Interpretations of Sustainability in the Field of Human-Computer Interaction Design: a Systematic Review

(1)

Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 108

Interpretations of Sustainability in the Field of Human-Computer Interaction Design: a Systematic Review

Interpretations of Sustainability in the Field of Human-Computer

Interaction Design: a Systematic Review

Maria Cecilia Brito R.

Uppsala University, Department of Earth Sciences Master Thesis E, in Sustainable Development, 30 credits

Printed at Department of Earth Sciences,

Master’s Thesis

(2)

Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 108

Interpretations of Sustainability in the Field of Human-Computer Interaction Design: a Systematic Review

Maria Cecilia Brito R.

Supervisor: Mikael Wiberg

Evaluator: Else Nygren

(3)

(4)

Content

1. Introduction... 1

1.1 Aim of the study ... 3

1.2 Previous studies ... 3

2. Problem and research questions... 5

3. Theoretical framework... 6

3.1 A formal framework for conceptions of sustainability... 6

3.2 A redirection of design towards sustainability ... 7

4. Methods – qualitative methods ... 9

4.1 Analysis of documents and materials ... 9

4.2 Criteria for search and selection of documents ... 9

4.3 Disassemble data – structured textual analysis... 10

4.3.1 Part A and part B ... 10

4.3.2 Part C - sustainability focus... 10

4.3.3 Part D – design focus... 11

5. Results ... 12

5.1 Results part A and B... 12

5.2 Results part C ... 12

5.3 Results part D ... 21

5.4 Relation between results... 26

5.4.1 Relation between results of part A and part B... 26

5.4.2 Relation between results of the questions in part C... 26

5.4.3 Relation between results of the questions in part D ... 28

6. Discussion... 29

6.1 Energy, digital technology and Blevis’s input to sustainable design ... 29

6.2 Further implications related to the conception of sustainability ... 30

6.3 Energy management systems, data visualization to support sustainable behaviour ... 30

6.4 Expanding views towards bigger systems... 31

6.5 Systems thinking in design methodologies ... 32

7. Conclusions... 33

8. References... 34

9. Appendix... 37

Appendix I. Model of the questionnaire elaborated for structured textual analysis... 38

Appendix II. Collected data on 27 documents ... 40

(5)

List of figures, tables and graphs

Figures

Figure 1. Formal framework for conceptions of sustainability ... 6

Tables

Table 1. Results part A and B ... 13

Table 2. Results part C ... 14

Table 3. Results part D ... 22

Graphs

Graph 1. Summary of results question 1 ... 18

(6)

Interpretations of sustainability in the field of Human-Computer Interaction design: a systematic review

M^ARIAC^ECILIAB^RITOR.

Brito, M. C., 2012: Interpretations of sustainability in the field of Human-Computer Interaction design: a systematic review. Master thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, No. 108, 94 pp, 30 ECTS/hp

Abstract:

Focusing in the importance of the sustainability discourse in the field of design, this qualitative study reviews how Human-Computer Interaction designers have addressed sustainability issues in their written works. For this, a structured textual analysis was used in order to filter out the main ideas related to key elements when constructing formal conceptions of sustainable development. The results show which elements have been determinant in these discourses but also how influential are these for the actual outcomes in design. Finally, the discussion gathers around the possibilities to strengthen this discourse as well as opening new directions for Human-Computer Interaction design.

Keywords: sustainable development, design, human-computer interaction, interaction design, interpretations of sustainability, sustainable design

Maria Cecilia Brito R., Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, SE- 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden

(7)

Interpretations of sustainability in the field of Human-Computer Interaction design: a systematic review

M^ARIAC^ECILIAB^RITOR.

Brito, M. C., 2012: Interpretations of sustainability in the field of Human-Computer Interaction design: a systematic review. Master thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, No. 108, 94 pp, 30 ECTS/hp

Summary:

Since the introduction of sustainable development in 1987, sustainability has been a topic of great importance for several disciplines and the academia in general. This interest promoted the study of this concept, together with the possibilities of interpretation, use and application according to each discipline’s interests. However, due to the broad initial concept of sustainable development, nowadays we count with a variety of vague conceptions of sustainability that hinders the guiding-capacity of this concept. Scholars devoted to the study of sustainability claim the importance of formal conceptions in order to avoid arbitrariness but mostly to build-up a strong concept that will direct effective actions.

Besides sustainability, it is also important the field in which this concept is studied. Following this, Human- Computer Interaction design plays a crucial role in the present societies due to its development along with technological devices and the inherent user’s relation with these artifacts. Therefore, the intersection between sustainability in Human-Computer Interaction design establishes priorities, values and directions towards present and future outcomes in this area.

The Human-Computer Interaction community has already discussed sustainability from both theoretical and practical perspectives. The discourses, although diverse, have marked certain paths and areas of interest.

However, which are the most important elements that have determined the interpretation of sustainability in the way it is? This is one of the questions that are addressed in this study. As a method, this qualitative study will use a structured textual analysis based on the key elements for the construction of a formal conception of sustainability. Besides looking into the structure of a complete interpretation, the collected information will also help to identify determinant factors and specific areas of interest for Human-Computer Interaction designers.

Moreover, the findings will help to indicate which are the most influential factors when delineating a path towards sustainability. Finally, the study will discuss options to strengthen the understanding and development of a solid conception of sustainability for both the theory and practice of Human-Computer Interaction design.

Keywords: sustainable development, design, human-computer interaction, interaction design, interpretations of sustainability, sustainable design

Maria Cecilia Brito, Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University, Villavägen 16, SE- 752 36 Uppsala, Sweden

(8)

1. Introduction

During the last decades, sustainable development has been one of the biggest challenges for humanity.

According to the Brundtland report (WCED, 1987), sustainable development is defined as “the development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the abilities of future generations to meet their own needs”.

Initially, this concept attributed the origin of the present environmental problems to 2 main factors: the high poverty levels of the countries from the South and the current levels of consumption and production of the countries from the North (Kemp and Martens, 2007, p. 5). From this point of view, environmental problems could not be solved without also caring about the global poverty levels, being these two crucial challenges towards a new type of development that the concept aimed (Ibid).

