Interpretations of Sustainability in the Field of Human

Transcrição

Interpretations of Sustainability
in the Field of Human-Computer
Interaction Design: a Systematic Review
Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 108
Maria Cecilia Brito R.
Uppsala University, Department of Earth Sciences
Master Thesis E, in Sustainable Development, 30 credits
Printed at Department of Earth Sciences,
Geotryckeriet, Uppsala University, Uppsala, 2013.
Master’s Thesis
E, 30 credits
Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 108
Supervisor: Mikael Wiberg
Evaluator: Else Nygren
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
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
18
19
20
20
21
25
25
26
Interpretations of sustainability in the field of Human-Computer
Interaction design: a systematic review
MARIA CECILIA BRITO R.
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
Interpretations of sustainability in the field of Human-Computer
Interaction design: a systematic review
MARIA CECILIA BRITO R.
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, HumanComputer 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
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.
1
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. 503504). These principles relate some important aspects in the practice of HCI design such as material qualities, lifecycle 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.
2
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 longlasting 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
3
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.
4
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?
5
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 metaperspective 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
6
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, intragenerational 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
7
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.
8
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
9
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).
10
• 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.
11
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.
12
Table 1. Results part A and B
13
Table 2. Results part C
14
(continues Table 2. Results part C)
15
16
17
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:
18
• 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).
19
• 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.
20
• 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.
21
Table 3. Results part D
22
(Continues Table 3. Results part D)
23
(Continues Table 3. Results Part D)
24
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).
25
•
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).
26
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.
27
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.
28
6. Discussion
The importance of the conception of sustainability lies in its capacity to guide actions, models and future plans
for new ways of development. Thus, the understanding of this concept is crucial when taking decisions towards
new directions in sustainability. Together with this, and in the field of HCI design, practical approaches aim to
fulfil the needs and demands related to sustainability.
HCI design has become an important field due to its relation with technology development. The interest of HCI
in sustainability brings new challenges to this community of designers but also, aims to manage the complexity
of the concept of sustainability in relation to their field of action.
Following the research questions, I will describe results, implications and most important relations.
For research question No. 1 - Which are the most important elements that define the interpretation of
sustainability made by the HCI community? –, the results are as following:
6.1 Energy, digital technology and Blevis’s input to sustainable design
When defining the sustainability problem, authors mostly look into energy and digital technology as the main
concerns. Together with this, environmental impacts and consequences are the most common concretization of
the sustainability problem.
According to Christen and Schmidt (2011), a definition of the sustainability problem presents the challenges
towards the future. In the case of the sustainability problems’ definition, energy and digital technology are the
main challenges but, among these, consumption is a common factor in both fields. In the case of digital
technology, manufacturing and disposal are two more important concerns, closely related with the materiality of
design.
By identifying energy and digital technology as 2 main areas of concern, designers show that these two fields are
critical in relation to sustainability but this also shows these fields as potential areas for the development of
innovations in sustainable design. Moreover, it also reflects the expertise and the areas in which the HCI
community has expanded their practice, beyond the initial ‘human-computer’ relation. Besides, the constant
interest in these areas during the past years implies also that the search of appropriate solutions within
sustainability is still an ongoing process.
When defining the sustainability problem, Christen and Schmidt (2011), point out the importance to understand
the relation between social and natural systems included in the problem. When talking about energy
consumption, designers relate this concern to global environmental impacts, e.g. global warming, or CO2
emissions. This reflects the approach of energy in a global perspective and consequently large-scale impacts.
The exploration of these global adverse effects in nature does not go further or more specific, limiting the
understanding of the relation of the social and natural systems within the problem. Finally, the broad approach of
energy mismatches the practical results, which mostly are specific and small-scale design solutions.
In the case of digital technology, a few more elements are recognized as part of the problem, being not only
consumption but also manufacturing and disposal. This approach is also more connected to the materiality of
design. When talking about the environmental impacts, a few authors recognize quite more details, e.g. toxicity
or lead in the waste stream due to excessive e-waste. Even though the problem is focused in the materiality of
digital artifacts, practical results are focused on sustainable behaviour. This can be due to the importance of
behavioural sciences in the practice of HCI design, because this science has supported the understanding of the
human factor in this area of design. As a last implication for digital technology, the sustainable behaviour
solutions might be determined by the individual approach that digital technology has nowadays.
When talking about Blevis input related to sustainable design, this document has a great acceptance by the HCI
community. His proposal lies in 5 principles that aim to be a guide towards sustainable interaction design. Given
this, Blevis’s principles have been referenced in the majority of the documents, being the most influential 2 of
them: linking invention and disposal and promoting renewal and reuse.
29
These ‘notions of Sustainable Interaction Design’, as Blevis calls them, have been used as part of the theoretical
support of some of the projects, and also as an inspiration to develop actions towards sustainability. Despite
these principles are a strong fundament and may be one of the fewest theoretical proposals by HCI design; it has
centered its attention in information and digital technology and mostly in the materiality of these artifacts. This
focus has at the same time the input of other sustainable design theories, e.g. cradle to cradle from William
McDonough. However, the importance of McDonough’s influence leaves apart the approach on the process of
interaction itself and concentrates on the life cycle of a product. Despite the importance of Blevis principles,
sustainability demands the inclusion of other multiple factors and stakeholders in the manufacturing,
consumption and disposal of digital technology.
6.2 Further implications related to the conception of sustainability
The broadness of the conception of sustainability is a common characteristic in multiple discourses nowadays
(Christen and Schmidt, 2011). In the case of HCI design, several elements within the conception have not been
taken as important to a further understanding.
This is the case of the principle of justice and integration, which correspond to a minimal part within the HCI
sustainability discourses. In the case of the principle of justice, it aims to bring ethical aspects, which are part of
the sustainability problem (Christen and Schmidt, 2011). Similar to this, the purpose of the principal of
integration is to bring into account the different institutions and stakeholders that are part of the social systems
but also to bring the scientific facts to a better understanding of the natural systems included in the sustainability
problem. A scarce look into these principles and sustainability goods limits the identification of the different
variables that are part of the sustainability problem and that could bring new insights when solving problems,
and new possibilities to asses the accuracy of results.
Finally, environmental impacts are mostly related with the HCI sustainability problems, leaves behind social and
economic aspects. Being interactive systems so related to individuals and technology, it may also have
implications in social aspects such as group interactions or the change of social physical spaces into virtual ones.
This might bring new areas that HCI design might be able to take in action and possibly enhance sustainability.
As stated by Fry (2009), the importance to decouple the practice of design from functional, technological and
aesthetical aspects will definitely open large-scale approaches for the future.
Regarding research question No. 2 - Which are the most important areas of action for HCI designers related to
sustainability? -, answers are given mostly by questions related to the practical result and the main areas within
HCI.
6.3 Energy management systems, data visualization to support
sustainable behaviour
In connection with the sustainability problem, energy management systems and data visualization are two of the
most common areas of action for HCI design.
Despite the fact that there is a big interest in trying to manage energy, most of the cases refer to small-scale
contexts such as the household. Different interactive design ideas have been already tested and being in the
market with the objective to influence practices related to energy consumption. Specifically, data visualization
has been used to create consciousness when consuming energy. A few of these projects have been assessed not
in relation to desired sustainability outcomes but in relation to design-in-use results. This is a clear example of
Tony Fry’s reflections (2009, p. 54), when he states the unclear goals of designers when they focus sustainability
on small-scale projects while the massive production is the one that causes devastating effects in nature. It is not
dismissed that design of energy management systems is in constant development but current design
methodologies and results should aim to go along with more ambitious sustainability outcomes.
In the case of data visualization, most of the design outcomes are related to enhance the behaviour of users,
when consuming energy or using digital artifacts. Most of the outcomes aim to ‘make visible’ energy through
different ways such as light or graphic representations. Through this, the purpose is to influence the consumption
of energy and thus, enhance sustainable practices.
30
Finally, the energy management systems and data visualization are closely related to the role that designers
express in relation to sustainability. The main purpose of these roles is to influence and motivate sustainable
behaviour. Despite the majority of designers interested in sustainable behaviour, a good number of them express
the roles as to expand the possibilities, contexts, areas of action between sustainability and HCI design. This
shows a considerable interest in looking into new opportunities for HCI design to support sustainability.
Regarding the 3rd question - Which are the possibilities to enhance the conception of sustainability towards new
challenges for HCI design? - finds answers by looking into the big picture and the relation of all these elements.
6.4 Expanding views towards bigger systems
As written in the previous paragraphs, the current conception of sustainability has marked a path towards two
important areas of action for HCI design. It also shows that the HCI community aims to develop the expertise in
those areas due to the close relation with technology. However, an extensive understanding of sustainability will
definitely bring opportunities for the HCI community to collaborate in the big challenges of sustainability.
Christen and Schmidt (2011) have expressed that a structured conception of sustainability will bring
opportunities to address sustainability into practical implementations, which goes along with the applications in
the field of design. Even though the actual approaches have already connected the understanding of
sustainability with practical results, there are still multiple opportunities that could bring different contexts for
explorations in design. Following this, bringing different elements such as the principles of integration
(descriptive) and justice (normative) will also open the field for social development and aim long-term goals
(Christen and Schmidt, 2011).
The formulation of such principles or the identification of sustainability goods require the understanding of the
social and natural systems involved in the sustainability problem, since it will include functions and dynamics in
social systems, political arena, public and private institutions to name a few. Moreover, when talking about the
natural systems, it demands scientific studies and facts related to roles of elements within ecosystems, resilience
capacities, evolutionary paths, etc. Therefore, the view of sustainability extends in complexity but also in the
problem solving capacity.
A multidisciplinary work will conduct the comprehension of sustainability problems towards the appropriate
way. Tony Fry (2009) remarks this by stating that, an open and collaborative work between disciplines, will
establish a common knowledge for practical change. This will enable also to expand the view into large-scale
systems, which is one of the challenges related to sustainability. This will go along with the views that a few of
the authors of the sustainability papers, which have already expressed the need of a holistic view when facing
sustainability problems (No. 27, 13).
When having a solid background both in normative and descriptive elements of a sustainability problem, it is
also necessary to structure these elements. A large-scale approach also demands a systems approach that will
enhance the problem-solving capacity of the conception of sustainability (Christen and Smith, 2011). A systems
approach will help to analyze relations between elements but also to identify the key variables for problem
solving in design.
Once a multidisciplinary and systems approach will be part of a conception of sustainability, the result of a wellstructured interpretation will definitely increase the opportunities to long-term and innovative sustainable
solutions.
To finish this part, I would like to highlight 2 important documents that were part of my set and that show
different and promising approaches of sustainability. The first one ‘Cross currents: water scarcity and sustainable
CHI’, from Tad Hirsch and Ken Anderson whose research goes beyond by identifying and integrating different
elements with social systems and natural systems as part of the approach of water scarcity in New Mexico. The
second document ‘Human Computer Biosphere Interaction: towards a sustainable society’ from Hiroki
Kobayashi, Ryoko Ueoka, Michitaka Hirose, whose document explore a different context and the auditory
interactions in natural ecosystems.
31
6.5 Systems thinking in design methodologies
As stated before, a systems approach will give the possibility to establish a well-structured conception and
understanding of sustainability. However, besides an understanding of sustainability, a system approach should
be part of design methodologies as well.
A system approach, and consequently a systems thinking will shift from a small-scale view into a larger one.
