Rethinking Design: Inclusion of Non-Human Perspectives

The recent bushfires in Australia have shown how serious consequences can arise when we change technology without considering the environment, society, and natural systems. This discussion leads to a new approach in design that looks at the connections between humans and other living beings as well as the natural world.

#Rethinking Design

Traditionally, design has focused on people and their needs. This method is called Human-centered Design. However, as we face more climate-related events, there is a growing concern about how non-human entities, like animals and plants, can also be included in the design process. This shift is called posthuman design or more-than-human design. It encourages designers to think beyond just human experiences and consider how other beings interact with technology.

#The Need for Participation

Design researchers are looking into how non-human entities can take part in technology design. Current methods often involve putting designers in natural settings or encouraging them to think like non-human beings to understand their experiences better. However, simply experiencing these settings does not tell us how to give a voice to these non-human entities in the design process.

#A Study with Smart Cities

In 2020, researchers worked with a local council to assess a smart city project in a region affected by the bushfires. Their goal was to suggest a design framework that considers both human and non-human perspectives. They found a gap in practice – a need for clear ways to integrate these perspectives into design. This gap led to looking at ideas from fields like philosophy to discover new approaches, like the "intentional stance."

#What is the Intentional Stance?

The intentional stance is a concept that helps predict how entities, whether human or non-human, might behave based on their supposed thoughts and feelings. Instead of focusing on the physical attributes of an entity, it asks us to treat them as if they have beliefs, desires, and intentions. This approach could help in understanding and including non-human entities in the design process by interpreting their actions as if they were rational beings.

#Applying the Intentional Stance to Design

In practical terms, applying the intentional stance for design can involve asking key questions about how non-human entities might engage in design processes. For example, in a smart city project, designers could consider what trees might "want" in terms of light exposure. When designing smart lighting systems, they could think about how tree growth might be affected by artificial light. Would trees "believe" that they thrive with the right amount of natural light? Would their "desire" be to minimize light pollution? Understanding these perspectives can lead to better outcomes not just for people but also for the environment.

#Considering the Role of Air

Another non-human element to think about is the air around us. Artificial lights can affect air quality by changing how chemicals interact in the atmosphere. However, it is challenging to attribute thoughts or intentions to something as abstract as air particles. This raises questions about how to effectively include such entities in the design process.

#Striking a Balance Between Interests

The goal of including non-human perspectives in design does not mean pushing human interests aside. Instead, it’s about finding balance. For instance, while human residents of a smart city might want well-lit pathways for safety, trees might advocate for less light to protect their growth. The challenge lies in reconciling these differing perspectives to create designs that work for everyone.

#Challenges of the Intentional Stance

While the intentional stance offers a framework for understanding non-human entities, it comes with limitations. Non-human entities do not always act in ways we consider rational. Emotions and social influences play a significant role in decision-making for humans, and similar complexities could exist for non-humans, which are not accounted for in the intentional stance.

Moreover, the stance typically focuses on individual entities rather than groups. For example, while we can think about the needs of a single tree, how do we consider the overall health of a forest? This collective aspect is important and requires additional processes to fully encompass the many voices in the natural world.

Another limitation comes from the idea that humans can represent non-human entities. This can lead to biases based on the designer's perspective. The designer's views may shape how they interpret what a non-human entity "wants," which may not reflect the entity's true needs. Future research should focus on refining this process and allowing for diverse perspectives.

#Alternatives to the Intentional Stance

While the intentional stance provides useful insights, there are other ways to engage non-human entities in design. One possibility is using direct sensing technologies that monitor environmental conditions. For example, using sensors to gather data about tree health and how they respond to light can create a feedback loop that informs design decisions.

Engaging with Indigenous knowledge can also enhance our understanding of relational thinking and the interconnectedness of living beings. This perspective can guide design processes in a way that honors the complexities of the natural world, promoting respect and care for all entities involved.

#Moving Forward

As climate challenges intensify, it is crucial to rethink how we approach design. Leaving behind strictly human-centered methods opens the door to a more inclusive practice that recognizes the needs of all living things. By incorporating the insights of non-human entities into technology design, we can work towards solutions that benefit the environment and society alike.

In summary, the discussion around including non-human perspectives in design is vital as we seek to create sustainable and just technologies. The intentional stance may serve as a valuable starting point, but it is essential to explore additional approaches and methodologies to achieve truly participatory design. The future of design must respect the voices of all entities, ensuring a harmonious balance between technology and nature.