Hostname: page-component-7bb8b95d7b-nptnm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-18T12:47:30.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BARRIERS AND ENABLERS IN CO-DESIGNING WITH MARGINALISED PEOPLE

Part of: Socio-technical Issues in Design

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2020

S. Jagtap
S. Jagtap*
Affiliation:
Blekinge Institute of Technology, Sweden
*
*santosh.jagtap@bth.se

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Co-design with marginalised people is crucial for sustained adoption and use of frugal innovations or Product Service Systems (PSS). Interviews were conducted with eighteen designers to identify barriers and enablers that they encounter in co-designing with marginalised people. The findings suggest that the factors supporting or hindering this co-design relate to the context of marginalised societies, co-design processes and methods, organisational issues, and aspects of collaboration. Consideration of these factors can lead to more impactful co-design with marginalised people.

Keywords

co-designdesign processhuman behaviourpovertybase of the pyramid (BOP)
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference , Volume 1 , May 2020 , pp. 1931 - 1940
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Ambole, L.A., Swilling, M. and M'Rithaa, M.K. (2016), “Designing for informal contexts: a case study of Enkanini sanitation intervention”, Int J Des, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 75–84.Google Scholar
Aranda Jan, C.B., Jagtap, S. and Moultrie, J. (2016), “Towards a framework for holistic contextual design for low-resource settings”, Int J Des, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 43–63.Google Scholar
Bryman, A. (2004), Social research methods, 2nd edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.Google Scholar
DAC (2016), http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/documentupload/DAC%20List%20of%20ODA%20Recipients%202014%20final.pdf. Accessed Jan 2016.Google Scholar
Dodson, L., Sterling, S. and Bennett, J. (2012), “Considering failure: eight years of ITID research”, In: Proceedings of the fifth international conference on information and communication technologies and development (ICTD’12). ACM, New York, pp. 56–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donaldson, K. (2009), “The future of design for development: three questions”, Inform Technol Int Dev, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 97.Google Scholar
Grönroos, C. (2011), “Value co-creation in service logic: a critical analysis”, Marketing Theory, Vol. 11 No. 3, pp. 279–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/1470593111408177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hussain, S., Sanders, E.B.N. and Steinert, M. (2012), “Participatory design with marginalized people in developing countries: challenges and opportunities experienced in a field study in Cambodia”, Int J Des, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 91–109.Google Scholar
Jagtap, S., Larsson, A. and Kandachar, P. (2013), “Design and development of products and services at the base of the pyramid: a review of issues and solutions”, Int J Sustain Soc, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1504/ijssoc.2013.054712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S. (2019a), “Design and poverty: a review of contexts, roles of poor people, and methods”, Research in Engineering Design, Vol. 30 No. 1, pp. 41–62. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00163-018-0294-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S. (2019b), “Key Guidelines for Designing Integrated Solutions to Support Development of Marginalised Societies”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 219, pp. 148–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.01.340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S. and Larsson, T. (2019), “Resource-Limited Societies, Integrated Design Solutions, and Stakeholder Input”. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, Vol. 5 No. 4, pp. 285–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sheji.2019.10.001Google Scholar
Margolin, V. (2007), “Design for development: towards a history”, Des Stud, Vol. 28, pp. 111–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2006.11.008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murcott, S. (2007), “Co-evolutionary design for development: influences shaping engineering design and implementation in Nepal and the global village”, Journal of International Development, Vol. 19 No. 1, pp. 123–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/jid.1353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nahi, T. (2016), “Cocreation at the base of the pyramid: Reviewing and organizing the diverse conceptualizations”, Organization & Environment, Vol. 29 No. 4, pp. 416–437. https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026616652666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papanek, V. and Fuller, R.B. (1972), Design for the real world, Thames and Hudson, London.Google Scholar
Prahalad, C.K. and Hart, S. (1999), Strategies for the bottom of the pyramid: creating sustainable development (working paper). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. http://www.bus.tu.ac.th/usr/wai/xm622/conclude%620monsanto/strategies.pdf. Accessed 5 Dec 2016Google Scholar
Prahalad, C.K. (2004), The fortune at the bottom of the pyramid: Eradicating poverty through profits. Upper Saddle River, Wharton School Publishing, NJ.Google Scholar
Jagtap, S. (2018), “Intentions and Inspiration in Shaping Visual Appearance of Products: The Practice of Professional Industrial Designers in India”, The Design Journal, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 85–107. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2018.1396075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankfort-Nachmias, C. and Nachmias, D. (1996), Reseach methods in the social sciences, 5th edn. St. Martin Press, Inc., London.Google Scholar
Rivera-Santos, M. and Rufín, C. (2010), “Global village vs. small town: Understanding networks at the Base of the Pyramid”, International Business Review, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 126–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2009.07.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanders, E.B-N. and Stappers, P.J. (2008), “Co-creation and the new landscapes of design”, CoDesign, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068Google Scholar
Schumacher, E.F. (1973), Small is beautiful: economics as if people mattered, Harper and Row, New York.Google Scholar
Sethia, N. (2010), “At the bottom of the pyramid: responsible design for responsible business”, Des Manag Rev, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 42–49. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1948-7169.2005.tb00202.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jagtap, S. and Larsson, A. (2013), “Design of Product Service Systems at the Base of the Pyramid”, In: ICoRD’13. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering, Springer, India, pp. 581–592. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-81-322-1050-4_46Google Scholar
Jagtap, S. et al. (2014), “How design process for the Base of the Pyramid differs from that for the Top of the Pyramid”, Design Studies, Vol. 35 No. 5, pp. 527–558. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2014.02.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teegen, H. (2003), “International NGOs as Global Institutions: Using social capital to impact multinational enterprises and governments”, Journal of International Management, Vol. 9, pp. 271–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1075-4253(03)00037-1Google Scholar
Thomas, D.R. (2006), “A general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data”, American Journal of Evaluation, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214005283748CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Viswanathan, M., Yassine, A. and Clarke, J. (2011), “Sustainable product and market development for subsistence marketplaces: creating educational initiatives in radically different contexts”, J Prod Innov Manag, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 558–569. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00825.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Hippel, E. (2005), Democratizing innovation, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/2333.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar