Designing Sustainability Together
- Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary
knowledge building
Presentation for TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland
Tatu Marttila1 (tatu.marttila@aalto.fi)
Design Connections Doctoral Programme
Department of Design
1Aalto University School of Art and Design, Finland
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
1
Introduction and Background
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
2
Aim of this paper…
Sustainability can be generally understood as an approach to design and
development "that focuses on environmental, social, and financial factors" and is
about "balancing" and "mediation" between different ideas and concepts
(Shedroff 2009, 5). It requires insight from several professions, and systemic
understanding on stakeholders and their interests. Transdisciplinarity has
become "a label for collaborative research" in sustainable design, crossing over
disciplinary boundaries and sectors of society (Bruun et al 2005), and gradually
deepening the integration in communication and knowledge between the
participants (Hukkinen 2008).
This text explores previous research on transdisciplinarity, and new data
that is gathered with questionnaires from a multidisciplinary Master's
study programme. It is positioning further research and development in design
teamwork between multiple disciplines, and it aims to identify the necessary
approaches to collaborative and transdisciplinary knowledge building for
sustainability.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
3
Theory and Literature
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
4
Balancing sustainability
Sustainable design should focus on the three different dimensions of sustainable
development: ecological, economic and sociocultural aspects. These dimensions
can be perceived to interact equally, or then hierarchically (see Fig. 1). The
traditional triangular model, however, may lead into "a narrow techno-scientific
approach" (Gidding et al. 2002, 187). In hierarchial or "nested" model for
sustainable development the "economy is dependent on society and both
dependent on the environment" (Ibid., 192).
The nested approach helps to
prioritize the compromises that have
to be made. To follow the systemic
approach, a team should first consult
their shared idea of the task, then
both socio-economic (stakeholders)
and ecological systems (ecological
feasibility), and then adjust the
concept according to these.
4/10/2015
Figure 1. The triangular versus the "nested" model for sustainable
development (Source: Gidding et al. 2002)
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
5
The need for transdisciplinarity
"Wicked" problems require "integrated and flexible design solutions" that are
adapted to the "eco-social complexity of their scale-linking context" (Wahl &
Baxter 2008, 75). In a complex system "collective and inclusive decision-making"
helps to develop more sustainable solutions, as it is "informed by a broader
knowledge base" (Ibid., 76).
The processes of collaborative work between professionals from different
fields range from cross- or multidisciplinary to interdisciplinary and
eventually to transdisciplinary, gradually deepening the integration of
knowledge, communication and values between the participants and the society
(Hukkinen, 2008; Bruun et al, 2005). At the same time the abilities to translate
and analyze disciplinary frameworks and concepts become important, because
without a mutual understanding and agreement on visions, scenarios and
problem-setting true progress cannot be made (see e.g. Marttila and Kohtala
2010).
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
6
Merging the professional knowledge
In the merging of transdisciplinary knowledge the aim in the process is in
acquiring an “integral vision” to understand and weave together different
perspectives and worldviews (Wilber 2001; as in Wahl & Baxter 2008). The merged
outcome resembles "Mode 2" knowledge (Gibbons et al. 1994), which is socially
distributed, application-oriented and transdisciplinary (Nowotny et al. 2003, 179).
This new type of knowledge requires unconstrained and instantaneous
interaction, and is "highly reflexive" (Nowotny et al. 2003, 187). It also requires
iterative approach, such as “Spiral Dynamics” that emerges from details towards
the holistic system level, and is emphasizing both professional side and the
shared side of the process (Beck & Cowan 1996; as in Wahl & Baxter 2008, 76).
Also, in parallel with the iterative co-creation of the design aim on several scales
and perspectives, there should be also a professional loop, in which the focus is on
specialist and profession-specific tools.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
7
Metadesigning collaborative frameworks
This integration of knowledge through iterative process happens on the
"metadesign" level that focuses on "conscious awareness, value systems,
worldviews, and aspirations" (Wahl & Baxter 2008, 73) and reflexive processes
that build “value-consciousness” among researchers are required (Wiesmann et
al. 2008, 438). Transdiciplinary design process is aiming into higher contextual
level: on mediation between value systems and visions, and the process itself.
There should exist a collaborative framework to design process, which would
promote the merging of knowledge, value systems and design aims, and support
integration, expanding on solution level from details to the whole, and on value
level from the whole towards the details. While the emphasis for multiprofessional collaboration has to be on the professional skills and expertise, in
sustainable design the complex problems always require also a transdisciplinary
approach. This calls for a problem assessment process that is done iteratively,
integrally and within a shared problem space, but with predefined disciplinary
competences.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
8
Material and Methods
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
9
Research data
Research data is gathered with questionnaires from the students of a new
multidisciplinary Masters' programme in Aalto University called Creative
Sustainability (CS), which started recently in Fall 2010. During the academic year
(2010-2011) these students attended introduction courses that aimed to prepare
them for multi-professional collaboration, and then to complete modules (up to
15 ECTS), which were engaging several professions, and which involved the
multidisciplinary student teams in specific design cases.