Despite this might be already part of HCI design methodologies; the focus in certain areas of interest may
underpin the potential of systems thinking and complex design solutions. Besides, integrating a systems
approach in design methodologies will bring flexibility when looking into solutions, opening possibilities to new
un-explored areas and bringing the needed changes for the future.
Finally, Tony Fry calls for the need of designers involved in the process of writing, being critical and also being
part of politics that could bring the theoretical support to the practical actions of designers, but also the ones that
could enhance the understanding of sustainability in the HCI community.
32
7. Conclusions
My study has looked into how the interpretations of sustainability have been elaborated by HCI designers.
Determinant elements have been identified such as energy and digital technology when looking into the
sustainability problems. Besides, energy management systems and data visualization are main areas of interest
accompanied by a strong positions of designers for motivating and influencing sustainable behaviour. Finally, a
multidisciplinary approach together with a system approach and thinking could enhance the conceptions of
sustainability made by designers.
Here a few ideas to conclude:
• It is important to recognize the need of well-structured conceptions of sustainability in order to bring relevant
solutions towards new ways of development. This will mostly bring a complete view and will definitely help
to systematize information, identify elements, rationalize the problems and mostly to identify the crucial
variables related to a sustainability problem.
• The understanding of sustainability within design is still a challenge that should focus on the inclusion of
more opened methodologies and perspectives in problem solving. Moreover, the inclusion of the ethical or
moral views in relation to sustainability problems could strengthen the position of designers in relation to
sustainability and enhance perspectives in relations to the actions to take.
• It is crucial to direct efforts towards the elaboration of new sustainability discourses in relation to design.
This will support the understanding of this field for the whole community of designers and diversify the areas
of action and challenges within sustainability.
• It is necessary to aim for solutions outside the digital technology arena. Even though this has been an area for
the development of expertise during the last decade, it is important to envision new field of actions to social
issues, ecosystems and other contexts that demand attention. The development of interactions in the present
time can be seen as opportunities for positive sustainability results.
• Future research could be related to how to include the multiple aspects part of the already approached
sustainability problems, but in a systematic way. Since the areas of interest are similar among the HCI
community, they can work on documentation that could be the ‘sustainability basis’ for several projects. By
this, the community can create a database that can work as a theoretical support in sustainability for designers
in specific areas of interest.
33
8. References
ACM, 2012. ACM Home [online]. Available at: <http://www.acm.org/> [Accessed 17 April 2012].
Atkinson P., Coffey A., 2004. Analyzing documentary realities. In: D. Silverman, ed. 2004. Qualitative
Research. Theory, method and practice, Padstow, Cornwall: TJ International.
Benyon D., Turner P., Turner S., 2005; 2010. Designing Interactive Systems: people, activities, contexts,
technologies, Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.
Benyus J., 2002. Biomimicry: innovation inspired by nature. New York: William Morrow Paperbacks.
Christen M., Schmidt S., 2011. A formal Framework for conceptions of Sustainability – a theoretical
contribution to the discourse in Sustainable Development, Sustainable Development. Available through Wiley
Online Library [Accessed 12 May 2012].
Di Salvo C., Sengers P., Brynjarsdóttir H., 2010. Mapping the Landscape of Sustainable HCI. CHI 2010, Atlanta
GA, USA, April 10 -15, 2010. ACM.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2012. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA). Risk Management Sustainable
Technology. Available at:
http://www.epa.gov/nrmrl/std/lca/lca.html [Accessed 17 September 2012].
Fry T., 2009. Design Futuring: sustainability, ethics and new practice. New York: Berg Publishers.
Jung H., Blevis E., Stolterman E., 2010. Conceptualization of the materiality of digital artifacts and their
implications for sustainable interaction design. Proceedings of Design Research Society (DRS) International
Conference. Montreal, Canada. Available at: www.drs2010.umontreal.ca/data/PDF/060.pdf [Accessed 26
October 2012].
Kellert, Heerwagen, Mador, 2008. Biophilic design: the theory, science and practice of bringing buildings to
life. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons Inc.
Kemp R., Martens P., 2007. Sustainable Development: how to manage something that is subjective and never
can be achieved? In: Sustainability: Science, Practice, & Policy 3(2):5-14. Available at:
http://sspp.proquest.com/archives/vol3iss2/0703-007.kemp.html [Accessed 10 September 2012].
McDonough W. & Partners, 2000. The Hannover Principles. EXPO 2000 Hannover, Germany, June 1st –
October 31st, 2000. Charlottesville: William McDonough Architects.
McDonough W., and Braungart M., 2002. Cradle to cradle. Re-making the way we make things. Vintage Books:
London.
Moggridge B., 2007. Designing interactions. Massachusetts Institute of Technology: London.
Orr D., 2002. The nature of design. Ecology, culture and human intention, New York: Oxford University Press.
Papanek V., 1995. The green imperative. Ecology and ethics in design and architecture. London: Thames &
Hudson Ltd.
Redclift, M., 2005. Sustainable Development (1987 – 2005): an oxymoron comes of age. In: Sustainable
Development Vol. 13. Issue 4 Available through Wiley Online Library [Accessed 15 August 2012].
Robinson J., 2004. “Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of Sustainable Development”. Ecological
Economics 48, pp. 369-384. Available through ScienceDirect database [Accessed 3 June 2012].
Sachs W., 1999. Planet Dialectics. Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press.
Silverman D., 2006. Interpreting Qualitative data, Oxford: The Alden Press.
34
Tilbury, D., Stevenson, R. B., Fien, J., Schreuder, D., (eds.), 2002. Education and sustainability: responding to
the global challenge. Commission on Education and Communication, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland; Cambridge,
UK.
United Nations, 2008. Achieving sustainable development and promoting development cooperation - Dialogues
at the ECOSOC. New York: United Nations Publications.
United Nations, 2012. Resilient people, resilient planet: A future worth choosing. Secretary General’s HighLevel Panel on Global Sustainability. New York: United Nations Publications.
Veerbek P. P., 2011. Moralizing technology. Understanding and designing the morality of things. Chicago: The
University of Chicago Press.
WCED, 1987. Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our common future. World
Commission on Environment and Development, UN.
Weis R. J., Craiger, J. P., 2002. Ubiquitous Computing. The Industrial-Organizational Psychologist vol. 39. No.
4
Wiberg M., Robles E., 2010. Computational compositions. Aesthetics, materials and interaction design.
International Journal of Design, 4 (2), p. 65-76.
Documents collected for my study
Ai He H., Greenberg S., Huang E. M., 2010. One Size Does Not Fit all: applying the transtheoretical model to
energy feedback technology design. CHI 2010, 10 – 15 April 2010, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Baumer E. P. S., Silberman M. S., 2011. When the implication is not to design (technology). CHI 2011, 7–12
May 2011. Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Bonanni L., Parkes A., Ishii H., 2008. Future craft: how digital media is transforming product design. CHI 2008,
5 -10 April 2008. Florence, Italy.
Bonanni L., Hockenberry M., Zwarg D., Csikszentmihályi C., Ishii H., 2010. Small business applications of
sourcemap: a web tool for sustainable design and supply chain transparency. CHI 2010, 10 – 15 April 2010.
Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Broms L., Katzeff C., Bång M., Nyblom Å., Hjelm S. I., Ehrnberger K., 2010. Coffee maker patterns and the
design of energy feedback artefacts. DIS 2010, 16 - 20 August 2010. Aarhus, Denmark.
Blevis E., 2007. Sustainable Interaction Design: Invention & Disposal, Renewal & Reuse. CHI 2007, April 28–
May 3, 2007, San Jose, California, USA.
Chetty M., Tran D. and Grinter R. E. 2008. Getting to green: understanding resource consumption in the home.
UbiComp'08, 21 - 24 September 2008. Seoul, Korea.
Chetty M., Brush A. J. B., Meyers, B. R. Johns P., 2009. It’s not easy being green: understanding home
computer power Management. CHI 2009, 4 – 9 April 2009. Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Dillahunt T., Mankoff J., Paulos E., Fussell S., 2009. It’s not all about ‘green’: energy use in low-income
communities. UbiComp’09, Sept 30 - Oct 3, 2009. Orlando, Florida, USA.
Dourish P., 2010. HCI and environmental sustainability: the politics of design and the design of politics. DIS
2010, 16 – 20 August 2010. Aarhus, Denmark.
Foster D., Blythe M., Cairns P., Lawson S., 2010. Competitive carbon counting: Can social networking sites
make saving energy more enjoyable? CHI 2010, 10 - 15 April 2010. Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
35
Hanks K., Odom W., Roedl D., Blevis E., 2008. Sustainable Millennials: attitudes towards sustainability and the
material effects of interactive Technologies. CHI 2008, 5 – 10 April 2008. Florence, Italy.
Hirsch T., Anderson K., 2010. Cross currents: water scarcity and sustainable CHI. CHI 2010, 10 – 15 April
2010. Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Huang E. M., Truong K. N., 2008. Breaking the disposable technology paradigm: opportunities for sustainable
interaction design for mobile phones. CHI 2008, 5–10 April 2008. Florence, Italy.
Kim T., Hong H., Magerko B., 2010. Coralog: use-aware visualization. Connecting human micro-activities to
environmental change. CHI 2009, 4 – 9 April 2009. Boston, MA, USA.
Kobayashi H., Ueoka R., Hirose M., 2009. Human Computer Biosphere Interaction: towards a sustainable
society. CHI 2009, April 4 – 9, 2009, Boston, MA, USA
Nathan L. P., Friedman B., Klasnja P., Kane S. K., Miller J. K., 2008. Envisioning systemic effects on persons
and society throughout interactive system design. DIS 2008, 25 – 27 February 2008. Cape Town, South Africa.
Odom W., 2008. Personal inventories: toward durable human-product relationships. CHI 2008, 5–10 April 2008.
Florence, Italy.
Odom W., Pierce J., Stolterman E., Blevis E., 2009. Understanding why we preserve some things and discard
others in the context of interaction design. CHI 2009, 4 – 9 April 2009. Boston, MA, USA.
Odom W., Pierce J., 2009. Improving with age: designing enduring interactive products. CHI 2009, April 4 – 9,
2009, Boston, MA, USA.
Odom W., 2010. “Mate, we don’t need a chip to tell us the soil’s dry” Opportunities for designing interactive
systems to support urban food production. DIS 2010, 16-20 August 2010. Aarhus, Denmark.
Pierce J., Odom W., Blevis E., 2008. Energy aware dwelling: a critical survey of interaction design for ecovisualizations. OZCHI 2008, 8-12 December 2008. Cairns, Australia.
Pierce J., 2009. Material awareness: promoting reflection on everyday materiality. CHI 2009, 4 – 9 April 2009.
Boston, MA, USA.
Pierce J., Schiano D. J., 2010. Home, habits, and energy: examining domestic interactions and energy
consumption. CHI 2010, 10 – 15 April 2010. Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Pierce J., Paulos E. 2010. Materializing energy. DIS 2010, 16-20 August 2010. Aarhus, Denmark.
Wakkary R., Tanenbaum K., 2009. A sustainable identity: the creativity of an everyday designer. CHI 2009, 4 –
9 April 2009. Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Xiao J., Fan J., 2009. PrintMarmoset: redesigning the print button for sustainability. CHI 2009, 4 – 9 April 2009.
Boston, MA, USA.
36
9. Appendix
Appendix I. Model of the questionnaire elaborated for the structured textual analysis
Appendix II. Collected data on 27 documents
37
Appendix I. Model of the questionnaire elaborated for structured textual
analysis
[number of the document].[First letter that represents the theme of the document – F, D, P]_[name of the
author(s)]
Title:
Author(s):
Publication information:
Citation count:
A. MAIN CATEGORY OF THE DOCUMENT:
Framework/ Conceptual development ___
Discourse ___
Project or Research Study___
B. Brief summary of the paper/document:
_____________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
TOPIC OF THE DOCUMENT:
______________________________________________________________________________
C. SUSTAINABILITY FOCUS
1. Does the document include a concept or definition of sustainability? If yes, which one?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
2. Which main specific ideas are related to a ‘sustainability problem’?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
3. Which main specific ideas are related to a ‘principle of justice’?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
4. Which main specific ideas are related to a ‘principle of integration’?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
5. Which are the main identified ‘sustainability goods’?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
6. Which is the practical result of the interpretation of sustainability in the paper?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
38
D. DESIGN FOCUS
7. Which are the main areas within HCI design related to the practical result?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
8. Which is the main role of HCI designers when tackling with sustainability?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
9. Which major input/reference is used in relation to sustainable design?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
Fact sheet
1. CONCEPT OR DEFINITION OF SUSTAINABILITY:
______________________________________________________________________________
2. MAIN SUSTAINABILITY PROBLEM:
______________________________________________________________________________
3. MAIN IDEA OF PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE:
______________________________________________________________________________
4. MAIN IDEA OF PRINCIPLE OF INTEGRATION:
______________________________________________________________________________
5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
______________________________________________________________________________
6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
______________________________________________________________________________
7. MAIN AREA WITHIN HCI DESIGN:
______________________________________________________________________________
8. MAIN ROLE OF HCI DESIGNERS:
______________________________________________________________________________
9. MAIN KNOWLEDGE INPUT FOR SUSTAINABLE DESIGN:
______________________________________________________________________________
39
Appendix II. Collected data on 27 documents
1. F_Blevis
Title: Sustainable Interaction Design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse
Author(s): Eli Blevis
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2007 Conference – Proceedings / Design Theory.
Florence, Italy.
Citation count: 182
Framework/ Conceptual development _X_
Discourse ___
The paper presents a perspective of sustainability within Interaction Design based on new ideas and principles
related to the understanding of material consequences in Interaction Design. Proposals are related to ways of
use, reuse and disposal. Practical examples are discussed at the end.
Ideas/principles for sustainable design – resource use
Fry (2005 cited in Blevis 2007, p. 503) suggests “Sustainability as a notion of viable futures can be defined to
include aspects of the environment, public health, social equality and justice, as well as other conditions as
choices about humanity and the biosphere”.
Moreover, Friedman, Kahn and Borning (2006 cited in Blevis 2007, p. 505) suggest, “Environmental sustainability
has been identified as a human value that is implicated in system design”.
Blevis brings a general situation which is related to a global perspective for sustainability. Eli Blevis (2007, p. 506)
