Hostname: page-component-758b78586c-t6f8b Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2023-11-27T23:21:39.731Z Has data issue: false Feature Flags: { "corePageComponentGetUserInfoFromSharedSession": true, "coreDisableEcommerce": false, "useRatesEcommerce": true } hasContentIssue false


Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Tjark Gall*
Université Paris-Saclay, CentraleSupélec, Laboratoire Genie Industriel, 3 rue Joliot-Curie 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France; IRT SystemX;
Flore Vallet
Université Paris-Saclay, CentraleSupélec, Laboratoire Genie Industriel, 3 rue Joliot-Curie 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France; IRT SystemX;
Sylvie Douzou
IRT SystemX; EDF Research & Development
Bernard Yannou
Université Paris-Saclay, CentraleSupélec, Laboratoire Genie Industriel, 3 rue Joliot-Curie 91190 Gif-sur-Yvette, France;
Gall, Tjark, CentraleSupeléc, Industrial Design Laboratory (LGI), France,


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

Most services and products are designed in response to the needs, desires or expectations of humans. A variety of methodologies grouped by the term Human-Centred Design (HCD) have been deployed to formalise and improve this process, ranging from user-centred to participatory practices. However, the approaches’ consideration is primarily limited to individuals in their respective space and time.

To examine these system boundaries in detail and address potentials for adaptation, this paper reviews dominant HCD methodologies, categorises them and highlights their respective characteristics. Further, concepts and methodologies from related fields are studied for potential contributions to HCD. This results in a proposed re-definition of the system boundaries of HCD by integrating spatio-temporal impacts on humans through an extended social, environmental and economic scope.

The different studied approaches and varying impact assessments are exemplarily applied to the case study of urban mobility, in particular human-centred, scenario-based design approaches. However, the described methods and concepts are kept generic to ensure the applicability across various domains of design practice.

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 (, 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.
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press


