or even weeks. It seems evident

that the municipality carefully planned the process of

introducing these new products to the urban scene, to

test if they would be accepted by the people, or not.

The four examples provided so far are very different,

but they share an aspect of how social change is made

through design. One interesting difference is the power

distance between the examples. Jill, or Fixerum had no

authority at all, and the City of Copenhagen have the

power to force things through if they want to. Depending

on the position of the initiator, we have social changes

that start and continues top-down from political

leaders, or bottom-up from enthusiastic individuals.

It is also interesting to note that that Jill’s campaign

was quite strong and noticeable, while Copenhagen’s

approach were more subtle and careful. This might be

because Jill is less concerned about being right than

Copenhagen, after all being wrong when you are a big

institution is far worse than if you are just one individual.

The three examples serves several purposes in the

discussion of social design and design activism. Firstly

it supports one of the first claims made in this text;

that social change by design happens everyday by

governments, organisations and individuals. Jill is a

good example of an individual adopting a designerly

approach to solve her problem, and Fixerum a good

example of an organisation doing the same. The City

of Copenhagen also use design to solve a concrete

situation, and as a byproduct they are changing what

acceptable modesty used to be. FIG. 8 UiWE, Morten Grønning Nielsen “StreetPee at Distortion” June 2012.

18 | D&IASC | introducing innovation activism

Secondly, it gives us a chance to discuss when social

design becomes design activism. If we go back to our

earlier definition:

A disruptive activity signalling a clear

activist statement in a shared space, when

an individual, organisation or government

institution intentionally try and change a social,

environmental or economic situation, with

innovative solutions, smart thinking and/or

creative communication.

Looking at Jill first, her actions live up to our definition

of design activism. Although not explicit, she

communicates her dismay with the current situation

and the behaviour of local dog owners. Technically the

project is a disruptive commentary action, so it does not

solve the problem immediately, but is does prove to be

very effective in changing the attitude of people - and

much better than the signs that was put up by the local

council. Like Jill, the Elm Groove Police Department is

using commentary design activism in their campaign to

make people reduce their driving speed. The Fixelance

project also live up to the definition of design activism as

they use a very disruptive method and powerful activist

behaviour to make the change they want. An important

aspect of this project is that it is much more active, when

compared to the other two, because Fixerum are actively

changing the situation, instead of commenting on it.

This is quite an accomplishment and much harder to do

than a commentary action, but as we can see, for certain

campaigns, it is definitely possible. Finally we have the

projects from the City of Copenhagen; the urinal is an

innovative and disruptive installation, it actively provides

a service that changes both behaviour and social norms,

so it could easily be seen as a design activist example.

However, from the criteria we have discussed and the

definition we are using, for us to call this project design

activism, it would need an element of activist bravery;

a passion for change, a clear statement or a counter-

narrative.

D&IASC | introducing innovation activism | 19

I N T RO D U C I N G I N N O V A T I O N ACTIVISM

Design is incredibly powerful as a communication tool,

but it can easily become much more than that. It can

be a tangible and functional object we can interact

with and this potential makes a big difference when

thinking design activism. There is an opportunity to

use design, not only as a commentary piece, but as a

solution that actively deals with a specified problem,

just like a speed bump has an immediate effect. This

opportunity is quite unique and separates design

activism from performance- and art activism. As design

activism is a broad term covering both active (solution-

oriented) and passive (commentary) design activism

projects, a new term ‘innovation activism’ is proposed

to identify the active, solution-oriented, projects. The

word innovation does not refer to high-tech solutions,

but rather to radical thinking, alternative ways of dealing

with a situation and communicating through solutions

instead of words or graphics. To help identify these

projects a set of 5 parameters has been established, and

the criteria is that an innovation activism project fulfils at

least 4 of the five parameters.

#1 Clear in its activist statement

The project clearly communicates the activist statement

to a target audience. I doesn’t have to be explicit but

we should understand what it is about, without having

someone explain it to us. It can be a quantitative

approach that targets everyone or a qualitative approach

that targets specific stakeholders who are the ones that

can help drive the change.

#2 Disruptive

Activism is a step further than advocacy and we want to

see it as a disruptive act. It has elements of confrontation,

attitude and interferes with routines of ordinary people.