adds in his document the equation set by Graedel and Allenby (1995 cited in Kumar et al., 2005) that suggests
the impact of energy consumption, resource use and waste production as a result of the population x GDP xs
energy use per capita. According to this, the increasing of population and GDP will also extend the impacts of
environment. Kumar (et al., 2005 cited in Blevis 2007, p. 506) suggests that we need to reduce or make efficient
the energy consumption in order to reduce our future impacts.
Moreover, Blevis (2007, p. 503) states that “The important claim is that software and hardware are intimately
connected to a cycle of mutual obsolescence with implications for the environmental sustainability and other
sustainability effects and modes of use enumerated by the rubric”.
Eli Blevis refers in this paper to Nicolas Makelberge and his reflections about quality of life when he exemplifies a
disconnection of our consumption decisions with resource use and the consequences on poor nations.
Makelberge (2003 cited in Blevis 2007, p. 505) states “Today when we get a car, the global economy has taken
as far from the real impact and consequences of our decision. The gasoline, the plastics, the rubber, the fabrics
that go into making and maintaining a car is not derived from our backyards where we can see the direct
consequences of our decision. They are derived from some place else, often poorer nations whith little chance to
raise their voice or organize themselves politically. It’s often their backyard and therefore problem. Billions of
people on this planet consume junk with no apparent clue on how it affects someone else’s surroundings”.
Blevis also mentions new concepts related to inter-generational justice. Tony Fry (2005, cited in Blevis 2007, p.
505) states “… the unintended effects of design, even well-intentioned, can alter our collective futures in
undesirable ways”.
Blevis establishes as broad relation of nature and society. As stated in the answer for question 3, there is a
relation between the use of natural resources, the consumer and the nations from where the resources were
obtained. This extract of the paragraph writen by Makelberge (2003 cited in Blevis 2007, p. 505) states the
relation: “The gasoline, the plastics, the rubber, the fabrics that go into making and maintaining a car is not
40 derived from our backyards where we can see the direct consequences of our decision. They are derived from
some place else, often poorer nations whith little chance to raise their voice or organize themselves politically”
(Makelberge, 2003) (Blevis, 2007, p. 505).
As stated in the answer of question 2, resource use is part of the sustainability problem. Therefore, it can be
assumed that natural resources are one of the sustainability goods.
Moreover, the author states that the environmental impact is related to “… use of physical materials and
resources, however prompted by the use of digital materials”. Following this the author also states “… how the
use of digital materials actually prompts the use of physical ones and motivates behaviors that affect sustainability
one way or another as part of the design process…” (Blevis, 2007, p. 507).
The result of the interpretation of sustainability turns into a proposal of definition for Sustainable Interaction
Design (SID). As written by the author, “… the goal of SID is to provide frameworks and discourse that enable
interaction designers to reflect on sustainability as a design value and situate and balance notions of sustainability
with respect to other design values” (Blevis 2007, p. 506).
As stated by the author “… I propose a rubric for understanding and assessing the material effects induced by
particular interaction design cases in terms of forms of use, reuse and disposal from the perspective of
sustainability. The items of the rubric are disposal, salvage, recycling, remanufacturing for reuse, reuse as is,
achieving longevity of use, sharing for maximal use, achieving heirloom status, finding wholesome alternatives to
use, and repair of misuse” (Blevis, 2007, p. 503).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Blevis identifies methods and reasoning as 2 important areas. Regarding design methods, the author states “…
methods for interaction design need to integrate concern for potential effects on the environment, and for the
sustainability of the behaviors induced by designed interactions” (Blevis, 2007, p. 506). Also, the author writes “A
goal of SID is to suggest ways in which sustainability concerns can be integrated into existing design methods or
new design methods in a manner that yields sustainable interaction design as a practice” (Ibid).
Regarding reasoning, the author says “… representations and interpretations of interaction design should as well
denote and account for the effects of a design on the environment and sustainable behaviors” (Blevis, 2007, p.
506). For this reasoning, the discourse proposed by Blevis is composed by statements such as “ … forms of use,
reuse and disposal from a perspective of sustainability…”(Ibid). Besides the support that these rubrics will bring to
specific interaction design cases, they will also illustrate the corresponding environmental impacts.
The author states that “As a starting point for a perspective of sustainability, I define design as an act of choosing
among or informing choices of future ways of being (Blevis, 2007, p. 503).
As a second statement for this question, the author writes “… the focus is primarly on environmental sustainability
and the link between interactive technologies and the use of resources, both from the point of view of how
interactive technologies can be used to promote more sustainable behaviors…” (Blevis, 2007, p. 503).
Third, the author brings an statement from Stegall (2006 cited in Blevis 2007, p. 508) that literally says “the role
of the designer in developing a sustainable society is not simply to create ‘sustainable products’ but rather to
envision products, processes and services that encourage widespread sustainable behaviour”.
Fry T. (2005) The voice of sustainment: the scenario of design. Design Philosophy Papers #01/2005.
41 Fact sheet 1.T_Blevis
Tony Fry’s definition of sustainability
Increasing population (energy consumption, resource use and waste production) extends impacts in
environment
Quality of life – disconnection between our decisions and their impacts in poorer nations and in nature
Inter-generational justice – Design might bring consequences and changes in our common future
Consumer - natural resources - nations producing resource 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
Natural resources – which are the basis of physical materials and resources 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Framework and rubrics to reflect on sustainability as a design value
Methods of design and reasoning about sustainability
Promote sustainable behaviors
Tony Fry and his article: The voice of sustainment: the scenario of design
42 2. P_Chetty/Tran/Grinter
Title: Getting to green: understanding resource consumption in the home
Author(s): Marshini Chetty, David Tran and Rebecca E. Grinter
Publication information: Article published as part of the Ubicomp 2008 Conference, held on September 2124, 2008 at Seoul, Korea.
Citation count: 91
Discourse ___
Project or Research Study_X_
This qualitative study looks into15 households and their management of resources in home. The starting point
for this research is the problematic of domestic resource consumption versus the limited natural resources
and energy available in the present time. From this problematic, the study focuses on how to affect behavior
related to domestic consumption.
Data collection on resource consumption - Domestic sustainability
The article does not include an specific definition of sustainability.
As a general problem, the authors write “Rising global energy demands, increasing costs and limitations on
natural resources have elevated concerns about resource conservation” (Chetty et al., 2008, p. 242).
Specifically about resource consumption, the authors state “… it is not well understood how householders
currently manage their consumption of natural gas, electricity and water, what their frustrations or desires are,
or how they currently conceive of resource usage” (Ibid.).
Related to the systems integrated at home – water, natural gas and electricity-, the authors state that their
interest as follows “… they depend on scarce natural resources and consume the most energy in the home…”
(Ibid.).
There are no statements related specifically to a principle of justice.
There are no statements related specifically to a principle of integration. However, as stated in the first
paragraph of the question 2, there is an inherent relation between the limited natural resources and the
consumption of them by householders. No more specific information given in the document.
As stated in the answer of question 2, paragraph 2, the authors write “… it is not well understood how
householders currently manage their consumption of natural gas, electricity and water, what their frustrations
or desires are, or how they currently conceive of resource usage” (Chetty et al., 2008, p. 242).
The authors write “… examining households that have not necessarily made a commitment to be ‘green’ to
determine their current practices with resource consumption. Additionally to understanding householders’
current resource management practices, we sought to understand their use of technologies that aid them in
this process and their interactions with outside stakeholders for information on resources” (Chetty et al., 2008,
p. 244).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
7. Which are the main areas within HCI Design related to the practical result?
The main purpose of the study was to collect data on household practices related to electricity, natural gas
and water. Related to HCI design, the authors state “Our work will help Ubicomp researchers to create
residential resource consumption management systems” (Chetty et al., 2008, p. 244).
The lack of real-time information when consuming resources was one of the design problems identified in the
study. Related to this, the authors stated “Participants wanted more visibility and insight into their resource
43
consumption” (Chetty et al., 2008, p. 246). According to this, they state “… this may mean visual systems that
equate our resource usea with units of production…” (Ibid., p. 249).
Related to this, the authors state “… designing for sustainablity in the home may require supporting both
individual and collective agency in ‘green’ behavior change” (Chetty et al., 2008, p. 249).
Blevis E. Sustainable Interaction Design: Invention & Disposal, Renewal & Reuse, CHI 2007, ACM, Florence
– Italy, 2007.
Mc.Donough W. and Braungart M. Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make things. North Point Press, 2002.
Fact sheet 2.P_Chetty
--2. MAIN SUSTAINABILITY PROBLEM:
Resource consumption(natural gas, electricity and water) which depend on limited natural resources
--4. MAIN IDEA OF PRINCIPLE OF INTEGRATION:
--- 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
Resources - natural gas, electricity, water 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Examining householders and their resource consumption
Residential resource consumption management systems
Support behavior change
Eli Blevis and this article: Sustainable Interaction Design: Invention & Disposal, Renewal & Reuse
William Mc.Donough and Michael Braungart and the book: Cradle to cradle: remaking the way we make things
44
3. P_Huang/Truong
Title: Breaking the disposable technology paradigm: opportunities for sustainable interaction design for mobile
phones
Author(s): Elaine m. Huang, Khai N. Truong
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2008 Conference – Proceedings / Green Day. April
5-10, 2008. Florence – Italy.
Citation count: 51
Discourse ___
This qualitative research looks into the possibilities of designing sustainable interfaces for mobile phones. As
part of this, the researchers study how users understand the lifetime of their phones, how they added value to
them and which are thed influential facts for replacement and discard of these artifacts.
Data collection on sustainability of mobile phones
There is no specific definition of sustainability in this study.
The authors state the main problem as the consumption of mobile devices vs. the resource use for this object and
its disposal. According to this, the authors write “… their increased consumption has also resulted in problems of
sustainability and disposal” (Huang and Truong, 2008, p. 323). Moreover, the Environmental Literacy Agency (2006
cited in Huang and Truong 2008, p. 323) suggests that “… consumer electronics comprise between .8% and 4% of
the municipal waste stream in Europe and the United States, but are responsible for 40% of the lead in the stream”.
The authors also write “… we witness the emerging ‘disposable technology paradigm’ – characterized by
technology that comes with the expectation of a short usage lifetime, despite the potential for a longer
functional lifetime” (Ibid., 2008, p. 323).
The authors also state “The problem of mobile phone proliferation and e-waste has been addressed in other
fields form a materials science perspective…” (Ibid., p. 323).
There are no ideas related to the principle of justice in the document.
Related to this principle, some elements within the nature-society system are mentioned. Paragraph 1 from
the answer of question 2 states a relation between electronic waste and consumption (Huang and Truong,
2008, p. 323). It is not stated exactly which are the elements related to nature.
There are no sustainability goods clearly identified.
The authors state “HCI expertise and design can be leveraged to find ways to encourage longer use, less
frequent replacement, responsible disposal, and novel repurposing to extend lifetime and value thus reducing
the need for the production of new devices” (Huang and Truong, 2008, p. 323).
In order to achieve this, the authors write “… we undertook a qualitative survey- and interview-based study of
mobile phone ownership, specifically investigating the reasons people choose to acquire, discard, or replace
their mobile phones and what they do with them after they stop using them”(Ibid.).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The study mentions a few ideas that can be related to areas in which HCI design is related to the practical
result. When talking about adding elements in the interface, the authors write “… a phone might make a user
more conscious of the functional lifetime; it could display a simple progress bar that shows how long the user
has had the phone in comparison to the projected functional time of that particular model” (Huang and Truong,
2008, p. 328).
45
As a second idea they propose Modular functionality. The authors write “… a possible idea for hardware
extensions such as speaker phone, camera or Bluetooth might lead to a ‘lego style’ design that would allow
owners to snap a new functionality in to fit their existing phones (Huang and Truong, 2008, p. 331).
Related to the specific proposed design ideas of the authors, they write “Having such information as a
reference might even have the side benefit of influencing people to choose phones that will last longer and
perceive them as less temporary, or promoting a sense of pride on long ownership of a single device” (Huang
and Truong, 2008, p. 328).
References related to sustainable design:
Friedman, B. & Freier, N. G. (2005) Value Sensitive Design. In K. E. Fisher, S. Erdelez, & E. F. McKechnie
(Eds.). Theories of Information Behavior: a researcher’s guide, 368 – 372.
Blevis, E. “Sustainable Interaction Design: Invention & Disposal, Renewal & Reuse.” Proc. CHI 2007, 503 – 512.
Fact sheet 3. P_Huang/Truong
Increased consumption results in increased e-waste/lead in the waste stream
Consumption – consumer - (e-waste) – waste streams 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
--- 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Collect data on why people obtain, change, dispose a mobile phone
Design of interface / Modular functionality
Influence people’s choices / promote long ownership
Friedman, B. & Freier, N. G. (2005) Value Sensitive Design.
Blevis, E., “Sustainable Interaction Design: Invention & Disposal, Renewal & Reuse.
46
4. P_Ai He/Greenber/Huan
Title: One size does not fit all: applying the transtheoretical model to energy feedback technology design
Author(s): Helen Ai He, Saul Greenberg, Elaine M. Huang
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2010 Conference – Sense and sustainability. April
