Futuringandtrust;Aprospectiveapproachtodesigningtrustedfuturesviaacomparative
studyamongdesignfuturemodelsFernandoGaldon |RoyalCollegeofArt,SchoolofDesign:London,[email protected] |RoyalCollegeofArt,SchoolofDesign:London,[email protected] |RoyalCollegeofArt,SchoolofDesign:London,[email protected]
ABSTRACT |
Thedesignofthefutureisthedesignoftrustinrelationtouncertaintyandrisk.Althoughyoucannotcompletelyeliminateuncertaintyandrisk,astheyareintrinsicoffutures,trustoperatesasacategorytomitigateandreducinguncertaintyandriskbyenablingmethodstoaddressthem.InthispaperweintroduceProspectiveDesignviaacomparativestudybetweenexistingdesignfuturemethodologies.Inthisstudy,weoutlinedtheirlimitationsandproposeamixedmethodologyaimedatcombiningandenhancingdifferentapproachestopresentanintegrativemodelthataimstoreconciledifferentperspectivesandimprovethemaintaskofdesigninourunpredictableandexponentialtechnologicalage:designingtrustinprospectivefutures.
KEYWORDS |Trust,design,prospectivity,probabilism,engagement,uncertainty,risk
1. INTRODUCTION Thedesignofthefutureisthedesignoftrustinrelationtouncertaintyandrisk.Althoughyoucannot
eliminateuncertaintyandriskcompletely,astheyareintrinsicoffutures,trustoperatesasacategory
tomitigateandreducinguncertaintyandriskintheprocessbyenablingmethodstoaddressthem.
In this paperwe introduce Prospective Design via a comparative study between existing design
futuremethodologies.Inthisstudy,weoutlinedtheirlimitationsandproposeamixedmethodology
aimedatcombiningandenhancingdifferentapproachestopresentanintegrativemodelaimingto
reconcile different perspectives and improve the main task of design in our unpredictable and
exponentialtechnologicalage:designingtrustinprospectivefutures.
Intheareaofdesignfutures,sixmainmethodologieshavebeenidentifiedasarepresentativesample
ofpractice:SpeculativeDesign(SD),Co-Speculation(CoS),TransitionDesign(TD),ForesightPanning
(FP), ABCD Planning (ABCD), and Scenario Planning (SP). They represent a spectrum ofmodels
raging fromconceptual topragmaticandfromemancipatorytoprofitdrivenapproaches(Fig.1).
Thesemodelshavebeenwidelyusedandareacknowledgedaspreeminenttoolsindesignpractise.
PAGE 2
Figure 1. An orientative and representative sample of design future methodologies raging from conceptual to pragmatic and from emancipatory to profit driven approaches.
Eventhoughthesepracticesaredealingwithuncertaintyandrisk,noneofthemdiscussesdesigning
trust, instead, they focus on designing engagement. As co-speculative designer Julia Lohmann
acknowledgesinherthesisTheDepartmentofSeaweed:co-speculativedesigninamuseumresidency,
intheseapproaches“Designers[…]creatediscourse,dialogue,activismandengagementwithfuture
scenarios”(Lohmann,2017,p.21).OrDunne&Rabythemselvesstatethat“Thisapproachrequires
viewerstocreativelyengagewiththepropsandmakethemtheirown”(Lohmann,2017,p.28).
Althoughtrustandengagementbelong torelationalpractices, trust issignificantlydifferent from
engagement.AccordingtotheOxfordEnglishDictionary,engagementisdefinedas“beinginvolved
withsomebody/somethinginanattempttounderstandthem/it”.However,trustisdefinedas“the
beliefthatsomebody/somethingisgood,sincere,honest,etc.andwillnottrytoharmortrickyou”.
Therefore,theintentionalityoftheotherpartandtheimplicationsofthisrelationship,whichcanbe
detrimental,arepositionedasfundamentalelementstodesigninthisrelationalmodel.