The attempts to use the Brundtland report concept brought models such as ‘the three pillars of sustainability’, in which economy, environment and society were identified as the 3 most important influential factors for the definition towards balanced global futures challenges (UN, 2008, p. 19). Over the years, this model evolved to the integration of other factors that, due to different interpretations, contexts and interests. Besides, different perspectives have also expanded the view of sustainability with the purpose to envision this concept systematically.

This definition stated in 1987 was the starting point for a series of strategies and agreements that encouraged different actors in society to take action towards a sustainable time to come. Despite the multiple actions based on this concept, it has received a lot of critique since it is said to be an imprecise definition (Robinson, 2004, p.

370). The ambiguity of the meaning of sustainable development opened the arena for academics to explore diverse interpretations but also for public and private institutions and persons in general to find an appropriate meaning connected with their interests and values.

Regarding academia, several research efforts have been made within different disciplines with the purpose to set the key issues that sustainable development brings to their fields of study. Within the field of Arts, design is not an exemption. An exploration of sustainability within design started around 1990’s when Victor Papanek looked into the critical issues that sustainability brought to the practice of design (Papanek, 1995). Taking into account environmental concerns is stated as an ecological responsibility that a designer should assume (Ibid, p. 9).

Furthermore, Papanek also remarks the ethical dilemma that designers face when looking into sustainable alternatives for the practice of design (Ibid, p. 70).

Together with him, other authors also examined possibilities both in a philosophical way but also in a practical one. Designers gathered around the extensive approach that sustainability demanded, giving attention not only for ecological concerns but also to social, cultural and economic ones. The systemic view started to be essential for sustainability in design. There was a need to put attention to other factors besides the ones that the design methodologies already included. As mentioned before, a need to include systems from other dimensions such as social, cultural, political, technological, economical, to name a few, was a new challenge for designers. As an example of this, David Orr (2002) remarks the importance to connect science and arts with politics and economics when talking about ecological design.

Other philosophical studies appointed to the elaboration of principles and theories, which act as guides towards the achievement of sustainability goals but still opened to multiple interpretations and applications. Related to principles, these intended to recognize the interdependence between humanity and nature; understand the consequences and limitations of design; seek for a constant improvement on knowledge for sustainable design (McDonough & Partners, 2000). In the case of theories, some of these based their interpretation on looking at nature as a source of inspiration for sustainable designs (Benyus, 2002). Others looked into more psychological benefits that the integration of nature in human environments could bring (Kellert, Heerwagen, Mador, 2008).

The challenge to integrate sustainability faced also the strong connection that design has with industrial processes. Different strategies were developed in this area, such as the Cradle-to-Cradle perspective, which has been one of the most important contributions in design theory. This theory was a response to the emerging environmental problems due to the industrial processes (McDonough and Braungart, 2002, p. 37-39). This philosophy of design and sustainability proposed a view of the industrial processes as closed cycles where materials used in the processes are reintegrated in the system once they have accomplished their function in the cycle (Ibid, p. 104). Together with this theory, assessment methods were developed to evaluate manufacturing processes in relation to the mitigation of environmental impacts (EPA, 2012). As a result of this, strategies such as eco-design practices should be applied to improve industrial operations.

(9)

Design has continuously been integrated with science and this is the case of Human-Computer Interaction (HCI¹). According to David Benyon (2005; 2010) “designing interactive systems is concerned with developing high-quality interactive systems, products and services that fit with people and their ways of living” (Benyon, 2010, p. 7). HCI design deals with the possibilities of interaction between people, artifacts and contexts (Ibid, p.

10). Together with this, HCI design also combines different sciences such as computer sciences, behavioral and cognitive sciences, turning this field to be complex for the design practice.

Several factors define the practice of HCI design in the present time. The user and following this, usability, marks a user-centered context of analysis and action (Moggridge, 2007, p. 59). Around this, methodologies manage variables related to the experience and expectations of the user, establishing results according to the efficiency to match the user’s satisfaction (Ibid p. 89). A user-centered approach has been one of the pivotal elements in the practice of HCI design because it brings insights for systems, which will be accepted and will satisfy the people needs (Benyon, 2005, p. 24). This interaction between user and the digital artifact finds its way in the form of graphic interfaces and functional computational systems (Wiberg and Robles, 2010). Along with the interactivity, materiality is part of the practice of design, when talking about the material components of digital objects, which are the ones that define shape, structure and durability of the object (Jung, Blevis and Stolterman, 2010.)

Digital technology brings multiple opportunities for HCI design. The users’ demands of this technology opened the arena for multifunctional devices, such is the case of ubiquitous computing, that integrates different information and computational systems in objects used in for daily personal and work activities (Weis and Craiger, 2002, p. 44). Besides, the rapid and constant development of technology demands innovation also in interactive systems, especially when priorities shift towards portability, connectivity, aesthetics and behavior (Moggridge, 2007, p. 248-301). Digital technology is shaping forms of communication in society while HCI design defines human behavior in relation to these digital systems (Ibid).

When talking about the power of technology, P. P. Verbeek (2011, p. 69) states that technology has the capacity to normalize, manage and shape individuals through everyday practices, regulating our ways of behavior. Going further, these also maintain the society working along with what technology directs (Ibid). However, Verbeek also states that technology should not be taken as intrusive element but as a factor that needs to be reviewed in terms of the purpose it has in the current societies (Ibid, p. 155). Moreover, the new global challenges, such as the sustainability ones, demand new perspectives to be developed.

The more the new ways of development are needed, the bigger the challenges are, and HCI designers have already put their interest in working towards sustainability and a balanced common future. During the last years, this community has established a variety of discussions and research looking for possible ways to integrate sustainability requirements in their practice. One of the important conceptual definitions in relation to sustainability has been elaborated by Elis Blevis in 2007. This perspective called ‘Sustainable Interaction Design’ brought insights related to critical issues in the area of HCI and sustainability (Blevis, 2007). As a brief summary, Blevis define 5 principles: “linking invention and disposal; promoting renewal and reuse; promoting quality and equality; de-coupling ownership and identity; using natural models and reflection” (Ibid, p. 503- 504). These principles relate some important aspects in the practice of HCI design such as material qualities, life- cycle of digital products, use and reuse, to name a few (Ibid, p. 505-509). Blevis’s contribution for sustainability has been very important for the HCI community; however, designers are continuously working on the expansion on their actions and results.

Despite the validity of the intentions of designers, as well as professionals from other disciplines, scholars in the field of sustainability discuss the lack of fundament that most of the interpretations of sustainability have nowadays. One of the identified causes is the broad initial concept of sustainable development that gives the opportunity for diverse interpretations; specifically of what does it means ‘need’, ‘development’ in the context of sustainable development (Redclift, 2006, p. 67). Each of these 2 terms has a different meaning depending on the social, cultural or economic context and priorities. Moreover, these ‘needs’ are not the same for the present and for the future generations (Ibid). Finally, the current actions that are connected with sustainability might not get near of what sustainable development really demands (Ibid).

Wolfgang Sachs (1999, p. 31) states the importance of recognizing the different demands the developed and developing countries have, which greatly differ ones from others. Moreover, this author argues that the concept

1 From now on in this study, I will use the acronym HCI when referring to Human-Computer Interaction.

(10)

of ‘development’ embodies the dilemma between the current forms of development versus the aimed sustained future. (Ibid, p. 76). Like this, several more arguments evidence the inconsistencies the initial concept of sustainable development has. And along with this, the resulting interpretations or conceptions of sustainability will lack of reliability too.

It is clear that the concept of sustainability demands an extended understanding and it is recognized also the importance to look into the possibilities to improve these conceptions and establish consistent theoretical foundations in relation to what sustainable development should bring for present and future generations. For this, some scholars have already established ways to approach and structure conceptions of sustainability. These opened tools aim to be implemented with the objective to support the task of elaborating conceptions of sustainability. Ideally, they should also include the different elements part of formal interpretations.

As important as conceptions of sustainability are, is also the discourse of HCI designers related to sustainability.

The path towards sustainability demands a holistic and systemic view of the concept of sustainability and an interconnection between all the requirements and dimensions in which sustainability will occur (Kemp, Martens, 2007). Therefore, my study will do a systematic review of the conceptions of sustainability made by HCI designers. After describing the theoretical background and the methodology used to examine the conceptions, the study will continue with the systematic review, followed by the results and the discussion related to the outcomes of the study and the possibilities to enhance the HCI sustainability discourse.

1.1 Aim of the study

The new approaches of sustainability are the reflection of the active participation of designers towards a sustainable future. The importance of a well-based conception of sustainability will definitely reinforce the role of designer in relation to sustainability but also will enhance the possibilities of action towards positive and long- lasting results.

The aim of my study is to strengthen the designer’s sustainability discourse from the point of view of sustainable development. Moreover, my study will connect knowledge related to sustainability that can enhance the future views of this field. Since designers usually direct their efforts towards concrete actions and design results, my study calls for the attention for a well-structured conception and broad understanding of sustainability.

My study will remark the areas in which the interpretation of sustainability could be expanded and consequently bring new insights for the practice of design. By gathering different studies and written documents of HCI design and review all of them from the point of view of sustainability, it will help for the HCI community to find common strengths, weaknesses and opportunities in relation to their own discourses and have an overview of the work they have done so far.

Once more, my contribution lies in bringing knowledge specifically related to sustainable development for the field of design, knowledge that I think is needed and will complement current and possibly future studies in the area of HCI design and sustainability.

Due to my academic profile, that combines design and sustainable development, I have seen the need of a holistic view of sustainability when it comes to the practice of design. By this, designers could build up a strong position in relation to sustainability concerns and act towards a sustained future. To sum up, the utmost goal is a type of development that would let us meet current and future needs.

1.2 Previous studies

Among the HCI documents related to sustainability, there are 2 documents similar to my study. Both collect and systematize the documents related to sustainability, however each one has a different outcome. Moreover, my study differs from those since my systematic review is done from the point of view of sustainability, while those develop a general overview.

The first document named as Mapping the Landscape of sustainable HCI collects and classifies the approaches according to genres, intellectual differences and arising topics (DiSalvo, Sengers and Brynjarsdóttir, 2010). This study elaborates a ‘map’ as the authors call it, of all the approaches made in relation to sustainability until 2010.

In order to do this, the authors review the documents according to the criteria that later takes the authors to classify the documents according to genres, different orientations between papers, and which are the arising

(11)

topics for the HCI community. Through this study, the authors aim to have an overview of approaches of HCI design to sustainability as a guide towards new proposals. Being an initiative towards the construction of sustainability discourses, this mapping looks into the actions and interests that HCI designers have in relation to sustainable development but not into the core of conceptualizations of sustainability in the HCI approaches.

The second study Three environmental discourses in Human-Computer Interaction from Elisabeth Goodman (2009) looks into the documents related to sustainability and HCI design and identifies 3 important environmental discourses within HCI design. Specifically, Goodman looks into how the environmental viewpoints have been elaborated and how influential they have been in the design practice. Similar to DiSalvo et.

al., Goodman categorizes the most relevant contexts of HCI applications. At last, the author brings new ideas to enhance the environmental discourse. Once more, this study looks into the proposals of HCI design and sustainability as discourses but not specifically on how HCI designers have developed this environmental approaches.

(12)

2. Problem and research questions

During the last decade, sustainability has received the attention of the HCI community, being one of the target topics for research. From the initial interest until now, written documentation related to sustainability has increased rapidly. The commitment with such an important issue has resulted in various outcomes, from theoretical definitions, discourses, methodologies and practical projects. Moreover, sustainability has been on the agenda of global conferences and meetings of the community, which have also been the arena to elaborate and discuss common concerns and keep building a basis for future actions and new perspectives.

The task to find possibilities of action is an ongoing task for HCI designers. Proposals of how to achieve sustainability are definitely of great importance and can bring key factors to put forward innovative ideas. But still, one of the remaining difficulties is how to merge the complexity of sustainability with the orientations, methodologies and contexts of HCI design. On one side, the concept of sustainable development demands the integration of aspects in its 3 dimensions: social, economic and environmental (UN, 2012, p. 5). Depending on the context, any of these dimensions may emerge more than the others. Besides, multiple other aspects require to be taken into account such as inter-generational and intra-generational justice, equity and ethics to name a few (Christen and Schmidt, 2011). Along with this, conceptions and interpretations of sustainability turn to be complex as well. Due to the ambiguous initial definition of sustainable development, sustainability conceptions nowadays lack of an extensive understanding of the different factors inherent in this definition. Current interpretations and discourses of sustainability are usually based on assumptions, lacking of scientific foundation and being arbitrarily formulated (Ibid). As a result, they diminish the guiding capacity of the concept of sustainable development, resulting in short-term and unfulfilling solutions.