10-15, 2010. Atlanta, GA – USA.
Citation count: 48
Discourse ___
This study aims to support research on sustainable behavior related with energy use. For this, the study builds
a theoretical basis with literature related to psychology, how these knowledge can be used and finally, present
a motivational framework based on Transtheoretical Model.
Sustainable behavior (Theoretical framework specifically for this) – Energy use
The document does not include a specific definition of sustainability.
The authors first identify a general sustainability problem. For this, the authors write “Global warming, and the
climate change it induces, is an urgent global issue” (Ai He, Greenberg and Huang, 2010, p. 927).
After this, the authors name energy-efficient technologies as a one of solutions for the general sustainability
problem (Ibid., p. 927). However, they find a new specific problem related to these technologies as to
sustainable energy use. Shipworth (2002 cited in Ai He, Greenberg and Huang 2010, p. 927) suggests “…
people do not always use this technology in energy-efficient ways”. The authors also state “… most
technologies are limited as they use a ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution – that is, they provide the same feedback to
differently motivated individuals, at different stages o readiness, willingness and ableness to change” (Ai He,
Greenberg and Huang, 2010, p. 927). McCalley and Midden (2002 cited in Ai He, Greenberg and Huang
2010, p. 927) suggest “Unless the energy consumer already holds a strong goal to use energy sustainably,
feedback only informs, but not necessarity motivate sustainable energy action”.
There are no specific ideas related to a principle of justice stated in the document.
There are no specific ideas related to a principle of integration stated in the document.
There are no specific sustainability goods to be identified.
Shipworth (2002 cited in Ai He, Greenberg and Huang 2010, p. 927) suggests “… understanding how and why
people use energy, so we can develop technologies that can motivate sustainable energy behavior”.
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The main purporse of the paper is to establish a theoretical framework that will help the understanding of
motivating sustainable behavior. At the end of the document, the authors discuss the use of the study for
“energy feedback technology design” (Ai He, Greenberg and Huang, 2010, p. 935). Moreover the authors
state “… we argued that the sucess of feedback technologies employing this framework lies in its effectiviness
in motivating a move towards the next stage of change” Ibid, p. 935).
8. Which is the main role of HCI Designers when tackling with sustainability?
The authors state that their study and the notions within it “… aim to motivate sustainable energy behavior
primarily from the psychological perspective” (Ai He, Greenberg and Huang, 2010, p. 935).
There is no references that support any of the interpretations.
47
Fact sheet 4. P_Ai He/Greenber/Huan
Global warming (and the induced climate change)
Understand people’s use of energy and then develop technologies to motivate sustainable energy behavior
Feedback technologies
Motivate sustainable energy behavior
---
48
5. P_Pierce/Odom/Blevis
Title: Energy aware dwelling: a critical survey of interaction design for eco-visualizations
Author(s): James Pierce, William Odom, Eli Blevis
Publication information: Article published as part of OZCHI 2008 Conference – Proceedings. December 812, 2008. Cairns, QLD - Australia.
Citation count: 47
Discourse ___
This study does a critical review of the performance of eco-visualizations in relation to different scales and
contexts. The study collaborates with knowledge for Evs (acronym for ‘ecovisualizations’) and its
effectiveness in relation to sustainable practices.
Analysis of Visualization of Energy use – Energy conservation
The authors bring a notion of sustainability from the artist and designer Tifanny Holmes (2007 cited in Pierce,
Odom and Blevis, 2008, p. 1) who states “… ‘The philosophy of sustainability is rooted in how humans
manage and maintain resources like electricity and water for future use by all cultures without compromising
ecological diversity. Here, sustainability calls for a localized resource management strategy that promotes
harmony among organisms from all types of ecosystems –both urban and rural- and among individuals from
different cultural and economic backgrounds’”.
The authors write “As concerns over global warming and the financial costs of energy increasingly pervade
international media, energy management is becoming an important and growing area…” (Pierce, Odom and
Blevis, 2008, p. 1).
As in the answer of question 1, in the statement from Tifanny Holmes (2007 cited in Pierce, Odom and Blevis,
2008, p. 1) “…how humans manage and maintain resources like electricity and water for future use by all
cultures without compromising ecological diversity”.
Moreover, related to resource consumption, Wilson (2001 cited in Petersen et al. 2007, p. 17), suggests
“Residential and commercial buildings account for two-thirds of the electricity used in the US, 36 percent of
US greenhouses, 9 percent of world greenhouses emissions, and 12 percent of US water freshwater
consumption”. Wilson (Ibid, p. 17) also suggests “Production of electrical energy contributes to a broad range
of environmental and health problems including climate change, acid deposition, lung ailments, and mercury
poisoning. Freshwater consumption (one source of energy use) leads to groundwater and surface water
depletion, pollution and habitat destruction”.
Regardig a principle of justice, the notion of sustainability of the artist Tifanny Holmes has a few elements
connected with this principle. Citing again Holmes’s notion “The philosophy of sustainability is rooted in how
humans manage and maintain resources like electricity and water for future use by all cultures without
compromising ecological diversity. Here, sustainability calls for a localized resource management strategy that
promotes harmony among organisms from all types of ecosystems –both urban and rural- and among
individuals from different cultural and economic backgrounds’” (Holmes, 2007 cited in Pierce, Odom and
Blevis, 2008, p. 1).
Some ideas related to relation between nature and society can be taken from the following text writen by
Wilson (2001 cited in Petersen et al. 2007, p. 17) “Production of electrical energy contributes to a broad range
of environmental and health problems including climate change, acid deposition, lung ailments, and mercury
poisoning. Freshwater consumption (one source of energy use) leads to groundwater and surface water
depletion, pollution and habitat destruction”.
The following paragraph taken from Holmes’s notion of sustainability (2007 cited in Pierce, Odom and Blevis,
2008, p. 1) state “…how humans manage and maintain resources like electricity and water for future use by all
cultures without compromising ecological diversity”.
49
The authors state “… it is essential for designers and researchers of interactive technology to work towards
facilitating more sustainable ways of being in the world” (Pierce, Odom and Blevis, 2008, p. 1).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The authors also write “… we are interested in consumption visualizations – otherwise known as ecovisualizations” (Pierce, Odom and Blevis, 2008, p. 2). They also state “By Evs, we mean devices that are
targeted at revealing energy use in order to promote sustainable behavior…” (Ibid., 2008, p. 3).
The authors also state “The visualization attempts to communicate numerical statistics in a more meaninful
way, creating an emotional connection between the individual and the environmental consequences of
electricity consumption” (Pierce, Odom and Blevis, 2008, p. 5).
The authors state “We argue that it is essential for designers and researchers of interactive technology to
work towards facilitating more sustainable ways of being in the world (Pierce, Odom and Blevis, 2008, p. 1).
Related to the same question, the authors also write “… how interactive technologies can be used (i) to better
inform the choices people make in their everyday lives [e.g. 6], (ii) influence the psychological and behavioural
factors motivating these decisions [e.g. 11], and (iii) motivate positive behaviour or social change [e.g. 12, 32]”
(Pierce, Odom and Blevis, 2008, p. 1).
No clear relation or use of any sustainable design text.
Fact sheet 5. P_Pierce/Odom/Blevis
Definition of the artist Tiffany Holmes
- Production of electrical energy generates environmental and health problems.
- Use of electricity generates green houses emissions and consumes freshwater.
Inter-generational justice - Maintain resources for the future
Quality of life / intra-generational justice - Harmony between organisms of different ecosystems and people
from different cultural and economic backgrounds.
- Production of electrical energy causes environmental problems. Within environmental problems are stated
acid deposition, mercury poisoning, climate change
- Fresh water consumption decreases availability of groundwater and surface water
Electricity and water 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
To facilitate sustainable ways of being through interactive technologies
Consumption data visualization
To facilitate and motivate sustainable behavior
---
50
6. P_Hanks/Odom/Roedl/Blevis
Title: Sustainable Millenials: attitudes towards sustainability and the material effects of interactive technologies
Author(s): Kristin Hanks, William Odom, David Roedl & Eli Blevis
Publication information: Article published as part of the CHI 2008 Conference – Proceedings Green Day.
April 5-10 2008 at Florence, Italy.
Citation count: 39
Discourse ___
This study is based on a survey that aims to understand the view that university students have in relation with
material effects of interactive design and technologies.
Data collection on material effects of digital technologies – Sustainable behavior
The authors write “The concept of sustainability refers to the viability of our collective future and includes
issues of social equity, public health and wellness, and ecological stability” (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis,
2008, p. 333).
Related to this, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2006, cited in Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p.
333) states “‘Americas discard approximately 2 millions tons of used electronics, including computers and
televisions each year. In addition, an estimated 128 million cell phones are retired from use annually’”.
The authors also write “The toxicity of such a massive amount of electronic waste has dangerous
environmental consequences. The acts of interaction designers are implicated in this situation, not only
apropos of the design of hardware devices, but also as pertains to the design of software which may often be
the cause of premature obsolescence of hardware” (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 333).
Moreover, they state “While it is widely known that our planet’s resources are limited and that waste has
become a pressing issue, it is less widely publicized that an increasing amount of today’s waste is electronics
related” (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 334). Later the authors write “What is of particular concern is
the toxicity of electronics waste or e-waste, which contains lead, cadmium, mercury, and other poisonous
chemicals” (Ibid.).
The authors finally identifiy 3 major reasons that collaborate with e-waste which are the short lifetime of
interactive technologies, the negative points when ‘reusing’ or ‘recycling’ and the lack of concern in
environmental consequences when designing technologies (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 335).
This idea written by the authors can be related to the principle of justice “… the viability of our collective future
and includes issues of social equity, public health and wellness, and ecological stability” (Hanks, Odom,
Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 333).
As stated in the answer from question 2 (paragraph 2) toxicity from e-waste causes harmful effects in the
environment. Moreover, toxicity is unfolded by naming some chemical elements involved (Ibid.).
There are not named specific goods to be sustained, however, is is stated that planet’s resources are limited
(Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 333).
For this, Mankoff et al. (2007 cited in Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 333) suggests “The focus in SID
(Sustainable Interaction Design) to date has centered on the link between environmental sustainablity and
interactive technologies in two broad senses: (i) sustainability through design – how interactive systems can
be used to promote more sustainable behaviors; and (ii) sustainability in design – how sustainability can be
used as a critical lens in the design of interactive technologies themselves”.
Related to the obsolescence of hardware, the authors write “One of the goals of SID is to mitigate these
consequences through both design criticism and critical design…” (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 334).
51
Based on this, the authors conducted a survey aiming to collect the thoughts of computing undergraduate
students on the topic of material effects of digital technology (Ibid., p. 334).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Interactive technologies and systems are mentioned (Hanks, Odom, Roedl, Blevis, 2008, p. 333, 334).
There is no specific role stated.
Blevis, E. (2007). Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proceedings
CHI’07. ACM Press, New York, NY, 503-512.
Mankoff, J. C., Blevis, E., Borning, A., Friedman, B., Fussell, S. R., Hasbrouck, J., Woodruff, A. And Sengers,
P. (2007) Environmental sustainability and interaction. In Extended Abstracts CHI’ 07. ACM Press, New York,
NY, 2121-2124.
Fact sheet 6. P_Hanks/Odom/Roedl/Blevis
1. CONCEPT OR DEFINITION OF SUSTAINABILITY
Own notion of sustainability
Electronic waste causing environmental consequences such as toxicity
Inter-generational justice - Collective future - social equity, public health and wellness, and ecological stability
E-waste toxicity - lead, cadmium, mercury are named as poisonous chemicals
Planet’s resources
Design criticism and critical design to mitigate consequences / Collect data regarding material effects of
interactive technology
--8. MAIN ROLE OF HCI DESIGNERS:
--9. MAIN KNOWLEDGE INPUT FOR SUSTAINABLE DESIGN:
Blevis, E. (2007). Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse.
52
7.P_Odom/Pierce/Stolterman/Blevis
Title: Understanding why we preserve some things and discard others in the context of Interaction Design
Author(s): William Odom, James Pierce, Erik Stolterman, Eli Blevis
th
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 Conference – Sustainability. April 7 , 2009.
Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 39
Discourse ___
The paper is a study on why we preserve some objects against others. This study was performed through a
survey to several individuals asking about the relation with some objects in their home. The aim of the study is
to bring more insights related to the topic of sustainability and HCI.
Data collection on Durability of digital technology – Sustainable behavior
There is no definition of sustainability in the document.
Related to this, the authors write “… what has changed is the need for emphasis on understanding behaviors
in relation to sustainable ways of being, a pressing need in the face of global climate change and one that
varies with the transformations that have accrued from the widespread consumption and disposal of digital
products” (Odom, Pierce, Stolterman, Blevis, 2009, p. 1054).
There are no ideas included for the principle of justice.
Regarding this question, it is stated a relation betwen natural and social systems in the answer of question 2.
Therefore, it can be seen a relation between climate change and increased disposal of e-waste (Odom,
Pierce, Stolterman, Blevis, 2009, p. 1054). However, no more specific information of this relation.
It is not identified clearly sustainability goods.
For this, the authors say “Why do we preserve some things passionately and discard others without thought?
In this paper, and in our ongoing research, we are trying to understand this question particularly for the
context of interactive technologies and their connection to sustainable practices” (Odom, Pierce, Stolterman,
Blevis, 2009, p. 1053).
