Visuals from 2030
This blog reflects the 07 weeks that I worked on the unit of Design futures in collaboration with the London borough of Southwark at M.A. Service Design, University of Arts London.
The London Borough of Southwark Council had declared a climate emergency in March 2019 and wants to accelerate its target of making Southwark carbon neutral by 2050 to 2030. (Climate emergency, 2021)
The U.K. government set this goal after signing the Paris Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change. It was adopted by 196 Parties at COP 21 in Paris on 12 December 2015 and entered into force on 4 November 2016. Its goal is to limit global warming to well below 2, preferably to 1.5 degrees Celsius, compared to pre-industrial levels. The Paris Agreement is a landmark in the multilateral climate change process because, for the first time, a binding agreement brings all nations into a common cause to undertake ambitious efforts to combat climate change and adapt to its effects. (UNCC, n.d.).
The collaboration between the council and the cohort of M.A. Service design happened to explore the possibility of multiple futures and see what a preferred future would/can look like for the borough. We, a team of 3 Service Designers (Dixita, Nirali, Sohana), set out to explore those possibilities for the industry of Energy and Construction.
Approach
Research through Design (RtD), in my opinion, is a design methodology that moves design from the shinny pedestal of a finished concept that appears at the end of a process to an artifact that you use to generate provocation and inform the future direction for research. In other words, this methodology uses Design as a way to generate knowledge; it uses design as a mere resource to manufacture new knowledge. The term finds its origins in a paper by Christopher Frayling in 1993 in which he made the distinction between Research into, through, and for art and Design. (Frayling, 1993) In the book ‘Design Research through Practise, Koskinen et al.’ argued that RtD could be practised in 3 ways- from Lab, Field, and Showroom. (Koskinen et al., 2011)
They described RtD from laboratory comes to design through psychology, where the aim is “to identify relationships that designers might find interesting” and using it to provide a solid ground for Design.(Koskinen et al., 2011 P.51)
RtD from field is described as a process in which researchers follow what happens to design in a place where some part of a design is supposed to be used. (Koskinen et al., 2011 P.69) This is a typical methodology used by Service Design practitioners, further refined as human-centered design. Research is conducted through design ethnography, journey maps, and other primary and secondary research techniques to hence Design. This process is a more practical approach to solving problems and informs solutions that can be implemented today.
Lastly, RtD from showroom binds on art and design rather than on science or the social sciences. Research is presented on shops, windows, exhibitions, and galleries. (Koskinen et al., 2011 P.89) This methodology has been most influential in the Critical Speculative Design practise. As described by Dunne and Rabbi, in the book Speculative Everything (Dunne. and Raby, 2013)
“Speculative Design is a form of Design that thrives on imagination and aims to open up new perspectives on what are sometimes called wicked problems, to create spaces for discussion and debate about alternative ways of being, and to inspire and encourage people’s imaginations to flow freely. Design speculations can act as a catalyst for collectively redefining our relationship to reality.”
In the Design Future unit, we explored a design methodology that was a hybrid of RtD from field and showroom, the showroom being the dominant one. Tackling the wicked problem of climate change, we used artifacts and scenarios as provocations to spark conversations and let the feedback dictate the next critical step in the process. But as Service Designers utilizing this methodology, we tried to keep the artifacts in the context and people we were designing for. After defining a preferable future for the borough, we also did the backcasting process, where we tried to understand what can we do today to attain the future we had speculated.
The beginning
Whenever asked to think about the future, my young, optimistic mind very quickly wandered into various elements of utopia from an idealistic world. Having survived through the craziness the pandemic brought to us in 2020 and its escalation in 2021 made me wonder if Roland Emmerich, the director of the American science fiction film 2012, had dyslexia? Did he mean 2021 and not 2012!? The scientists and engineers from the 2000s wouldn’t have predicted 2020 as it is today. Then what went wrong? The predictions made purely out of technological and resource points of view often try to pin a future down. But in my opinion, that is one of the most absurd things to do because there is no one future. The events of the future are dependent on the actions, behavior, and policies we design today. It is almost like the theory of the butterfly effect. As described by Dunne and Rabbi in the cone of various possible futures fanning out from the present, we as designers need to carefully craft the preferable future by asking the right questions and actively involving the people we are speculating the preferable future for in the conversations.