On the other side, HCI design and interactive systems deal closely with 4 main factors: users, technology, activities and contexts (Benyon, 2005, p. 10). This field explores the phenomena happening between users and technology; the research have a strong fundament on psychological and cognitive theories and accordingly, the methods are mostly centered in the user’s participation (Moggridge, 2007, p. 127). Together with this, the expansion of digital technologies has taken them to develop most of their field of action in that area.

HCI designers have already been active in exploring the possibilities of integrating sustainability in their occupation. However, they may be limited in their work due to sustainability interpretations that lack of enough fundament. Therefore, it is important to look into how these conceptions of sustainability have been done in the field of HCI design, since these discourses are the supporters of the practical actions of these designers.

Moreover, these sustainability discourses will influence the visions and roles for the HCI community.

Therefore, my research questions are:

1. Which are the most important elements that define the interpretation of sustainability made by the HCI community?

2. Which are the most important areas of action for HCI designers related to sustainability?

3. Which are the possibilities to enhance the conception of sustainability towards new challenges for HCI design?

(13)

3. Theoretical framework

In order to look into the conceptions of sustainability and the relation with design, my study will use the following theoretical basis:

• As a guide to gather the information related to the interpretation of sustainability, I will use The formal framework for conceptions of sustainability from Marius Christen and Stephan Schmidt (2011) and,

• When looking into the design aspect, I have used as inspiration the written work related to the practice of design elaborated by Tony Fry (2009).

3.1 A formal framework for conceptions of sustainability

When interpreting sustainability, the results might be diverse and pointing to different sub-aspects within sustainable development. Thus, it is important to see how the factor of sustainability is interpreted in the context of HCI design. Following this, I will use a framework that helps to structure conceptions of sustainability with the purpose to find out which elements have been relevant or not when elaborating sustainability discourses.

Marius Christen and Stephan Schmidt, the authors of A formal framework for conceptions of sustainability – a theoretical contribution to the discourse in sustainable development (2011), define their proposal as a meta- perspective for structuring conceptions of sustainability. The current diversity of sustainability discourses and the resulting arbitrariness in the comprehension of this idea is the starting point for their work (Christen and Schmidt, 2011). Whether the conceptions of sustainability are appropriate or not, the lack of a rational basis leads to intuitive and imprecise interpretations (Ibid.).

As seen in Figure 1 (Formal framework for conceptions of sustainability cited in Christen and Schmidt, 2011, p.

4), the formal framework consists of 5 modules that aim to bring all the elements needed for an appropriate understanding and conception of sustainability. The first module named the sustainability problem is very connected to the perspective the Brundtland report gives in relation to the global devastation of natural resources (WCED 1987, cited in Christen and Schmidt 2011, p. 4), which states “… many forms of development erode the environmental resources upon which they must be based”. The authors identify this as the sustainability problem, being referred to the dilemma of actual and future development due to relations between social and natural systems in which we have based life (Christen and Schmidt, 2011).

Figure 1. Formal framework for conceptions of sustainability cited in Christen and Schmidt, 2011, p. 4

(14)

In order to understand the problem of sustainability, the authors unfold it in 2 more modules: the normative principle of justice and the descriptive principle of integration.

The second module, the normative principle of justice refers to the claim of the right to have a dignified quality of life for every person (Christen and Schmidt, 2011, p. 5). Similar to the first principle, the authors refer to the statement from the Brundtland report saying that “…every human being has the right to live a decent life (WCED 1987, cited in Christen M., Schmidt S., 2011). This principle is an intrinsic motivation and a request to include a theory of justice in the sustainability discourse. The inclusion of this theory of justice goes along with the purpose to set a criterion on the way to ensure the right of a decent life (Ibid). Following this, Christen and Schmidt state that a theory of justice should include 3 components: a theory of distributive and political justice;

universal validity and participation (Ibid). The first one, distributive justice, refers to a fair distribution of goods, while political justice refers to ensure goods that cannot be distributed, as exemplified by Christen and Schmidt, the participation in legal systems (Ibid). The second component refers to universal validity, which means the aimed ‘quality of life’ considers the existing human beings and the future generations as well. Therefore, intra- generational and inter-generational justice should be part of the sustainability interpretation (Ibid). The third component, participation, aims to include every person in the decision-making process, valuing the claims and needs of the people involved (Ibid). Finally, by including these 3 components, this principle aims to include the ethical components when doing an interpretation of sustainability, which is how the ‘quality of life’ is envisioned.

The third module is named as the descriptive principle of integration, which refers to the integration of social and natural systems when formulating the conceptions of sustainability (Christen and Schmidt, 2011, p. 6). This module brings the importance of the relation and dependency between human beings and society which Christen and Schmidt call ‘social systems’, with the natural environment, called ‘natural systems’. This descriptive principle brings the conditions under which the normative principle should be accomplished, remembering that the right to a dignified quality of life does not depend only on social systems but also of our relation with the natural systems as well (Ibid). Moreover, this principle aims to bring the empirical evidence or facts when looking into the sustainability problem. As a example, related to social systems, facts related to social actors, organizations and structures must be identified, while in the natural systems, scientific facts related to functions, qualities and characteristics of natural elements or forms of life should be taken into account (Ibid).

The fourth module, the criteria for sustainability, refers to define ‘what’ has to be sustained (Christen and Schmidt, 2011). For this, the authors identify the need to define which are the ‘sustainability goods’ according to the conditions of what sustainability should fulfill, the understanding of quality of life and the social and natural systems (Ibid).

The fifth and last module, the transformation into practice, responds to the question, how will we ensure the sustainability goods? (Christen and Schmidt, 2011). To answer this question, all the elements mentioned above should be taken into account, from the common responsibilities as well as participations of individuals and institutions; followed by the inter-relation of social and natural systems; and the participation of scientific tools (Ibid). The transformation into practice involves different thematic and systematic fields of application, which, at the same time, will bring criteria and indicators to achieve sustainability (Ibid). All these elements will help to set goals towards practical results.

Once described the complete steps of this framework, this model will be the basis for the search of elements related to sustainability in my study. Since I am not building a new sustainability conception but reviewing approaches, this framework will be used as a guide to set which elements should be essential in order to have a strong basis in sustainability.

3.2 A redirection of design towards sustainability

When relating the conception of sustainability with design, I have looked into the main areas of interest as well as the role of HCI designers. For this, I have taken as inspiration some of the arguments from Tony Fry when talking about the practice of design related to sustainability.

Tony Fry in his book Design futuring (2009, p. 46) brings the importance to shift the practice of design towards sustainability by identifying the needs and actors that should move towards new paths. This shift or ‘redirection’

as Tony Fry calls it, means to engage different actors in society and perform collective changes (Ibid). In order to have a collective change, you first need to change in the individual basis. This change should be accompanied by

(15)

central ideas such as the aim of common goods and the detachment of any ‘shift action’ from current economic and political foundations (Ibid).

The challenge of sustainability is rather big for designers, especially now when the capacity of action of design is so close related to technology development (Fry, 2009, p. 53). Despite this, there have been already initiatives to incorporate sustainability in the practice of design. Integrating sustainability with design could be a great opportunity in which designers could take the role of leaders of a process of change towards a common future.

However, the current initiatives such as corporate sustainability appear to be ambiguous where the reduction of environmental impacts are measured in small scale, while impacts of large volumes of production keep causing adverse effects in nature (Fry, 2009, p. 54). Similar to this, user-centered design aims to integrate sustainability through the study of products’ usability, however, without taking care of needed improvements in the products rather than in the use of them (Ibid).

Tony Fry (2009, p. 55) establish that, a redirection of design towards sustainability should include openness to other disciplines, insights through dialogues and a construction of common knowledge that will support a practical change. Moreover, when facing this redirection of design, Fry states the importance to bring into account elements within the practice of design for sustainability, elements related to time, context, who are involved, what is unsustainable for who or why it should be sustainable. By this, he remarks the importance to identify variables related to sustainability (Ibid). Finally, the incorporation of different contexts, together with social, cultural and political, demands a change from particular or individual views to global ones (Ibid, p. 91-92, 176).

As a last idea, Fry brings into discussion the social and environmental responsibilities that designers should have in relation to their practice. Designers should react to the current unsustainable situations and lead processes of change (Fry, 2009, p. 172). Additionally, Fry claims that designers need to be involved in writing, critics and politics and thus engage in the intellectual change towards future transformations in design (Ibid). As a third strategy, Fry also remarks the importance to integrate and collaborate with the involved stakeholders in the different design scenarios (Ibid). The engagement in design scenarios beyond the technological, aesthetical and functional will contribute to the macro changes that societies will face in the future.

(16)

4. Methods – qualitative methods

My study will be developed by qualitative research methods with the purpose to review the conception of sustainability made in the field of HCI design. My main source of data will be published documents specifically about sustainability and HCI design; therefore I will establish the criteria for collection and selection of these documents as well as for disassembling data. As a result, I will get the needed elements, which will be analyzed and discussed in relation with the theoretical framework. Following, each step within my methodology is explained:

4.1 Analysis of documents and materials

The studies of sustainability within HCI design have been mostly made in the form of published documents, reports and studies, which will be the main source of data for my research. As stated by Atkinson and Coffey (2004, p. 57), a good understanding of contemporary societies includes the recognition of paperwork, written evidence and documents as a way to record and externalize opinions, purposes and self-descriptions. Atkinson and Coffey define documents as ‘social facts’ and its importance lies in the implication these documents have, being the evidence of a construction of forms, values and achievements (2004, p. 58).

Similarly, David Silverman recognizes some advantages when analyzing texts as data, being one of them the

‘natural occurrence’ of texts. The author explains that written data records the actions and thoughts of individuals or communities (2006, p. 157). Besides, the availability of written materials in the contemporary society is rapid due to the electronic and digital means that support their promulgation and this prompts researches to do more analyses with this type of data (Ibid).

However, an examination of documents requires to know also which of those data can be used or not for the purpose of investigation (Atkinson and Coffey 2004, p. 58). Factors to be taken into account should be the source of the documentation and in which context they have been created (Ibid).

Concerning the field of my research, the community of Human-Computer Interaction centers around an online organization named Association for Computer Machinery – ACM. This online society acts as a platform to enhance the educational and professional interests and purposes of the computing community (ACM, 2012).

Within these services, ACM counts with one of the most complete digital libraries regarding computing publications. The compiled online publications go from magazines, journals and proceedings to literature in form of reports, theses, books and periodicals (Ibid).

Due to the updated information and wide availability of literature that the ACM Digital Library holds and provides, I have chosen that online database as the main information retrieval for my study.

4.2 Criteria for search and selection of documents

Once chosen the online database ACM digital library, I used the following searching criteria:

• Text: sustainable interaction design + keyword: sustainability and,

• Text: sustainable HCI + keyword: sustainability.

The text strings: ‘sustainable interaction design’ and ‘sustainable HCI’ have been chosen since they have been a common way to name the approaches related to sustainability. In the case of the keyword ‘sustainability’, it is a way to confirm and remark that the selected documents are elaborating that topic.

From those documents I apply a selection criterion. I chose the documents that have any citation count in the Google Scholar retrieval system, since this is a current common system used to promulgate online academic research but also to indicate the use of the papers in other publications.

Finally, as a second selection criterion, I exclude the papers that are not specifically elaborating research or discourse related to my topic of interest, i.e. summaries of panels, workshops or interest groups meetings in conferences, because they are generally too brief, most often short summaries only. As a result, I got 27

(17)

documents, being the final number of papers that I will analyze in my study. Finally the documents have been numbered according to the citation count, starting with the one with the highest citation count.

4.3 Disassemble data – structured textual analysis

Once I have 27 documents to work with, I will look for the elements of analysis in the documents. For this, I have elaborated a structured textual analysis in the form of a questionnaire that will help me to find and collect information. The main structure of the questionnaire is a group of questions and, at the end of the document, a fact sheet that collects ‘key-ideas’ obtained from the answers. In order to facilitate the obtainment of these key ideas, I have highlighted texts in each answer, which are the crucial words or group of words related to the answer. Then, the key ideas are taken from these highlighted texts. For more detailed information, Appendix 2 collects the 27 questionnaires.

