Skip to main content

The Challenges of Interdisciplinary Participation and Anti-oppressive Principles

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Advances in Industrial Design (AHFE 2020)

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing ((AISC,volume 1202))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Championed as an emancipatory, bottom-up approach, participatory design (PD) continues to be a popular method for collaborative and interdisciplinary designers. PD approaches not only emphasize, but require for their success, the engagement of key stakeholders throughout the design process, including end-users, interdisciplinary team members and subject matter experts. This literature review examines contemporary perspectives on PD, highlighting participation and challenges to PD approaches, before introducing the reader to the principles of Anti-Oppressive Practice (AOP). Reframing challenges to PD approaches as issues of participation allows for the consideration of AOP principles to meet these challenges.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Halskov, K., Hansen, N.B.: The diversity of participatory design research practice at PDC 2002-2012. Int. J. Hum Comput Stud. 74, 81–92 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2014.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Burke, B., Harrison, P.: Anti-oppressive practice. In: Barrett, S., Komaromy, C., Robb, M., Anita, R. (eds.) Communication, Relationships and Care, pp. 131–138. Routledge, London (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Sánchez de la Guía, L., Puyuelo Cazorla, M., De-Miguel-Molina, B.: Terms and meanings of “participation” in product design: From “user involvement” to “co-design”. Des. J. 20, S4539–S4551 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352951

  4. Andersen, L.B., Danholt, P., Halskov, K., Hansen, N.B., Lauritsen, P.: Participation as a matter of concern in participatory design. CoDesign 11, 250–261 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1081246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Saad-Sulonen, J., Eriksson, E., Halskov, K., Karasti, H., Vines, J.: Unfolding participation over time: temporal lenses in participatory design. CoDesign 14, 4–16 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2018.1426773

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Donetto, S., Pierri, P., Tsianakas, V., Robert, G.: Experiencebased co-design and healthcare improvement: Realizing participatory design in the public sector. Des. J. 18, 227–248 (2015). https://doi.org/10.2752/175630615X14212498964312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Hendriks, N., Slegers, K., Duysburgh, P.: Codesign with people living with cognitive or sensory impairments: a case for method stories and uniqueness. CoDesign 11, 70–82 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710882.2015.1020316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hussain, S., Sanders, E.B.N., Steinert, M.: Participatory design with marginalized people in developing countries: challenges and opportunities experienced in a field study in Cambodia. Int. J. Des. 6, 91–109 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Drain, A., Shekar, A., Grigg, N.: Participatory design with people with disability in rural cambodia: the creativity challenge. Des. J. 21, 685–706 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2018.1488923

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Kleinsmann, M., Valkenburg, R.: Barriers and enablers for creating shared understanding in co-design projects. Des. Stud. 29, 369–386 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2008.03.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Pirinen, A.: The barriers and enablers of co-design for services boundary-crossing collaboration and organisational change. Int. J. Des. 10, 27–42 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. de Montigny, G.: Beyond anti-oppressive practice: investigating reflexive social relations. J. Progress. Hum. Serv. 22, 8–30 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1080/10428232.2011.564982

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Potts, K., Brown, L.: Becoming an anti-oppressive researcher. In: Brown, L., Strega, S. (eds.) Research as Resistance: Critical, Indigenous, and Anti-Oppressive Approaches, pp. 255–283. Canadian Scholars Press, Toronto (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Pihkala, S., Karasti, H.: Reflexive engagement - enacting reflexivity in design and for “participation in plural”. In: ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, pp. 21–30 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2940299.2940302

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Dawson Clark or Lois Frankel .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Clark, D., Frankel, L. (2020). The Challenges of Interdisciplinary Participation and Anti-oppressive Principles. In: Di Bucchianico, G., Shin, C., Shim, S., Fukuda, S., Montagna, G., Carvalho, C. (eds) Advances in Industrial Design. AHFE 2020. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 1202. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51194-4_49

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51194-4_49

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-51193-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-51194-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics