Questions Raised by Design

Questions Raised by Design Michala Lipková, Barbara Predan Questions Raised by Design Michala Lipková, Barbara Predan Ljubljana 2020 Content Questions Raised by Design 04 Foreword Preface Exhibition Social design workshop E-zine Nº1 E-zine Nº2 Reader’s list References Content 05 06 08 10 14 26 54 72 74 Foreword The Fall of Public Space? Questions Raised by Design 06 Written by Boštjan Bugarič a story for the future. Such a movement is but a first step towards building the new city walls, including different narratives from the city itself. Let’s stop erecting new unnecessary buildings and start building contents instead. Everything is already there: all it really needs is only starting to be collected. The historical city of Koper is a race to the capital. The role of public spaces has been crucially shrunk due to neoliberal money-making facilities. The last comprehensive urban plan for Koper was prepared in the 1960s by the architect Mihevc and a remnant of that plan, the workers' skyscraper, has been sold to a private investor by current policy. The impact area around the city centre was transformed into a city of consumption. What happens in a certain period of time, while capital takes over development of the city without an urban plan, where social and public buildings are sold or demolished, in other words left to the investor, urbanism is perfectly presented in the case of Koper. In today’s world of limited natural resources, there are new ways of communication that can create networks that can bring together bottom-up initiatives, destroyed small farmers, precarious cultural workers and forgotten cooperatives in the fight of the new solidarity to shape a city in which everyone is equal. The main power in today’s exhausted territory is the use of correct educational and communication skills. In the raped urban landscape of Koper there is only one way to empower the commons by creating diversity and gaining independence. If politics work hand in hand with investor urbanism, how can today’s urban problems be solved? If commoners/dwellers are convinced that the potential of urban public spaces is circumvented by politics and, consequently, by the profession, then design, management and maintenance of public spaces is becoming a completely marginal topic, missing both clear visions and a strategic approach. Enough of negative scenarios from the past; we as intellectuals and space experts need to take over the meaningless decisionmakers destroying our identity in our cities. There is still enough room for optimism in Koper; therefore, we invited a team of students from ALUO to find in such an environment a perfect polygon for their experimentation. Besides the current situation, there is no more wrong that can be done, quite the opposite. The creation of opensource online archives compounded with written and oral research is forming a library of oral history, collecting the knowledge from the past and creating Foreword 07 Preface Questions Raised by Design 08 In The Lancaster Care Charter (2019), its authors wrote that a substantial part of the design profession holds a sentimental belief about what design could eventually become and consequently, persists in devoting energy towards finding out what design can achieve. In truth, however, design ought to face an uncomfortable truth: that it might prove unable to actually accomplish everything it feels capable of doing. You can, of course, face this uncomfortable truth from the opposite, positive perspective; design can be understood as a gesture, a tool, a means of analyzing and synthesizing visions of the future. These can help us develop ways to take better care of our world, our cities, our survival and each other; the latter was also the topic of our workshop, which took place at Avtomatik Delovišče in Koper. The workshop dealt with the fundamental question of what it means to be human in our times—in the individual, as well as social sense— and how human action in the world, through design and participatory practices, enables the creation of conditions that facilitate better (co)habitation, better living. The workshop was accompanied by a group exhibition prepared by the students, which was, likewise, held at the premises of Avtomatik Delovišče. The exhibition is the fruit of a threemonth seminar conducted at the Industrial Design and Applied Arts Department at the Academy of Fine Arts and Design of the University of Ljubljana. Participants at the seminar, which was conducted through the History and Design Theory class and titled “Questions Raised by Design”, were 2nd level students in the first year of the industrial design programme under the mentorship of Assist. Prof. Barbara Predan. Preface 09 Exhibition Questions Raised by Design 10 Introduction written by Matevž Breznikar, student of industrial design What is our world like? What will tomorrow bring? How will the world change in the future? Why do aspects of daily life evolve in one direction or the other? How (if at all) do we influence these changes? Why does passivity play an active role in the changing of the world, much like doubt and critical thinking? These are just some of the many questions that we, industrial design students at the Academy of Fine Arts and Design of the University of Ljubljana, asked ourselves in the class History and Theory of Design. We designed the works with our gaze fixed on the world—both as it is now and as it could be—using the method of speculative design as the starting point. According to Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby (2013), the basis of every instance of speculative design is actually criticism. No one enjoys facing criticism, as it exposes weaknesses and flaws. Indeed, the word itself has a negative undertone. That said, criticism is also indispensable if we want to take a step forward, and in order to take such a step, we first have to identify flaws. From this point on, each step forward presents alternatives and, therefore, enables development. This is the foundation of every instance of good design. As Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby wrote in the book Speculative Everything: “All good critical design offers an alternative to how things are. It is the gap between reality as we know it and the different idea of reality referred to in the critical design proposal that creates the space for discussion. [...] it is an intellectual journey based on challenging and changing values, ideas, and beliefs” (Dunne and Raby 2013, 35). We invite you to view the exhibition as a reflection of what humanity is and what it could be. We hope that the exhibition will inspire questions, ideas, expectations and criticism. Let the exhibited works offer you a new perspective on what was, what is, and what (might) come to be. We invite you to look at the world of the present through the eyes of the future. Exhibition Short descriptions of the exhibited works 2073 short film Authors: Tino Duralija, Jon Schwarzmann, Žiga Žalec 2019/2020 2073 is a short film that takes us to the near future, raising questions about global warming, the problem of mass migrations, and mass surveillance. These are issues we are already facing today, but that we are all too tempted to retreat from into the comfort of conformism. If we fail to change our attitude towards the world, a dark future awaits us. Tomorrow’s Memories video installation Authors: Dea Beatovikj, Matevž Breznikar, Pami Prevolnik 2019/2020 Tomorrow’s Memories is an attempt to show what our lives would look like if body augmentation were commonplace. The videoclips present the various ways in which technology could affect us and our environment. The viewer watches the videoclip in the company of a brain, which serves to illustrate how that organ, though ever present, is often overlooked. With this project, we ask the viewer the following question: what is human? 2020 spatial installation Authors: Deja Kofol, Martin Pevec, Valeska Rimele 2019/2020 More than ever before, we are facing an urgent need for a rapid and drastic change in our way of life in order to prevent an environmental catastrophe. The question we are asking ourselves is whether it is even possible to change the world without also changing the principles that we, as a society, follow. Can a change of the concepts of work, property and progress—through establishing ecological conscience at all levels of society—contribute to a higher quality of life for all living beings? Through speculation, we attempted to illustrate what life might have been like in 2020, had such principles already been adopted in 1992, following the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro. The exhibition was open to the general public free of charge from 17 February to 15 March 2020. 