To begin speculating the future, it was essential to cover our bases by looking at the horizon. We analysed the topic through various lenses like- community, politics, technology, etc., as visible in the image.
The deep dive led us to the following main insights.
- The global energy system must undergo a profound transformation, from one largely based on fossil fuels to one that enhances efficiency and is based on renewable energy. Such a global energy transformation — seen as the culmination of the “energy transition” that is already happening in many countries — can create a world that is more prosperous and inclusive. (Global energy transformation, 2018, P.8)
- Four in five (82%) people in the U.K. surveyed support the commitment to reach net-zero by 2050. However, only over a third (38%) are aware they need to change the way their home is heated. Of those who know they will need to change their heating system and are prepared to do so, 76% say they’d need advice or financial support such as grants. People are willing to change their homes and lifestyles to reach net zero, but they need support. (Decarbonisation, n.d.)
- The decarbonisation of the grid would result in the loss of 7.4 million jobs in fossil fuels by 2050, but 19.0 million new jobs would be created in renewable energy, energy efficiency, and grid enhancement and energy flexibility, for a net gain of 11.6 million jobs. To meet the human resource requirements of renewable energy and energy efficiency sectors in rapid expansion, education and training policies would need to meet the skill needs of these sectors and maximising local value creation. (Global energy transformation, 2018, P.12)
- The Southwark Council wants to speed up the process of electrification of the borough and retrofit all houses with heat pumps, eliminating the use of natural gas.
Apart from collecting data, the purpose of horizon scanning was also to acquire enough knowledge to make sense out of the brief, acknowledge the current developments, predict future trends and also get a bird’s eye view of how politics, technology, policy, etc. are interdependent and where the fall-outs are. Keeping all the information in mind, we decided to explore how we can accelerate the transition from fossil fuels to clean sources to produce energy.
What if..
As a service designer, my first instinct after gaining some knowledge about the subject was to jump on to High might we question, looking for direct and practical ways to solve the problem at hand. Using speculative design methodology, we asked ‘what if’ questions. The purpose behind it was to provocate further conversations. To push the boundary of imagination, let our minds think beyond the realm of the practicality of today and into the possibilities of the future. To critically analysed the solutions thrown onto us in the form of technology and policies by MNCs and government and observe them through the hopes and fear of the people dealing with those solutions. As described by Dunne and Rabbi, in the book Speculative Everything,
“on the most basic level it is about questioning underlying assumptions in the design itself, on the next level it is directed at the technology industry and its market-driven limitations, and beyond that, general social theory, politics, and ideology.“’ ”(Dunne. and Raby, 2013, p.35)
Horizon scanning led us to some obvious what-if questions like, what if the entire borough of Southwark was only powered by renewable energy? What if individuals could produce and regulate the energy they use? What if students were made the advocate for the transition to carbon-free sources of energy? These initial questions almost felt like our pre-mature predictions for a preferred future of the borough. We decided them in the form of a newspaper to observe what conversations could the headlines from Southwark 2050 sparked.
We used the Speculative design methodology to make predictions for the preferable future but failed to recognise the service designer’s job here. The newspaper thought held all the critical events that could define the future of energy production and consumption in Southwark. I felt we failed to bring up the nuisances of the future. We did not think about how the humans of that time would interact with the treads. Though we were successful in collecting the data to build a narrative for the future, we lacked on the human interactions bit.
The Process
Following the process of RtD, we moved ahead and developed various artifacts from the future. The idea was not to invest time into finished prototypes but to use a ‘work in progress’ prototype to show the audience and used reactions as feedback to move forward in the unit.
