skip to main content
10.1145/3210586.3210599acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespdcConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Work, labour and action: the role of participatory design in (re)activating the political dimension of work

Published:20 August 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

This article discusses the difficult task of Participatory Design (PD) to design for/with the political dimension of work, such as the work environments' care for inclusion of different groups. It first describes PD's role through time in giving form to this political dimension after the crisis of Fordism and detects some challenges PD is confronted with in addressing this task today. It then explores how Hannah Arendt's reflections on the political dimension of work can contribute to addressing these challenges, researching how her definitions of 'work', 'labour', 'action', 'agorà', 'heroes' and 'interests' can be used as steering concepts that support the (re)activation of this political dimension. We describe how we used Arendt's concepts to steer a PD case in urban design with a group of architects, companies and citizens on how to reintegrate work into the city space of Antwerp. This paper ends with a discussion on the implications of using Arendt's concepts in PD for work.

References

  1. Liesbeth Huybrechts, Henric Benesch & Jon Geib. 2017. Institutioning: Participatory Design, Co-Design and the public realm. In CoDesign, 13, 3, 148--159.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Jane Jacobs. 1961. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Hannah Arendt. 2013. The Human Condition. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Antonio Gramsci. 1934. Americanism and Fordism. Gramsci Quaderni dal Carcere, 1, Einaudi, 1975.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ash Amin. 1995. Postfordism: A Reader, edited by Ash Amin, 409--427. Wiley, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Mouffe, Chantal. 1993. The Return of the Political. Verso, London and New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Jacques Rancière. 2004. Aesthetics and Its Discontents. Polity Press, Cambridge.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Mahmoud Keshavarz and Ramia Maze. 2013. Design and Dissensus: Framing and Staging Participation in Design Research. Design Philosophy Papers, 11, 1, 7--29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Thomas Binder, Eva Brandt, Pelle Ehn, and Joachim Halse. 2015. "Democratic Design Experiments: Between Parliament and Laboratory." CoDesign 11 (3-4): 152--65.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Richard Sennett. 2009. The Craftsman. Penguin, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Peter Mair. 2013. Ruling the Void: The Hollowing of Western Democracy. Verso, London and New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Ahrensbach, T. and Beunderman, J., Eds. 2012. Compendium for the Civic Economy. Trancity Valiz, Amsterdam.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Borgonuovo, V. and Frnsceschini, S., Eds. 2015. Global Tools 1973-1975. SALT/Garanti Kültür: Istanbul. AŞ.. Retrieved from http://saltonline.org/media/files/globaltools_scrd-1.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Susanne Bødker, Pelle Ehn, Morten Kyng, John Kammersgaard, J., and Yngve Sundblad, 1987. A UTOPIAN Experience: On design of powerful computer-based tools for skilled graphic workers. In Computers and democracy: A Scandinavian challenge. Gower.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Papanek, Victor. 1985. Design for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change. Pantheon Books, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. National Research Council. 1999. The Changing Nature of Work: Implications for Occupational Analysis. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Clay Spinuzzi. 2012. Working Alone Together. Coworking as Emergent Collaborative Activity. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 26, 4, 399--441Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Andy C. Pratt. 2002. Hot jobs in cool places. The material cultures of new media product spaces: The case of South of the Market, San Francisco. Information, Communication and Society, 5, 1, 27--50.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Rachel Botsman and Roo Rogers, Eds.. 2011. What's mine is yours: How collaborative consumption is changing the way we live. Collins, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Eleanor Colleoni and Adam Arvidsson. 2014. Knowledge sharing and social capital building. The role of co-working spaces in the knowledge economy in Milan. Unpublished Report. Office for Youth, Municipality of Milan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Carl DiSalvo, Andrew Clement, and Volkmar Pipek. Communities: Participatory Design for, with and by communities. In J. Simonsen & Toni Robertson (eds.). Routledge International Handbook of Participatory Design. Routledge International Handbooks, New York, 2012, 182--209.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Steven Graham and Simon Marvin. 1994. More than Ducts and Wires: Post-Fordism, Cities and Utility Networks. In Managing Cities: The New Urban Context, edited by Patsy Healey, Stuart Cameron, Simin Davoudi, Stephen Graham and Ali Madani-Pour, 169--190. Wiley, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Jane Fulton Suri. 2003. The experience of evolution: developments in design practice. The Design Journal, 6, 2, 39--48Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Pelle Ehn. 2008. Participation in design things. In Proceedings of the tenth anniversary conference on participatory design 2008. Indiana University. 92--101. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Ezio Manzini, Francesca Rizzo. 2011. Small projects/large changes: Participatory design as an open participated process. CoDesign, 7, 3-4, 199--215Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Maurizo Teli, Silvia Bordin, María Menéndez Blanco, Giusi Orabona, and Antonella De Angeli. 2015. Public Design of Digital Commons in Urban Places: A Case Study. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 81, 17--30, doi> Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Pelle Ehn, Elisabet M. Nilsson, and Richard Topgaard (eds.). 2014. Making Futures: Marginal Notes on Innovation, Design, and Democracy. MIT Press, Massachusetts. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. General Intellect. Commonfare or the Welfare of the CommonWealth. Inte Gloerich, Geert Lovink, Patricia De Vries. Moneylab. Overcoming the hype.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Anna Seravalli, Mette Agger Eriksen & Per-Anders Hillgren. 2017. Co-Design in co-production processes: jointly articulating and appropriating infrastructuring and commoning with civil servants. CoDesign, 13, 3, 187--201.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Virginia Tassinari, Francesca Piredda & Elisa Bertolotti. 2017. Storytelling in design for social innovation and politics: a reading through the lenses of Hannah Arendt. The Design Journal, 20, supl 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Elisa Bertolotti and Virginia Tassinari. 2017. Experimenting "theatres" for social innovation. A reading through the lenses of Hannah Arendt. NORDES Proceedings.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Hannah Arendt. 1973. The Origins of Totalitarianisms. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Jacques Rancière. 2006. The Politics of Aesthetics. A&C Black, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Ezio Manzini. 2015. Design, When Everybody Designs. An Introduction to Design for Innovation. MIT Press, Massachusetts.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Per-Anders Hillgren, Anna Seravalli, Mette Agger Eriksen. 2016. Counter-hegemonic practices; dynamic interplay between agonism, commoning and strategic design. Strategic Design Research Journal, 9, 2, 89--93.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Bernardo Secchi and Paola Vigano'. 2009. Antwerp: Territory Of A New Modernity. Sun Publishers, Amsterdam.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Wendy Gunn, Ton Otto, Rachel Charlotte Smith, Eds. 2013. Design Anthropology. Theory and Practice. Bloomsbury Academic, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Jamer Hunt. 2011. Prototyping the Social: Temporality and Speculative Futures at the Intersection of Design and Culture. 33--44. In: Alison Clark. Design Anthropology. Springer, Vienna.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Marijn van de Weijer, Koenraad Van Cleempoel, and Hilde Heynen. 2014. Positioning Research and Design in Academia and Practice. A Contribution to a Continuing Debate. Design Issues, 30, 2, 17--29Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Henry Sanoff. 1991. Visual research methods in design. Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Hannah Arendt. 2017. The Origins of Totalitarianisms. Penguin UK.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Work, labour and action: the role of participatory design in (re)activating the political dimension of work

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      PDC '18: Proceedings of the 15th Participatory Design Conference: Full Papers - Volume 1
      August 2018
      207 pages
      ISBN:9781450363716
      DOI:10.1145/3210586

      Copyright © 2018 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 August 2018

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      PDC '18 Paper Acceptance Rate17of67submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate49of289submissions,17%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader