Once upon a time, while in college, I began researching Sustainable Design. At that time, it came in the form of a summer research project in London, with the results contained in one of my previous blogging attempts. I never felt quite satisfied with my research, I think in part because it really was the seedling idea for this current, more
comprehensive project, but also because I never quite concluded it.Last summer, in an attempt to calm some self-criticism, I returned to my thoughts and notes from the original research, and mapped out what I had learned. The mapping, done on a giant piece of newsprint, has been hanging on my wall since February, and I finally determined the time was ripe for another version, a public version. The results are contained in the following essay.
Sustainable Design
Let us first discuss the broad subject of design. Pulling on my good friend, Wikipedia, design can be formally understood as, ‘a specification of an object, manifested by an agent, intended to accomplish goals, in a particular environment, using a set of primitive components, satisfying a set of requirements, subject to constraints.’ While this can apply to a particular thing: say the architectural plan for a house, lets consider it in slightly broader terms, as the discipline of design. As a discipline, the ‘manifesting agents’ are designers, in the broad understanding as ‘someone who designs.’ This may be a trained designer, an architect, an engineer, a scientist ‘designing’ an experiment, you – designing a solution to your CD tray needing to be propped up in one corner to play correctly. All of these people can be considered designers: at its core, design is about problem solving. While our formal definition of design declares ‘specification of an object,’ it really can move beyond just physical things: designers generate ideas, make things, work on services (Check out thinkpublic, who I worked with a couple days in that original project), create experiences (neils peter flint), or perhaps designing whole communities or systems. Basically, the design process can be applied for all scales of problems. In that last statement, I touch on an important part of design: it is a process. Not all design processes are the same, in fixing the CD tray, we go through most of that process in our head, and the problem is relatively simple. The more complex the problem, the more complicated or challenging the intended goals, requirements, and constraints are, the longer the design process becomes. But basically, the process can be broken down into the following (sometimes non-linear) processes: state the problem. Break the problem down into its component parts, keeping in mind links between these parts. Determine the context of the problem. State the goals. Determine the requirements and restraints of the solution. Brainstorm and model solutions. See how they work and re-design. The collective thinking of Wikipedia once again kicks my ass, summing up the process into research, thinking, modeling, interactive adjustment, and re-design. In almost all cases, design is people oriented, and attempts to better the object, service, or community to make it easier to use, better looking, more efficient, etc. etc. for the people interacting with it.
So know that we know about what the design process is, lets consider the people doing the designing. As we already know, inherent in design is problem solving. The other core characteristic of design is the element of artistry or craftsmanship, which introduces subjectivism into the mix. Looking to not only solve the problem, the design usually involves some ‘higher values’ by which to judge success, traditionally values addressing aesthetics. In actuality, the flexibility and variety of potential value sets makes design a cross-discipline skill. Returning to the role of designers, larger scale design processes often involve interdisciplinary work, with many people contributing specialized knowledge, and in this situation, a professionally trained designer can play a translator role. Through the process, designers are decision makers, prioritizing requirements, deciding where to make compromises. Through design, designers can affect peoples self-perception, change their sense of responsibility towards a thing or system, and can enhance engagement. In this way, designers can be visionaries and agents of change… which brings us to sustainability.
As I’ve come to understand, sustainability is a vision for the future characterized by ecological respect, responsible economic development, and social equality. From this vision stems the value set by which we can decide good design from bad design. Sustainability, as by the Brundtland Commission of the United Nations, “sustainable development is development that meets the needs the of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” This sounds great but difficulties arise when people start figuring out the details. Conflicting interests, differing opinions concerning method, how to compromise, what consequences may result – the specifics of the value set become more difficult to determine.
Many groups are working to create value sets, usually in specific sectors of society. LEED, for example, works to create a green building code and certify the sustainability of buildings. EnergyStar ratings on appliances and the USDA Organic seal on your pear could also be considered manifestations of an effort to design a more sustainable community. These marking or brandings are also important educational systems for American consumers, and allow us to make more informed decisions.
I worked for a group, [re]design, for a couple of days during my summer research. They create public sustainable design exhibitions in London, and have also put together a sustainable design booklet, offering designers multiple strategies by which to make products more sustainable. Major aspects for consideration are observing the entire life-cycle of a product, considering materials, making the product more user friendly. In the case of Thinkpublic, who use design to improve social services, it’s the application that makes it ‘sustainable design.’
Unfortunately, while designers can use their products to educate the public and make positive change, everyone I talked with admitted that design education will need to change too. Apparently in most design programs, the sustainable value set isn’t even discussed. Fortunately, these designers also said that awareness was increasing, as it is in the general public.
My sound bite conclusion: Sustainable design is design attending to problems or issues currently challenging our vision for a lasting, healthy future and measuring its success based on priorities determined by that vision.
I would greatly appreciate feedback on this post, especially any questions that you have, or areas you would like me to discuss further.
Posts
