Memorandum by Jonathan Chapman
1. The UK disposes of considerable, and increasing,
volumes of domestic electronic products (DEPs) each year—the
majority of which still perform their tasks perfectly, in a utilitarian
sense. In an emotive sense, however, these unwanted products bear
an immaterial form of defect manifest within the relational space
occupied by both subject and object (user and product). In this
way, it is clear that the "design for durability" paradigm
has important implications beyond its conventional interpretation,
in which product longevity is considered solely in terms of an
object's physical endurance—whether cherished or discarded.
In this sense, it can be seen that durability is just as much
about desire, love and attachment, as it is fractured polymers,
worn gaskets or blown circuitry. It therefore appears clear that
there is little point designing physical durability into consumer
goods, if consumers lack the desire to keep them.
2. It may be argued that the unsustainable
consumption and waste of natural resources is a legacy of modern
times, born largely from the inappropriate marriage of excessive
material durability with fleeting product life spans. Landfill
sites and waste management facilities throughout the UK are overloaded
with fully functioning DEPs—toasters that still toast and
freezers that still freeze. In many cases, waste of this nature
can be seen as nothing more than a symptom of a failed relationship
between the user and the product. This is because consumer desire
is unstable; it continually evolves and adapts, whilst the DEPs
deployed to both mediate and satisfy those desires remain relatively
frozen in time. It is this incapacity for evolution and growth
that renders most DEPs incapable of both establishing and sustaining
relationships with users. The waste this inconsistency generates
is substantial, coming at increasing cost to manufacturers facing
the policy-driven demands of the European Union (EU) Waste Electrical
and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive and, perhaps more importantly,
the natural world. We must therefore begin to consider the emergent
paradigm of emotionally durable design alongside more established
notions of physical durability and material endurance.
3. Despite growth as a territory of enquiry,
thus far, the creative methodologies addressing design for durability
have attended almost exclusively to the cosmetic, bodily survival
of manufactured objects. Indeed, at present, products designed
for take-back are generally geared toward economical disassembly,
recycling and reuse, rather than prolonged lifespans. Though these
end-of-pipe methodologies are essential, it may also be stated
that, through focusing solely on waste management strategies (such
as the design and production of recyclable waste, biodegradable
waste and disassemble-able waste, for example), deeper strategic
possibilities are overlooked. In this way, it may be argued that
sustainable design methodologies are symptom-focused; addressing
the after effects—rather than the causes—of the inefficient
model of design, production and consumption we face today.
4. In the case of most DEPs, longer lifespans
are environmentally beneficial, as the majority of energy consumed
occurs pre-use, during the resource extraction and manufacturing
phases. This is particularly true of digital products—such
as mobile phones, PDAs, digital cameras and MP3 players—that
require low levels of energy to operate (largely due to their
frictionless action, achieved through a lack of moving parts),
but actually require relatively high levels of energy to produce.
However, there are exceptions to this rule. DEPs that consume
substantial amounts of energy during the use phase, when more
energy efficient alternatives are commercially available, may
well become counterproductive over extended periods of time (exceeding
8-10 years); products that typify this classification include
washing machines and fridge freezers.
5. Though the need for longer lasting DEPs
is widely recognised and supported, practical working methods,
design frameworks and tools that enable the commercial implementation
of such artefacts, are scarce. This may be described as a consequence
of the apparently intangible, ethereal nature of considerations
pertaining to psychological function, which cause confusion for
the practicing designer tasked with the design and development
of greater emotional longevity in DEPs. As a result, the positive
impact(s) of academic studies in this area has thus far failed
to penetrate the working practices and methodologies of design—arguably,
the one place where new models of sustainable design knowledge
and understanding are most urgently needed. It is essential therefore
that practical methodological information is generated, that enables
product designers to engage more effectively with complex issues
of emotional durability through design; presenting a more expansive,
holistic approach to design for durability, and more broadly,
the lived-experience of sustainability.
6. From my research, in which an empirical
study (2006) examined the attachment behaviours of 2,154 respondents
with their DEPs, the following six-point experiential framework
has been distilled; providing product designers with distinct
conceptual pathways through which to initiate engagement with
salient issues of emotional durability and design; the six-point
experiential framework (and supporting annotations) is as follows:
(a) Narrative: users share a unique
personal history with the object. This often relates to when,
how and from whom the object was acquired;
(b) Detachment: feel no emotional
connection to the object, have low expectations and thus perceive
it in a favorable way due to a lack of emotional demand or expectation
(this also suggests that attachment may actually be counterproductive,
as it elevates the level of expectation within the user to a point
that is often unattainable);
(c) Surface: the object is physically
ageing well, and developing a tangible character through time,
use and sometimes misuse;
(d) Attachment: feel a strong emotional
connection to the object, due to the service it provides, the
information it contains and the meaning it conveys;
(e) Fiction: are delighted or even
enchanted by the object as it is not yet fully understood or known
by the user; these are often recently purchased objects that are
still being explored and discovered by the user; and
(f) Consciousness: the object is perceived
as autonomous and in possession of its own free will; it is quirky,
often temperamental and interaction is an acquired skill that
can be fully acquired only with practice.
7. By designing DEPs that consumers wish
to keep for longer, these products are transformed into conversation
pieces—linking consumers to producers, though an ongoing
and sustained dialogue of service, upgrade and repair. If appropriately
managed, it is proposed that fostering and maintaining such relationships
with customers, presents a significant part of the solution to
issues of sustainability and design; enabling business to continue
generating revenue whilst reducing the frequency of need for further
costly manufacturing, resource extraction, energy consumption,
atmospheric pollution and waste.
8. Form has a vital role to play in achieving
the function of sustainability. Function has a more ethereal quality
than is commonly recognised—it could be said that function
exists on a linear scale, in which at one end you have task-oriented
function where objects perform and fulfil their tasks well (which
is a sustainable characteristic), and at the other end of the
scale, you have a more sociological/existential function where
objects are effective in mediating the particular values and beliefs
of the individual user. Both modes of functionality are largely
dependent on the designer, and are central to the success or failure
of an object in social, economic and environmental terms, as when
objects succeed within both modes of functionality through design,
replacement motives are quelled, and things generally, are valued,
cherished and kept.
9. Amidst the industry-wide movement to
achieve compliance with environmental legislation such as the
EU WEEE Directive, the root causes of the ecological crisis we
face are overlooked; meanwhile the inefficient consumer machine
surges wastefully forth, but now it does so with recycled materials
instead of virgin ones. By neglecting to better understand the
motivational drivers underpinning the consumption and waste of
DEPs, design resigns itself to an end-of-pipe problem-solving
agency, rather than the central pioneer of positive social, economic
and environmental change that it potentially could be.
January 2008
|