The questionnaire starts collecting:

• The general data of the document that is title, author(s), publication information, year and citation count.

• Part A, in which I will fill the main category of the document.

• Part B, which is a brief summary of the document and from this, I obtain the Topic of the document.

• Part C, which is named the sustainability focus and is composed by 6 questions related specifically to the conception of sustainability.

• Part D, which is named the design focus, and is composed of 3 questions related to design sub-areas.

4.3.1 Part A and part B

Part A states the category of the document. According to the type of content of each paper, these can be categorized as: a Framework or Conceptual development, a Discourse or a Project / Research study. A document will belong to the category Framework or Conceptual development if the study elaborates and define ideas, principles and concepts in relation to sustainability. In the case of category Discourse, the study elaborates a point of view or perspective in relation to sustainability. Finally, a study belongs to the category Project / Research study, if the document defines a problem, method and a result related to sustainability.

Part B describes a short summary of the document. This summary is written after the reading the paper and aims to state the most important ideas of the whole document. From this, I define in a topic, which is the main subject elaborated in the paper.

4.3.2 Part C - sustainability focus

Part C looks into the conception of sustainability of the chosen documents.

Following A formal framework for conceptions of sustainability, I explain the questions and the criteria to answer each one.

• Question 1, looks for a general definition of sustainability. To start the review of the interpretation of sustainability, it is important to see if there is any concept or definition that the author(s) uses as a starting point, e.g. Brundtland report definition or any other significant definition for the author(s).

• Question 2, aims to find which is the sustainability problem in the document. As stated in the Brundtland report (WCED 1987, cited in Christen and Schmidt 2011, p. 4 “Many forms of development erode the environmental resources upon which they must be based”. According to Christen and Schmidt (2011), a sustainability problem is a development dilemma, a development that we desire but, due to the social and natural conditions that we live, might be difficult to achieve.

• Question 3, looks into the ideas related to the normative principle of justice. As written by Christen and Schmidt (2011), should “… refer to a conception of quality of life as well as a theory of justice”.

Furthermore, the answer to this question should contain ideas related to any of these: distributive, political, intergenerational and intra-generational justice.

• Question 4, looks into ideas related to the descriptive principle of integration, which should describe the conditions in which the natural and social systems are related. It aims to describe with more detail which are the social and natural aspects involved within the sustainability problem (Ibid).

(18)

• Question 5, looks into ideas that identify the sustainability goods, in other words, what should be sustained (Ibid).

• Question 6, aims to find the practical result, which is, how the goods will be sustained, the actions to take for this purpose (Ibid).

4.3.3 Part D – design focus

Taken from the inspiration of Tony Fry’s written work, these are the following questions:

• Question 7, once knowing which is the practical result (question 6), this question looks into main areas within HCI design specifically.

• Question 8, aims to find which are the main roles of HCI designers

• Question 9, aims to know which is the most relevant input when talking about sustainable design.

4.4 Limitations

The materials I use for my study are design papers and, despite that they are related to sustainability, their main focus is on design. I want to highlight that, following the framework of conceptions of sustainability may be ambitious, and therefore, much of the elements will not be found in the papers. However, it is a good starting point and reference to look into the integration and completion of future conceptions of sustainability by HCI.

(19)

5. Results

The results of the structured textual analysis have been compiled in tables, which are organized according to the citation count, starting with the document with the highest number of citations. Besides, specifically to part C and D I have added graphs that summarize the results of each question.

5.1 Results part A and B

Table 1 compiles the results from part A and B of the 27 documents. As seen in the table, the results from part A - category of the document-, are the following:

• 20 out of 27 documents are categorized as Project or Research study, while 6 are listed as Framework / Conceptual development and 1 as Discourse.

In the case of part B – topic of the document, results are:

• 13 out of 27 documents are related to data collection on different variables. Some of these variables might help the understanding of consumers’ behaviour and move towards more sustainable practices. The second most common topic is application of sustainability in design. 6 of the papers elaborate on a design solution related to sustainability. The elaboration of design methodologies is the main content of 4 papers.

Ideas/principles for sustainable design is the topic for 4 documents.

Finally, I have added the year of publication of each document as part of table 1, so the reader can follow also the year of the publications.

5.2 Results part C

The results from part C, the sustainability focus, reflect the elements included as part of the conception of sustainability made by the documents’ authors. I have compiled the results in Table 2- Results part C, but also included graphs that will help the understanding of the result’s compilation. Finally, Appendix II contains all the questionnaires with more detailed information of each question’s answers.

(20)

Table 1. Results part A and B

(21)

Table 2. Results part C

(22)

(continues Table 2. Results part C)

(23)

(24)

(25)

Results from question 1 - Does the document include a concept or definition of sustainability? If yes, which one?, are:

Graph 1. Summary of results question 1

• 4 out of 27 documents include a concept or definition of sustainability as a starting point in the papers. The definitions are: in document No. 1, the view of sustainability from the design philosopher Tony Fry; in document No. 5, artist Tiffany Holmes’s definition; in paper No. 6, the authors’ own notion of sustainability (Kristin Hanks, William Odom, David Roedl & Eli Blevis) and finally in document No. 16, the Brundtland report concept.

Results from question 2 – Which are the main ideas related to a sustainability problem? are summarized in graph 2, and explained in the text below the graph.

• 23 out of 27 documents define a sustainability problem, stating clearly a development dilemma, e.g.

development actions generate effects that may underpin its future realization. The remaining 4, do not identify a sustainability problem at all. Among the definitions of the sustainability problem, most of them state the problem in a very general way, referring usually to generic terms both in the development actions as well as effects. According to this:

(26)

• From the 23 papers, 9 of them base these ‘actions’ in energy. From these 9, 6 sustainability problems refer specifically to energy consumption, 2 of the 9 refer to energy in the form of electricity, being the problem the electricity consumption; and finally 1 of the 9 refers to energy production. When talking about consumption some papers also add water or natural gas, which correspond to papers that define a sustainability problem in the household level.

• When relating the development actions and the consequential effects, the 23 papers usually define these effects in a very general way. Terms such as ‘environmental problems, consequences or impacts’ or simply

‘adverse effects’ are used. In some cases, energy consumption is related to ‘climate change’, ‘CO2 emissions’. Only one paper defines a more specific effect (No. 21).

