The future as a design problem

Design Issues

Volumn 32, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 6-17

  Reeves, Stuart ^a   Goulden, Murray ^a   Dingwall, Robert ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b NOTTINGHAM TRENT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84978374657     PISSN: 07479360     EISSN: 15314790     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1162/DESI_a_00395     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Victor Margolin, “Design, the Future and the Human Spirit,” Design Issues 23, no. 3 (Summer 2007): 4–15.
2. Harold Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1967).
3. Michael Batty, “Limits to Prediction in Science and Design Science,” Design Studies 1, no. 3 (1980): 153–59.
4. Theodore Zamenopoulos, and Karerina Alexiou, “Towards an Anticipatory View of Design,” Design Studies 28, no. 4 (2007): 411–36.
5. For example, Adam Greenfield, Everyware: The Dawning Age of Ubiquitous Computing (Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press, 2006).
6. Barbara Adam, “History of the Future: Paradoxes and Challenges, Rethinking History,” Journal of Theory and Practice 14, no. 3 (2010): 361–78.
7. also see Peter L. Bernstein, Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1996).
8. Alfred Schütz, “Tiresias, or Our Knowledge of Future Events,” Social Research: An International Quarterly 26, no. 1 (1959): 71–89.
9. Schütz prefers “typification” to “type” to emphasize the dynamic and enacted character of this stock of knowledge. We may freeze it for analytic convenience, but what we know to be typical is always in a process of emerging from our past experiences, informed from our current engagements with the world, and directed toward our projects for the future; see Kwang-ki Kim and Tim Berard, “Typification in Society and Social Science: The Continuing Relevance of Schütz’s Social Phenomenology,” Human Studies 32, no. 3 (2009): 263–89.
10. Schütz, “Tiresias, or Our Knowledge of Future Events.”
11. Schütz, “Tiresias, or Our Knowledge of Future Events.”, 287.
12. Frank Knight, Risk, Uncertainty and Profit (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1921).
13. Nik Brown, Brian Rappert, and Andrew Webster, eds., Contested Futures: A Sociology of Prospective Techno-science (Aldershot: Ashgate, 2000).
14. Also see Nik Brown and Mike Michael, “A Sociology of Expectations: Retrospecting Prospects and Prospecting Retrospects,” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 15, no. 1 (2003): 3–18.
15. Deborah Wise, “Experts Speculate on Future Electronic Learning Environment,” InfoWorld 4, no. 16 (April 26, 1982): 6.
16. We note that while there are exceptions e.g., Adrian Forty, “Of Cars, Clothes and Carpets: Design Metaphors in Architectural Thought,” Journal of Design History 2, no. 1 [1989]
17. Jeffrey L. Meikle, “Material Virtues: On the Ideal and the Real in Design History,” Journal of Design History 11, no. 3 [1998]: 191–99, the prevailing narrative of design histories tends to be written in a Whiggish fashion that makes the designer’s success seem inevitable. For designers, the future is not a simple matter of “progress.”
18. The terminology itself is often used interchangeably with “pervasive computing” (originating from IBM).
19. Roy Want et al., “The Active Badge Location System,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems 10, no. 1 (January 1992): 91–102
20. Wayne Piekarski and Bruce H. Thomas, “Tinmith-Metro: New Outdoor Techniques for Creating City Models with an Augmented Reality Wearable Computer,” in Proceedings of 5th International Symposium on Wearable Computers (2001)
21. Anthony LaMarca et al., “PlaceLab: Device Positioning Using Radio Beacons in the Wild,” in Proceedings of Pervasive 2005 (2005), 116–33.
22. For example, Peter Tolmie et al., “Unremarkable Computing,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘02), ACM, New York, (2002), 399–406.
