I’ll be honest, it’s rare for me to read papers from scientific journals [… yes, Geoff, let’s potentially discredit your commitment to learning right up-front; this is surely an infallible idea 🙄]. However, I was doing some research into an article I was drafting today and I stumbled upon this thought-provoking read:
"From human-centred to life-centred design: Considering environmental and ethical concerns in the design of interactive products." (Borthwick, Tomitsch, Gaughwin)
Before today, I had only briefly been made aware of this push to redirect capital-D “Design” away from being a driver for increased consumption and commercial growth under the guise of helping our fellow humans and more towards “Post Anthropocene” Design (ie. where/when “human activities no longer exceed the planetary limits”). How this works in practice will take me much more time to digest, but the paper lays out the arguments and scene quite well and that is simply what I want to recommend you do today —> open up a new tab and read the first 4 sections of that paper plus its Desirability x Feasibility x Viability x Responsibility diagram [Go ahead! I really won’t mind if you stop reading this post right now in favour of that report].
In sharing that paper, I also openly recognise that I'm still using the human-centred design "HCD" tag in my social handles and this website, but due to the ever-changing nature of the industry slicing disciplines up as UX, CX, Service or Product Design, now Life-Centred Design, and whatever it may be tomorrow, I’m keeping it.
What I do is focused on people more, for better or worse, but I like to tell myself that my purpose for pursuing and championing HCD is more nuanced than traditionally capitalistic purposes.
By trying to make 1 person's everyday life a little easier through the delivery of good product, process, and service designs, I hope that that person might then go on to do something nice for somebody else as they walk around that day a little less frustrated. Then, that kind gesture recipient might naturally pass it on to somebody else, maybe even to a few people at once.. One of those people, or maybe the thousandth or millionth person down the line, might then be the one to solve a major sustainability or world problem - by giving people a chance to shine, who knows what we might be able to do.
This paying-it-forward snowball effect is what I like to believe can result from both my daily work and interactions. So, whilst "HCD" isn't a perfect identifier, it fits my intentions well enough to keep using it.
Anyways, go read that paper haha. It's a reminder to look beyond the short-term needs of us humans alone as we're generally where we stop. How might designing for the long-term be done more intentionally so that we exist with the planet(s) rather than it having to deal with us?
[Way off in the distance, Mars starts to feel a little itchy as these little metallic things with wheels scurry along its surface, scouting for a habitable landing zone 😆].
PS: If this topic has piqued your interests, I also recommend you read my peer’s brief think-piece on planet-centric design. I’ll leave you with this one excerpt that I appreciate in its acknowledgement and challenge to what I had just above described as my purpose:
“Human-centred design has capitalised on creating "seamless" and "frictionless" experiences, whilst minimising inconvenience. In being planet-centric, people will have to accept more inconvenience in their daily lives.” (Chris Jackson)