11 Questions Raised by Design 12 Exhibition 13 Social Design Workshop Questions Raised by Design 14 The full length of the social design workshop was 4 days, divided into 5 phases: Introduction Analysis Ideation Intervention Documentation Introduction A stroll around the city centre During the introduction of the host and the local situation in general, Boštjan Bugarič, founder of Avtomatik Delovišče and Tina Cotič, local activist, provided their local insights. They presented the ongoing participatory activities that already are happening in Koper, shared the challenges of the community and their views on the current situation. After the introduction, the next step was to get active and try to engage with the city. Boštjan guided the group of students and mentors through the layers of Koper—from the industrial harbour, through the old city centre up to the newly built neighbourhood beyond the historical centre. The changing role of design Why should industrial designers care about local identity or the experience of foreigners in a particular city? Shouldn’t their job be to design physical objects? These questions easily pop up not only from the general public, but very often from the professional community, too. Designers are stereotypically seen as stylists, solo creators Social Design Workshop of tangible artifacts. However, in the 21st century, as Ken Friedman argues, design is an interdisciplinary profession serving multiple needs, working in transdisciplinary teams whose nature and constituency changes according to the project at hand—and, therefore, it is difficult to argue for a definitive range of skills or even a specific knowledge domain (Friedman, 2012). The first day started with the introduction of guest lecturer Michala Lipková. With the aim to stress the shifting role of design in our society, the lecture introduced a (1) brief retrospective of the ongoing cooperation with automotive industry at the Institute of Design at the Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, (2) a case study of a hardware startup project and (3) the international summer school Holis. According to Meyer and Norman, designers are nowadays trusted with increasingly complex and impactful challenges, which the current system of design education seldom prepares them for (2020). The case of design education in Slovakia, particularly the product design study programme at the Slovak University of Technology, is a rather typical example of the ongoing shift (and struggle) from initially purely form-oriented training towards multidisciplinary and less tangible and strategic forms of design. Walking along the coastline of Koper, you can easily witness signs of the global automotive trade— just as the research group did during the initial stroll around the city centre. Overseas transfer of freshly manufactured cars, visible in the harbour, is only the tip of the “economic iceberg” that the automotive industry represents worldwide. Lipková illustrated the shift from classical industrial design education to the post-industrial design mindset on the example of STU’s cooperation with the automotive industry—Škoda and Volkswagen. More than 10 years of cooperation with the Czech car manufacturer’s design studio and the recent participation of Volkswagen Group Research allows for long term reflection—two contrasting project examples from different eras show the shift from seeing design as a superficial marketing tool vs. a fundamental competitive advantage: • The cooperation of Slovak University of Technology with Škoda Design started shortly before the global economic crisis in 2008. 15 Questions Raised by Design 16 The first projects were focused mostly on the development of car accessories, such as the example project of accessories for the New Small Family platform (NSF). Volkswagen’s small and affordable city car concept, produced by three brands at the same time (Volkswagen up!, SEAT Mii and Škoda Citigo), was focused on efficient engineering design and investmentcost reduction, “redressing” the same technology purely by outer styling. Similarly, the student projects delivered during these early years of cooperation focused on development of simple physical products—car accessories for different target groups of NSF and other production models (such as women, families, seniors, etc.) • Today—12 years later—digitalization, electrification and autonomous driving are redefining car ownership and keep disrupting the functionality and architecture of car interiors. The continued cooperation of STU with Škoda Design and Volkswagen Group Research has accordingly shifted its focus to intangible forms of experience and service design, as well the design process itself. As the car becomes a gadget and personal mobility becomes a service, the shadow of technological transformation makes designing car accessories obsolete. Suddenly, before the secondary skills of user research and testing become crucial, process learning and user feedback are appreciated over perfectly shaped models. In a similar way as in the automotive industry, the consumer electronics market moved from shaping physical products to strategic design much earlier, faster and more fundamentally. The term “strategic design”, often used in the contemporary business world, can be described as a professional field in which designers use their principles, tools and methods to influence strategic decision-making within an organization (Calabretta, 2016). To give an example of the facets of a similar design approach, Lipková used the case study of a hardware startup project—development of a smart wearable camera Benjamin button, successfully introduced on the major international crowdfunding platform Kickstarter in 2017. of design methodologies to other disciplines was proved as equally or even more important for the overall progress of the project. The most influential aspects of design during the product development process were identified as follows: • Branding became the key market differentiator of the product. The philosophy of “reverse ageing” of Francis Scott’s Benjamin Button, represented in the brand’s name, supported the idea of a family first person view action camera and continued to be considered by all following design decisions. Design storytelling helped to target the niche identified by market analysis. • The designer acted as the key facilitator of the co-creation process. To shape both hardware and software to provide a seamless experience, the product needed to be tested iteratively with the target group, using different methodologies of human-centered design (focus groups, indepth interviews, observation, shadowing). The designer played the key role in leading a simplified version of the complete co-creation approach, which is defined as a transparent process of value creation in ongoing productive collaboration with, and supported by all relevant parties (in our case marketing, sales, hardware and software development), with the end-user playing the central role (Jansen & Pieters, 2017). • Design decisions were directly influencing the hardware and software development timeline. The user journey and interaction experience were crucial factors for final software and hardware features, and their integration wouldn’t have been possible without ongoing transdisciplinary team cooperation. • Understandability of the Kickstarter page became a key factor of campaign success. The quantitative questionnaire, undertaken after the Kickstarter campaign, confirmed that the majority of the campaign’s supporters understood the key features of the device and the software. Some 78.6% of the respondents considered having free hands when recording as the key feature and 60.7% appreciated the time saved by automatic video editing (Zaťko, 2017). While design’s aesthetic contribution still played a significant role in the project, it proved itself as a mandatory minimum and the importance of intangible forms of design (experience design, service design) as well as the use and the transition Two examples from the field of mobility and consumer electronics argue for the changing role (and responsibility) of the design profession, spreading its field of influence far beyond “making things nice”. The message of the case study of this seemingly simple high-tech gadget leaves us with Social Design Workshop 17 the question—what could be an analogy of this kind of approach on a bigger scale? Imagine complex and environmentally fundamental issues such as designing the city. What happens when designers are left out of the discussion? The closing part of the lecture was dedicated to an example of an alternative education platform— Holis. Since 2014, this summer school has been regularly prototyping an experiment of place-based, interdisciplinary learning. As of 2020, the school has hosted more than 170 participants in four countries. The curriculum of the Holis School is updated every year so their team has an up-to-date understanding of methodologies, tools for social innovation and entrepreneurship. The school cooperates with local partners and experts who help them identify local challenges. During the summer, the school’s participants gather directly in the location of the identified challenge. Using design thinking and cocreation methodologies, they research, generate ideas, and refine prototypes, and pitch the final ideas to local stakeholders. The school follows one simple rule: Leave the place in a better condition than you found it. social innovation should be on protagonists. “This means looking at the people who take part and the social forms they generate, and especially at the social forms