Embedded Files
2.2 Ethical, Social & Environmental Issues DRAFTVolvo has installed an environmentally friendly seawall along the coast of Sydney's harbour that aims to improve biodiversity and water quality in the area.
The Volvo Living Seawall consists of 50 hexagonal tiles with small corners and recesses that are designed to imitate the root structure of native mangrove trees – a popular habitat for marine wildlife.
Irregular-shaped tiles attract sealife
Each tile is made from marine-grade concrete that has been reinforced with recycled plastic fibres.
Developed in collaboration with the Sydney Institute of Marine Science and Reef Design Lab, the project offers an alternative to traditional, linear seawalls, which are often linked to the loss of surrounding ecosystems.
Attached to the surface of the existing seawall structure, the irregular-shaped tiles are designed to attract wildlife such as oysters and molluscs, which filter the water by feeding on passing particles.
"Designed to mimic the root structure of native mangrove trees, the Living Seawall adds complexity to the existing seawall structure and provides a habitat for marine life," said Volvo.
"This aids biodiversity and attracts filter-feeding organisms that actually absorb and filter out pollutants – such as particulate matter and heavy metals – keeping the water clean. The more organisms we have, the cleaner the water," explained the brand.
Scientists will continue to monitor the seawall tiles
Researchers will monitor the Living Seawall for the next 20 years to see how it affects biodiversity and water quality in the area.
Volvo developed the seawall tiles after its research found that one rubbish truck of plastic enters the world's oceans every minute, and more than half of Sydney's shoreline is made of artificial seawalls.
"Rich and vibrant habitats have been replaced with seawalls and degraded by plastic pollution," said the brand.
By adding the tiles to an existing seawall, the project aims to transform a man-made structure into a potential marine habitat.
"It also presents a unique opportunity to research which specific seawall designs and geometries best support the ecosystems in our oceans," added Volvo.
Volvo has pledged to replace all its single-use plastics with sustainable alternatives by the end of 2019.
Other companies taking similar initiatives include IKEA, which has revealed plans to eliminate all single-use plastics from its product range by 2020.
In a bit to reduce unnecessary packaging, UK national newspaper The Guardian recently scrapped its polythene packaging in favour of a compostable wrapping made from potato starch.
Consider this persons critical analysis, do you concede the point?
Consider this persons critical analysis, do you concede the point?
This idea rather omits the main feature and advantage to sea life, which mangrove forest roots at coastal margins offer – they form a three-dimensional matrix in great depth. A textured two-dimensional tile array cannot approach this and probably offers little extra benefit beyond the riven surface of rocks, bricks or concrete.
Any added benefit is worthwhile, but if this surface treatment doesn't reconstitute those rich habitats provided by marginal plant growths, now lost to the bay, it surely cannot provide the protective nursery home, which mangroves do naturally, for the many fish, molluscs and invertebrates, which require that type of environment to survive and thrive.
Swedish homeware giant IKEA has revealed plans to remove all single-use plastics from its product range by 2020, while the Indian government has committed to banning the material from the country by 2022.
To coincide with World Environment Day this week, numerous national governments and large organisations have pledged to reduce use of the unsustainable, disposable plastics.
IKEA, the world's largest furniture retailer, has pledged to phase all virgin plastic from its homeware collections – a move that could set a precedent across the industry.
"By August 2020, all plastic material used in our home furnishing products will be 100 per cent renewable and/or recycled," reads its sustainability statement published yesterday, 7 June 2018.
IKEA promotes closed-loop society
The announcement forms part of a larger commitment to significantly improve IKEA's environmental impact. The company plans to completely overhaul its manufacturing processes so that only renewable, recyclable or recycled materials are used in its products.
The aim is to promote the circular economy – an approach where resources are kept in use for as long as possible, then recycled. IKEA's target is to "close at least two material loops" by 2020, in a bid to reduce customer waste.
"We will develop reverse material flows for waste material, ensure key parts of our range are easily recycled and take a stand for a closed-loop society," reads the statement.
India to ban single-use plastic from all 22 states
IKEA's statement comes days after it was revealed that India plans to ban single-use plastics from all of its 22 states by 2022.
During a summit on World Environment Day, 5 June 2018, Indian prime minister Narendra Modi announced his vision for India, the fastest-growing economy in the world, to set a global example for sustainability.