As the quotation from Stappers found in the book ‘Design through Research’ aptly describes, (Koskinen et al., 2011 P.60)
“The designing act of creating prototypes is in itself a potential generator of knowledge”
Iteration Round 1
We conducted the first round of iteration did the first round of iterations based on three provocations.
#1 What if the Educational Institute of Southwark were to take part in the process of building awareness for energy conservation in Southwark?
#2 What if People could easily track their carbon emissions by their daily activities to make informed decisions?
#3 What if energy production was decentralised, and the residents could produce the energy they would use to power their house?
After showing the objects from 3 possible scenarios to our tutor and classmates, the gap I felt while crafting the newspaper was more visible. I realised that we had recognised the future trends but, instead of using them as provocations to explore how humans would interact with those scenarios, our Service Designer brain pushed us into the technical details of how it would work out.
Nevertheless, we chose to explore the concept of education and up-skilling further because that provocation generated some discussions around, Who needs to get educated? How will education affect behavior?
Iteration Round 2
What if all coal power stations in the U.K. shut down?
- People will lose their jobs from many coal-dependent sectors.
- There will be a need for a platform that can help up-skill those unemployed due to radical changes in policies.
- Many other carbon-intensive industries will look for ways to survive.
- Creation of new, radical “green” roles that will be highly valued in recruitment.
The provocation remained that we need to switch to clean energy sources, which meant we might have to shut down the old carbon-intensive ways. But coal power stations employ thousands of people. What will happen to their jobs if they are shut?
After sharing our artifacts with our tutors, colleagues, and Tom from Southwark Council, we recognised that our provocation could not establish a direct link with residents of Southwark. We were reactive and not proactive. We displayed the dystopia from the preferable future and then later tried to design them out. The conversations it created were more about the fear it would cause and less about the opportunity of the service and its impact we were proposing in the future. As discussed in the book’ speculative Everything’, it is the backdrop and values of the society in a story that is interesting and not the narrative, plot, and characters.(Dunne. and Raby, 2013, p.75)
On testing out our concepts with local residents and at the London Bridge job center, we felt the artifacts we developed were more ‘nice to have’ but not ‘must have’ in our speculated future. Also, the people we spoke to did not represent the demographics of Southwark. In the attempt to narrate the story of Rita, we missed who Rita is in the Question still was, Who is this future preferable for?
The Final Pivot
What if All Construction and Energy professionals had to be proficient in green & sustainable approaches to energy and construction?
What if the use of clean energy was the norm?
Shifting from gas boilers to heat pumps is a key to reach the cabin neural goal, but gas engineers in the U.K. are installing 1.6 million gas boilers per year for 30,000 heat pumps a year. (Energy Live News, 2021)
#Provocation 1
What if the new Carbon Safe Register is developed, which makes it mandatory for all the professionals (plumbers, electricians, architects, etc.) directly involved in the energy and construction domain to only suggest more sustainable or carbon-free options to the residents?
#Provocation 2
What if universities in Southwark were incentivised to prepare and host short courses that could upskill the professionals working in the industry and create more green jobs?
#Provocation 3
What if the professions who take up these up-skilling courses were provided with a green quality check at platforms (e.g., task rabbit) where residents look to book an appointment.
Testing
While testing this concept with stakeholders, some of the interesting feedback we got to hear-
“When I was moving houses, I asked for an electrified kitchen, but the technician did not know how to do that, and even I had very little knowledge about it, so eventually I settled for Gas.”
-Local Resident
“People expect us to know all about the new kinds of appliances in the market, but we stick to what we know and have been doing for years. “
-Chris, Building Electrician
“It also fits in nicely with our construction skills center — we have targets around ‘green jobs,’ and this up-skilling would be a great way of expanding the center.”