Moreover they write “We have also argued for the benefits of constructing personal inventories of things and
attitudes for particular people, since such inventories can tell us about the mediation between people and the
world and that we in that can find some of the answer to the question of how to act more sustainably (Odom,
Pierce, Stolterman, Blevis, 2009, p. 1054).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Within the understanding people’s attachment with objects, the theoretical framework of this paper is based
on Peter Paul Verbeek. This author explains that the durability of objects is based in 3 main aspects: function,
symbolism and material qualities. From these, the authors of this study, as well as Verbeek, take special
attention to material qualities. The authors write “Verbeek’s emphasis on material qualities target and
scaffolds a perspective of sustainability” (Odom, Pierce, Stolterman, Blevis, 2009, p. 1054).
The understanding of material effects in objects is connected to sustainable behavior. This also implies an
further application of new insights from this study. Therefore the following statement writen by the authors can
be related to the role of interaction designers “The challenge of designing artifacts that are pleasurable,
53
meaningful, and engaging has been and remains a significant focus” (Odom, Pierce, Stolterman, Blevis, 2009,
p. 1054).
Blevis, E. & Stolterman, E. (2007). Ensoulment and Sustainable Interaction Design. In Proc. Of IASDR 2007.
Hong Kong.
Verbeek, P. P. (2005). What things do – philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. The
Pennsylvania State Press.
Blevis, E. (2007) Sustainable Interaction Design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proc. of CHI’ 08.
ACM press, New York, NY. 503-512.
Fact sheet 8.P_Odom/Pierce/Stolterman/Blevis
Consumption and disposal of digital products as one of the causes of global climate change
- Understand why we preserve things for the context of interactive technologies
- Construct personal inventories of things and attitudes
7. MAIN AREA WITHIN INTERACTION DESIGN:
Regarding design, the focus is on material qualities
8. MAIN ROLE OF INTERACTION DESIGNERS:
Designing artifacts that are pleasurable, meaningful and engaging
Blevis, E. & Stolterman, E. Ensoulment and Sustainable Interaction Design.
Verbeek, P-P. What Things Do – Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design.
54
8.P_Pierce/Schiano/Paulos
Title: Home, habits, and energy: examining domestic interactions and energy consumption
Author(s): James Pierce, Diane J. Schiano, Eric Paulos
Publication information: Article published as part of the CHI 2010 Conference – Home Eco Behavior. April
10 -15, 2010, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Citation count: 38
Discourse ___
This is a qualitative study on the interactions between people and artifacts in the household environment. The
aim of the study is to bring more knowledge related to understanding the consumer’s behavior towards more
sustainable actions.
Data collection on Energy consumption - Sustainable behavior
There is no definition of sustainability included.
There are no ideas related to sustainability problem itself. As a starting point, the authors write “In this paper we
invetigate the relationships among ‘normal’ domestic interactions with technology, energy consumption, and the
design of everyday products and systems in order to suggest ways that ‘normal’ interactions with and practices
around technology could be designed to be more sustainable” (Pierce, Schiano, Paulos, 2010, p. 1985).
There is no ideas related to the principle of justice in this paper.
There is no ideas related to the principle of integration in this paper.
There is no ideas related to sustainability goods.
This qualitative study collects information related to energy conservation practices at home (Pierce, Schiano,
Paulos, 2010, p. 1985, 1991). The authors write “In this paper we focus on the relationships among micro-level
design decisions, user interactions, and energy consumption”(Ibid.). Moreover, their focus is on “energyconserving interactions” (Ibid.).
As part of the results, the authors write “… the importance of designing affordances and constraints to
promote conservation behavior” (Pierce, Schiano, Paulos, 2010, p. 1991).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
As strategies, the authors also ellaborate ideas in relation to: relabelling what is ‘normal’ consumption,
creating energy-efficient settings in appliances, accessibility and upgrade of efficiency options in the
interfaces of house equipments (Pierce, Schiano, Paulos, 2010, p. 1992-1993).
Related to this question, the authors first refer to Blevis (2007 cited in Pierce, Schiano, Paulos, 2010, p. 1986)
definition of design “choosing among or informing choices of future ways of being”.
After this, Shove (et al.,1998 cited in Wilson & Downlatabadi, 2007) states “As suggested by sociological
perspectives on sustainable consumption, ‘intervention designers need to recognize critical moments when
sociotechnical regimes are openly changing and can be most easily influenced’”.
Finally the authors also write “HCI and interaction design should, and will, play a role in shaping new
paradigms of energy consumption…” (Pierce, Schiano, Paulos, 2010, p. 1993).
Blevis, E. (2007). Sustainable Interaction Design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proc. Of CHI’ 08,
503-512.
55
Jackson, T. (2005). Motivating sustainable consumption – a review of models of consumer behaviour and
behavioural change. A report to the Sustainable Development Research Network.
Fact sheet 8.P_Pierce/Schiano/Paulos
--3. MAIN IDEA OF PRINCIPLE OF JUSTICE:
Collect data con energy conserving practices (focus on energy conserving interactions)
Energy efficient settings in appliances, upgrading interfaces in house equipments
Choosing among or informing choices of future ways of being
Shaping new paradigms of energy consumption
Blevis, E. Sustainable Interaction Design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse.
56
9.P_Chetty/Bernheim Brush/Meyers/Johns
Title: It’s not easy being green: understanding home computer power management
Author(s): Marshini Chetty, A. J. Bernheim Brush, Brian R. Meyers, Paul Johns
th
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 Conference – Sustainability 2. April 7 , 2009,
Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 33
Discourse ___
This study looks into power management of computers in the household. The study aims to understand the
user’s behavior in this context and get new insights towards sustainable design.
Data collection on Computer power management - Sustainable behavior
Related to this, the authors write “As energy costs rise and adverse effects of energy production become more
apparent, there is a growing interest in sustainability issues…” (Chetty, Bernheim Brush, Meyers, Johns 2009,
p. 1033).
There are no ideas related to the principle of justice.
There are no ideas related to the principle of integration.
There are no statements related to sustainability goods.
For this, the authors state, “… we suggest creating greener home computer technologies that increase
computer availability” (Chetty, Bernheim Brush, Meyers, Johns 2009, p. 1033, 1040).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The qualitative study looks into people behave in relation to the use of computers. Studies like this will
encourage future actions. For this, the authors write “… we as a community might concurrently explore how to
create greener technologies and improve power management interfaces” (Chetty, Bernheim Brush, Meyers,
Johns 2009, p. 1033, 1041).
As ideas for further investigation, the authors also suggest sensors to improve computer availability and a
change in the paradigm of desktop computer (Ibid., p. 1041).
As writen in the answer of question 8, the authors state “…explore new ways of technologies and
interfaces…” (Chetty, Bernheim Brush, Meyers, Johns 2009, p. 1033, 1041).
Blevis, E., Sustainable Interaction Design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse, CHI 2007, ACM, Florence,
Italy, 2007, 503-512.
57
Fact sheet 9.P_Chetty/Bernheim Brush/Meyers/Johns
Energy production has adverse effects
Collect data that will support the improvement of power management interfaces
Power management interfaces
Explore new ways of technologies and interfaces
Blevis, E., Sustainable Interaction Design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse
58
10.F_Nathan/Friedman/Klasnja/Kane/Miller
Title: Envisioning systemic effects on persons and society throughout interactive system design
Author(s): Lisa P. Nathan, Batya Friedman, Predrag Klasnja, Shaun K. Kane, Jessica K. Miller
Publication information: Article published as part of DIS 2008 Conference. February 25-27, 2008. Cape
Town, South Africa.
Citation count: 31
Framework/ Conceptual development_X_
Discourse ___
This document brings envisioning criteria that aims to help system thinking in future interaction design
practice.
Design methodologies
The document does not include a definition of sustainability.
The authors write “The design, development and deployment of interactive systems can substantively impact
individuals, society, and the natural environment, now and potentially well into the future” (Nathan, Friedman,
Klasnja, Kane, Miller, 2008, p. 1).
Regarding the quantity of electronic waste, Grossman (2006 cited in Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, Miller,
2008, p. 1) state “Toxins from their disposal flow into the planet’s waste streams, often sent to countries
lacking the infraestructure to handle massive amounts of contaminated material”.
Regarding this principle, the following paragraph mentions present and future consequences, the authors
wrote “The design, development and deployment of interactive systems can substantively impact individuals,
society, and the natural environment, now and potentially well into the future” (Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja,
Kane, Miller, 2008, p. 1).
Similarly, taken from answer of Question 1 - paragraph two, mentioning the countries that cannot manage the
contaminated material may imply talking about quality of life.
Tha answer from question one may also reveal the relation between interactive systems with society and
nature, but moreover, between electronic waste, nature and countries that cannot handle this material
(Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, Miller, 2008, p. 1).
Taken from the answer to question 1, it can seen which could be sustainability goods. As the authors wrote
“… individuals, society, and the natural environment, now and potentially well into the future” (Nathan,
Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, Miller, 2008, p. 1).
Given the influence of interactive technology in the societies, the authors write “Design methods that are
sensitive to these interactions provide opportunities for reflections, iteration, and course-correction in the
design process” (Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, Miller, 2008, p. 1).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
For this the authors write “The consideration of technological appropiations, along with the new forms of social
and cultural interactions that arise alongside them, should be part and parcel of ongoing technology
development” (Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, Miller, 2008, p. 1).
59
Despite there is no specific role, Wiener (1940/1961 cited in Nathan, Friedman, Klasnja, Kane, Miller, 2008, p.
1) suggests “… individuals developing interactive technologies have an ethical responsibility to take likely
consequences, positive and negative, of their designs into account”.
Blevis, E. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. 2007. In Proceedings of CHI’
07. (San Jose, CA). ACM Press, 503-512.
Grossman, E. High tech trash: digital devices, hidden toxics and human health. Island Press, Washington, 2006.
Fact sheet 10.D_Nathan/Friedman/Klasnja/Kane/Miller
- Development and use of interactive systems causes social and environmental impacts.
- Electronic waste brings toxins affecting waste streams and also countries that lack of capacity to manage ewaste.
Intra and Inter-generational justice – Development and use of interactive systems impact both the present
and future.
Quality of life – when referring to the countries that cannot deal with electronic waste
Developers and users of interactive systems (produce e-waste) – planet’s waste streams affected - countries
that cannot deal with that waste
Individuals, society (countries affected) - natural environment (planet’s waste streams)
Design methods, sensitive to the influence of interactive systems in society
New forms of social and cultural interactions
Blevis, E. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse.
60
11.P_Wakkary/Tanenbaum
Title: A sustainable identity: the creativity of an everyday designer
Author(s): Ron Wakkary, Karen Tanenbaum
th
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 Conference – Sustainability 1. April 6 , 2009.
Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 29
Discourse ___
This ethnographic study looks into the sustainable practices of people in their homes. The document aims to
find new possibilities of use and adaptation of objects in households.
Data collection on domestic use of objects
The study does not include a specific definition of sustainability.
The authors identify some problems. Related to electronic waste, EPA (2008, cited in Wakkary, Tanenbaum,
2009, p. 365) estimates “… in 2005, a total of 1.9 to 2.2 million tons of electronic products were obsolete. 1.5
to 1.8 million tons of that total was disposed in landfills and less than 400,000 tons were recycled”. Moreover,
the authors write “While this represents only the general waste dimension of the sustainability picture, leaving
aside the energy consumption issues, we believe it makes clear the negative impact of the consumption and
disposal cycle of digital artifacts” (Ibid.).
The authors also mention a sustainability problem initially stated by Eli Blevis (2006, 2007) when discussing
sustainability and HCI. For this, the authors write “He (Blevis) highlights concerns such as the use of toxic
metals in computers and other technologies, as well as market-driven obsolescence” (Wakkary, Tanenbaum,
2009, p. 367).
There is no ideas related to the principle of integration.
There are no ideas that clearly identify sustainability goods.
For this, the authors write “We advocate that an understanding of the user that includes the notion of the
everyday designer together with a new set of design-in-use principles offers a more sustainable approach to
interaction design” (Wakkary, Tanenbaum, 2009, p. 365). Related to this and the findings in the study, the
authors also write “We found that the actions of the everyday designer with today’s non-digital artifacts
strongly suggest new desirable attributes for tomorrow’s digital artifacts” (Ibid., p. 366).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Related to this and the everyday design, the authors write “We describe home dwellers as a type of everyday
designer who remakes or modifies systems and who appropriates design artifacts and surroundings as
creative resources” (Wakkary, Tanenbaum, 2009, p. 367). Therefore, every artifact or system within the home
environment is seen as a potential to be changed.
For this, the authors bring a reflection made by Eli Blevis. The authors write “Blevis advocates a critical design
perspective or an ethical design stance in which interaction designers have a heightened awareness of the
environmental impact of their design enterprise” (Wakkary, Tanenbaum, 2009, p. 365).
61
Blevis, E., Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proc. CHI 2007, ACM
Press (2007), 503-512.
Walker, S. Sustainable by Design: explorations in theory and practice. Earthscan, Sterling, Va., 2006.
Fact sheet 11.P_Wakkary/Tanenbaum
Consumption and disposal of digital artifacts that causes negative impacts in the environment
An understanding of the user that includes the notion of everyday designer
Redesign of systems from the notion of everyday designer
Awareness of the environmental impacts
Blevis, E., Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse.
Walker, S. Sustainable by Design: explorations in theory and practice.
62
12.D_Dourish
Title: HCI and Environmental Sustainability: the politics of design and the design of politics
Author(s): Paul Dourish
Publication information: Article published as part of DIS 2010 Conference. August 16-20, 2010. Aarhus,
Denmark.
Citation count: 25
