Abstract
We increasingly understand technical artefacts as components of complex product systems. These systems are designed, built, maintained, and deprecated by stakeholders with different interests. To maintain interoperability between components, standards are being developed. The standardisation process itself is, however, also influenced by different stakeholders.
In this chapter, we argue that a full, comprehensive overview of all relevant components of a system is increasingly difficult. The natural response to complex problems is to delve into details. We suggest that an opposite move towards a more abstract approach can be fruitful. We illustrate this by describing the development of smart meters in the Netherlands. A more explicit focus on the values that play a role for different stakeholders may avoid fruitless detours in the development of technologies. Policymakers would do well by not only addressing functional requirements but also taking individual and social values into consideration.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
We follow the definition of standardisation as proposed by de Vries (1999): An activity of establishing and recording a limited set of solutions to actual or potential matching problems, directed at benefits for the party of parties involved, balancing their needs and intending and expecting that these solutions will be repeatedly or continuously used, during a certain period, by a substantial number of the parties for whom they are meant.
References
AlAbdulkarim L (2013) Acceptance-by-design: elecitation of social requirements for intelligent infrastructures. Next generation infrastructures thesis 66, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands
Balta-Ozkan N, Davidson R, Bicket M, Whitmarsh L (2013) Social barriers to the adoption of smart homes. Energy Policy 63:363–374
Borning A, Muller M (2012) Next steps for value sensitive design. In: CHI '12, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems. Austin, Texas, USA
Clark KB (1985) The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution. Res Policy 14:235–251
Cuijpers C, Koops BJ (2013) Smart metering and privacy in Europe: lessons from the Dutch case. In: European data protection: coming of age, Chap. 12. Springer, Berlin, p 26–9AQ2
de Vries H (1999) Standardization, a business approach to the role of national standardization organizations. Kluwer Academic, Boston/Dordrecht/London
de Vries H Verheul H Willemse H (2003) Stakeholder identification in it standardization processes. In: Standard making: a critical research frontier for information systems, MISQ Special Issue Workshop
den Hartog F Baken N Keyson D Kwaaitaal J Snijders W (2004) Tackling the complexity of residential gateways in an unbundling value chain. In: 15th international symposium on services and local access, Edinburgh, Scotland
Dietz T, Fitzgerald A, Shwom R (2005) Environmental values. Annu Rev Environ Resour 30:335–372
Dijkstra A, Leussink E, Siderius P (2005) Recommendation implementing smart metering infrastructure at small-scale customers. Technical Report FAS No. 1-2893 (SenterNovem: 4150), SenterNovem, Utrecht, the Netherlands
EC (2011) Definition, services, functionalities and benefits of smart grids. Commission staff working document SEC (2011) 463 final. European Commission, Brussels
Friedman B (1996) Value-sensitive design. Interactions November + December, pp 17–23
Friedman B, Kahn PH, Borning A (2002) Value sensitive design: theory and methods. Technical Report 02-12-01, Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington
Friedman B, Kahn PH, Borning A (2008) Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Himma KE, Tavani HT (eds) The handbook of information and computer ethics, Chap. 4. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 69–101.