PAGE 3
Inthiscontext, thenature, intentionalityandimplicationsofthesystemof interactiondemandsa
differentkindofdesignand time intervention.Engagementpresentsamultiplicityof contingent,
boundaried or conditional solutions based on open-ended systems, real-world constraints and
contextsvia idealisedutopias, and relational connections toaddress “theendofdiscreteobjects,
hermeticmeanings,andthebeginningofconnectedecologies”(Blauvelt,2008,p.6).Trust,onthe
otherhand,demandsthedesignertoevolvetowardsthedesignofunsupervisedsystems,unintended
consequences, prospectivity, probabilism (not-fully-knowing), reparation and accountability, and
theubiquityoffluidcyber-blendedandhyper-connectedexponentialandunpredictableecologies.
Atthispoint,apreliminaryinvestigativeoverviewoftwentieth-centuryapproachestofuturestudies
structuresprospectivedesignpracticesaroundtwomainparadigms:thescientific-positivisticmodel
basedonthemethodofextrapolation(1900-1950)andasociological-pluralisticperspectivebased
onconstructivism(1950-2015)(Galdon,2019a).Althoughtheseperspectiveshavebeenwidelyused,
theypresent limitations. The scientific/positivistic approach is perceived as objective and value-
neutral.However,itisalsoperceivedaspresentinganarrownessoffocus(onlyonepossiblefuture),
depending exclusively from the past and a lack of contextual awareness. From this perspective,
Richard Buckminster Fuller called for an ‘industrially realisable design science’ "(Fuller, 1957)
throughhis‘Eightstrategiesforacomprehensiveanticipatorydesignscience’.However,thisfailed
tomaterialiseasanewfield.Ontheotherhand,thepluralisticapproachisperceivedasinclusiveand
partial.However,itisalsoperceivedaspresentingaloosefocus(toomanypossiblefutures)andis
toodependentoncontextualawareness(Gidley,2017).
In this study, the authors consider both limitations to propose amixed-methodology. Themain
intentioninthisprocessistodevelopareliablemodeltodesigntrustinfuturedesignpracticesto
reduce uncertainty and risk in the process. In this paper we will further critically analyse the
sociological-pluralistic paradigm via a comparative study among the six aforementioned
methodologies,asthisareaislackingfurtherscrutiny.Forinstance,intermsofthebroadestused
methodologyofspeculativedesign,oneofthefundamentaladvantagesisthatitremovesarangeof
constraints typicallyused inproductdesign,however, it createsa lateralproblem;difficultieson
controllingthespeculation.Asaresult,manyof theproposedoutputsend inwhat futurestudies
expertJenniferGidleynames‘Popfuturism’(superficialandmedia-friendlyoutputs)(Gidley,2017).
2. METHOD AccordingtoBukhari(2011)aComparativeStudyanalysesandcomparestwoormoreobjectsor
ideas to examine, compare and contrast them to showhow two ormore subjects are similar or
different (Bukhari, 2011). Building from this perspective, the authors built a comparative study
PAGE 4
betweenthesixaforementionedmethodologiestodesignthefuturetounderpinthedifferencesand
informthemainargument.
3. DESIGNING THE FUTURE
3.1 Sociological and pluralistic - methods based on sociology. Thisapproachisbasedonthesocialandcriticalpracticeofconstructingawealthofpossiblefutures.
Itsmainmethodsarecontextualdataanalysis,interpretativeanalyticalmethodsandthesystematic
useofparticipatorymethods.Thisapproachusesconesandmatrixes(Fig.2).
Inthisarea,asampleofsixmainapproacheshavebeenidentifiedasarepresentativespectrumof
practice:SpeculativeDesign(SD),Co-Speculation(CoS),TransitionDesign(TD),ForesightPanning
(FP),ABCDPlanning(ABCD),andScenarioPlanning(SP).
Figure 2. Prospecting the future; Sociological model based on constructivism.
Wecan categorise these asmethods leading to either emancipatoryorprofit-ledprojects. In the
emancipatoryrangethesemethodsmainlyusethecone,whereasmethodsintheprofit-drivenrange
use thematrix. Further, emancipatorymethods tendbeusedmostly on sociologically leddesign
practicesthatleadtoculturalcontributions,whereasprofit-drivenmethodstendtobeusedmostly
on technologically led design practices that lead to corporate contributions. Finally, in the
emancipatory range, analytical practices revolve around critical perspectives and inductive
PAGE 5
reasoning,whereasintheprofit-ledrangeanalyticalpracticesrevolvearoundrationalandlogical
perspectives and deductive reasoning. However, both perspectives pursue the same objective:
change.