in which people collaborate in order to achieve a result they would not be able to achieve alone, and that produces or could produce wider social value as a side effect” (Manzini 2015, 77). According to Ezio Manzini, the task of design for social innovation can, therefore, be described as follows: It is a design action that seeks to make these ways of being and doing things (that is, the existence of these collaborative organizations) both possible and likely. The emphasis is on a design action. But what does this mean? One of the possible answers was given by Herbert Simon in his book The Sciences of the Artificial, where he wrote: “Everyone designs who devises courses of action aimed at changing existing situations into preferred ones” (Simon 1996, 111). This is an important notion due to the much wider understanding of design action. A notion we should all be much more aware of. It stresses that we can all be designers, and from that, we can conclude that we can all be protagonists as well, generating social forms in order to collaborate and produce wider social values. Notes on the Social Innovation The first day’s afternoon started with a lecture on Social Innovation by Barbara Predan. Predan introduced historical overview of collaboration in Slovenia and examples of good practice of social innovations from Slovenia and abroad (foreign practices focused on ten world-changing social innovations based on collaborative networks, based on the report titled Social innovation, What it is, Why it matters and how it can be accelerated (Mulgan 2007). The main aim of the lecture was to present a selection of projects that share three key “ingredients”: grassroots initiative, collaboration, and design action, and social innovation as a result. So actually, the aim was not only to shed light on a selection of projects, but also to put forward a question: What would the world look like if the majority of projects incorporated the aforementioned “ingredients”? The same was emphasized by Ezio Manzini, a leading thinker in social design and collaborative networks, who founded DESIS, an international network on design for social innovation and sustainability. In his book Design, When Everybody Designs, Manzini wrote that our focus in Questions Raised by Design For a brief moment, before focusing on the contemporary situation through the presentation of a selection of Slovenian projects we looked to the past. The idea of looking at the past was to provide a connection with collaborative networks, as well as to present social innovation and cooperatives from the Slovenian past. At first, it seemed that the research would reach back to the 19th century, but it actually took us as far back as the 6th century. It took us all the way back to when Slavs settled in the Eastern Alps. In his book A History of the Slovenian Nation [Zgodovina slovenskega naroda], the Slovenian historian and priest, dr. Josip Gruden, wrote the following about the time of the Slavic settlement: “The social life of early Slovenians was based on cooperation. This was a society of extended family members who lived together and worked on an indivisible estate” (Gruden 1910, 56). None of them had any private possessions. All the land, buildings, cattle, and all the tools were the shared property of all. Whatever a member of the cooperative made or received was used for the common benefit of all persons living and working in the cooperative. According to Gruden, “Living in a cooperative had many benefits. Not only for family 18 life but also for the national economy and social order as a whole. Cooperation prevented the division of lands and accelerated smart tillage. It also assured that everyone was taken care of (including the old, ill, or handicapped)” (Gruden 1910, 56). All other political formations spawned from cooperation. A union of cooperative was a municipality, and a mayor was elected as its head. The role of a mayor was to control trade and to exercise juridical power. In the event of an attack from the outside, municipalities closed ranks and elected a duke to lead the defence of the territories. The duke’s authority and position were revoked immediately after the attack was over. In time, each cooperative broadened its scope of work. Farming was joined by craft making. Each settlement produced a single kind of goods by using know-how passed down by their ancestors. That is why only wheelwrights are found in a particular region. Other regions had only potters, weavers, and so on. The goods were exchanged with other settlements or with Frankish and Venetian merchants—for gold, silver, glass or other metal. This order started to crumble with the growing influence of the Frankish state. As Gruden noted: with the subjection to foreign rule, the “initial equality vanished. Families with more properties gained more power, more rights and more liberties. And as we all know, the moment we introduce a class with more privileges, we also obtain a class with less rights” (Gruden 1910, 59). With this change, the approach to crafts-making also changed. We entered the epoch of the guilds of merchants and craftsmen that dominated economic life in the better part of Europe from the Middle Ages to the Industrial Revolution. Sheilagh Ogilvie, a professor of economic history at the University of Cambridge, wrote about the negative side of guilds in her article, “The Economics of Guilds”. She states: Some researchers—like dr. Franci Avsec (2012)— describe guilds as sheer extortion. This is why, in the late 19th century, cooperatives started to form again. The first, established in 1856, was called the Association for Financial Assistance to Craftsmen. The principle of the cooperative was self-aid, mutuality, economic and national emancipation. Therefore, the idea behind it was similar to the Grameen Foundation’s microcredit idea that we can see at work today. The first period of cooperation was, according to Avsec, followed by four additional periods. From Janez Evangelist Krek, whose cooperations were based on the notion: “money divided everything, so let’s begin organizing everything around money” (Avsec 2012, 4), to self-management organizations in ex-Yugoslavia and, finally, contemporary legislation. The latter introduced its most important change in 2010, when the government acknowledged cooperatives as a form of a social enterprise (Avsec 2012). In this brief history overview, it becomes apparent that we have built our society as a response to encounters. History is a long list of collaborative organizations. The only thing that has changed over time is the context in which these encounters take place. Nowadays, economic, environmental and social crises generate an ever-increasing need for collaboration and exchange. We’re witnessing renewed interest in the concepts of community and common goods. New technologies have facilitated the process of connecting and organizing large groups of people. They have also created new forms of participation. In this context, emerging projects of social innovation offer an alternative to the existing system. After a brief look into the past, we continued by reviewing a selection of Slovenian projects. All the projects that were presented incorporate the four ingredients that we mentioned at the beginning of the lecture: “Guilds tended to do what was best for guild members. In some cases, guilds brought certain benefits for the broader public. But overall, the actions guilds took mainly had the effect of protecting and enriching their members at the expense of consumers and nonmembers” (Ogilvie 2014, 174). • grassroots initiative • collaborative networks • design action and • social innovation as a result of all three Social Design Workshop 19 The following Slovene projects were presented: • Today is a new day: a project built on active citizenship, critical thought and with a strong belief in community (additional emphasis was placed on the Parlameter project). • Crops-2-Swap, a civil initiative organizing crop swaps in many towns across Slovenia. All events are organized on a volunteer basis and many participants help out with equipment, skills and ideas. • A Friendly Enemy—Japanese knotweed in the paper laboratory, a brilliant design initiative that gives a very interesting answer to the question “What is waste?” • Hacking Households and Cloning Objects are illustrative examples of a practical experiment in decentralized structures. • Revealed Hands products: an example of social economy the main objectives of which are: creating intercultural connections, educating through manual work, creating spaces for the socialization of vulnerable groups and designing textile products for sale. • Zadrugator’s Cooperative Housing: the main goal of the cooperative is providing affordable and quality living conditions in Ljubljana • Vision of Murska Sobota: one student’s project explored idea of a self-sustainable city, based on a circular economy. A city that, instead of being moulded by the demands of traffic or capital, places its citizens at the centre of city planning. A city that is built on the idea of commons, sharing, solidarity economy, and social innovation. • What on Earth are we leaving behind? was another student’s