The data is gathered from the students of two study-modules, of which the other
was organized in Fall 2010 by the Department of Design with 14 answerers, and
the other during Spring 2011 by the Department of Architecture with also 14
answerers. Courses had students with backgrounds in various design fields, such
as industrial (7), product (2), spatial (2) and graphic design (2), engineering (2),
architecture (6), real estate (2), economics (2) and media communication (1).
Both courses were credited with 15 ECTS, and they included lectures and a design
case.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
10
Student questionnaire
The student questionnaire was created based on the findings in the literature
study, and on earlier research. The part of the questionnaire in focus in this article
consisted of triangular rating regarding the balances between the dimensions of
sustainability, and the emphases in multi-professional collaboration (see Fig. 2).
The results were assessed to visually compare where the emphases are, and how
shattered the outcome was. These findings were then reflected on the earlier
findings from the theory and literature.
Figure 2. The student questionnaire and the triangles.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
11
Findings from the data
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
12
Analyzing the results
Transdisciplinary collaboration should be based on integrated value systems and
new application-oriented knowledge. It is justified to assume that in sustainable
design shared understanding of the problem should be perceived beneficial.
Hence, it seems that at least fluent communication, and perhaps even a shared
aim should be promoted. This, however, requires certain experience, skills and
management from the team, and a correct framework provided by the teachers.
The results are divided firstly according to the students’ professional backgrounds
either in design (industrial, product or spatial; 11) or then architecture,
engineering and real estate (12), and then secondly according to the two different
study-modules, either by the Department of Design (10 from design fields, 2 from
economics and 2 from engineering) or then by the Department of Architecture (6
from architecture, 2 from real estate, 2 from engineering and 4 from design
fields).
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
13
Professional differences
All respondents seem to put emphasis on "shared vision" and "communication"
and "shared language" over ”shared frameworks” and ”tools”, and this fits well into
the findings from the literature. However, there seems to be some differences in
how the participants in the two professional groups balance the different
dimensions of sustainability in their approach.
According to the literature review there are different types of professional
approaches to sustainability, and the findings from the data seems to
support this assumption. The designers in the first group, perhaps being more
socially or humanistically oriented, seem to emphasize "sociocultural" side more
than the second group.
However, their group also seem to emphasize "economic" dimension over the
latter group. It seems that not only the professional background, but also
the context of the course is orienting the focus in collaboration.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
14
Below the data is divided into two groups according to the educational
background of the students. The first group (see Fig. 3, left side) consists of the
students with backgrounds in industrial, product or spatial design (11), and the
second group (see Fig. 3, right side) of the students from architecture, engineering
and real estate (12).
Figure 3. Results divided by the students' professional backgrounds.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
15
Differences in the educational approaches
If the results are then divided by the two study-modules (see Fig. 4), it seems
evident that actually the courses are orienting the focus of the collaborators.
Although the first course (SPD) consisted mainly of designers, the latter course
(SUD) consisted of a greater variety of participants (6 from, 4 from design fields
etc.) and still resulted in more precise focus in the answers. The difference in
the students’ answers seems to be mostly linked to the course itself and to
its educational approach, and not that strongly to the background of the
participants.
In general, it seems that architectural education might emphasize ecology over
sociocultural wellbeing, and this might be well justified since the aim in the
profession is on large scales. And design vice versa, as product and service design
practices seem to focus more to human level, where the focus extends more
clearly to sociocultural and even economic aspects.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
16
Here below, the results are divided according to the two study-modules they were
gathered from. Emphases seem to be linked to the context of the course.
Figure 4. Results divided by the two study-modules.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
17
Discussion:
Collaborative frameworks for
sustainable design
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
18
Design abilities to orientate towards
sustainability
As the managers of collaborative work the educators should carefully define, at
least to themselves, what kind of sustainability is taught on their courses.
Although the earlier research on this topic shows several different approaches to
the collaborators themselves - and these obviously exist - more important is how
the design challenge is laid out. While there are some necessary skills for
transdisciplinary collaboration, and it seems that the focus should be brought
specifically on communication and iterativity and reflexivity of the
process. Collaboration should be built so that it allows scaling of professional
knowledge, but also the metadesign of value systems for the task.
Transdisciplinary design process requires collaborative and synthetic skills (e.g.
defining, reflecting, contrasting, synthesizing). It also requires general, shared
frameworks (e.g. Spiral Dynamics, integral vision) and specific, disciplinary
frameworks (e.g. natural vs. social scientist). And finally, it requires general tools
to facilitate collaboration (e.g. SWOT, Mind Maps) and specific, professional tools
(e.g. LCA, Return On Investment, etc.).
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
19
Disciplinary competences
The approaches to collaboration might not be dictated by participant's personal
characteristics, but could instead be learned through experience in earlier projects
and work. Designers, engineers, architects and all the other professions
that take part in transdisciplinary collaboration, should be willing to
continuously negotiate the aim of their work and reshape their
understanding of the problem, and "evaluate whether you’re truly working on a
solution at the right level to make the change intended" (Shedroff 2009, 8).
