Suchergebnisse

Die Dissertation beschäftigt sich mit kontemporären Entwicklungen eines zunehmend als sozial und politisch engagiert und involviert begriffenen Designbegriffs, und beleuchtet unterschiedliche Problemkomplexe, die sich aus einer Übertragung modernistischer Designerpositionen in Kontexte ergeben, wie sie heute etwa in den Diskursen zum "Social Design" verhandelt werden. Darauf aufbauend folgt die Arbeit einem Research-through-Design-Ansatz (RtD) zur Exploration unterschiedlicher Positionen des Gestaltens, die sich diesen Problemen gegenüber produktiv und souverän verhalten. Von besonderer Bedeutung für diese Auseinandersetzung ist die Metapher der Infrastruktur, wie sie von Susan Leigh Star entwickelt und innerhalb der Skandinavischen Debatten um das partizipative Design für den Designdiskurs adaptiert wurde. Die Dissertation besteht aus drei Teilen: Zunächst aus der Bearbeitung der Fragestellung, mit welchen derzeitigen Selbst- und Rollenverständnissen wir auf das Verhältnis von Design und sozialen Transformationsprozessen blicken, und der Entwicklung der Forderung, den vorrangig konzeptionell-normativen Diskurs mit einer kritischen Praxis anzureichen bzw. aus einer solchen heraus zu reflektieren. Der zweite Teil besteht aus dem Versuchsaufbau einer ebensolchen, reflexiven Praxis, also einer systematisch und im Sinne des übergeordneten Erkenntnisinteresses strukturierten, designerischen Tätigkeit, und deren Reflexion im Rahmen von MAZI (CAPS/H2020), eines interdisziplinären und EU-geförderten Forschungsprojekts, innerhalb dessen Positionen aus Design, Aktivismus und Technologieentwicklung aufeinander bezogen werden. Innerhalb dieser Auseinandersetzung wurde ein Modell entwickelt und vorgeschlagen, welches den skandinavischen Ansatz "Design as Infrastructuring" operationalisiert und für den Kontext der Dissertation nutzbar macht. Im dritten und letzten Teil der Arbeit schließlich werden diese beiden Ebenen zusammengeführt, und aus dieser analytischen Verschränkung von Theorie und Praxis Positionen zu den Fragestellungen der Arbeit entwickelt. ; This dissertation is concerned with contemporary developments around concepts of a politically engaged design and traces multiple challenges and contradictions that arise from entraining traditional framings of our field into contexts under discussion within debates around the relationship of design and processes of social transformation. Building on this theoretical inquiry, the dissertation follows a research through design (RtD) approach in exploring positions that bear the possibility of productively dealing with the problems identified. Special attention is given to the metaphor "infrastructure" as developed by Susan Leigh Star, and later adopted for the design discourse by the Scandinavian debates on participatory design. The dissertation consists of three parts: In the first part, the dissertation queries the guises, roles and self-understandings, with which the disciplinary discourse is debating the relationship of design and processes of social transformation. Here, I propose the necessity to reevaluate and differentiate our understanding of design's roles to productively deal with the contradictions described, by challenging and complementing theoretical considerations within the contemporary design research discourse with systematically structured reflections-in-practice. In the second part, the dissertation develops such a practice-led approach to exploring different positions within the nexus of design and the political, and applies this approach to reflect on the participatory design process that unfolded within the dissertation's case study MAZI (CAPS/H2020), an interdisciplinary and EU-funded research project that oscillates in-between entities such as design, activism, and technology. Here, I propose a model that operationalizes the Scandinavian participatory design approach "Design as Infrastructuring" in the context under discussion. The third and final part brings together these theoretical and practical inquiries in order to discuss insights and positions emerging from this analytical synthesis vis-à-vis the research questions.

Digital sovereignty has become a hotly debated concept. The current convergence of multiple crises adds fuel to this debate, as it contextualizes the concept in a foundational discussion of democratic principles, civil rights, and national identities: is (technological) self-determination an option for every individual to cope with the digital sphere effectively? Can disruptive events provide chances to rethink our ideas of society - including the design of the objects and processes which constitute our techno-social realities? The positions assembled in this volume analyze opportunities for participation and policy-making, and describe alternative technological practices before and after the pandemic

Digital sovereignty has become a hotly debated concept. The current convergence of multiple crises adds fuel to this debate, as it contextualizes the concept in a foundational discussion of democratic principles, civil rights, and national identities: is (technological) self-determination an option for every individual to cope with the digital sphere effectively? Can disruptive events provide chances to rethink our ideas of society - including the design of the objects and processes which constitute our techno-social realities? The positions assembled in this volume analyze opportunities for participation and policy-making, and describe alternative technological practices before and after the pandemic.

Digital sovereignty has become a hotly debated concept. The current convergence of multiple crises adds fuel to this debate, as it contextualizes the concept in a foundational discussion of democratic principles, civil rights, and national identities: is (technological) self-determination an option for every individual to cope with the digital sphere effectively? Can disruptive events provide chances to rethink our ideas of society - including the design of the objects and processes which constitute our techno-social realities? The positions assembled in this volume analyze opportunities for participation and policy-making, and describe alternative technological practices before and after the pandemic.

This document is a report on the structured discussion workshop at the EAD 2017 Design for Next (Society) conference in Rome, Italy. The workshop was hosted by Bianca Herlo and Andreas Unteidig from the Berlin University of the Arts and joined by İdil Gaziulusoy from Aalto University and Wolfgang Jonas from the University of Braunschweig. ; Peer reviewed

The three year EU-funded MAZI research project (www.mazizone.eu) brought together universities, civil society organizations, and neighbourhood groups to design, develop and trial a digital toolkit for supporting local sustainability in four European countries. Funder constraints, partner ambitions and community needs had to be balanced to both adhere to academic research protocols while making a difference in the neighbourhoods where research and action took place. These sometimes conflicting ambitions caused partners to continuously question whose agendas were best being served by the project activities. They had to confront asymmetries of power, capacity, and credibility both within the consortium and within the community settings. Local circumstances changed; partners had to negotiate new, unfamiliar, and changing roles; and guises had to be adopted to progress sometimes conflicting ambitions. In this paper, we report on the challenges encountered in two of the pilot locations, Berlin and London. These two pilots were similar as they consisted at the outset of a university partner previously unconnected to the locality, working with a civil society partner that was deeply embedded in the setting though long-term engagement. In both cases, the pairings sought to work closely together both on the ground and in research tasks. Finding acceptable compromises stimulatedconsiderable self-reflection and required ongoing negotiation. We offer insights on the potentials and pitfalls of civil society activistsand academic researchers collaborating within a research framework from the perspectives of both, with the goal of building a bridge of understanding between these two viewpoints

Over the last decade, digital sovereignty has become a central element in policy discourses on digital issues. Although it has become popular in both centralised/authoritarian and democratic countries alike, the concept remains highly contested. After investigating the challenges to sovereignty apparently posed by the digital transformation, this essay retraces how sovereignty has re-emerged as a key category with regard to the digital. By systematising the various normative claims to digital sovereignty, it then goes on to show how, today, the concept is understood more as a discursive practice in politics and policy than as a legal or organisational concept.