research project, which tried to find an answer to the question What do we need for our collective well-being? With this short selection of projects, we tried to demonstrate that alternatives are possible—and that they’re already taking place. The selection was deliberately diverse in order to show that we can all tackle different fields around us, and that the degree of activity can differ from project to project. In her thesis, Nuša Jelenec stated that bottom-up, participatory projects shouldn’t replace the state and its institutions. The main task of the state is to generate the conditions in which projects like these can develop and prosper (Jelenec 2016). Questions Raised by Design Here’s how Australian designer David Sless described the world we live in: “The posturing and domineering voices are part of the soup in which we all swim. That is the natural order of systems that are structured through authority and power. It would be wrong to blame the scum for rising to the top of the liquid. I commend to you the view from the bottom. Bottom feeders have a unique and important view of the world. Changing the chemistry of the liquid world we inhabit is a worthy project” (Sless 2016). The latter: “Changing the chemistry of the liquid world we inhabit” was the task that lay ahead of us. Analysis New Lexicon After the lecture, the students were offered six terms to choose from: society, democracy, participation, care, future, design. Their task was to select three of them and find short explanations and existing definitions for the three selected words through fast online search. After sharing their outcomes in the group, this activity was followed by a literature analysis. Students analyzed texts provided by Barbara Predan. They received a wide selection of texts from contemporary design theoreticians and authors, directly related to the topics they were previously trying to define (see Reader’s List). The goal of the analysis of these resources was to find new relations between the words they chose and revise both the language and meaning of the selected terms from a critical perspective. The task was to rewrite the existing explanations, using the new insights and knowledge gained by reading the texts. Both teams delivered “new definition”, new explanations for the three selected words. As a result, each group delivered a triangle and their own perspective on the relationship of the three selected words. 20 • Social Design Workshop 21 Thinking foundation exercises The second day of the workshop started with an inspiring lecture by Indy Johar. The workshop participants watched a lecture “A Small World Future: From Start-Ups to System Change” from TEDx Brum (2015). In it, Indy Johar argues that since the 17th century, western society has been organized as a group of discrete, independent individuals and corporations. We have designed our systems, markets and institutions around the idea of an “in vitro” approach, which he sees as a myth and stresses the need for a new approach. Johar states that the biggest revolution of the 21st century will not be our technology, but in the way we organize ourselves (Johar 2015). The talk was followed by an analogy exercise. Students were asked: Can we describe the triangle of the chosen words by using the language of nature? The task was to rewrite the description from the previous day with the word lexicon that is based on analogies from nature. They were to choose one of the following phenomena from nature: Mycelium, Virus (Parasite), Cell (and cytosol), Metamorphosis, Bombyx mori, Gene. The goal of this exercise was to rethink the relationship of the selected terms from a different perspective, free from social bias. This exercise became an intermediary to the analysis of the situation in Koper. The steps towards design action started with the clarification of team goals, values, rules and purpose. We used a simplified version of The Team Canvas to identify the foundation on which the team was to build in the next steps. The canvas also helped us to detect key criteria that were to be used in the future to evaluate the ideas and enable decision-making of the group. In order to clarify what kind of impact the group intends to have on people’s lives in the community, each team discussed and collectively answered following questions: • Goals: What do we want to achieve as a group? How do we define success? • Values: What are our guiding principles? Core values? What do we stand for? • Rules: How do we execute? How do we communicate? How do we make decisions as a group? • Purpose: Why are we doing this? Why Koper? Questions Raised by Design After agreeing on the shared team foundation, the next step was to explore the protagonists of the local environment. Instead of thinking about local actors in terms of the frequently used “personas”, we decided to use the term “protagonists”, referring to the language used by Ezio Manzini (2015), who stresses that to go further into what design for social innovation does, and what it could do, we must focus on the protagonists of each particular innovation. The task for the participants was to identify and shortly describe different protagonists of Koper, using the modified version of the Ripple Effect Tool from Frog Design’s Collective Action Toolkit. The participants were thinking as a group about the possible effects their action can have and which protagonists can be potentially involved or influenced. The protagonists were to be mapped on a circular diagram. The variety of choices The map of protagonists was followed by documenting the so-far received insights from the local community. After a short mind-mapping, the groups decided to have an additional Q&A with key local protagonists—which in our case became again Boštjan Bugarič. After one-hour in-depth group interview, the participants concluded that the insight into the situation was sufficient to move to the next step—exploring the How Might We... questions method. Known mainly from IDEO’s Design Kit, the tool invites participants to transform a problem into an opportunity for design. By framing the challenge as a question starting with the words “How Might We...”, one sets him or herself up for an innovative solution. By defining themes and insights, the participants identified problem areas that pose challenges to the community in Koper. The goal of reframing the insight statements as How Might We questions was to turn those challenges into opportunities for design. The How Might We format suggests that a solution is possible, because the questions offer the chance to answer them in a variety of ways. A properly framed How Might We doesn’t suggest a particular solution, but gives you the perfect frame for innovative thinking. The participants were also invited to split large challenges into smaller actionable pieces. The goal was to ideate for quantity, share the results in a group and vote for top three HMW questions. While creating the questions, the participants followed seven basic principles: 22 1. Explore positive effects 2. Focus on emotions 3. Take it to an extreme 4. Explore the opposite 5. Question an assumption 6. Create an analogy from insight or context 7. Focus on an element Ideation • Who can use the solution and what problem does it solve? • How feasible is it? (from impossible to possible) • What do we need to make this idea work? • How can we improve this idea? The participants sketched and described the ideas with short notes. The developed ideas were presented with the whole team, and each presentation was followed by a group feedback session. Afterwards, each team discussed individually and decided on the direction they want to continue in. Design Action On the third day, the two teams entered the ideation phase and the whole day was devoted to the development and prototyping of two different intervention ideas. During the morning session, we used three ideation tools to get to the basic concept, that was later developed and prototyped in the afternoon. The first activity was Crazy 8 from Google Design Sprint. Participants individually generated eight distinct ideas in eight minutes on folded A4 paper, divided into eight sections. After sharing in a group, they each voted for the favourite ideas. This activity was run in the team separately, to avoid influences between the teams. The follow-up activity was again a tool from the Google Design Sprint: The Solution Sketch. The exercise starts with choosing the number-one favourite idea from the previously chosen ones, and the task is to sketch it, using multiple frames that develop the simple thought into a “How it works” story in at least three steps. After sharing the ideas among the team members, the ideas can be developed further and built upon in several rounds. The final ideation tool that we used is the Grow an idea, again from Frog Design's Collective Action Toolkit. The groups still continued to work in the “separate mode”, divided into two teams, without giving each other feedback. The goal of the “Grow an idea” activity is to narrow down the focus to two favourite ideas. It requires the team to divide into smaller groups, that develop two different ideas that the team previously agreed on as top favourites. In our case, the participants worked in pairs for 30 minutes, trying to develop the idea by asking the following questions: Social Design Workshop Intervention The teams spent the afternoon prototyping the selected ideas and were encouraged to test their tangible outputs in the city. Every team managed to perform an active investigation in the local environment, that is further described, documented and reflected upon on the following pages as student’s e-zines. Documentation E-zine Creative processes can become cluttered and hard to grasp from outside. Therefore, from the very beginning, our goal was to create a tangible, understandable output. Workshop participants have agreed to present the results of the workshop Questions Raised by Design in the form of two e-zines. In the wider cultural context, we can define a zine (short for magazine) as an independent and noncommercial content format, usually produced by an individual or small group, in a small-circulation (or as in our case—online). Zines spread specific messages for specific audiences. This self-published form of media has a long history in counterculture movements, science fiction and various niche communities. 