In education, there is a need to guide collaborative design towards specific
systemic levels of sustainability according to the educational focus. The emerging
transdisciplinary knowledge of application, "however widely distributed, however
trans-disciplinary, however heterogeneous, however reflexive” must be “managed”
(Nowotny et al. 2003, 189). Still, to enable truly integrated outcomes, some leeway
should be left for the student teams to be able to reshape their knowledge and
approach to the design task.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
20
Conclusion
Rather than believing that we could design "universally applicable blueprints"
(Wahl & Baxter 2008, 73) or "perfect solutions" for "more sustainable offerings"
(Shedroff 2009, 20), it may prove to be more useful to seek these sustainable
outcomes as "an emergent property of the complex dynamic system in which we
all participate" (Wahl & Baxter 2008, 73).
The managers and educators, however, can orientate the transdisciplinary design
process by selecting the necessary professional and psychological approaches,
choice of tools, team-setups and exercises. In the integration of knowledge the
focus should not in the end be "on types of people" but instead on "types in
people” (Wilber, 2001: 6). In transdisciplinary collaboration it's not that
much about the participating professions and not about the people
themselves, but about the framework for collaboration and application of
the work that supports certain type of integrative approach.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
21
Thank You! - Q&A?
References:
Beck, D. – Cowan, C. C. (1996) Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership, and Change. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.
Bruun, H. – Hukkinen, J. – Huutoniemi, K. – Klein, J. T. (2005) Promoting Interdisciplinary Research: The Case of the Academy of Finland. Helsinki,
FI: Edita.
Després, C., N. Brais and S. Avellan (2004) Collaborative planning for retrofitting suburbs: transdisciplinarity and intersubjectivity in action.
Futures, 36, 471–486.
European Commission (2003) The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge. Brussels, BE: European Commission
Gibbons, M. – Limoges, C. – Nowotny, H. – Schwartzman, S. – Scott, P. – Trow, M. (1994) The New Production of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science
and Research in Contemporary Societies. London, UK: Sage.
Giddings, B. – Hopwood, B. – O'Brien, G. (2002) Environment, economy and society: fitting them together into sustainable development.
Sustainable Development, 10, 187–196.
Hukkinen, J. (2008) Sustainable Networks: Cognitive tools for expert collaboration in social-ecological systems. London, New York: Routledge.
Marttila, T. – Kohtala, C. (2010) Towards Transdisciplinarity: Understanding Current Multidisciplinarity in Designing Sustainable Urban Solutions.
In Ceschin, F. – Vezzoli, C. – Zhang, J. (Eds.) Proceedings of LeNS Conference Sustainability in Design NOW!: Challenges and Opportunities for
Design Research, Education and Practice in the XXI Century (1), 169-177.
Nieminen, M. (2004) Lähtökohtia yliopistojen kolmannen tehtävän tarkastelulle. In Kankaala, K. – Kaukonen, E. – Kutinlahti, P. – Lemola, T. –
Nieminen, M. – Välimaa, J. (Eds.) Yliopistojen kolmas tehtävä? [The third role of universities?], Helsinki, FI: Edita, 15-42.
Nowotny, H. – Scott, P. – Gibbons, M. (2003) ‘Mode 2’ Revisited: The New Production of Knowledge. Minerva, 41, 179–194.
Pohl, C. (2005) Transdisciplinary collaboration in environmental research. Futures, vol. 37, 1159–1178.
Shedroff, N. (2009) Design is the Problem the Future of Design must be sustainable. New York, US: Rosenfeld Media.
Tukker, A. – Charter, M. – Vezzoli, C. – Stø, E. – Andersen, M. (Eds.) (2008) System Innovation for Sustainability 1: Perspectives on Radical Changes to
Sustainable Consumption and Production. Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.
Wiesmann, U. – Hirsch Hadorn, G. – Hoffmann-Riem, H. – Biber-Klemm, S. – Grossenbacher, W. –Joye, D. – Pohl, C. – Zemp, E. (2008) Enhancing
Transdisciplinary Research: A Synthesis in Fifteen Propositions. In Hirsch Hadorn, G. – Hoffmann-Riem, H. – Biber-Klemm, S. – Grossenbacher, W.
–Joye, D. – Pohl, C. – Wiesmann, U. – Zemp, E. (Eds.) Handbook of Transdisciplinary Research. Dordrecht, GE: Springer, 433-441.
Wahl, D. C. – Baxter, S. (2008) The Designer's Role in Facilitating Sustainable Solutions. Design Issues, 24, no. 2, April 1, 72-83.
Wilber, K. (2001) A Theory of Everything: An Integral Vision of Business, Politics, Science and Spirituality. Dublin, IR: Gateway.
4/10/2015
TRENDS AND FUTURE OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (9-10 June 2011, Tampere, Finland)
Tatu Marttila: Designing Sustainability Together - Disciplinary competences in transdisciplinary knowledge building
22