• From the 23 papers, 6 of these state digital technology/electronics as the sustainability problem. From these, 5 refer to consumption and disposal of digital artifacts, the so-called e-waste. The remaining 1 document refers to the manufacturing of electronics as the problem.

• In the case of these 6 papers, the effects are also identified generally as ‘environmental impacts’ however, others specify ‘toxicity’ or ‘lead in the waste stream’ due to the excessive electronic waste in the natural waste streams. In a less extend, ‘climate change’ is also related to the development actions. Among these papers, one of the papers identify social consequences, e.g. the impact in countries that cannot manage properly e-waste.

• The last 8 papers state general problems, in different fields or have not identified a cause of the sustainability problem but only the effect. According to this, 2 does not identify a problem origin while the other 6 state topics such as ‘everyday actions’, globalization of industrial production, paper waste, unregulated use to water, tourism in conservation natural areas, food demands.

Results from question 3 - Which main specific ideas are related to a ‘principle of justice’? are summarized in graph 3, and explained in the text below the graph.

• 6 out of 27 documents contain ideas related to the principle of justice. Most of them briefly mention ideas related to conditions for the present or future or either the distribution of goods. Usually these ideas related to the principle go together with the sustainability problem but they accompany the conception rather than giving more specific information of the sustainability problem itself (except document No. 20).

• When talking about the principle of justice, these 6 documents usually include ideas related to quality of life, inter and intra-generational justice. Regarding quality of life, the documents No. 1, 5, 10 and 18 talk about this. Ideas between them are similar, referring usually to the aim of harmony between people of different cultures and economic backgrounds (No. 5) or when naming that, decisions of consumers affect the conditions of other countries.

• Referring to inter-generational justice, documents No. 1, 5, 6 and 10 talk about these. They usually mention a common or collective future connected with something that may affect the achievement of it. Document No. 6, goes further by naming that the collective future includes “… social equity, public health and wellness, and ecological stability…” (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 333).

(27)

• About intra-generational justice, documents No. 5, 10 mention it and refer either to the aim of a harmonic present and future (No. 5) or either to the impacts that the development causes in the present time (No. 10).

• Finally, document No. 20 mentions distributive justice, by mentioning the right to access safe water to all stakeholders under fair conditions (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2845).

Results from question 4 - Which main specific ideas are related to a ‘principle of integration’? are summarized in graph 4, and explained in the text below the graph.

• 10 out of 27 documents include ideas related to the principle of integration. Among the ideas related to this principle, the relation between natural and social systems states the same ideas that the sustainability problem already stated (answer from question 2). 6 out of the 10 documents do not bring more details related to the functions either of the natural or social systems involved in the sustainability problem.

• 4 out the 10 documents state more detailed information, especially when talking about the natural systems (documents No. 5, 20, 21, 25). For example, in the case of No. 5 when talking about environmental problems, they also state acid deposition and mercury poisoning as the impacts. Similar to this, documents 20, 21 and 25 also state more specific impacts or elements involved in the natural systems. However, these statements do not go further in terms of functions or roles of the elements within the systems.

Results from Question 5 - Which are the main identified ‘sustainability goods’? are summarized in Graph 5, and explained in the text below the graph.

(28)

• 10 out of 27 documents identify sustainability goods, which means that threatened resources are mentioned.

• Similar to the answers of the questions above, the sustainability goods vary from being very general e.g.

planet’s resources (document No. 6) to be quite more specific e.g. coral reefs (No. 21). Following this, 4 of the 10 documents identify sustainability goods in a very general way (No. 1, 6, 12, 26), while the rest are more specific at some extent (No. 2, 5, 10, 20, 21, 25).

Results from question 6, Which is the practical result of the interpretation of sustainability in the paper? are summarized in graph 6 and explained below.

• All of the papers count with practical results of the interpretation of sustainability. There are two types of results; the first ones are conceptual or philosophical proposals, which are theoretical guides for future applications in sustainable design. The second type of result is concrete actions or design solutions towards sustainability.

• Following this, 14 out of 27 documents have conceptual or philosophical proposals as results. Among these 14 proposals, 5 are based on a better understanding of the technology’s user towards a sustainable behaviour (e.g. documents No. 4, 5, 7, 11, 12). The remaining 9 documents propose notions, concept, methodologies or views that can guide the designer when doing sustainable design (e.g. documents No. 1, 6, 10, 15, 16, 18, 20, 23, 25).

• Regarding the 13 documents that propose concrete actions or design solutions, 4 of them state to collect information about energy practices (e.g. documents No. 2, 8, 9, 13); 3 papers’ results state to collect information regarding consumption and disposal of digital/interactive technology (documents No. 3, 24, 26);

1 result is related to collect information related to urban agricultural practices (No. 27). The remaining 5 (documents No. 14, 17, 19, 21, 22) propose very specific solutions in design.

5.3 Results part D

The results from part D, the design focus, are compiled in table 3. These results are related to the main areas within HCI that are related to sustainability and design, together with the role of designers and the major input of sustainable design literature.

(29)

Table 3. Results part D

(30)

(Continues Table 3. Results part D)

(31)

(Continues Table 3. Results Part D)

(32)

Results from question 7 – Which are the main areas within HCI design related to the practical result? are illustrated and explained below.

• 22 out of 27 documents define main areas within HCI design. From these 22 responses, 7 responses are related to management systems as a main field (e.g. No. 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 13, 14, 17, 21, 26). Among this, energy management and resource management are included. When talking about management, usually designers focus on consumption, since the purpose is to encourage sustainable practices in the use of energy / resources.

• The following 7 results are centred in data visualization, feedback technologies, most of them related to motivate sustainable behaviour.

• 4 of the 22 responses offer conceptual proposals, which are ideas to enhance HCI design systems from a theoretical perspective.

• 3 of the 22 responses state more proposals in the forms of methodologies, while the remaining 1 document brings a different area within HCI, which are acoustic systems.

Results from Question 8 – Which is the main role of HCI designers when tackling with sustainability? are illustrated and explained below.

•

23 out of 27 documents state ideas related to the role of HCI designers. From these, 9 responses state as role to influence, motivate or promote sustainable behavior/products (No. 1, 2, 4, 5, 15, 17, 22). 2 of these are related specifically to influences through persuasive experiences (No. 3, 19).