Althor, G., Watson, J. E. M. and Fuller, R. A. (2016), Global mismatch between greenhouse gas emissions and the burden of climate change. Scientific Reports, Vol. 26/20281. Scholar
Bertolini, L. (2020), “From “streets for traffic” to “streets for people”: can street experiments transform urban mobility?”, Transport Reviews, pp. 1-20. Scholar
Bigo, A. (2020), Les transports face au défi de la transition énergétique. Explorations entre passé et avenir, technologie et sobriété, accélération et ralentissement. PhD Dissertation. Chaire Energie et Prospérité.Google Scholar
Buur, J. and Matthews, B. (2008), “Participatory Innovation”, International Journal of Innovation Management, Vol. 12/03, pp. 255-273. Scholar
Burón García, J. and Sánchez Mora, M. (2019), D3.2: Delivery of the citizen participation playbook. [online] +CityxChange. Available at: (24/11/2020).Google Scholar
Cabannes, Y. (2017), “Participatory Budgeting in Paris: Act, Reflect, Grow”, Another city is possible with Participatory Budgeting. Montréal/New York/London: Black Rose Books, pp. 179-203.Google Scholar
CDC (2020), “Road Traffic Injuries and Deaths – A Global Problem”. (03/12/2020)Google Scholar
Cooper, A. (1999). The inmates are running the asylum. Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-322-99786-9_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COP21 (2015), “Paris Agreement to the United Nations Framework Convention on ClimateChange”, Dec. 12, 2015, T.I.A.S. No. 16-1104.Google Scholar
Watch, Climate (2020), “Historical GHG Emissions”, [online] (03/12/2020)Google Scholar
Crawford, M. M. (2019), “A comprehensive scenario intervention typology”, Technological Forecasting & Societal Change, Vol. 149/119748, pp. 1-27. Scholar
Budman, M. and Khan, B. (eds.) (2018), “Making the future of mobility”, Deloitte Insights, Deloitte series on the future of mobility.Google Scholar
Fergnani, A. (2019), The future persona: a futures method to let your scenarios come to life, foresight. Scholar
Fergnani, A. and Jackson, M. (2019), “Extracting scenario archetypes: A quantitative text analysis of documents about the future”, Future & Foresight Science, Vol. 1/2, pp. 1-14. Scholar
Fuglerud, K., Schulz, S., Janson, T., and Moen, A. L., A. (2020), “Co-creating persona scenarios with diverse users enriching inclusive design”, In: Antona, M., Stephanidis, C. (eds) Universal Access in Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, Cham. Scholar
Gall, T., Haxhija, S. (2020), “Storytelling of and for Planning: Urban Planning through Participatory Narrative-building”, 56th ISOCARP World Planning Congress, virtual, November 2020-February 2021.10.47472/BTYM1702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gehl, J. (2011), Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. Sixth Edition. London: Island Press.Google Scholar
Glotzbach, S. and Baumgärtner, S. (2012), “The Relationship between Intragenerational and Intergenerational Ecological Justice”, Environmental Values, Vol. 21, pp. 331-355. Scholar
Gregory, J. (2003), “Scandinavian Approaches to Participatory Design”, International Journal on Engineering Education, Vol. 19/1, pp. 62-74.Google Scholar
Héran, F. and Ravelet, E. (2008), “La consommation d'espace-temps des divers modes de déplacement en milieu urbain Application au cas de l'Ile de France. Lille: PREDIT.Google Scholar
IDEO (2015), “A Field Guide to Human-Centred Design”, 1st Edition.Google Scholar
Inayatullah, S. (2013), “Future Studies: Theories and Methods.”Google Scholar
Design, Interaction (2020), “User Centered Design”, [online]. (25/11/2020).Google Scholar
International Organization for Standardization (ISO) (2006), “ISO 14040:2006: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Principles and framework.”Google Scholar
IPCC (2014), “Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report”, Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland.Google Scholar
Jacobs, J. (1961), The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York (NY): Random House; 1961.Google Scholar
Julsrud, T. E. and Uteng, T. P. (2015), “Technopolis, shared resources or controlled mobility? A net-based Delphi-study to explore visions of future urban daily mobility in Norway. European Journal of Futures Researches, Vol. 3, pp. 1-13. Scholar
Kahn, H. and Wiener, A. J. (1967), The Year 2000: A Framework for Speculation on the Next Thirty Years. Macmillan Publishing.Google Scholar
Maslow, A. H. (1943), “A theory of human motivation”, Psychological Review, Vol. 50/4, pp. 370-396. Scholar
Metabolic (2019), Metal Demand for Electric Vehicle: Recommendations for fair, resilient, and circular transport systems, Amsterdam: Metabolic.Google Scholar
Miaskiewicz, T. and Kozar, K. A. (2011), “Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes? Design Studies, Vol. 32/5, pp. 417-430. Scholar
Nussbaum, M., 2003. Capabilities as fundamental entitlements: Sen and Social Justice. Feminist Economic, 9/2-3), pp. 33-59. Scholar