23 • Questions Raised by Design 24 In our case, the e-zines document the creative process and thinking behind the proposals as seen by both teams. We decided to use the form of an e-zine to communicate the results of all phases of the workshop in a visual way. Two proposals The team of Tino Duralija, Deja Kofol, Jon Schwarzmann and Žiga Žalec titled their intervention Conversation Park. The team set its goal to design an intervention that would not exclude, but rather empower participants and promote equity and self-initiative. The concept of the “conversation park” suggests the idea to transform a part of Koper Park in a way that makes it easier to engage in conversation with others. The simple idea—to equip each bench with a button that lights up and lets others know that the person sitting there needs help or wants to engage in conversation—aims to establish new interactions between people, lessen the sense of loneliness of elderly people and build a much more connected and enriched society in Koper. The second team of Valeska Rimele, Mastin Pevec, Matevž Breznikar and Dea Beatovikj present their zine under the headline Improving the quality of life in Koper. The team shared a rather different motivation—to connect as many citizens as possible defined by an event and a place, providing local inhabitants the opportunity to contribute and feel a sense of social inclusiveness. The final idea, presented in the e-zine, describes a one day event that should include activities for a variety of age groups: it should connect the residents of Koper through different and engaging activities such as an exchange of material goods, skill sharing and sharing of personal experiences, including talks on mental health and group reflections. Both e-zines aspire to not only document the results—but also to mediate the creative energy of the workshop and provide the reader with the atmosphere of Avtomatik Delovišče. The students used the format of the e-zine to retrospectively organize their thoughts, document their observations and insights received during the research process, express their opinions and describe their interventions—and last but not least—to pass on the questions raised by design to the local community. Social Design Workshop 25 E-zine Nº1 Questions Raised by Design 26 Conversation Park Public space intervention Koper, 17–21 February 2020 Social design is design that is mindful of the designer's role and responsibility in society, and of the use of the design process to bring about social change.* Conversation Park, Public space intervention Koper, 17–21 February 2020 Authors: Tino Duralija, Deja Kofol, Jon Schwarzmann, Žiga Žalec Mentors: doc. dr. Barbara Predan, dr. Michala Lipkova 1st year, Master programme Industrial Design Academy of Fine Arts and Design University of Ljubljana * Social design, Wikipedia, Retrieved 18 February 2020. The workshop We came to Koper to exhibit our speculative design projects, which we completed during the Design Theory course, under the mentorship of doc. dr. Barbara Predan. Our visit continued with a five-day workshop, during which we explored the practice of participatory and socially orientated design. The theoretical foundation was presented by prof. dr. Barbara Predan and dr. Michala Lipkova. Later on, we engaged with the local community to form a public space intervention concept. The goal was to bring the needed and desired change into the city’s environment and enable active participation for people living in Koper. First impressions Task: Set up the exhibition and use the spare time to get to know the city. “The main square is basically empty.” “Shopping centre right next to the prison?” “All the activities in the park are banned.” “Where can students find a good cheap “Look at that huge a** ship.” meal?” Monday “Finding parking is a pain in the morning” Introduction The workshop started with a presentation by our hosts dr. Boštjan Bugarič and Tina Cotič. Both are architects and well-integrated in the community, so they were able to provide us with insights into life, culture and events in the city of Koper. Tina presented her unique way of interaction with the locals, through an event called Open Gardens of Koper, which features and evaluates local gardens. Tuesday Key observations: Locals are not connected and lack a common identity. However, once offered a chance to connect, they will participate. Keep in mind that people must take ownership of the project being offered in order to fully participate. City tour Boštjan took us on a tour around the city centre. He presented the remains of the old architecture and later interventions from the Yugoslav era. He pointed out how Koper’s industry shaped the city centre into its final form and how neoliberalism has driven people out of the heart of the city in the last two decades. Key observations: The old hotspots where people used to gather are dead, with the exception of the market. The city centre is designed to accommodate tourism, instead of fostering new ways for locals to connect. City tour route: 1 2 3 4 6 11 5 10 7 8 Tuesday 9 1. Delovišče Avtomatik 2. Old salt barn 3. National reserve 4. Rotonda & palm trees 5. Brolo Park 6. Tito Square 7. Prešeren Square 8. Green park II 9. Eternal building site, Solis 10. Statues of national heroes 11. Taverna & free WC Social design 1 Professor Predan introduced us to the world of social design and its derivates such as open design. On the whole, it is a way of looking at design and community projects, not from a financial standpoint, but rather from how they enhance or benefit people’s lives. Tuesday Task: Form two groups of four students and prepare your workspace. Social design 2 Wednesday Dr. Michala Lipkova introduced us to her professional career in product design and her shift to social design, NGOs and participatory design events. She explained the organisational hurdles of projects like Flowers for Slovakia, which strives to exhibit Slovak cultural heritage. She also presented the Holis summer school, which teaches soft skills and social design methodologies. Keyword triangle I Task A: Discuss and choose three words, that will work as core values for your project. You can choose from the following set of words: Society, Democracy, Participation, Care, Future, Design Task B: Use different dictionaries and perspectives to define each of the chosen words. Tuesday We chose care, participation and society, because we recognized those as crucial ingredients to the actual implementation of change. They also, in a way, represent what we wanted to establish in the local community of Koper. Keyword triangle II Task: Use your new knowledge to redefine the Keyword triangle. Present it to others. We defined the connections between the concepts in the triangle; care is crucial for participation; participation is fuel for society. All three components are connected by communication. Key observations: Successful participation cannot be accomplished without the following: - participation requires a common set of goals between all participants, - society should establish balance between common growth and the growth of an individual, Tuesday - care should not be a linear relationship, we should aspire to grow a web of caring interactions through all of society. Reading Task: Try to expand your definitions with new understanding of social design and communities gained through reading the articles given. Articles: Douglas Rushkoff: Team Human Guy Julier, Lucy Kimbell: Keeping the System Going: Social Design and the Reproduction of Inequalities in Neoliberal Times ... Key observations: Tuesday The role of design too often ends with virtual concepts, never to be implemented. Therefore, especially in social design, we must strive to reach actual change, however small it might seem. That is the only way we can actually shape society and give society a chance to shape design as well. Analogy Task: describe the concept of your triangle by taking principles or processes we can observe in nature. Borrow the