(33)

• 8 of the 23 responses state as role expand, reconsider or explore more (or new) possibilities of sustainability within HCI design. Among these, some express to broaden the theoretical assumptions already done in the field of HCI, others propose holistic views, new contexts, and awareness of impacts. One of these specifically expresses to explore new forms of technology or digital technology (No. 9).

• 4 of the 23 roles are related to the materiality of design and to explore/add new functions or interactions to existing objects.

• The last 2 roles, are expressed as Blevis’ text (2007, p. 503), which is to “choosing among or informing choices of future ways of being”.

Results from question 9 – Which major input/reference is used in relation to sustainable design? are illustrated and explained below.

• 22 out of 27 documents use an input or major reference from literature in sustainable design. From these, 14 refer to Eli Blevis (2007) and his 2 most important documents: ‘Sustainable Interaction Design: invention &

disposal, renewal & reuse’ and ‘Ensoulment and sustainable interaction design’.

• Among other inputs, William McDonough and Michael Braungart with his book Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make things, is also an important input, being cited in 3 documents.

5.4 Relation between results

5.4.1 Relation between results of part A and part B

The topics data collection and application of sustainability correspond to the 20 papers categorized as Project or Research study. This means that most of the documents about sustainability are studies with a specific outcome, either in action or a design result.

The 6 papers under the category Framework/Conceptual development elaborate design methodologies and ideas/principles for sustainable design. Last, the only paper categorized, as discourse is the one that elaborate a discourse around the ideas of sustainable interaction design.

5.4.2 Relation between results of the questions in part C

I will start looking into the 4 documents that include a definition or concept of sustainability as a starting point (question 1).

(34)

Two of the documents that include a concept of sustainability, define the problem in the field of energy (documents No. 2 and 5). Despite a general definition of the sustainability problems, the ideas related to the principle of justice in both documents are more extensive than in other documents. In the case of the principle of integration, document No. 1 defines a general relation between natural and social systems and also identifies generic sustainability goods. Document No. 5 goes into more detail with the principle of integration and the sustainability goods. In both documents the practical result is defined as conceptual and philosophical.

Document No. 5 includes also a concept of sustainability as a starting point and defines the sustainability problem in the field of electronics consumption and disposal. Both principals of justice and principal of integration are used more extensively than in other documents, however, the definition of the sustainability goods is very general, leading to a result of philosophical nature.

In the case of document No. 14, which includes a concept of sustainability, does not reflect at all the inclusion of this concept in the rest of the elements. The definition of the sustainability problem is incomplete and general, the document lacks of ideas related to principle of justice, integration and sustainability goods. But, opposite to document No. 5, the result turns out to be a very specific solution in design.

Aside from the 4 documents mentioned before, 6 more papers include a principle of justice, and 3 of these include also a concept of sustainability. However, an initial concept of sustainability might help to define a principle of justice but may not influence in how specific the principle of justice is. That is the case of documents No. 10 and 20, those define both principles of justice and integration without the starting point of an specific concept of sustainability. Moreover, these two papers state principles of justice and integration more related to the sustainability problem rather than the ones that include a concept (No. 2, 5 and 14). This may mean that, since the concepts of sustainability are usually broad, it may hinder a more specific definition of the sustainability problem, principles of justice, integration, as well as sustainability goods. Moreover, this also means the need to extend the understanding of sustainability concepts.

When talking about sustainability problems, we have already seen that does not need of a concept of sustainability for its definition. How specific the problems are, depend on the scope and scale of the studies the authors are doing. However, it is clear that most of the problems are very broad and they usually play the role of introductory paragraphs in order to support or justify why designers have decided to intervene in those fields of action. The recurrent the fields are, depends mostly on how interesting are those topics for the HCI community, but mostly, I would say, to which of the major fields that the HCI designers have connection with.

As expressed before, 6 of the 23 papers have a principle of justice. The relation of both depends more on how deep the author wants to get into those details. Even if some of the principles of justice correlate with the sustainability problems, the principles lack the identification of stakeholders, institutions or legal instruments that should be part of the system in order to achieve the principle of justice. In conclusion, almost all the principles of justice are only broadly defined.

Regarding the principle of integration, its existence depends also on how extensive the definition of the sustainability problem is. As stated by Christen and Schmidt, (2011), the purpose of the principle of integration is to go deeper into the systems involved in the sustainability problem and clearly state under which conditions they are. Due to the broad the sustainability problems are defined, the principles of integration are also generally defined.

Identifying sustainability goods is also an element that lack importance in the interpretation of sustainability made by HCI designers. Once more, it depends on how the author would like to extend the definition of the problem of sustainability. It is also important to say that, even some sustainability goods are defined in some of the documents, they have a direct relation with the sustainability problem and the principle of integration, but they do not connect with the practical result.

Practical results vary from being philosophical to concrete actions and design solutions. However, they are more connected to the author’s desired outcomes rather than to the sustainability discourse. When philosophical, the results act as a conceptual definition towards a practical result in design. When results are concrete actions and design solutions, they define more specific outcomes.

(35)

5.4.3 Relation between results of the questions in part D

The main areas within HCI design show the main areas of interest for these designers. According to this, management systems and data visualization are the 2 more important areas for development of interactive systems and applications. Specifically, these areas of action are related to consumption and sustainable behaviour. Moreover, these main areas are also closely connected to energy and digital technology.

When talking about the main roles of HCI designers, these roles are connected to areas of action of this community. Since human factors and specifically the user is crucial when designing interactions, the designer should influence and motivate new practices related to energy, digital technology or resource use in general.

While most of the roles are defined into the task of influencing and motivating sustainable practices, a few leave opened the possibilities to reconsider the ongoing solutions and explore new perspectives in sustainability.

Finally, regarding the major input in sustainable design, Eli Blevis’ principles of sustainable interaction design has been influential in the development of sustainable solutions. Moreover, this influence is also reflected in the definition of the sustainability problems, practical results and designers’ roles. These reflect that the HCI community has concentrated and narrowed their view of sustainability to very few references that were launched a few years ago. Last, William McDonough with Cradle to Cradle has also been influential especially when looking into solutions related to the materiality of design.