-Council member
The concept we were proposing was fitting in the safe space for the authorities; it aligned with their future goals. The conversations around how can a local body make a ‘carbon safe’ mark a legal requirement for all the professionals-where they are legally required to offer carbon-free options? I think that the concept was not far into the future and looked close to the implication. It fit in the council’s comfort zone. In my opinion, one reason for the failure of our concept to spark thought-provoking conversation was our lack of concrete testing with stakeholders. In retrospection, the provocation was almost a last-minute pivot- we did not engage with enough professionals to understand their opinion over having to go through new up-skilling courses to remain relevant in an industry they worked in all their lives? Retrofitting sustainable measures might come up with upfront costs or increased electricity bills for the borough residents; what could the council do to mitigate such financial strains on the residents?
As bland and Westlake stated in their report, ‘Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow,’
“Innovation starts with a story about the future. imagining and sharing desires and fears about the futures is a way for all of us to shape it”. (Nesta, 2013, P.20)
What we came up with was the start of the story, research through design methodology is always a learning process, you learn through every artifact created, every artifact opens up an avenue for new conversations.
Parting note
RtD is not a linear, straightforward process; it can get messy at times and frustrating at others. Every artifact created informs the future of the project. Sometimes it felt like we were not progressing, but only toward the end did I understand that there is no shiny finish to the unit, the process is the solution.
Designing for the future is tricky because there is no one defined future. The future is determined by the choices we make today. In my opinion, climate change is not an issue to solve in a day or by a local body. Contrary to the usual service design methodology; this unit was not about finding any solutions; it was about exposing the problem and asking concrete questions.The idea was to use the future as a tool to understand the present better and to discuss the kind of future people want and don’t want. The future usually take the form of scenarios, often starting with a what-if question, and are intended to open up spaces of debate and discussion; therefore, they are by necessity provocative, intentionally simplified, and fictional(Dunne. and Raby, 2013, p.3)
As Service Designers, I see myself as the moderator between the understanding of what people want, the ones who develop the technology for them, and those who make policy around it. The life-centered approach and the innate optimism that service designers carry would inform the preferred future and help build a roadmap to attain the same; the behavior, the actions, and the societal changes that we need to ban amplify or create today and bring in the radical change we envision for tomorrow. Thanks to this unit, I no more see the perfect future in flying cars or immortal human beings, but in a fair society and a healthy lifestyle.
The quote from the book Change by Design (Brown and Kātz, 2018, P.111) summarises my learning-
A successful prototype is not that works flawlessly; it is one that teaches us something about our objectives, our process, and ourselves.
References
- Brown, T. and Kātz, B. (2018) Change by design. HarperCollins e-books, p. 111.
- Climate emergency (2021). Available at: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/environment/climate-emergency?chapter=2 (Accessed: 14 May 2021).
- Decarbonisation (no date). Available at: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/about-us/our-work/our-campaigns/all-our-current-campaigns/decarbonisation/ (Accessed: 12 May 2021).
- Dunne., A. and Raby, F. (2013) Speculative everything : design, fiction, and social dreaming. London: MI T Press.
- Frayling, C. (1993) Research in Art and Design, Researchonline.rca.ac.uk. Available at: https://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/384/3/frayling_research_in_art_and_design_1993.pdf (Accessed: 12 May 2021).
- GLOBAL ENERGY TRANSFORMATION (2018). https://www.irena.org/publications/2018/Apr/Global-Energy-Transition-A-Roadmap-to-2050, pp. P.8, P.11.
- Group of energy suppliers call for urgent reforms to deliver green heat goals — Energy Live News (2021). Available at: https://www.energylivenews.com/2021/04/29/group-of-energy-suppliers-call-for-urgent-reforms-to-deliver-green-heat-goals/ (Accessed: 10 May 2021).
- Koskinen, L. et al. (2011). Elsevier Inc.
- Nesta (2013) Don’t stop thinking about tomorrow. Available at: https://media.nesta.org.uk/documents/dont_stop_thinking_about_tomorrow.pdf (Accessed: 19 May 2021).
- (no date) Unfccc.int. Available at: https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement (Accessed: 4 May 2021).