#3 Active, not passive

As stated earlier, design and designers have the

potential to actively change a situation from day one,

through interventions in public space. This is a unique

opportunity that other types of activism rarely have,

its an important criteria for innovation activism and

something design activists should push hard for.

#4 Measurable

Depending on the project it can be challenging to

measure any immediate change. Commentary projects

requires time to change the attitude of people. With an

active project, however, it becomes easier to measure

impact, and prove that it had an influence. This reflects

back onto the campaign and strengthens it even further.

#5 Permanent

Effective change is permanent, so the activist should try

and get the intervention accepted in the public space on

a long-term basis. Pop-ups and temporary installations

are good tactics for activism, however it is questionable

how effective these are when compared to a permanent

installation.

20 | D&IASC | introducing innovation activism

As we can answer yes to all the parameters, we can

think of this project as a very strong innovation activist

example. Although, finding examples that clearly meet

all the criteria is difficult and it is often debatable if

something has a clear statement or not, or when exactly

something is disruptive. However, this method gives us

some clear aspects to think about when evaluating a

project, and its qualities.

As this idea of using parameters was developed and

tested, it occurred to be useful not only for thinking

about innovation activism, but for design activism

and social design as well. As discussed earlier, it is

often tempting to think of a social design project as

being a form of activism - maybe it’s because we tend

to romanticise social design and want to underline its

nobility by calling it activism(?). Although in some cases

it is definitely design activism, in many cases it isn’t, and

this is where this new framework can help us. We can go

through point one to five on any social design project,

and the thinking is that if it fulfil one, two or none of the

parameters at all, it is probably a social design project. If

EXAMPLE

To support this idea of using criteria, the Fixerum project

is tested against the parameters:

#1 Clear in its activist statementYes. Although not explicit.

#2 DisruptiveYes. Very controversial.

#3 Active, not passiveYes. They are actively dealing with the problem.

#4 MeasurableYes. Very successful in change as they got the

government to change legislation and take over

the project. Also successful in measuring their

positive impact on fatal overdoses.

#5 PermanentYes.


D&IASC | introducing innovation activism | 21

it fulfils three or four parameters we are probably dealing

with a solid design activist project, and if it fulfils 4 or 5

parameters, it is likely to be the active type of design

activism, which in this text is referred to as ‘innovation

activism’. Of course the borders between these

definitions are overlapping each other, and we should

be critical and question the outcome of this method.

However, based on the results of many evaluations, it

does seem like a really good way of approaching a social

project, to shape our initial opinion and think of which

other projects are comparable with the one at hand.

This method of using parameters was ultimately what

shaped the way this text is interpreting the described

examples. In appendix 1, the method is applied to all

the examples mentioned in the text, and reveals that

Elms Grooves Police Department’s interactive speed

sign is also a good example of innovation activism.

Jill’s campaign against dog fouling is definitely design

activism and borderline innovation activism. The new

urinals in Copenhagen and the New Nordic Schools

looks like design activism but is, on the background of

this methodology, now thought of as design for social

change. For future research, this framework could be

used to build, a library of projects that can be discussed

by researchers, so that a consensus of comparable

projects is easier to reach. This would give us a better

overview of what social design and design activism was

10 years ago, what it is right now, and where we can

expect it to go in 10 or 25 years.

22 | D&IASC | social change in the future

SOCIAL CHANGE INITIATIVES OF THE FUTURE

Within the last 40 or 50 years we have seen more and

more social change by design, created by private

initiatives or governments. With all these projects came

various degrees of design activism which slowly but

securely established itself as a very effective method for

change. This chapter is devoted to try and reach some

insights to why social design and design activism came

about when it did, and where we can see it going in the

future.

Looking at design history it was not until after the second

world war we started seeing real effort in designing for

change20. Until then design was generally not conceived

as a social or political discipline and it was the avant-

garde art movements that lead the development of

20 Alastair Fuad-Luke. Design Activism Beautiful Strangeness for a Sustainable World (London, UK: Earthscan, 2009). p. 48.

aesthetic activism. Today, many designers still prefer to

stay neutral, and are reluctant to approach controversial

subjects (like harm-reduction for drug abusers),

or express political viewpoints through their work.