language commonly used in biology. We decided to describe our keyword triangle using a case of the symbiosis of goby fish and shrimp. Wednesday Their relationship summarizes the connection between society, care and participation, which we, as a group, defined as crucial values and our end goal. The symbiotic co-existence of goby fish and shrimp Shrimp and goby fish exist in an inclusive society in which the shrimp allow the goby fish to live in their burrows. Wednesday They are aware of each other’s qualities and decide to not only co-exist but also actively participate. The fish hover above the shrimp, while they dig their common home. While keeping an eye on predators, they form one homogenous organism, which takes care of each of its components. The shrimp use their antennae to communicate with the fish, which wiggle their tail in dangerous situations. Team Canvas Task: define guidelines that are important for you as a team and will work as key parameters for the final assessment of your project. Our goal was to design a feasible opportunity, which could be adopted and further developed by the local community. This may be a small example of a joint effort, but we believe it could show the power of collaboration and spark more projects. Wednesday For us, it was really important to make an intervention that would not exclude, but rather empower participants and promote equity and self-initiative. Protagonists Task: define key groups of inhabitants in Koper and arrange them in a stakeholder’s map in accordance with your ability to approach them. Consider Avtomatik Delovišče as your starting point. Wednesday We selected various groups of people with different resources, that could help us implement our project; the unemployed and the elderly who have more time, students who have more energy and social capital, and children who are usually curious about new stuff and bring people together. We would also like to include the Municipality of Koper. Wednesday Illustration by Nina Mršnik, www.czk.si/kreativec/Bostjan_Bugaric_5 Q&A, Boštjan We collected insights through interviewing Boštjan from Avtomatik Delovišče. We asked him about organizations in Koper which might help us with the realization of our intervention. Key observations: The community of Koper, especially older inhabitants, seem to be rather closed towards mainland visitors, who are considered outsiders. HMW How might we Task: Create “how might we” questions using insights from the interview with Boštjan. Later, all the participants of a workshop evaluated them by voting for 2 ideas on the board. We further developed 3 selected ideas: - How might we make a place for expressing gratitude or regrets? - How might we make a place for mutual acceptance and help? - How might we make people feel safe on the streets at night? Ideation Crazy 8s Task: Crazy 8 is an idea generation exercise. In a period of 8 minutes, each group member must come up with 8 solutions to the chosen HMW questions. From among the 32 ideas generated, we chose 2 for further development. The chosen ones were “Help” and “Problem bank”. Thursday We chose these 2 because they aligned best with our team’s purpose, goals, values and rules, that we set up at the beginning of the workshop. We expanded our ideas into a 3-step story explaining their use. The image above shows the “Help” concept. The idea revolves around park benches with symbols, via which the individuals can non-verbally express their crisis, or just a basic need for conversation. Selected concept Story boards Concept development Task: split into 2 pairs and spend 30 minutes further defining the solution. Do so by asking yourself these questions: Wednesday - Who can use the solution and what problem does it solve? - How feasible is it? (from impossible to possible) - What do we need to make this idea work? - How can we improve upon this idea? Concept development Help The main idea behind our selected solution is to get people to socialize, help each other and by doing so, participate in building a strong community. Since there are quite a lot of parks in Koper, we would only need to slightly modify existing benches. Therefore, the idea seemed relatively feasible. Wednesday Problem bank Our second concept involves solving personal and public problems with a help of a Problem Bank. There, the issues that the residents of Koper face would be collected. The database of problems would be available online and residents would be invited to solve the problems. By resolving an issue, an individual would get a credit for what they did and in return, they would also receive help, whenever they might need it. Since both ideas had very similar goals, we decided to combine them. The Problem Bank would therefore function as a potential upgrade. Thursday Prototyping Task:Try to write a provocative question to get people involved and encourage discussion between participants. Intervention Location: Koper park Task: Test if the people are prepared to engage in activities, conversation, or at least give their opinion when given the chance. Our approach was to get people to talk to us and to share their opinion on life in Koper. It turned out that the locals felt intimidated by our presence. Therefore, we left a poster with some post-it notes for people to use and express their thoughts. Thursday Even though our quote had a negative connotation, people reacted by giving positive comments about the city. We were surprised by the amount of feedback we got in only an hour. Results The big idea Our idea is based on the fact that people in Koper have the empathy and the capacity to share but lack the opportunity to do so. We wanted people to engage with one another and to show that they care for their fellow inhabitants. The idea is to transform a part of Koper Park in a way that makes it easier to engage in conversation with others. We came up with a plan to equip each bench with a button that lights up and lets others know that the person sitting there needs help or wants to engage in conversation. The most challenging part of the implementation would probably be the initial phase, where the users would be getting accustomed to a new “bonding ground”. Based on our testing and research, we anticipate that the first adopters would be the elderly, unemployed and curious young people. If it were adopted, our proposed solution would establish new interactions between people, lessen the sense of loneliness of elderly people and build a much more connected and enriched society in Koper. Concept evaluation Task: Evaluate your concept according to your keyword triangle. Have you followed the team values determined during the Team Canvas exercise? The proposed intervention cannot be implemented without voluntary communication. As stated in our keyword triangle, communication has a crucial role in connecting all three selected values. It sparks care, which leads to unselfish help among people. Despite this only being a small first step, we believe it can lead to other projects and eventually to a better society. Our project fosters reciprocal care among the people of Koper and is therefore truly inclusive. Furthermore, it affords individuals to become an active part of the local community. The social design squad E-zine Nº2 i� -z.� - - Improving quality of life in Koper Social innovation workshop Koper, Avtomatik Delovisce February 17-21, 2020 Authors Valeaka Rimel•, Martin P•v•c. Mat.vi Breznikar, Dea Beatovikj Mentors doc. dr. Barbara Predan dr. Michala Lipkova 1. FIRST IMPRESSIONS OF KOPER As a group of designers from the Academy of Arts and Design of the University of Ljubljana, we came to Koper, a coastal city in Slovenia, where we had enrolled in a social PHOTO: Aleš Rosa and personal archive design workshop at Avtomatik Delovišče. Avtomatik Delovišče is a coworking community space where we set up an exhibition on speculative design. Boštjan welcomed us to the coworking space and during the process he provided assistance and constant support, and was our ally throughout the project. Together with Tina, he gave us a brief summary of participatory practices in Koper. They shared many anecdotes about life in Koper and helped us understand the identity of the city. We discussed the problematic of loneliness among the elderly, how the city had developed throughout the years, and discrimination towards drug addicts and foreigners in general. We also got to know that one of the most rebellious things that the citizens of Koper have done was to burn some of the palm trees in the city centre. PHOTO: Aleš Rosa Tina told us about how the city streets need to be better lit at night in order to make the city a safer place. She also explained that the city has many hidden gardens (in the inner courtyards of each house). She presented a project that they started a few years ago where people can open their gardens to the general public and through these walks they can better connect and cobuild Koper’s community spaces. Boštjan also took us on an insightful tour around the city to get a sense of its history and to explore the specifics of the public spaces. He also explained how the infrastructure and social life have developed over the years. PHOTO: Aleš Rosa 2. KEYWORD TRIANGLE In the following task we needed to found a connection between different words, their meanings and mutual influences. It was important to define key meanings before we started playing around and exploring them. We chose the following three words: DESIGN, CARE and SOCIETY. We chose them because we saw a mutual connection between them and found them relevant for us as a team. We defined society as a state of being together with other people, but in order to do that we, as individuals, need to care. In order to achieve that we recognised design as a good medium and a tool connecting the two. The second task was reading different short texts, such as chapters from the book Team Human by Douglas Rushkoff. After reading them, we discussed our new perspectives on the three words mentioned above. The new perspective was used to define a new definition and the relation between them. Our perspective changed in the sense of how we perceive the individual both independently and as a contributor to society. We asked ourselves: “Is it enough to define a good society, that the majority in a society is in a good condition, but along the way, aren’t we—by doing this—forgetting about the minorities?” 