Discourse _X_
This paper investigates the discourse related to HCI and sustainability. Specifically, it looks into the HCI
community approach to environmental sustainability and the undermined design possibilities but also the new
opportunities to come.
Analysis of Sustainable Interaction Design
There is no definition of sustainability included in this document.
This document does not look into a specific sustainability problem. However, the author states a few
environmental impacts that are the common concern of individuals when caring about environment (Dourish,
2010, p. 2). For this, the author writes “Frequently, this is inspired by a sudden realization of the environmental
consequences of everyday actions – choices people make in transportation, disposal of waste materials, etc.”
(Ibid., p. 2). The author also states these as reasons to focus on environmental behavior.
There are no ideas related to a principle of justice in relation to an interpretation of sustainability. Still, the
author highlights the importance to bring environmental justice as well as social justice as part of the
sustainability discourse in HCI (Dourish, 2010, p. 2-3).
The answer from question 2 shows a relation between the individual’s actions and the consequences in the
environment (Dourish, 2010, p. 2).
Nature and the environment can be seen as the general sustainability goods in the HCI sustainability
discourses (Dourish, 2010, p. 2).
There is no practical result connected to a sustainability problem. However, the author analizes the HCI
discourse related to sustainability in order to expand the understanding of this type of discourse (Dourish,
2010, p. 1).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The main area involved within Interaction Design is the development of the environmental discourse.
Moreover, areas such as sensor systems, information and visualization technology are mentioned during the
analysis of the discourse (Dourish, 2010, p. 2-5).
The authors bring a reflection of the environmental discourse and HCI, thus, his proposal is related to expand
the theoretical approaches of environmental issues with a better understanding of politics of design (Dourish,
2010, p. 7-8).
Cronon,W. 1995. Uncommon ground: rethinking the human place in nature. Norton
Macnaughton, P. And Urry, J. 1998. Contested Natures. London: Sage.
63
Robbins, P. 2004. Political Ecology. Oxford: Blackwell.
Williams, R. 1980. Ideas of Nature. Problems in Materialism and Culture, Williams (ed), 67-85.
Pepper, D. 2007. Tensions and dilemmas in ecotopianism. Environmental values, 16, 289-312.
Fact sheet 12.D_Dourish
Everyday actions (transportation, disposal of waste) that causes environmental consequences
Individual action and choices – consequences in nature 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
The environment 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Better understanding of the environmental discourse
The environmental discourse within HCI
Expand theoretical approaches on environmental issues
Cronon,W. 1995. Uncommon ground: rethinking the human place in nature.
Robbins, P. 2004. Political Ecology.
64
13.P_Dillahunt/Mankoff/Paulos/Fussell
Title: It’s not all about ‘green’: energy use in low-income communities
Author(s): Tawanna Dillahunt, Jennifer Mankoff, Eric Paulos, Susan Fussell
Publication information: Article published as part of UbiComp 2009 Conference. Sept 30 – Oct 3, 2009,
Orlando, Florida, USA.
Citation count: 22
Discourse ___
This study looks into the energyy use of low-income households in USA and aims to understand the reasons
of their consumption and/or sustainable practices in relation to energy.
Data collection on energy use in the household - Sustainable behavior
Gardner and Stern (2008 cited in Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009, p. 255) suggest “Energy use and
its impact on the environment have become a topic of global concern in recent years. In countries with high
per-capita energy use, such as the United States, households consume 21.7% of total U.S. energy and
generate 21.1% of total U.S. carbon emissions”.
Moreover, Van Raajj and Verhallen (1983 cited in Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009, p. 255) suggest
“‘Necessities’ such as housing, home energy, food and transport are the largest contributors to energy use
(and thus carbon emissions) in low-income households”.
Specifically about low-income households, Corcoran (2001 cited in Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009,
p. 255) write “Economic factors such as an inability to purchase energy efficient devices, and renting or
owning homes in poor repair [ibid.], are likely to have a big impact”.
There are no ideas related to the principle of justice as part of the sustainability interpretation. However, there are
ideas related to intergenerational justice in the study results, when the participants expressed their concern about
their descendants an future generations (Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009, p. 258-259).
There are no ideas that identify sustainability goods.
During the whole study, the authors express the focus of their study in U.S. low-income households.
Related to this, Corcoran (2001 cited in Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009, p. 255) suggest “Since
low-income households tend to have smaller homes, it is important to understand the causes of their
relatively high home energy emissions”. Moreover the authors state “The goal of our study was to elicit
participant viewpoints and practices surrounding energy management” (Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos,
Fussell, 2009, p. 256).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
For this the authors write “Basic assumptions about responsibility for bills, building ownership, and the
relationships between households members need to be reconsidered when designing Ubicomp technologies
for saving energy” (Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009, p. 256).
65
The role of designers is related to Ubicomp technologies in the new low-income context. Therefore, the
authors state “Designers may need to address issues such as unsupportive landlords or housemates”
(Dillahunt, Mankoff, Paulos, Fussell, 2009, p. 256).
Blevis, E. (2007). Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & re-use. CHI’ 07, 503-12.
Fact sheet 13.P_Dillahunt/Mankoff/Paulos/Fussell
Energy use (housing, home energy, food, transport) cause impacts in the environment
To elicit participant’s viewpoints and practices surrounding energy management.
As an example: Energy saving Ubicomp technologies.
To address solutions related to sustainability in different contexts
Blevis, E. (2007). Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & re-use.
66
14.P_Bonanni/Hockenberry/Zwarg/Csikszentmihályi/Ishii
Title: Small business applications of sourcemap: a web tool for Sustainable Design and supply chain
transparency
Author(s): Leonardo Bonanni, Matthew Hockenberry, David Zwarg, Chris Csikszentmihályi, Hiroshi Ishii
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2010 Conference – Sense and sustainability. April
10-15, 2010. Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Citation count: 19
Discourse ___
This study is about an application of sustainable interaction design through web tools for small businesses.
This proposal aims to facilitates the visualization of data related to Life Cycle Assesment for product and
services enterprises.
Application of sustainability in design– Life Cycle of a product
Yes, the authors refer to the definition from Our Common Future. The authors quote “We are at a critical
moment in the pursuit of sustainability, or how to meet ‘the needs of the present without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs’” (World Commission on Environment and Development,
1987) (Bonanni, et al., 2010, p. 937).
The sustainability problem is not clearly stated. However, it is stated the actions to alleviate the environmental
effects. The authors refer to a text related to Life Cycle Regulations (Anon., n.d. cited in Bonanni, et al., 2010,
p. 938). ) that says “Mandatory regulation has been very effective in spreading sustainable practices by
restricting dangerous compounds and reducing pollution, waste and resource depletion”.
A general principle of justice is stated in the cited definition of Sustainable Development in Our Common
Future, “how to meet ‘the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs’” (World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987). However, there is no other
specific principle related to the sustainability problem.
There are no ideas related to a principle of integration.
There are no ideas that identify or name sustainability goods.
Related to this, the authors state “The practice of sustainable design relies on understanding the supply
chains behind products and services-information that is out of reach for most people. Supply chain
transparency is the disclosure of materials and processes and where they occur. A comprehensive approach
to sustainable design compares potential supply chains to arrive at a solution that meets social and
environmental goals” (Bonanni, et al., 2010, p. 937).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The result of this study is based on visualization of information through web-tools (Bonanni, et al., 2010, p.
937-938). Specifically, the visualization is related to Life Cycle Assessment data (Ibid, 2010).
Related to this, the authors write “… the choices made in the professional world constitute design –‘the act of
choosing among or informing choices for future ways of being’” (Goodman, 2009) (Bonanni, et al., 2010, p. 937).
Moreover, the authors also write “Sustainable design can bring to market new products and services with
long-term social and environmental benefits” (McDonough, Braungart, 2002) (Bonanni, et al., 2010, p. 937).
67
Blevis, E. 2007. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proceedings
of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (San Jose, California, USA, April 28 May 03, 2007). CHI '07. ACM, New York, NY, 503 - 512. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1240624.1240705.
McDonough, W. and Braungart, M. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. New York: North
Point Press, 2002.
Fact sheet 14.P_Bonanni/Hockenberry/Zwarg/Csikszentmihályi/Ishii
1. CONCEPT OR DEFINITION RELATED TO SUSTAINABILITY:
WCED Definition
Pollution, waste and resource depletion
Understanding supply chains products and services-information and compare them to get solutions that meet
social and environmental requirements.
Visualization of information - LCA
Choosing among or informing choices for future ways of being
Blevis, E. 2007. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse.
McDonough, W. and Braungart, M. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things.
68
15.F_Bonanni/Parkes/Ishii
Title: Future craft: how digital media is transforming product design
Author(s): Leonardo Bonanni, Amanda Parkes, Hiroshi Ishii
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2008 Conference – Proceedings alt.chi. April 5-10,
2008. Florence, Italy.
Citation count: 15
Discourse ___
This study brings a new methodology called Future Craft for teaching product design. This methodology aims
to bring new insights to designers when approaching social and environmental sustainability.
Design Methodologies
There is no definition of sustainability included in the paper.
Related to this, the authors write “Industrial production has fostered vast distances between the sources of
products and their users, with often disastrous social and environmental consequences” (Bonanni, Parkes,
Ishii, 2008, p. 2554).
Moreover, the authors write “The globalization of industrial production isolates consumers from designers and
manufacturers, and encourages complex, closed products and resource-intensive and opaque manufacturing
practices. Recently society has grown more concerned with the severe consequences of unchecked industrial
production, including pollution, resource consumption, toxic products, and unethical practices” (Bonanni,
Parkes, Ishii, 2008, p. 2555).
There are no ideas related to a principle of justice.
The study proposes a new design methodology called Future Craft which integrates 3 innovative tools: Public
Design, Local Design and Personal Design (Bonanni, Parkes, Ishii, 2008, p. 2554). Related to this, the
authors write “Future Craft seeks to apply these emerging tools and processes to the teaching of product
design in order to intervene directly with the conception of new objects to strive for social and environmental
sustainability (Ibid., 2008, p. 2554).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Related to Public Design and Open Design, the authors highlight the use of web-publication tools and social
networks to share information (Bonanni, Parkes, Ishii, 2008, p. 2555-2556). For this, the authors write “…
products designers create a public identity to become informed, to interact with the marketplace and to offer
novel and improved products” (Ibid., p. 2555).
Related to the role of designers, this statement written by the authors says “Engaging in new systems of
production, distribution, ownership and re-use allows designers to promote truly sustainable products by
shifting the dominant models and cultural practices” (Bonanni, Parkes, Ishii, 2008, p. 2557).
As another role, the authors write “… designers need to be their own ethnographers, continuously evolving
and appropriaitng methods of evaluation for their discipline…” (Bonanni, Parkes, Ishii, 2008, p. 2562).
69
McDonough, W. and Braugart, M. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way we Make Things. New York: North
Point Press, 2002
Fact sheet 15.P_Bonanni/Parkes/Ishii
Globalization of industrial production, society growth (pollution, resource consumption, toxic products,
unethical practices) brings environmental consequences
New methodologies of design
Web publication tools – social networks – public identities
Promote sustainable products
McDonough, W. and Braugart, M. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way we Make Things.
70
16.F_Baumer/Silberman
Title: When the implication is not to design (technology)
Author(s): Eric P. S. Baumer, M. Six Silberman
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2011 Conference – Session: Design Methods. May
7 – 12, 2011. Vancouver, BC, Canada.
Citation count: 13
Discourse ___
This study brings questions to be used as part of future research in HCI. The aim of these questions is to help
the understanding of whether technology is an appropriate or inapropriate solution when tackling
sustainability.
Design Methodology
There is no definition of sustainability.
There is no sustainability problem clearly stated. However, the study questions if technology is an appropriate
solution when approaching sustainability (Baumer, Silberman, 2011, p. 2271).
For this the authors write “… this paper lays out three specific, concrete, ways of articulating when technology
may be inappropriate, by presenting three questions to be asked during technology design and
implementation…” (Baumer, Silberman, 2011, p. 2271).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The author specifies that the study is related to computational and information technology. Among this, a few
examples related to sensors, mobile phones and data visualization devices (Baumer, Silberman, 2011, p.
2271-2273).
For this, the authors write “An important process in design is to explore the solution space, i.e., to investigate
the realm of possible approaches that will satisfactorily address a given problem” (Baumer, Silberman, 2011,
p. 2273).
Moreover, tha authors write “Rather than imagining that technology design offers solutions to the problems of
unsustainability, we suggest thinking of design as an intervention in a complex situation” (Baumer, Silberman,
2011, p. 2273).
Silberman, M. S., B. Tomlinson. Toward an ecological sensibility. CHI’ 10: 3469-74.
71
Fact sheet 16.D_Baumer/Silberman
--5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
--6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Questions to be included in design methodologies when designing new technology-based solutions.
Computational and information technology – sensors, mobile phones – data visualization devices
Explore the solution arena and reflect towards new possibilities
Silberman, M. S., B. Tomlinson. Toward an ecological sensibility.
72
17.P_Broms/Katzeff/Bång/Nyblom/Ilstedt/Ehrnberger
Title: Coffee maker patterns and the design of energy feedback artefacts