3.2 Critical analysis. Inthisstudy,acomparativestudyhasbeenconductedtounderpinthekeystepsandstrategiesofthe
sixmethodsoutlined(Fig.3).Wehavestructuredthisanalysisaroundfivequestionsweconsider
criticaltobuildtrustindesignfutures;doesthismethodintegrate historicalbackgroundresearchinthetechnologydevelopmentasstartingpoint intheprocess?Howdoesthismethodgeneratethe
projection?Howdoesthismethodcriticallyanalysetheprojection?Howdoesthismethodcontrol
theprojectiontoavoidsuperficialandmedia-friendlyoutputs?Howdoesthismethodtransformthe
projectionintoareal-worldexecutableaction?
Thefirstcharacteristicwecanobserveisthattheystartbygeneratingaprojection.Thisaspectmay
beduetotheutilisationofdesignfuturestogeneratepotentialapplicationsforupcomingtechnology
comingfromthelab.Howthisprojectionisenabledvariesbetweenthemethods.Someofthemuse
visions,othervalues,signals,ordrivers,andSpeculativeDesignuses‘whatif…?’questions.Interms
ofanalysingtheprojection,onlyTransitionDesign(TD)providesamethod:CausalLayeredAnalysis
(CLA).Thismethodisstructuredinfourlevels:TheLitany;SystemicCauses;Worldview/Discourses,
andMyth/Metaphor.Thismethodisinteresting,butreallydifficulttoimplement.Itisverybroad,
and someof the levels are tooopen to interpretation. In the SystemicCauses level, for instance,
“Interpretationandcommunicationisoftenundertakenbypolicyinstitutes,editorialnewsarticles
andnon-academicjournals”(Irwing,2015).AndtheMyth/Metaphorlevelassumesthatpeoplecan
explaintheirvisceralemotions.Intermsofmethodsusedbytheseoutlinedmethodologiestocontrol
theprojection,theserangefromplausibilitytovalues,torealneedsorpriorities.Intermsoftheone
ofthemostbroadlyusedmethodologyofSpeculativeDesign,thislimitsthevalidityofitsoutcometo
plausibility (Auger, 2012). However, it creates a lateral problem: difficulties in controlling the
speculation.Asaresult,manyoftheproposedoutputsendinwhatFutureStudiesexpertJennifer
Gidley names ‘Pop futurism’ (superficial and media-friendly outputs) (Gidley, 2017). This
problematicisalsotranslatedtootherpractices.Finally,onlytwomethods,TDandABCD,proposea
techniquetogroundtheprojection:back-casting.
Inthisstudy,weconsiderallthelimitationsoutlinedandproposeamixedmethodologyaimedat
combiningandenhancingthepositivesideofeachapproachaddressedandpresentanintegrative
model that aims to reconcile different perspectives to improve the main task of design in our
unpredictableandexponentialtechnologicalage:prospectingthefuture.
PAGE 6
3.3 Prospective design – Mixed-method. Building from these insights, the authors defined trajectories, probabilistic extrapolations,
asymmetries,consequences,andcounter-fictions(Fig.3),aspotentialmethodstoaddresstheissues
outlinedabove.
Figure 3. Comparative study between the six models used in design to address the future. This process identified the limitation of historical background research in technological developments as starting point in the process, projection analysis and reversing the projection as areas to consider for further development. Building from this analysis, the bottom of this diagram presents a set of methods to build a more reliable and mixed-method model to address and mitigate uncertainty and risk in design futures.
From this point,we developed ProspectiveDesign (PrD) (Fig. 5). This approach is based on the
systematic practice of relational systemanalysis toprospect andmodel prospective futures. The
mainmethodsusedarehistoricaldata analysis, relational frameworksand the systematicuseof
ethicalmethods.
PAGE 7
Figure 4. This diagram presents the final embodiment of the proposed methodology. It contains the methods, approach, variables to address, processes, and research techniques used.