3. BIOLOGICAL ANALOGY EXERCISE The next step of our workshop was to see and define the keyword triangle through the perspective of biological terminology and understand it through the prism of biological processes. This was our new description: “ME” IN THE SYSTEM If we observe biological processes, we see cells, which function through mutual support. Each cell has its own system and is autonomous. Yet its true potential is achieved with collaboration with other cells. We see design as an intelligent impulse to make the necessary changes in the cell (social) environment to maintain its health and improve its genome according to the surroundings. The design gives the singular cell an active role in the tissue structure. Collaboration is only possible with a healthy balance between me and us. 4. TEAM CANVAS AND PROTAGONISTS In the next phase, we performed a Team Canvas to align our values, goals and the rules that will govern us to reach the defined team purpose. Following the previous fields of researched words, we defined the content of the four categories. We agreed that our purpose would be to connect as many citizens as possible defined by an event and a place. The rules should be proposed by the organisers and citizens to nurture a sense of ownership of the project. Throughout the project we wanted to value inclusiveness, non-discrimination and genuinely finding joy in social interaction. Our goal was to make the event a selfinitiative and to be self-sustainable during the years to come. Giving people the opportunity to contribute and feel a sense of social inclusiveness was the main goal. We also defined who would be appropriate to include in the project. We chose the following protagonists because, in our view, they create a strong (horizontal) network through which people can connect further. We started with Boštjan and Tina who can— during the process—connect us to: - people with skills willing to share - people curious to learn - volunteers - moderators - different interest groups and communities - tour guides 5. INSIGHTS This was followed by a Q&A session with Boštjan, where we got the main insights into our specific questions raised after four tasks. We asked him about what connects the people of Koper; what is the situation with public toilets; where are people spending their time in public spaces; and what are their hobbies. 6. HOW MIGHT WE? We used the insights we had collected to start forming quick questions in the direction of “how might we”. For instance, how might we make streets safer at night? How might we create a habit of more social gatherings? The sprint concluded with several questions. Out of many, we picked out those with most potential to foster inclusiveness among the citizens of Koper. The questions we chose to work on in our social intervention project are provided below: How might we use the new park for social gatherings and events? HMW connect people thorugh activities like jam-sessions and so on? HMW develop the trend of yoga and making it more available to citizens through use of public spaces? HMW destigmatize people and make them feel included again? 7. IDEATION During the ideation phase we combined the two selected challenges (marked in bold). We came up with an idea for a one-day event which would include activities that fit a variety of age groups. This would connect the residents of Koper through different and engaging activities such as an exchange of material goods, skill sharing and sharing of personal experiences, including talks on mental health and group reflections. For the location of the one-day event we chose Taverna, the former salt warehouse. The location seemed like an appropriate place as it already functions as a place of interaction and gathering. We believe it has the potential to provide a space for further social exploration. 8. SELECTED CONCEPT (WHAT, WHY, FOR WHOM?) The proposed concept mostly depends on volunteers. The is because we want to create an open space which will be as inclusive as possible to a variety of profiles. In our opinion, the concept will require only minimal financial support, due to the fact that the whole organisational structure would be built on self-initiative. TIMETABLE IDEA THINGS WE WILL NEED: - permits - volunteers - transparency - good organisers - good content - minor financial support and equipment from the city HOW TO SUSTAIN THE EVENT AND MAKE IT BETTER: transparency continuation and iteration event promotions (internet, radio, word of mouth) financial support self-reflection for the organisation group group of enthusiasts (2–4 “pushers”) FLOOR PLAN OF ACTIVITES 9. PROTOTYPING/INTERVENTION (HOW?) We developed the idea further in order to present it to the public and gather first feedback. We visited Taverna, the designated location where the intervention would take place. The insights were gained were: - many of the citizens are familiar with the place; for instance: they regularly attend a weekend flea market there, and concerts are organised throughout the year at this location, as well as children’s workshops in the warmer months; - the interviewees highlighted a strong interest in mental health talks, but only if the topics were current (stress, use of mobile phones, depression…); - one mother also told us that she would not leave her child alone under supervision of an unknown volunteer. 10. NEXT STEPS Our proposal is to use the habitual attraction of people to existing events like the flea market, open kitchen, etc. that already take place at the Taverna location. Citizens are already familiar with ongoing events, which is why it would be very convenient to add a new event and test it simultaneously. Our on-site research showed that people were mostly interested in the mental health aspect of our intervention idea. They showed particular interest in everyday subjects like stress and excessive use of mobile phones. We suggest further research on topics the residents find interesting. Using this feedback, we could proactively provide talks on those subject and also gather further information on what sort of content they would be interested in hearing in the near future. If the intervention caught on, we could provide more talks on the selected subjects and test other forms of communicating about the topic of mental health. Some ideas might include: inviting psychologists and psychology students, talking stick sessions, a dementia café and so on. As designers we can keep this process ongoing by understanding the actual needs of the participants and addressing them in harmony with the culture and habits of the residents of Koper, just as in all tissue there should be proper harmony between cells to ensure healthy environment. In our proposal, the actual input comes from the citizens. Our role is to be a medium between the problems they have and possible solutions. In doing so, we can give a voice to those who feel excluded and create a network of mutual support. If we observe Koper as a living organism, the only way for it to grow and improve is if we try to make every citizen (cell) fulfilled and accepted. We hope that this concept would catch on and create a place where people could express themselves, create a genuine connection between participants and educate themselves about everyday mental health topics. We would like to thank: - doc. dr. Barbara Predan - dr. Michala Lipková - doc. dr. Boštjan Bugarič - architect Tina Cotič - photographer Aleš Rosa - Academy of fine arts and design, Ljubljana Reader’s List Questions Raised by Design 72 Alain Badiou “To be young, today: sense and nonsense”, The True Life, Polity Books, Cambridge 2017. Gui Bonsiepe “Design and Democracy”, Design Issues, vol. 22, no. 2., Spring, MIT Press, Cambridge (MA) 2006, www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/ desi.2006.22.2.27. Filozofski abecedarij Danes je nov dan, Ljubljana 2018. Guy Julier, Lucy Kimbell “Keeping the System Going: Social Design and the Reproduction of Inequalities in Neoliberal Times”, Design Issues, vol. 