futuring and trust; a prospective approach to designing trusted … v3- paper... · 2021. 5. 4. ·...

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

futuring and trust; a prospective approach to designing trusted … v3- paper... · 2021. 5. 4. ·...

Documents