However, it does look like more designers are becoming

more determined and comfortable with controversy,

and at the same time we see that individuals from all

disciplines and backgrounds confidently adopt design

methodology in their work and become designers.

We could probably assume that a lot of activism is

a product of political impatience, and a lot of design

activism and especially innovation activism develop

when things are simply not solved properly, or quickly

enough. In Copenhagen the citizens of Vesterbro

waited 10 years for the debate on drug consumption

rooms to end in some kind of conclusion or action21,

and it was only when they took matters into their own

hands, things really started moving and a change was

finally made. It is success stories like this that show the

21 Steen Andersen, Fixerummet Der Fik Hjul: En Historie Om Værdighed. (Copenhagen: Forlaget PB43, 2012). p. 66.

value of design activism, when the persistence and

impatience of activists, force them to try and change

current situations using alternative routes - The fastest

route being innovation activism, which can bypass a

long debate and prove its worth in one day, and almost

immediately become publicly accepted as something

indispensable.

SOCIAL CHANGE IN FUTURE DEMOCRACY

In some countries, especially in Scandinavia, a democracy

with more public participation is slowly but steadily

developing. It seems like there is a changing attitude

in Scandinavian governments, who are becoming more

willing to open up and let laypeople bring their input to

the discussion. In Denmark, for example, a collective of

cultural and social entrepreneurs called KPH launched

a website; TagDel.dk (translates directly into ‘TakePart.

dk’). Through this website individuals, organisations

and most importantly official Danish government

institutions, post briefs and questions on how to solve

social challenges, which anyone can respond to. This

opportunity has been very well received by responders

D&IASC | social change in the future | 23

as well as government institutions, councils, and think

tanks, who regularly post new challenges, for example

on how smaller cities can be made more attractive for

young families. A second example is that the Finish

government-funded think tank SITRA, recognised

the need for a changing democracy and arranged an

event in 2012 called The New Democracy Forum. The

purpose of this was to envision a future democracy were

laypeople would have other options than just voting.

One of their key augments is that people do not feel

much ownership, or involvement when they only have

an influence every 4 years at the voting booth. Instead

SITRA propose ideas and examples of how to empower

the public. One example was that individuals could freely

assign a part of their taxes to a public sector of their

choice. Another example was that transparency would

be the norm in decision-making and as little as possible

would be decided behind closed doors22. Relating this

back to design activism, we could imagine that this

goodwill towards participatory democracy could result

22 http://www.sitra.fi/en/future/new-democracy(accessed1 June 2014)

in official support-mechanisms that would advise design

activists, on how to get permission for their installations,

help them fund their ideas, or help them find the best

way to strengthen their message.

In conclusion, we can expect to see more design

activism, and experimental design installations in

public space, as they have proven to be effective in

implementing social change. For governments we

can expect innovative trials and pilots, experimenting

with different new ways to encourage participatory

democracy, and an open-minded attitude towards

the new forms of activism. This route could very well

lead to societies that provide the public with a better

sense of individual contribution and if our governments

choose to welcome these activities, we will see a

variety of colourful initiatives that will ultimately result

in faster sociopolitical renewals, for the better of future

generations.

24 | D&IASC | appendix 1

BIBLIOGRAPHYAndersen, Steen. Fixerummet Der Fik Hjul: En Historie Om Værdighed. Copen-hagen: Forlaget PB43, 2012

Berman, David. Do Good: How Designers Can Change the World. Berkeley, California: AIGA, 2009.

Brown, Tim. Design for Social Impact. Palo Alto: IDEO & The Rockefeller Foundation, 2008. http://www.ideo.com/images/uploads/news/pdfs/IDEO_RF_Guide.pdf (accessed 12 June 2014)

DiSalvo, Carl. “Design, democracy and agonistic pluralism.” (Proceedings of the Design Research Society Conference 2010). http://blog.ub.ac.id/irfan11/files/2013/02/Design-Democracy-and-Agonistic-Plural-ism-oleh-Carl-Disalvo.pdf (accessed 13 September 2014)

Fuad-Luke, Alastair. Design Activism Beautiful Strangeness for a Sustainable World. London, UK: Earthscan, 2009.