35, no. 4, Autumn, MIT Press, Cambridge MA 2019, https://doi.org/10.1162/ desi_a_00560. Guy Julier “Can Design Ever Be Activist? The Challenge of Engaging Neoliberalism Differently”, Design (&) Activism, Tom Bieling (ed.), Mimesis International, Milan 2019. Elina Kiiski Kataja “From the trials of democracy towards future participation” (Introduction), Sitra Memorandum, Helsinki 2017, www.sitra.fi/en/publications/trialsdemocracy-towards-future-participation/. Victor Margolin, Ezio Manzini Open Letter to the Design Community: Stand up for Democracy, Democracy and Design Platform, 2017, www.democracy-design.org/open-letter-stand-updemocracy/. Douglas Rushkoff Chapters: “Social Animals”, “Organize”, “You are not Alone”, Team Human, W. W. Norton & Company, New York 2019. Reader’s list 73 References Questions Raised by Design 74 Avsec, Franci (2012), Zadruge na Slovenskem – kratek sprehod iz zgodovine v sedanjost, Ljubljana: Zadružna zveza Slovenije, http://fsp.si/wp-content/ uploads/2012/10/Franci_Avsec.ppt. Calabretta, Giulia with Gemser, Gerda and Karpen, Ingo (2016), Strategic Design, Amsterdam: BIS Publishers. ISBN 978-90-6369-445-6. Dunne, Anthony and Raby, Fiona (2013), Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming, Cambridge (MA) and London: MIT Press. Friedman, Ken (2012), “Models of Design: Envisioning a Future Design Education”, Visible Language, 46 (1/2), pp. 132–154, https:// www.academia.edu/download/30525217/ Friedman_D_2012_Models_of_Design_.pdf Jansen, Stefanie and Pieters, Maarten (2017), The 7 Principles of Complete Co-Creation, Amsterdam: BIS Publishers. ISBN 978-90-6369-473-9. Innovation, 6 (March), pp. 13–39. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.sheji.2019.12.002 Ogilvie, Sheilagh (2014), “The Economics of Guilds”, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 28(4), pp. 169–192, https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/ pdfplus/10.1257/jep.28.4.169. Simon, Herbert A. (1996), The Sciences of the Artificial, Cambridge (MA) and London: MIT Press. Sless, David (2016), correspondence on the topic Launching the Decolonising Design platform [29. 6. 2016]. PhD-Design – This list is for the discussion of PhD studies and related research in design. Zaťko, Ivan (2017), Why we REALLY cancelled our Kickstarter. Retrieved January 12, 2020, from https://medium.com/benjamin-button/ why-we-really-cancelled-our-kickstarter-campaign9714e5435b62 Sources Johar, Indy (2015), “A Small World Future: From Start-Ups to System Change” from TEDx Brum, TEDx Talks, www.youtube.com/ watch?v=dEAPkjPABEc. Gruden, Josip (1910), Zgodovina slovenskega naroda, del 1, Celje: Mohorjeva družba. Jelenec, Nuša (2016), Kako lahko oblikovanje vzpodbudi in podpre družbene spremembe skozi nove oblike sodelovanja in skupnih dobrin, diplomsko delo, Ljubljana: Akademija za likovno umetnost in oblikovanje. “The Lancaster Care Charter” (2019), Design Issues, 35(1), pp. 73–77, DOI: 10.1162/ desi_a_00522. Manzini, Ezio (2015), Design, When Everybody Designs: An Introduction to Design for Social Innovation, Cambridge (MA) and London: MIT Press. Mulgan, Geoff with Simon Tucker, Rushanara Ali and Ben Sanders (2007), Social innovation, What it is, Why it matters and how it can be accelerated, London: The Young Foundation. Frog Design Collective Action Toolkit (CAT): https://info2.frogdesign.com/en/collective-actiontoolkit Google Design Sprint: https://designsprintkit.withgoogle.com IDEO’s Design Kit: www.designkit.org Team Canvas: http://theteamcanvas.com Projects A Friendly Enemy—Japanese knotweed in the paper laboratory: www.www.facebook.com/regeneracija/; https://trajna.com/project/notweed-paper/ Cloning Objects: www.sepic.cc/Cloning-an-object Crops-2-Swap: www.zelemenjava.si Flowers for Slovakia: https://f4sk.com Hacking Households: http://sepic.cc/Hacking-Households-1 Holis School: www.weareholis.org Parlameter project: https://parlameter.si Revealed Hands: www.oloopdesign.com Today is a new day: https://danesjenovdan.si Vision of Murska Sobota: www.zkts-ms.si/kultura/ vizija-murske-sobote Zadrugator’s Cooperative Housing: http://zadrugator.org Meyer, Michael and Norman, Donald (2020), “Changing design education for the 21st century”, She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and References 75 Michala Lipková, Barbara Predan Questions Raised by Design CIP - Kataložni zapis o publikaciji Narodna in univerzitetna knjižnica, Ljubljana Published by Pekinpah Association, represented by Žiga Predan, MA and Faculty of Architecture, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, represented by prof. Ing. arch. Pavel Gregor, PhD. 7.05 711.2 Publication Authors: Michala Lipková, Barbara Predan Foreword by: Boštjan Bugarič Exhibition introduction by: Matevž Breznikar English translation: Tadej Rosa, Jezikovna zadruga Soglasnik English proofreading by: Fiona Thompson, Jezikovna zadruga Soglasnik Design: Chmela I www.chmelastudio.com Photographs: Aleš Rosa and authors Edition: 50 pieces Publication is free of charge Exhibition Location: Avtomatik Delovišče, Nazorjev trg 5, Koper, Slovenia Exhibition date: 17 February–12 March 2020 Participating students: Dea Beatovikj, Matevž Breznikar, Tino Duralija, Deja Kofol, Martin Pevec, Pami Prevolnik, Valeska Rimele, Jon Schwarzmann, Žiga Žalec (1st year, Industrial Design Master Programme, Academy of Fine Arts and Design, University of Ljubljana) Graphic Design: Tino Duralija, Jon Schwarzmann Design of the Mind Map: Jovana Đukić, Ada Silva, Aljaž Mrak Mentor: Assist. Prof. Barbara Predan Head of the Project: dr. Boštjan Bugarič English proofreading by: Fiona Thompson, Jezikovna zadruga Soglasnik Co-producers: Academy of Fine Arts and Design of the University of Ljubljana, KUD C3 (with the financial support of the Centre for Creativity), Pekinpah Association (with the financial support of the Municipality of Ljubljana) Thanks: Ilija Andreevski, Jure Miklavc, Maja Koser Pevec, Metod Pevec, Peter Pulin, Luka Susič, Nejc Stupan, Amadej Tauses, Jo Zornik Workshop Location: Avtomatik Delovišče, Nazorjev trg 5, Koper, Slovenia Workshop date: 17–21 February 2020 Lecturer: Assist. Prof. Barbara Predan, Academy of Fine Arts and Design, University of Ljubljana Guest lecturer: dr. Michala Lipková, Faculty of Architecture, Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava Project leads: dr. Boštjan Bugarič, Avtomatik Delovišče Participating students: Dea Beatovikj, Matevž Breznikar, Tino Duralija, Deja Kofol, Martin Pevec, Valeska Rimele, Jon Schwarzmann, Žiga Žalec (1st year, Industrial Design Master Programme, Academy of Fine Arts and Design, University of Ljubljana) Co-producers: Academy of Fine Arts and Design of the University of Ljubljana, KUD C3 (with the financial support of the Centre for Creativity), Pekinpah Association (with the financial support of the Municipality of Ljubljana) Ljubljana 2020 © The authors LIPKOVÁ, Michala Questions raised by design / Michala Lipková, Barbara Predan ; [foreword by Boštjan Bugarič ; exhibition introduction by Matevž Breznikar ; English translation by Tadej Rosa ; photographs Aleš Rosa and authors]. - Ljubljana : Pekinpah Association ; Bratislava : Faculty of Architecture, Slovak University of Technology, 2020 ISBN 978-961-94078-7-5 (Društvo Pekinpah) 1. Predan, Barbara COBISS.SI-ID 23060739 Scopus Author ID Lipkova, Michala: 57215670933 Predan, Barbara: 15058236900 ORCID iD Lipkova, M.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2584-618X Predan, B.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0765-4571 Questions Raised by Design 77 Dr. Michala Lipkova graduated in Product Design from the University of Technology in Bratislava and interned in the field of industrial and automotive design (University of Southern Denmark, Škoda Auto, Plastic Omnium). Since 2013, she has been leading the NGO that coordinates the exhibition project Flowers for Slovakia. She has worked for several years as a researcher at the Faculty of Architecture in Bratislava, which is also where she obtained her doctorate. In her work, she focuses on researching design education and user-centred product design. She currently leads product design studio at Slovak University of Technology in Bratislava, focused on transferring academic research to commercial practice. Dr. Barbara Predan is a theorist and lecturer, co-founder of the Pekinpah Association and the head of its design theory section; she also co-founded the Institute of Design, an academic research organization, where she has been the director since 2014, and the international design association CODEC. She has published professional and scholarly articles in Design Issues, Design Principles and Practices, The international journal of design in society, Filozofski vestnik, Dialogi, ČKZ, 2+3D, Oris, and Piranesi, among others. She has authored or co-authored six and edited ten books. She was also the author and curator of 20 exhibitions. Since 2009 she has been teaching The History and Theory of Design and Service design classes at the Industrial Design and Applied Arts Department at the Academy of Fine Arts and Design, University of Ljubljana, in addition to regularly lecturing at international academic and professional conferences. Questions Raised by Design 78