design- & innovation activism for social change - 2015
DESCRIPTION
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.TRANSCRIPT
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. 9 MICHAEL LODBERG OLSEN, “DE FRIVILLIGE” 2012.
FIG. 10 MICHAEL LODBERG OLSEN, “DE FRIVILLIGE” 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.
8 | D&IASC | understanding design activism
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.
D&IASC | understanding design activism | 9
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.
10 | D&IASC | understanding design activism
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.
D&IASC | understanding design activism | 11
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.
12 | D&IASC | understanding design activism
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.
D&IASC | understanding design activism | 13
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.
FIG. 9 Michael Lodberg Olsen, “De frivillige” 2012.
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. 10 Michael Lodberg Olsen, “De frivillige” 2012.
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.