In themodelpresented,wecombinedanddevelopedexistingmodelsofdesigning(futures).This
modelpresentssomevariationsonestablishedmodelssuchasSpeculativeDesign,whichrevolves
around reactive models based on “what if…?” questions. In the Prospective Design model, we
integratedthestrengthofhistoricalandcontextualresearchtoconnectthepasttothepresentto
define technological trajectories. This process aims to overcome hyped reactivity by bringing
historical and contextual evolutive traces in technological developments. Then, we introduce
probabilisticextrapolationstotriangulatethefuturebyanalysingexistingpatents,prototypes,and
demos.Thisprocessenablesustooperatethismethodasananalyticaltooltoidentifyasymmetric
problems in the system. Once we identify asymmetries, we conduct a three-level consequential
analysisinordertomaptheimpactoftheasymmetryintheuser.Thisprocessprovidesmorefocus
thanlong-termandbroaderperspectives,suchasTD.Finally,itinvertsthefuturesconetoreverse
theasymmetryviacounter-fictionsintoatransformationalactiontogenerateemancipatoryprojects.
PAGE 8
Insteadof framingthedystopiaorutopia togenerateadebate, itprovidesasystematicmodel to
reframethemandtransformtheprojectionintoareal-worldinterventionthataimstoeffectchange.
Intheprocess,thisapproachalsochallengesthedominantideaofanticipation,whichaimstoforesee
what may happen and then waits for it to happen. Prospective research is directional and
transformational.BuildingonGlanville’swork, its fundamental aim is to generate knowledge for
futureactions(Glanville,2005)inthecontextofuncertaintyandrisk.Itaimstogeneratepreliminary
insightstoshapethefuture.Thesuccessoftheseinterventionswillbeassessedbytheirpotential
impactandtransferabilitytoreal-worldinterventionstoeffectrealchange.Inthisprocess,building
fromnotionsofeconomics,weproposedthattheprospectiveelementcanshapethefuturethrough
probabilisticknowledge(Galdon,2019f).Thisknowledgewouldenablethispracticetooperatein
the future systematically, as well as, be integrated into established models and structures of
knowledge.
4. DISCUSION
4.1 Evaluation Thedesignofthefutureisthedesignoftrustinrelationtouncertaintyandrisk.Inthiscontext,we
introducearangeofmethodstoconstructProspectiveDesign(PrD)asamethodologytoenhance
trust in design futures practice. In terms of evaluation, this research identified conferences,
practitionersandpublicbodiestoimplementacross-disciplinaryandprogressiveevaluationmodel
toremoveassumptionsandconsolidateknowledgefromanexternalperspective.Theresearchhas
been presented to awide range of diverse audiences, including professional researchers, design
consultancies,practitioners,NGOs,andgovernmentbodies.
Aspartofimplementingthismethodology,weproducedseveralpapersviaacasestudyonVirtual
Assistants.WesubmittedfourofthosepublicationstotheNationalDataStrategyBoard(NDSB)in
theUKtoaffectthedevelopmentofAI.Allfoursubmissionswereacceptedbytheboard(Galdon,
2019b),(Galdon,2019c),(Galdon,2019d),(Galdon,2019e).Wehavealsopublishedandproposeda
new digital right (Galdon, 2020a), which has been submitted to the EU Commission for their
consideration.WhethertheNDSB,ortheEUCommissiondecidestoimplementthesestrategiesis
beyondourcontrol.OurdutyasaPrDresearcherswastoprospectthefuturetoproposethatthings
canbe otherwise byproviding guiding knowledge for transforming the future in an applied and
ethicalmanner.
PAGE 9
4.2 Futuring ProspectiveDesignaimsto“affect”change,ratherthan“influencing”or“criticizing”it.Therefore,
operating in the emancipatory spectrum. It differs from theother formsof futuredesign studies
operatingthisspace.Forinstance,inthedepartmentofseaweed(2017)JuliaLohmannpositionsCo-
Speculation (CoS) beyond Critical and Speculative Design (CSD). Building on JohnWood’sMeta-
design,herprocessisbasedongeneratinggrassrootslocalactivismtoinfluencepolicy.Wefindthis
notionofinfluencinginterestingandevolutiveinrelationtoCSD’sprovocations,butlimitedinscope.
When you "affect" something, it means that you have made it change. Conversely, when you
"influence"something,itmeansthatyouhavealtereditsbehaviour,butnotnecessarilychangedit.