Hindle, Tim. “Triple Bottom Line,” The Economist, November 17, 2009, http://www.economist.com/node/14301663 (accessed 10 August 2014)

Markussen, Thomas. “The Disruptive Aesthetics of Design Activism: Enacting Design Between Art and Politics.” Design Issues: 1. (2011), http://www.nordes.org/opj/index.php/n13/article/viewFile/102/86. (accessed 13 September 2014)

Merriam-Webster.com “Activism.” http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/activism. (accessed 23 August 2014).

Oxford Dictionaries. “Activism”. Oxford University Press. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/ activism (accessed 23 August 2014).

Papanek, Victor. Design for the Real World; Human Ecology and Social Change. New York: Pantheon Books, 1972.

Ranciére, Jacques. The Politics of Aesthetics: The Distribution of the Sensible London: Continuum, 2006.

SITRA.http://www.sitra.fi/en/future/new-democracy(accessed 1 June 2014).

Thorpe, Ann. Architecture and Design versus Consumerism: How Design Activism Confronts Growth. Abingdon, Oxon: Earthscan, 2012.

D&IASC | appendix 1 | 25

APPENDIX 1EVALUATION OF EXAMPLES

This collection show how the proposed five parameter

method23 is used to reveal insight to wether the examples

are social design, design activism or innovation activism.

23 described on page 20

initiator: FIXERUM

#1 Clear in its activist statementYes. Although not explicit.

#2 DisruptiveYes. Very controversial.

#3 Active, not passiveYes. They are actively dealing with the problem.

#4 MeasurableYes. Very successful in change as they got the government to change legislation and take over the project. Also successful in measuring their positive impact on fatal overdoses.

#5 PermanentYes.

CommentsA very strong innovation activist example.

initiator: MINDLAB

#1 Clear in its activist statementNo. Its more of a social change statement.

#2 DisruptiveNo. It is a proposal.

#3 Active, not passiveNo. It is a proposal.

#4 MeasurableYes, it could be if realised.

#5 PermanentNot yet.

CommentsThis is an example of designing for social change. They propose a framework that encourages grassroots level activism.


FIG. 11 Mind-Lab, “Ny Nordisk Skole – forandring nede-fra” 2014.

26 | D&IASC | appendix 1

initiator: ELM GROOVE POLICE

#1 Clear in its activist statementYes. “Slower is better”.

#2 DisruptiveYes.

#3 Active, not passiveThis is debatable as it is commentary in an interactive way, and encourages people to slow down. It is not actively slowing cars, but it makes the drivers do so.

#4 MeasurableYes.

#5 PermanentUnknown. Location might change.

CommentsInteresting example of how government institutions also use innovation activism.

initiator: JILL

#1 Clear in its activist statementYes. Although not explicit we know that dog fouling is not acceptable.

#2 DisruptiveYes. It is an original intervention in public space.

#3 Active, not passiveNo. Passive, commentary.

#4 MeasurableYes. The result was 75% less dog fouling in 2 months.

#5 PermanentNo. The flags are temporary.

CommentsJill is a great example of an individual, grassroots-level activist who has no design background, but successfully adopt a design activist method for her campaign.

initiator: CITY OF COPENHAGEN

#1 Clear in its activist statementNo. Its more of a solution to a practical problem.

#2 DisruptiveNo. It is disruptive as an unusual installation, but I does not have a passionate activist counter-narrative, and most people walking by wouldn’t notice it.

#3 Active, not passiveYes. They are actively solving the problem.

#4 MeasurableYes. They stopped using the bushes.

#5 PermanentYes.

CommentsEven though this fulfill several criteria, it is lacking fundamental activist behavior, and is therefore an example of social change though design.

FIG. 12 Cramer-Krasselt, “Slower is better” for Elm Groove Police, April 2009.

FIG. 13 Nick O’Dwyer, “Litter Wars” Documentary for BBC, February, 2013.

FIG. 14 Morten Grønning Nielsen, “StreetPee” 2012.

Design- & Innovation Activism for Social Change - 2015

Documents

Transcript of Design- & Innovation Activism for Social Change - 2015