23. For example, Louise Barkhuus and Anind K. Dey, “Location-Based Services for Mobile Telephony: A Study of Users’ Privacy Concerns,” in Proceedings of Interact 2003 (2003), 207–12
24. Yvonne Rogers et al., “Ubi-learning Integrates Indoor and Outdoor Experiences,” Communications of the ACM 48, no. 1 (January 2005): 55–59.
25. Matthew Chalmers and Areti Galani, “Seamful Interweaving: Heterogeneity in the Theory and Design of Interactive Systems,” in Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Designing Interactive Systems (DIS ‘04), ACM, New York (2004), 243–52.
26. Yvonne Rogers, “Moving on from Weiser’s Vision of Calm Computing: Engaging Ubicomp Experiences,” in Proc. Ubicomp (New York: Springer, 2006), 404–21.
27. Mark Weiser, “The Computer for the Twenty-first Century,” Scientific American (1991), 94–104.
28. Stuart Reeves, “Building the Future with Envisioning,” Interactions 20, no. 1 (2013): 26–29.
29. Mark Weiser, Richard Gold, and John S. Brown, “The Origins of Ubiquitous Computing Research at PARC in the Late 1980s,” IBM Systems Journal 38, no. 4 (1999): 693–96.
30. Weiser, “The Computer for the Twenty-first Century.”
31. Schütz, “Tiresias, or Our Knowledge of Future Events.”
32. Julian Bleecker, Design Fiction: A Short Essay on Design, Science, Fact and Fiction (San Francisco, CA: Near Future Laboratory, 2009).
33. Lucy Suchman, Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-machine Communication (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987).
34. Louise Barkhuus, The Context Gap: An Essential Challenge to Context-Aware Computing, thesis, IT University of Copenhagen, 2004.
35. For example, Anind K. Dey, “Understanding and Using Context,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 5, no. 1 (February 2001): 4–7.
36. Barkhuus, The Context Gap.
37. Paul Dourish, “What We Talk About When We Talk About Context,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 8, no. 1 (2004): 9–30.
38. Garfinkel, Studies in Ethnomethodology.
39. For example, see Andy Crabtree, Mark Rouncefield, and Peter Tolmie, Doing Design Ethnography (New York: Springer, 2012).
40. Johan Redström, “Towards User Design? On the Shift from Object to User as the Subject of Design,” Design Studies 27, no. 2 (2006): 123–39.
41. For example, Herman Kahn and Anthony J. Wiener, The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty-three Years (New York: Macmillan, 1967).
42. Weiser, “The Computer for the Twenty-first Century.”
43. Abigail J. Sellen and Richard Harper, The Myth of the Paperless Office (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2002).
44. Greenfield, Everyware.
45. Bleecker, Design Fiction.
46. Genevieve Bell and Paul Dourish, “Yesterday’s Tomorrows: Notes on Ubiquitous Computing’s Dominant Vision,” Personal and Ubiquitous Computing 11, no. 2 (2007): 133–43.
47. Reeves, “Building the Future with Envisioning.”
48. Neil Gunningham, Robert A. Kagan, and Dorothy Thornton, “Social License and Environmental Protection: Why Businesses Go Beyond Compliance,” Law and Social Inquiry 29, no. 2 (2004): 307–41.
49. For example, Eva Hornecker et al., “UbiComp in Opportunity Spaces: Challenges for Participatory Design,” in Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Participatory Design (PDC’06), (ACM Press, 2006), vol. 1, 47–56.
50. Jennifer Mankoff, Jennifer A. Rode, and Haakon Faste, “Looking Past Yesterday’s Tomorrow: Using Futures Studies Methods to Extend the Research Horizon,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’13), (ACM Press, 2013), 1629–38.
51. Redström, “Towards User Design?”
52. Bleecker, Design Fiction; Bruce Sterling, “Design Fiction,” Interactions 16, no. 3 (2009): 20–24.
53. Anthony Dunne and Fiona Raby, Speculative Everything: Design, Fiction, and Social Dreaming (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2013).
54. Cynthia Selin, “On Not Forgetting Futures,” Journal of Responsible Innovation 1, no. 1 (2014): 103–08.