Influence ispersonalandemotional,whereasaffect issystematicandrelational.Thisperspective
impliesmoving theprocess towardsasystematicprocessof ideation,rather thanaconceptual
(Dunne) or materialistic (Lohmann) process of ideation. It aligns more with Transition Design
(Irwin). As we are placing the intervention in the context of potential (not-fully-materialised)
interactions,theoutputcannotbefullyobservedorgraspable,butcanbedissolved.IfCSDandCoS
deal with materialism from a conceptual and experiential perspective, Prospective Design
approachesthedesignprocessfromaconsequentialperspectivetoinsertanethicaldirectionality
(Fig.6).
Intermsofparticipation,ProspectiveDesign(PrD)alsorepositionsLohmann’sfocuson‘involving
theuser’,Dunne’sfocuson‘directingtheuser’,andIrwin’sfocuson‘connectingtheuser’,tooutputs
focusedondesigning‘onbehalfoftheuser’.Intheprocess,PrDaimstodesigntrust,ratherthan
engagementorcomprehension.Inthisprocess,PrDrepositionstheroleofthedesignerfromthatof
anauthor (Dunne),or facilitator (Lohmann; Irwin) to thatofanexpert inprospective future-led
technologicalpotentialitiesaimedatmitigatingunintendedconsequences.Themainintentionofthis
approach is toprotectusers. It aims toshape frameworks rather thanchallenge them(Dunne),
reframethem(Irwin),orprovideamethodtodealwiththem(Lohmann).Thesuccessoftheoutput
willbedeterminedbythepotentialtoaffectchange,asthedecisiontoaffectitdoesnotrelyonthe
designerbutonsomebodyelse.Thispositiondepartsfromgrassrootsactivism(Irwin)thataimsfor
abottom-upprocess.Instead,PrDpositionschangeinarelationalcontextwherethis‘other’becomes
capital.Thisprocessdemandstheidentificationoftheactorsinvolvedinthesystem,andtheweight
ofthoseactorswithinthesystem,(becauseitisthisaspectthatdetermineswhoiscapableofenabling
change)ratherthanconfrontingthem.Therefore,PrDisaimingforreformratherthanconfrontation.
Finally,theoutputshouldbeembodiedintheappropriatetypology.Theagent/sofchangeneedto
beidentified,andtheoutputtranslatedinatypologythattheyunderstand.
PAGE 10
Figure 5. This table presents a comparative analysis between future design methodologies in the emancipatory area. It contrasts PrD with CoS, TD and SD to illustrate the differences between them.
PAGE 11
5.0 CONCLUSIONS
With PrD, we have probed ways of designing trust in the context of digital systems, black-box
technologies, embodying uncertainty, unpredictability and autonomous behaviour, based on
exponentialandunpredictabletechnologicaldevelopments.Theframeworkwehavepresentedin
thisstudyprovidesafocusedandsystematicapproachtowaysofaddressingtrustinthecontextof
uncertaintyandrisk.
In the process, PrD evolves current models in design futures such as Speculative Design, Co-
Speculative design, or Transition Design which rely on reactive practices around “what if …?”
questions,visions,trends,signsordrivers,ratherthangroundedprojectionssupportedbyhistorical
backgroundresearchtojustify,focusandguidetheprojection.PrDextendsrecentmodelssuchas
TransitionalDesign or Co-speculation by identifying key attributes in systems dynamics such as
probabilisticextrapolationselements(demos,prototypesandpatents),asymmetricelements(data,
inferencesanddependencies),andconsequentialelements(contexts+unintendedconsequences=
unintended actions), and focuses the intervention by countering control, repression, and/or
dependencies. In the process it changes orthodoxies of participation and design operationality.
Finally,PrDcanaccessthefutureviaprobabilisticknowledge(Galdon,2019g).Thisaspectallows
this practice to operate in the future, unlike any of the practices above,which operatewith the
premisethatdesigninthepresentcanbeinformedbyvisionsofthefuture.
Finally,PrDengageswithdesignprocesses thatmightnotresult in immediate interventions,and
withdesignerslookingatthesesystemstobuildandimplementethicalandemancipatoryprojects
fromtheshorttothelongterm.Thisapproachmovesdesign’stemporalframetowardsthefuture
andshiftsthesharingofknowledgefromthe“known”’tothe“partially-know”’,fromthe“factual”to
the “potential”, and from the “intended” to the “unintended’”. In this context, design research
becomes an orthogonal node for grounded transformational directionality and emancipatory
formingpractices,leadingtoaspaceforeffectingchange.
REFERENCES
Auger,J.(2012)Whyrobot?Speculativedesign,thedomesticationoftechnologyandtheconsideredfuture.PhDthesis,RoyalCollegeofArt.
Blauvert,A.(2008)Towardsrelationaldesign.Designobserver11.03.08.Available:http://art.yale.edu/file_columns/0000/0076/blauvelt.pdf
Bukhari,S.A.H.(2011).WhatiscomparativestudySSRN,November20.Availablefrom:https://ssrn.com/abstract=1962328orhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1962328
PAGE 12
Dunne,A.,&Raby,F.(2013).Speculativeeverything:Design,fiction,andsocialdreaming.Cambridge,Massachusetts;London:TheMITPress.
Fuller,R.B.(1957)."ComprehensiveAnticipatoryDesignScience".RoyalArchitecturalInstituteofCanadaJournal.J.F.Sullivan.34(9),357–361.Retrieved2019-12-21.
Galdon,F.,Hall,A.&Wang,S.J.(2019a).Prospectivedesign:Afuture-ledmixed-methodologytomitigateunintendedconsequences.In:ProceedingsoftheInternationalAssociationofSocietiesofDesignResearchConferenceIASDR2019,TheUniversityofManchester,UK.
Galdon,F.,&Wang,S.J.(2019b).Designingtrustinhighlyautomatedvirtualassistants:Ataxonomyoflevelsofautonomy.ArtificialIntelligence.In:Industry4.0:Acollectionofinnovativeresearchcase-studies.InternationalConferenceonIndustry4.0andArtificialIntelligenceTechnologiesIAIT.Cambridge,UK.
Galdon,F.,&Wang,S.J.(2019c).Fromapologytocompensation;Amulti-leveltaxonomyoftrustreparationforhighlyautomatedvirtualassistants.In:Proceedingsofthe1stInternationalConferenceonHumanInteractionandEmergingTechnologies(IHIET2019)conferenceAugust22-24,2019,Nice,France.
Galdon,F.,&Wang,S.J.(2019d).Addressingaccountabilityinhighlyautonomousvirtualassistants.In:Proceedingsofthe1stInternationalConferenceonHumanInteractionandEmergingTechnologies(IHIET2019)August22-24,2019,Nice,France.
Galdon,F.,&Wang,S.J.(2019e).Optimisinguserengagementinhighlyautomatedvirtualassistantstoimproveenergymanagementandconsumption.In:Proceedingsofthe2019AppliedEnergySymposiumAEABConferenceProceedings,MIT,Boston.22-24May2019.
Galdon,F.,Hall,A.(2019f).Theontologicalnatureofdesign;prospectingnewfuturesthroughprobabilisticknowledge.In:DesignResearchforChangeSymposium.DesignMuseum,London
Galdon,F.,Hall,A.(2020a).Therighttoreparations:anewdigitalrightforrepairingtrustintheemergingeraofhighlyautonomoussystems.In:Proceedingsofthe2ndInternationalConferenceonHumanInteractionandEmergingTechnologies:FutureApplications(IHIET-AI2020)Lausanne,Switzerland.
Gidley,J.M.(2017).Thefuture;Averyshortintroduction.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.
Glanville,R.(2005).Designpropositions.In:M.BelderbosandJ.Verbeke,eds.Theunthinkabledoctorate:Brussels:SintLucas.
Irwin,T,Kossoff,G.,Tonkinwise,C.,Scupelli,P.(2015).TransitionDesign2015;Anewareaofdesignresearch,practiceandstudythatproposedesign-ledsocietaltransitiontowardmoresustainablefutures.Pittsburgh:CarnegieMellonUniversity.
Lohmann,J.C.(2017).TheDepartmentofSeaweed;co-speculativedesigninamuseumresidency.PhDthesis,RoyalCollegeofArt.Availablefrom:https://researchonline.rca.ac.uk/3704/4/JuliaLohmannPhDThesis2018.pdfAccessed10/05/2020.