Gallagher S (2007) The complementary role of dominant designs and industry standards. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 54(2):371–379
Hess DJ, Coley JS (2012) Wireless smart meters and public acceptance: the environment, limited choices, and precautionary politics. Public Underst Sci 23(6):688–702. doi:10.1177/0963662512464936. Published online 6 November 2012
Hierzinger R, Albu M, van Elburg H, Scott AJ, Lazicki A, Penttinen L, Puente F, Sale H (2013) European smart metering landscape report 2012 – update may 2013. Deliverable 2.1, SmartRegions, Vienna. www.smartregions.net
Keeney RL (1994) Using values in operations research. Oper Res 42(5):793–813
Krishnamurti T, Schwartz D, Davis A, Fischhoff B, de Bruin WB, Lester Lave JW (2012) Preparing for smart grid technologies: a behavioral decision research approach to understanding consumer expectations about smart meters. Energy Policy 41:790–797
Ligtvoet A, van de Kaa G, Fens T, van Beers C, Herder P, van den Hoven J (in press) Stakeholder values in home energy management. Sci Eng Ethics
Luiijf EA, Klaver MH (2006) Protection of the Dutch critical infrastructures. Int J Crit Infrastruct 2(2/3):201–214
Manders-Huits N (2011) What values in design? the challenge of incorporating moral values into design. Sci Eng Ethics 17(2):271–287
McDaniel P, McLaughlin S (2009) Security and privacy challenges in the smart grid. IEEE Secur Priv May/June:75–77
MinEZ (2003) Voorzienings- en leveringszekerheid energie. In: Brief van de Minister van Economische Zaken, Tweede Kamer, Tweede Kamer. The Hague, The Netherlands, 29023-1
MinEZ (2006) Liberalisering energiemarkten. In: Brief van de Minister van Economische Zaken, Tweede Kamer, Tweede Kamer. The Hague, The Netherlands, 28982-51
Mitchell RK, Agle BR, Wood DJ (1997) Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Acad Manag Rev 22(4):853–886
Morgan MG, Apt J, Lave LB, Ilic MD, Sirbu M, Peha JM (2009) The many meanings of 'smart grid`. Technical Report, Department of Engineering and Policy, Carnegie Mellon University
Mulder W, Kumpavat K, Faasen C, Verheij F, Vaessen P (2012) Global inventory and analysis of smart grid demonstration projects. Technical Report, DNV Kema, Arnhem, the Netherlands
Peddie R (1988) Smart Meters, NATO ASI Series. In: Demand-side management and electricity end-use efficiency, vol III. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, pp 171–180
Rokeach M (1968) Beliefs, attitudes and values: a theory of organization and change. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco
Rosenkopf L, Tushman ML (1998) The coevolution of community networks and technology: lessons from the flight simulation industry. Ind Corp Change 7(2):311–346
Schilling MA (1998) Technological lockout: an integrative model of the economic and strategic factors driving technology success and failure. Acad Manag Rev 23(2):267–284
Schilling M (2002) Technology success and failure in winner-take-all markets: the impact of learning orientation, timing, and network externalities. Acad Manag J 45:387–398
Sheremata W (2004) Competing through innovation in network markets: strategies for challengers. Acad Manag Rev 29:359–377
Suarez FF (2004) Battles for technological dominance: an integrative framework. Res Policy 33:271–286
Tidd J (1995) Development of novel products through intraorganizational and interorganizational networks – the case of home automation. J Prod Innov Manag 12:307–322
van de Kaa G, den Hartog F, de Vries HJ (2009) Mapping standards for home networking. Comput Stand Interf 31:1175–1181
van de Kaa G, van den Ende J, de Vries HJ, van Heck E (2011) Factors for winning interface format battles: a review and synthesis of the literature. Technol Forecast Soc Change 78:1397–1411
van de Poel I (2009) Values in engineering design. In: Handbook of the philosophy of science, vol 9. Philosophy of Technology and Engineering Sciences, pp 973–1006
van den Hoven J (2007) ICT and value sensitive design. In: Goujon P, Lavelle S, Duquenoy P, Kimppa K, Laurent V (eds) The information society: innovations, legitimacy, ethics and democracy, IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, vol 233. Springer, Berlin, pp 67–72
Verbong GP, Beemsterboer S, Sengers F (2013) Smart grids or smart users? Involving users in developing a low carbon electricity economy. Energy Policy 52:117–125
Winner L (1980) Do arifacts have politics? Daedalus 109(1):121–136
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) grant MVI-12-E02 on responsible innovation (“maatschappelijk verantwoord innoveren”). We are indebted to our valorisation committee (Gertjan van den Akker, Theo Borst, Johan Crols, Michiel Karskens, Gerrit Rietveld, Rick van der Tol, and Gerritjan Valk) for their insight and comments. We would also like to thank our interviewees: Johan Boekema, Coco Geluk, Tjakko Kruit, Erik Linschoten, Willem Strabbing, Jeike Wallinga, and Teus de Zwart.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ligtvoet, A., van de Kaa, G., Fens, T., van Beers, C., Herder, P., van den Hoven, J. (2015). Value Sensitive Design of Complex Product Systems. In: Janssen, M., Wimmer, M., Deljoo, A. (eds) Policy Practice and Digital Science. Public Administration and Information Technology, vol 10. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12784-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12784-2_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-12783-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-12784-2
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)