"It is the duty of each one of us to ensure that the quest for material prosperity does not compromise our environment," said Modi.
"The choices that we make today, will define our collective future," he continued. "The choices may not be easy. But through awareness, technology, and a genuine global partnership, I am sure we can make the right choices. Let us all join together to beat plastic pollution and make this planet a better place to live."
The move, described by the UN Environment agency as "unprecedented", will affect 1.3 billion people living in India.
India "will inspire the world and ignite real change"
Waste plastic is one of the world's biggest environmental issues. According to recent studies, 12 million tonnes of plastic is added to the oceans every year, weighing as much as 60,000 adult blue whales.
Microplastics from cosmetics, bathroom products and vehicle tyres have also been discovered in tap water and food across the world.
This year's World Environment Day, an annual initiative spearheaded by the UN, was a call to action for nations and businesses around the globe to commit to beating plastic pollution.
Other countries that announced new environmental initiatives included Kenya, which pledged to ban plastic bags, and Sri Lanka, which is set to ban styrofoam. Similarly, China announced it will introduce biodegradable bags.
Like India, the Galápagos Islands, which are part of Ecuador, also said it will ban single-use plastics.
"This has been the biggest, most resonant World Environment Day ever, thanks to the leadership of our global host India," said Erik Solheim, head of UN Environment.
"India has made a phenomenal commitment and displayed clear, decisive and global environmental leadership. This will inspire the world and ignite real change."
Volvo and LG plan to reduce plastic waste
Other companies that have now committed to fight the use of single-use plastics include Volvo, LG Electronics and the International Olympic Committee.
Architects and designers have been increasingly championing the use of recycled plastic in recent years.
Milanese design gallerist Rossana Orlandi recently launched a project aimed at changing the perception of plastic, while environmentally minded company Parley for the Oceans has worked with brands like Adidas to create sustainable alternatives to typical products.
Ethics in Design
Ethics in Design
You’re a hired gun, not a tool. Don’t fall into the wrong hands.
This was written in response to an ”Ethics in Your Industry“ prompt in 2007. Obviously my thoughts on the subject are constantly evolving along with the industry. Thanks to Amy Sue Kim for the graphic header.
Introduction
It used to be that people would blame themselves when they couldn’t figure out how to use something. The classic example is programming a VCR. It would frustrate people causing them to give up using the features they had paid for. However, with the rise of the savvy consumer, people have rightfully started blaming the companies that market these poorly designed products. An ethical designer, however, bears the responsibility of the design’s consequences. Blindly obeying a client ignores the role of the designer as an expert adviser, and goes against the spirit of making products and processes better than they currently are.
What Does Good Design Stand For?
When discussing design, aesthetics is often the first thing to come to mind. It’s scientifically proven that pretty things work better. At least they are perceived to work better.2 Good design is more than skin deep though. Pleasing aesthetics is just one tool in creating products that provide value to those that use them. It is actually how a product functions that designers should be concerned with first and foremost.
Designing function includes product features, but also takes into consideration what the product is supposed to accomplish in a certain context. Doors in a home don’t have labels saying push or pull because the same individuals use the doors day in day out. They would eventually learn how the doors function based on experience, and the labels would become an unnecessary eyesore after a few days. However, glass doors at a mall entrance have thousands of individuals each using the doors infrequently. Labels or another method, such as having a push plate or handle, make the door more functional for the person using it. This may seem basic, but simple design decisions can have dramatic impacts. Even the biggest companies sometimes stumble in their efforts to set themselves apart.
Usability expert Donald Norman provides a classic example of how the Boston Hilton’s entrance is a row of glass doors with hidden hinges and horizontal handlebars that are nearly centered on each door. The effect is a minimalist, elegant wall of glass with floating bars. But guests sometimes have trouble figuring out which side of the doors they should push or pull on.3 If the designer had placed the handlebars closer to the edge to be pushed, operating the door would be more obvious. In this case, the designer bears the responsibly for the poor design. The perception is that the guests’ priorities were placed lower than the hotel’s image. Poor design affects the reputations of both the client and the designer even if the client approves each decision. This is why working to satisfy only the client without fully considering the end user is unethical design. It ignores the most important party in the dialogue between client and consumer that the designer is assigned to mediate. A designer not only acts as an agent of the client, but must also be the end-user’s advocate. It is the role of the designer to take client objectives and develop a solution that accomplishes those goals while seamlessly creating a solution that satisfies the end-user.
Responsibility to the Client
How can the designer be held responsible if the client is approving everything? It’s true that the client is historically the one deciding what functions something will have, because they assume the financial risk of failures.4 But a designer isn’t a mindless agent producing a product from a blueprint. There may be specifications, but the designer is the one drawing the blueprint. This is where the designer’s role as an expert adviser comes into play. Hopefully, the client hired the designer because of his expertise in understanding how a particular medium functions. It is assumed that he has a body of knowledge that is deeper than the client’s in a particular area. It wouldn’t make sense for the client to seek the designer’s services otherwise. Thus the ethical burden is placed on the designer because the client does not have the expertise that the designer does. The client can plead ignorance but the designer cannot.
For example, in web design, the body of knowledge a designer possesses can span as wide as visual language, information architecture, interaction design, marketing, and coding. The web designer might not be an authority in all of these fields, but should know enough to have an understanding of how they work together. When a client asks to implement check boxes on an e-commerce site so that visitors can opt-in to newsletters, that is a legitimate request. It allows for the company to create a dialogue with its customers. However, if the client wants that box to be checked by default, it creates an ethical dilemma. Doing so would only require two words to be added to the code. The technical simplicity, however, hides the underlying complexity. From a marketing standpoint, having it checked by default would be great, since it results in more people signing up. However, from a usability perspective it is bad according to the Nielsen Norman Group’s User Experience Report.5 Signing up for something shouldn’t be default behavior because the user can easily overlook it, or become annoyed at having to uncheck it. It’s also deceptive. Just as an ethical lawyer should discourage illegal courses of action to clients, it is the professional responsibility of a designer to advise against doing something that would be detrimental to end users, and potentially to the client, even if the client asks for it. Following through on unethical design orders will only end up hurting the client in the long run as customers get angry and frustrated. After all is said and done, the end-user is still who determines the success of any business.
Responsibility to the End-User
Good design seeks to foster the user’s trust, then fulfills or exceeds her expectations. This can only happen when the user is the main priority in the design process. The hotel entrance and checkbox scenarios above are examples of how design decisions can lead to frustration and distrust from users if things don’t work as expected. When someone sees a movie poster with colorful cartoon characters, she shouldn’t be shocked with a horror film when she goes to the theatre with kids in tow. Apple, as a design-centric company, understands this. At the Goldman Sachs Technology Investment Symposium, COO Tim Cook said, “We realized that people really want a video camera built into the system. So in every Mac…there’s a camera built in...that takes down our peripheral revenue, but we give the customer what they want.” 6 This strategy of designing for the end user’s needs and wants develops into a loyalty that will continue to grow so long as trust and expectations aren’t violated. End-users will pay a premium if their need and wants are satisfied. Clients might not always recognize this while chasing short-term results. It is up to the designer to advocate for a better design while striving to make the best product they can for the end-user.
Considering the end-user is key to ethical design. This doesn’t mean that balancing research and production costs for the client are not important. The point is that if the end-user isn’t more important than the other two, the design solution is set up to fail. A designer’s responsibility to the end-user is to make something more useful or to refuse to make it at all. There are cases where the client will not have the end-user’s well being in mind. No design solution can reconcile that ethical position because it is doomed from the start if the client asks for something unethical. It is the designer’s responsibility to refuse the job in this situation. Taking that work will only end up in wasting natural and mental resources. The worst-case scenario is that it ends up hurting the user, which is the complete opposite of good, ethical design.
Responsibility to Society
Most discussion of ethical design (if mentioned at all) usually revolves around using environmentally sustainable materials, or doing a communications campaign for a non-profit group. Rarely is the relationship between designer, client, and end user questioned. Yet it’s something that nearly every designer is faced with on a daily basis. It’s easy to refuse a client when much of society denounces it, as in the case of Big Tobacco. It’s a lot harder to advocate against a client’s marketing plans when most of the people that end up consuming the product will probably never come back to complain. We pick and choose our battles, but if we retreat from every fight we’ll eventually have nothing left of a professional soul. Erring on the side of the users over the client might cost you your job, but at least your integrity as a designer will be intact. This isn’t an issue of legal liability, but rather an ethical issue of creating the kind of world we want to live in. After all, we are all end-users of products that someone else is designing.
Report abuse