Pruitt, J. and Grudin, J. (2003). “Personas: Practice and Theory”, Conference on Designing for User Experiences, San Francisco, June 2003, Association for Computing Machinery, New York (NY), pp. 1-15. Scholar
Rawls, J. (1971), A Theory of Justice, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rawls, J. (2001), Justice as Fairness. A Restatement Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reis Santos, M. (2021), “Learning from Global Best Practices: An Overview of Urban Land Policies and Inclusionary Measures for Affordable Housing”, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Rifkin, J. (2011), The Third Industrial Revolution, London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Salminen, J., Santos, J. M., Jung, S.-G., Eslami, M. and Jansen, B. J. (2020), “Persona Transparency: Analyzing the Impact of Explanations on Perceptions of Data-Driven Personas”, International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, Vol. 36/8, pp. 788-800. Scholar
Sanders, E. B.-N. and Stappers, P. J. (2008), “Co-creation and the new landscapes of design”, International Journal of CoCreation in Design and the Arts, Vol. 4, pp. 5-18. Scholar
Sanders, E. B.-N. and Stappers, P. J. (2014), “Probes, toolkits and prototypes: three approaches to making in codesigning”, CoDesign, Vol. 10/1, pp. 5-14, Scholar
Schäfer, K., Rasche, P., Bröhl, C., Theis, S., Barton, L., Brandl, C., Wille, M., Nitsch, V. and Mertens, A. (2019), “Survey-based personas for a target-group-specific consideration of elderly end users of information and communication systems in the German healthcare sector”, International Journal of Medical Informatics, Vol. 132/103924, pp. 1-7. Scholar
Sen, A. (1979), “Equality of What?”, The Tanner Lecture on Human Values. Stanford University, 22 May 1979. Transcript available at: (02/12/2020).Google Scholar
Seyfang, G. and Smith, A. (2007), “Grassroots Innovations for Sustainable Development: Towards a New Research and Policy Agenda”, Environmental Politics, Vol. 16/4, pp. 584-603, Scholar
Schuckmann, S. W., Gnatzy, T., Darkow, I.-L. and von der Gracht, H. A. (2012), Analysis of factors influencing the development of transport infrastructure until the year 2030 – A Delphi based scenario study”, Techn. Forecasting & Social Change, Vol. 79, pp. 1373-1387. Scholar
Planning, Shell Group (1971), “A Probabilistic Approach to the Forecasting of Upstream-Government Take on Crude Oil Exports: 1970-1985”, PL/ 52.Google Scholar
Shove, E. (2010), “Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change’, Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 42/6, pp. 1273-1285. Scholar
Soja, E. (2009), “The City and Spatial Justice”, Spatial Justice Vol. 1/2009, pp. 1-5.Google Scholar
Soja, E. (2010), “Seeking Spatial Justice.Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press.10.5749/minnesota/9780816666676.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spickermann, A., Grienitz, V. and von der Gracht, H. A. (2014), “Heading towards a multimodal city of the future? Multi-stakeholder scenarios for urban mobility. Technological Forecasting & Social Change Vol. 89, pp. 201-221. Scholar
Stevenson, P. D. and Mattson, C. A. (2019), “The Personification of Big Data”, International Conference on Engineering Design ICED19, Delft, August 2019. Scholar
United Nations (2015), “Draft outcome document of the United Nations summit for the adoption of the post-2015 development agenda. Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development."Google Scholar
University of Cambridge (2020), “Inclusive Design Toolkit”, University of Cambridge [online]. (03/12/2020).Google Scholar
Urry, J. (2016), “What is the Future?”, Cambridge, UK: Policy Press.Google Scholar
Vallet, F., Puchinger, J., Millonig, Al. and Lamé, G. (2020), “Tangible futures: Combining scenario thinking and personas - A pilot study on urban mobility”, Futures, Vol. 117/102513, pp. 1-26. Scholar
Verloo, N. (2019), “Captured by bureaucracy: street-level professionals mediating past, present and future knowledge”, In: Raco, M. and Savini, F. (eds), Planning and Knowledge: How New Forms of Technocracy Are Shaping Contemporary Cities. Policy Press, pp. 7589.Google Scholar
Watson, V. (2002), “Do We Learn from Planning Practice? The Contribution of the “Practice Movement” to Planning Theory”, Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 22 (2), pp. 178-187. Scholar
Watson, V. (2003), “Conflicting Rationalities: Implications for Planning Theory and Ethics”, Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 4/4, pp. 395-407. Scholar
WCED (1987), “Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: Our Common Future."Google Scholar
Weidema, B.P., Ekvall, T., Pesonen, H.-L., Rebitzer, G., Sonnemann, G.W. and Spielmann, M. (2004), “Scenarios in life cycle assessment”. Society of Env. Toxicology and Chemistry, Brussels/Pensacola.Google Scholar