Author(s): Loove Broms, Cecilia Katzeff, Magnus Bång, Åsa Nyblom, Sara Ilstedt Hjelm, Karin Ehrnberger
Denmark.
Citation count: 12
Discourse ___
This study presents the Energy Aware Clock, an artifact that enhances energy awareness in the household.
Application of sustainability in design - Energy awareness
There is no defintion of sustainability included.
Biesiot and Noorman (1999 cited in Broms, et al., 2010, p. 93) suggest “Households are responsible for approximately
15-20 percent of total energy related CO2 emissions and this proportion is expected to keep rising”.
Moreover, the authors write “Since the seventies, the use of electricity is Swedish households has increased
with about 50 percent and behaviour patterns are considered responsible for a major part of this increase”
(Broms, et al., 2010, p. 93).
There are no sustainability good identified.
The authors state the result as the visualization and feedback of energy consumption data (Broms, et al.,
2010, p. 93). For this, the authors write “… households receiving feedback reduced their electricity
consumption up to 15.7 percent. Feedback decreases the experienced gap between the production and
consumption of energy” (Broms, et al., 2010, p. 93).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Wisneski, et al., (1998 cited in Broms, et al., 2010, p. 94) suggests “This paper focuses in the design of ambient
interfaces; a class of user interfaces bridging the gap between physical and the electronic world”.
For this, the authors write “In focusing the role of design and technology for promoting energy efficient
behaviour, the human computer interaction community may play a significant role” (Broms, et al., 2010,
p. 93).
Blevis, E. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. CHI '07: Proceedings of the
SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (Apr 1, 2007).
73
Fact sheet 17.P_Broms/Katzeff/Bång/Nyblom/Ilstedt/Ehrnberger
Energy consumption and CO2 emissions create environmental impacts
Households receiving feedback can reduce their electricity consumption
Ambient interfaces
Promote energy efficient behavior
74
18.P_Pierce/Paulos
Title: Materializing energy
Author(s): James Pierce, Eric Paulos
Denmark.
Citation count: 12
Discourse ___
This study looks into the way energy is understood by individuals. The authors propose to materialize energy
through the design of mementos that contribute in the understanding of energy as a thing. The aim of the
study is to approach the issue of energy awareness in a different way.
Application of sustainability in design - Energy awareness
The authors state the initial problem as energy consumption (Pierce, Paulos, 2010, p. 115). However, as part
of their study, they explore the concept of energy brought by Stern and Aronson (1094 cited in Pierce, Paulos,
2010, p. 116) who bring 4 ways to conceptualize energy, “energy as a comodity (e.g. electricity, coal, oil,
natural gas), energy as an ecological resource, energy as a social necessity and energy as strategic material”.
Therefore, this quote shows the relation of energy with natural resources.
It is mentioned in the document that energy is related to individual’s quality of life and wellbeing as well as
preserving natural resources (Pierce, Paulos, 2010, p. 113). However there is no more ellaboration of these
ideas.
There are no ideas related to a principle of integration in the document.
There are not goods identified to be sustained.
The authors write “The design approach proposed and employed here is one of materializing energy in
everyday life” (Pierce, Paulos, 2010, p. 113). This is proposed as an “… alternative of ‘energy alternatives’…”
(Ibid, p. 114). Moreover they state “… energy-as-materiality is proposed involving collecting, keeping, sharing
and activating energy” (Ibid., P. 113).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The authors refer to interactive technologies in general (Pierce, Paulos, 2010, p. 114).
While looking into new ways to see energy, the authors write “… consider reconsidering assumptions
informing sustainable interaction design and HCI research…” (Pierce, Paulos, 2010, p. 114).
Devine-Wright, P. (2006). Energy citizenship: psychological aspects of evolution in sustainable energy
technologies. In J. Murphy (ed.) Governance of Sustainable Technology.
Borgmann, A. (1984). Technology and character of contemporary life. University of Chicago Press.
Verbeek, P-P. (2005). What Things Do – Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design. Penn
State.
75
Fact sheet 18.P_Pierce/Paulos
Energy consumption causes the use of resources coal, oil, and natural gas
Conceptualization of energy: as an ecological resource, social necessity and strategic material
Quality of life and well being – energy forms part of both terms.
Materializing energy in everyday life
Interactive technologies
To reconsider assumptions within Sustainability and Design
Verbeek, P-P. (2005). What Things Do – Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design.
76
19.P_Foster/Blythe/Cairns/Lawson
Title: Competitive Carbon Counting: can social networking sites make saving energy more enjoyable?
Author(s): Derek Foster, Mark Blythe, Paul Cairns, Shaun Lawson
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2010 Conference – Work in Progress. April 14-15,
2010. Atlanta, GA, USA.
Citation count: 10
Discourse ___
The study presents the Facebook application ‘Wattsup’ and was implemented between a group of
householders in order to obtain and share data of energy consumption between them. The study remarks the
importance of social networks as a way to enhance energy saving.
Application of sustainability in design - Energy use
The starting point of the sustainability problem is domestic energy consumption (Foster, Blythe, Cairns,
Lawson, 2010, p. 4040). After this, Defra (2006) and Kinver (2006 cited in Foster, Blythe, Cairns, Lawson,
2010, p. 4040) suggest “Domestic households alone are responsible for 30% of the UK’s total energy
consumption [7] and, since 1970, household energy demands have grown by 32% [16]”.
Moreover, the authors write, “Rising energy consumption currently still results in increased CO2 emissions…”
(Foster, Blythe, Cairns, Lawson, 2010, p. 4040).
There are ni ideas related to a principle of justice.
There are no identified sustainability goods.
For this, the authors write “… embedding live, continuous energy data into a fully interactive socially-enabled
energy application” (Foster, Blythe, Cairns, Lawson, 2010, p. 4040). The aim is to reduce energy
consumption.
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The study focuses in design of interfaces and the graphic elements within it with the objective to engage the
user (Foster, Blythe, Cairns, Lawson, 2010, p. 4041).
There is no clearly stated a role for interaction designers, however, it is aimed to design more effective
persuasive experiences by using social networks (Foster, Blythe, Cairns, Lawson, 2010, p. 4044).
Mankoff, J., Blevis, E., Borning, A., Friedman, B., Fussell, S., Hasbrouck, J., Woodruff, A., and Sengers,
P. Environmental Sustainability and Interaction. In Proc. CHI 2007, 2121-2124.
77
Fact sheet 19.P_Foster/Blythe/Cairns/Lawson
Energy consumption and CO2 emissions
Embedding live, continuous energy data into a fully interactive social-enabled energy applications
Design of interfaces – graphic elements
To design more effective persuasive experiences
Mankoff, J., Blevis, E., Borning, A., Friedman, B., Fussell S., Hasbrouck, J., Woodruff, A., and Sengers P.
Environmental Sustainability and Interaction.
78
20.P_Hirsch/Anderson
Title: Cross currents: water scarcity and sustainable HCI
Author(s): Tad Hirsch, Ken Anderson
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2010 Conference – Imagine all the people. April 1015, 2010. Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Citation count: 8
Discourse ___
This study looks into new aspects of water consumption, use and access. Specifically brings new insights
related to political and social aspects involved in water consumption, opening the arena of sustainability to
bigger systems and to face bigger challenges from the point of view of design.
Systematic analysis on water consumption
The initial problem for this study is the present and future scarcity of water. For this, the World Health
Organization and United Nations Children's Fund Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and
Sanitation report (2008, cited in Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2844) suggest “Approximately 1 in 8 people
currently lack access to safe water supplies [1]…”.
Moreover Seckler, et al., (1998 cited in Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2844) suggest “… some estimate as many
as two-thirds of the world’s population will face water shortages by 2025 [8]”.
Regarding the resource water, the authors bring several social and political aspects that are part of the
consumption and access to water (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2845). Related to consumption, the authors
bring and write the following “We discovered complex relationships between water and money that are shaped
by broad institutional and policy frameworks. For example, in New Mexico as throughout the American West,
water use is tied to water rights. Homeowners, farmers, factories, municipalities, indigenous tribes, and other
stakeholders all have water allocation rights that entitle them to a certain amount of water per year” (Ibid., p.
2845). They conclude this idea by remarking that the non-use of the amount of water takes out from the
individuals the right to count with that resource (Ibid., p. 2845).
Due to the specific location chosen for the study, the allocation of water is another important issue. Demand of
water is usually over the supply capacity, which leads to the government to apply rules for restrictions of use
(Ibid., p. 2846). For this, the authors write “Currently, New Mexico’s surface water is distributed according to a
market-based system of transferable “rights,” while groundwater is largely unregulated (Ibid., p. 2846).
Consequences of this is the overuse of groundwater, and a distrust system prone to law-breaking activities
(Ibid., p. 2846).
Finally, a long-term planning in the use of the resource and the development of the area seems to be difficult
to achieve. For this the authors write “… a representative of the State Engineer’s office cited their 40-year
planning horizon to consider environmental impacts as evidence of deep environmental commitment” (Ibid., p.
2847). However, environmentalist does not agree with the time set as long-term planning to envision impacts
in nature.
The answer of question 3 states the relation of nature systems and social systems in several ways, from the
consumption of water, the use, the access and the different regulations affecting these.
As seen in the answer of question 3, the main sustainability good is water (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2845).
Once the study has taken into account different aspects of water consumption, the authors call into question
which is the right actions of designers when approaching sustainability issues. For this, they propose to
challenge the current views and assumptions made specifically of the involved actors in the actions such as
consumption and in looking into bigger scenarios (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2847-2849). Related to this, the
authors write “… designing for systemic change presents a fundamental challenge to traditional notions of humancentered design” (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2850).
79
D. DESIGN FOCUS
There is no specific or main area of Interaction Design related to the practical result. The authors’ view goes
more into a change in the common approach of sustainability. However, the authors highlight the importance
of the already developed areas in HCI. For this, the authors write “… our community has developed deep
expertise in educational technology, modeling and simulation, decision support tools, participatory planning,
remote collaboration, process monitoring and remote sensing. All of these techniques and technologies have
a central role to play in addressing the challenges outlined above” (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2850).
For this the authors write “… care must be taken to understand users’ specific goals, fears, and aspirations
and to design accordingly” (Hirsch, Anderson, 2010, p. 2848).
Goodman, E. "Three Environmental Discourses in Human-Computer Interaction," CHI 2009 Extended Abstracts.
Dillahunt, T., Mankoff, J., Paulos, E., Fussell, S. "It's Not All About 'Green': Energy Use in Low-Income
Communities," UbiComp 2009.
Fact sheet 20.P_Hirsch/Anderson
The unregulated use of water causes the lack of safe access of water
Distributive justice - Right to access safe water to all stakeholders under fair conditions
Use of water (regulations and policy frameworks) – use of groundwater – lack of safe water in the future 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
Groundwater and surface water 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Designing systemic change – looking into bigger scenarios
Understand users and the different needs they have and design accordingly
Goodman, E. Three Environmental Discourses in Human-Computer Interaction.
80
21.P_Kim/Hong/Magerko
Title: Coralog: Use-aware visualization connecting human micro-activities to environmental change
Author(s): Tanyoung Kim, Hwajung Hong, Brian Magerko
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 Conference – Spotlight on works in progress
– Session 2. April 4-9, 2009. Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 9
Discourse ___
The study proposes a new way to enhance sustainable behavior by a widget named ‘Coralog”. The study
looks into the design of the widget which will conect the information of energy consumption and its impact in
coral reefs.
Application of sustainability in design - Energy consumption
The main sustainability problem is related to energy consumption and climate change (Kim, Hong, Magerko,
2009, p. 4303). For this, Domack (2005 cited in Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4304) suggests “… climate
change such as the increasing air and ocean temperatures around the globe is primarily caused by human
activity on a micro level”.
Specifically about coral reefs depletion, Nurse (1998 cited in Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4305) suggests,
“Increasing CO2 levels and temperature changes caused by burning fossil fuels are considered main
influences on global climate change (figure 2)”. Kleypas (1999 cited in Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4305)
states “Elevated sea surface temperatures can cause coral to turn into white and are referred to as ‘bleached’.
Moreover, coral skeletons can be weakened by higher temperature and chemical reactions (see figure 3)”.
The authors write about the effects on the ecosystems due to the coral reef depletion “Reef fish can be
exposed to danger because of the lack of suitable reef shelter. As reef fish stocks decline, the local ecosystem
can be quickly collapsed” (Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4305).
Regarding this principle, part of this answer can be found in the answer from question number 2. The authors
states the relation between the human activity and the consequences in climate change, coral reefs and the
local ecosystems (Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4305). The authors also give an overview of the natural
functions and ecosystems affected by the human’s actions (Ibid, p. 4305).
A detailed overview of the impact in the local ecosystems gives also a clearer idea of the sustainability goods.
As seen in answer from question 2, the coral reefs and reef fish are two goods to be sustained (Kim, Hong,
Magerko, 2009, p. 4305).
For this, the authors explain that the communication of energy consumption should be connected to a real
impact in nature in order to enhance the awareness in the energy user (Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 43034304). For this, the authors write “… the public become aware of the connection between their everyday
activities and global climate change” (Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4303).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
In this study the main area is eco-visualization, by showing the data related with energy use vs. data of the
impact of coral reefs, based also on scientific facts (Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4304-4306).
81
There is no clear ideas related to the role of interaction designers, however, it is aimed to find innovative ways
to inform and create awareness (Kim, Hong, Magerko, 2009, p. 4307).
There is no a main influential reference for sustainable design in the paper.
Fact sheet 21.P_Kim/Hong/Magerko
1.CONCEPT OR DEFINITION OF SUSTAINABILITY:
Energy consumption causes climate change / elevated temperatures in the ocean / impact on coral reefs /
Declining of reef fish stock
Human activities – climate change - impacts in local ecosystems
Higher temperatures in the sea (and chemical reactions) - bleaching of coral reefs, weakening of coral
skeletons – declining of reef fish 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
Coral reefs / local fish 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Relate energy consumption with a real impact in nature
Eco-visualizations
---
82
22.P_Xiao/Fan
Title: PrintMarmoset: redesigning the print button for sustainability
Author(s): Jun Xiao, Jian Fan
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 Conference – Expertise/People finding. April
th
6 , 2009. Boston MA, USA.
Citation count: 5
Discourse ___
This study looks into the possiblity to optimize the process of web printing by desinging a tool for web
browsers that helps in selection and visualization of data to be printed.
Application of sustainability in design - Paper waste
There are very few ideas related to the sustainability problem. The authors write “Rapidly dwindling natural
resources are calling for a shift from a model based on producing more new goods to one that emphazises
sustainable growth” (Xiao, Fan, 2009, p. 109).
Specifically, the design problem is the increasing printing and consequently paper waste (Xiao, Fan, 2009, p.
110). Related to this the authors write “… the continuing and increasing use of printing (50 trillion pages in
2007) calls for an examination…” (Ibid, p. 110). In addition to this, they write “The shocking waste of paper we
witnessed during the field…” (Ibid, p. 110).
There are no clearly identified sustainability goods.
For this the authors write “… our work that aims to reduce paper waste from web printing” (Xiao, Fan, 2009, p.
109).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The authors design a tool for a web browser that can allow green web printing (Xiao, Fan, 2009, p. 110). This
tool is based on data selection and its visualization that allow to perform a better printing (Ibid, p. 110).
Ideas related to the main role are stated by the authors “Effective SID techniques should motivate lasting
behavior changes in users” (Xiao, Fan, 2009, p. 109).
Moreover, in the relation to the problem of paper waste, the authors write “… as HCI researchers, we have a
responsibility and the power to actively address the problems right now” (Xiao, Fan, 2009, p. 110).
Blevis, E. Sustainable interaction design: invention & disposal, renewal & reuse. In Proc. CHI 2007, ACM
Press (2007), 503-512.
83
Fact sheet 22.P_Xiao/Fan
Use and waste of paper diminishes natural resources
Reduce web-printing paper waste
Tools for web browser – selection and data visualization
Motivating lasting behavior changes
84
23.F_Pierce
Title: Material awareness: promoting reflection on everyday materiality
Author(s): James Pierce
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009, April 4 – 9, 2009, Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 5
Discourse ___
The study looks into awareness of digital technology. For this, the authors propose 2 concepts that could be
taken into account when designing digital technology.
Design methodology
There study does not go into a sustainability problem. The starting point of the study is the 2 main areas of
interest that HCI has addressed recently, which are increasing the life span of digital products and the second
one is reflection on the use of technology (Pierce, 2009, p. 4460). From this the study focus of the life span of
products through material awareness (Ibid., p. 4460).
There are no ideas related to sustainability goods.
Being the starting point the awareness of materials and consequently the durability of digital technology, the
authors propose reflections and critical thinking whe finding design solutions (Pierce, 2009, p. 4461). After
this, the author relate his critical thinking specifically to Heidegger’s concepts of the relation between humans
and technology (Ibid., 2009, p. 61).
Based on this the author writes “ I present conceptual prototypes employing two primary strategies, namely (i)
amplifying the histories of things and (ii) amplifying the agency of things” (Pierce, 2009, p. 4462).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Since the paper discusses mostly 2 concepts, it does not apply them on specific areas within HCI.
The purpose of the concepts related to awareness in materials is to call the atention of designers to those
aspects and to consider this when designing (Pierce, 2009, p. 4464).
Mazé, R. & Redström, J. (2005). Form and the computational object. In Digital creativity, 16 (1), 7 – 18.
85
Fact sheet 25.P_Pierce
Critical thinking when finding solutions in design
--8. MAIN ROLE OF INTERACTION DESIGNERS:
Attention to aspects such as awareness in materials when doing design.
Mazé, R. & Redström, J. (2005). Form and the computational object.
86
24.P_Odom/Pierce
Title: Improving with age: designing enduring interactive products
Author(s): William Odom, James Pierce
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 Conference – Spotlight on works in progress
– Session 1. April 4-9, 2009. Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 5
Discourse ___
This study looks into the relation of people with non digital objects and digital ones. This study looks into the
household context collects information for future durable designs.
Data collection on material awareness
No, there is no definition of sustainability included.
The study does not include a sustainability problem. The study starts with the already existing actions of the
HCI community related to durability of increasing the life span of products.
There are no sustainability goods identified.
Being the starting point to extend the life span of digital products, the authors write “… this study aims to
examine people’s relationships with digital technology and non-digital objects in the home–with an eye toward
the ways in which products improve over time” (Odom and Pierce, 2009, p. 3794).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
It is mentioned digital technologies in general (Odom and Pierce, 2009).
Related to this, the authors write “We must ask ourselves, in what ways can designers of digital technologies
exploit the unique properties of “digital-material” in order to design digital products with qualities that improve
over time?” (Odom and Pierce, 2009, p. 3797).
Blevis, E. & Stolterman, E. (2007). Ensoulment and Sustainable Interaction Design. In Proc. IASDR ’07. Hong
Kong, China: HKPT.
87
Fact sheet 24.P_Odom/Pierce
Examine relationship between people and digital technology as well as non-digital objects.
To exploit the properties of digital-materials
Blevis, E. & Stolterman, E. (2007). Ensoulment and Sustainable Interaction Design.
88
25.F_Kobayashi/Ueoka/Hirose
Title: Human Computer Biosphere Interaction: towards a sustainable society
Author(s): Hiroki Kobayashi, Ryoko Ueoka, Michitaka Hirose
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2009 – alt.chi – Build a better world. April 4-9,
2009. Boston, MA, USA.
Citation count: 3
Framework/ Conceptual development_X_
Discourse ___
This study proposes the notion of Human Computer Biosphere Interaction. The study looks into enhancing
relations with nature by auditory ways.
Ideas/principles for sustainable design – nature and biosphere
For this, Murayama et al., (2006 cited in Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose, 2009, p. 2510) suggests “Ironically,
the nature conservation movement, which promotes conservation areas for preservation purposes, has
increased the demand for tourism in these areas and this has accelerated the speed of environmental
destruction”.
The authors explain a view of the relation between people and nature. For this, the authors refer to Suzuki
(1959 cited in Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose, 2009, p. 2510) who suggests “… a sense of belonging to nature is
essential for emotional balance. Japanese Zen Buddhism, for example, encourages deep meditation to
achieve a sense of being one with nature”.
When explaining the natural interactions between species in ecosystems, Leigh, Rand and Windsor (1996)
and Reagan and Waide, (1996 cited in Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose, 2009, p. 2513) suggest “In particular,
animal communities in tropical forests have extremely complex interactions involving vast numbers of
species”. Following, Krause (1987) suggests, “The natural rounds in a rainforest convincingly demonstrate the
special relationships among the many insects, birds, mammals and amphibians. If one creature stops
vocalizing, another immediately joins the chorus. Therefore, the animals interact bio-acoustically with other
animals according to the biological diversity of that habitat” (cited in Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose, 2009, p.
2513).
According to the answer of question 2, natural areas that aimed to be conserved (Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose,
2009, p. 2510).
For this the authors write “… it is necessary to establish a concept, a method, and an interface, Sustainable
Interaction with Ecosystems, by which we can achieve a feeling of belonging to nature without causing
environmental destruction and in which human and nature coexist” (Kobayashi, Ueoka, Hirose, 2009, p. 2510).
The purpose of this is, as write by the authors to look into “non-human centric interactions” (Ibid., 2009, p. 2512).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The authors name some projects as example for a sustainable interaction with ecosystems. For this, the
authors name examples such as acoustic systems or computer systems that are instrument of communication
between nature or animals (wildlife) or ecosystems with humans.
89
There are no clear roles stated specifically to designers.
This project does not use a particular view of sustainable design.
Fact sheet 25.T_Kobayashi/Ueoka/Hirose
1. CONCEPT OR DEFINTION OF SUSTAINABILITY:
Tourism in conservation areas creates environmental destruction
Nature (complex interactions in ecosystems) (bio-acoustical interactions in nature) – emotional balance 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
Preserved natural areas 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
A method called Sustainable Interaction with Ecosystems – non-human centric interactions
Acoustic systems / computer systems
---
90
26.P_Odom
Title: Personal Inventories: toward durable human-product relationships
Author(s): William Odom
Publication information: Article published as part of CHI 2008 Conference – Proceedings / Student
Research Competition. April 5-10, 2008. Florence, Italy.
Citation count: 4
Discourse ___
This study looks into the relation of people with objects in the household. The aim of the study is to bring
knowledge that can help in the understanding of more durable objects rather than others and which insights
this bring for future sustainable designs.
Data collection on durability of digital technology
For this, Legget (2007 cited in Odom, 2008, p. 3778) suggests “Since the industrial revolution carbon dioxide
levels have steadily risen in our atmosphere, a trend linked with global warming that is predicted to continue”.
Moreover the author states “While is it widely known that our planet’s resources are limited, it is less widely
publicized that an increasing amount of today’s waste is electronics related” (Odom, 2008, p. 3778).
It is mentioned the limited planet’s resources as the main concerning.
The author proposes inventories as a way to collect information related to the understanding of durability of
objects (Odom, 2008, p. 3779). For this, the author writes “This ongoing study aims to collect, categorize, and
describe the individual personal inventories of domestic interactive and other technologies in a systemic way”
(Ibid.).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
Interactive technologies in general are mentioned in the study (Odom, 2008, p. 3779). However, the author
also writes “The design of domestic interactive devices ought to be more open to humans…” (Odom, 2008, p.
3781).
For this the authors write “… new ways to augment already existing domestic objects with new functionality
should be explored, as opposed to introducing entirely new devices” (Odom, 2008, p. 3781).
Blevis, E & Stolterman, E. (2007) Ensoulment and Sustainable Interaction Design. IASDR 2007.
91
Fact sheet 26.P_Odom
Electronics manufacturing diminishes the already limited natural resources
Planet’s resources 6. MAIN PRACTICAL RESULT:
Create individual inventories related to interactive and other technologies
Domestic interactive devices
Add new functionality to already existing objects
Blevis, E & Stolterman, E. (2007) Ensoulment and Sustainable Interaction Design
92
27.P_Odom
Title: “Mate, we don’t need a chip to tell us the soil’s dry” Opportunities for designing interactive systems to
support urban food production.
Author(s): William Odom
Denmark.
Citation count: 3
Discourse ___
This study looks into new possibilities to integrate interactive systems in urban agriculture activities. This
document summarizes a fieldwork and a workshop performed with a community of urban agriculture in
Australia.
Data collection on urban agricultural practices
For this, Smit, Ratta and Nasr (1996 cited in Odom, 2010, p. 232) suggest “Currently, 50% of the global
population lives in urban settings, by 2015 it is estimated that 26 cities worldwide will have populations of 10
million people or more”.
Moreover the author states that migration of people from rural areas to big cities decreases local production of
food (Odom, 2010, p. 232). Following, Vijoen, et al., (2005 cited in Odom, 2010, p. 232) estimate “… an
average of 6,000 tons of food will have to be important daily to support a city of 10 million people”.
Smit, Ratta and Nasr (Ibid.) suggest “These increasing food demands, paired with the globalization of trade,
have resulted in significant consequences for social and environmental sustainability. On one hand, the
average produce item is estimated to travel between 1500-2500 miles before being purchased for
consumption, resulting in significant levels of pollution and carbon dioxide emissions”. Finally the author brings
urban agriculture as one solution for this problem.
As explained in the answer from question 2, the author states the relation between the food system and
impacts in nature. Increasing population and food demands results in transporting food from other countries
causing pollution and CO2 emissions (Odom, 2010, p. 232).
There are no identified sustainability goods.
The study focuses in finding opportunities to integrate interactive systems in urban agriculture practices. For
this the author writes “Our study builds on this emerging area through describing the practices of urban
agriculturalists as well as key opportunities for designing interactive systems to support urban agriculture”
(Odom, 2010, p. 232).
D. DESIGN FOCUS
The study is more on understanding the practice of urban agriculture so there is no main area involved since
this is a preliminary fieldwork for data collection.
93
The author mentions that it is important for the HCI community to understand sustainability in the combination
of social, economic and environmental aspects and to do research for sustainable futures (Odom, 2010, p.
232).
The authors does not have a major input for sustainable design.
Fact sheet 27.P_Odom
Increasing demands of food (increasing population in cities and transportation of food) creates pollution and
carbon dioxide emissions
Increasing population – food demands – transportation of food – CO2 emissions 5. IDENTIFIED SUSTAINABILITY GOODS:
Describe practices in urban agriculture to find opportunities in that field
A holistic understanding of sustainability
---
94

Interpretations of Sustainability in the Field of Human

Transcrição

Documentos relacionados

lessons from the Sustainable Urban Social Housing Initiative

Da Costa, Anna - Workspace

Disclosure 1 - UNEP Finance Initiative

Teaching within their worlds

Marketers

analysis of the practices aimed at sustainability at a shopping mall

paper

5. green passaport. map games in pernambuco

King 3 - Application of King 3 principles for year

Bonsucro Week 2013 New Orleans, Louisiana