Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Design for the Values of Democracy and Justice

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design

  • 572 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, we provide an overview of literature on the relation between technology and design and the values of democracy and justice. We first explore how philosophy has traditionally conceptualized democracy and justice. We then examine general philosophical theories and arguments about this relation, dealing with the conception of technology as being “value-free” as well as with pessimistic and more optimistic assessments with regard to technology’s potential for advancing democracy and justice. Next, we turn to three concrete design methods that seek to promote democracy and justice in the design process, namely, participatory design, technology assessment, and value-sensitive design. Finally, we examine two cases of technology influencing democracy and justice: one regarding the relation between energy technology and democracy and one regarding the use of social media during the Arab Spring. We conclude that many pessimists focus on the “technological mind-set” as a problem that undermines democracy and justice; that in the absence of general design guidelines for democracy and justice, a focus on democracy and justice in the design process seems all the more important; and that design methods tend to include values rather than theories of democracy and justice, which suggests that a further integration of philosophy and the design sciences could create added value for both disciplines.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adorno Th (1999) Aesthetic theory, New edn. Athlone, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Adorno TW, Horkheimer M (1979) Dialectic of enlightenment, New edn.Verso, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Akrich M (1992) The de-scription of technical objects. In: Bijker WE and Law J (eds) Shaping technology/building society. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 205–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Allagui I, Kuebler J (2011) The Arab Spring and the role of ICTs: editorial introduction. Int J Commun 5:1435–1442

    Google Scholar 

  • Apel KO (1973) Transformation der Philosophie: Sprachanalytik, Semantik, Hermeneutik. Das Apriori der Kommunikationsgemeinschaft. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt a. M.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacon F (1620) The new organon. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bacon F (1627) New Atlantis: a worke vnfinished. In: Bacon F (ed) Sylva sylvarum: or a naturall historie, in ten centuries. William Lee, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bimber B (1998) The internet and political transformation: populism, community and accelerated pluralism. Polity 31(1):133–160

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bohman J, Rehg W (eds) (1997) Deliberative democracy: essays on reason and politics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Caney S (2005) Justice beyond borders. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chess C, Purcell K (1999) Public participation and the environment: do we know what works? Environ Sci Technol 33(16):2685–2692

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christiano T (1996) The rule of the many: fundamental issues in democratic theory. Westview Press, Boulder

    Google Scholar 

  • Christiano T (2008) Democracy. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Fall 2008 Edition. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/democracy/. Accessed 30 Mar 2014

  • Clarkson PJ, Coleman R, Keates S, Lebbon C (2003) Inclusive design: design for the whole population. Springer, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Clement A, Besselaar P van den (1993) A retrospective look at PD projects. In: Muller M, Kuhn S (eds) Participatory design: special issue of the communications of the ACM, vol 36, no 4. pp 29–39

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen J, Sabel C (2006) Extram republicam nulla justitia? Philos Public Aff 34(2):147–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dechesne F, Warnier M, Van den Hoven J (2013) Ethical requirements for reconfigurable sensor technology: a challenge for value sensitive design. Ethics Inf Technol 15(3):173–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deluca KM (2005) Thinking with Heidegger: rethinking environmental theory and practice. Ethics Environ 10(1):67–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devine-Wright P (ed) (2013) Renewable energy and the public: from NIMBY to participation. Routledge, London/Washington DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Dewey J (1920) Reconstruction in philosophy. Henry Holt, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dijstelbloem H, Meijer A (2011) Migration and the new technological borders of Europe. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan T, Bowler S (1998) Direct democracy and minority rights: an extension. Am J Polit Sci 42:1020–1024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellul J (1964) The technological society. Knopf, New York (french orig. 1954)

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg A (1991) Critical theory of technology. Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg A (1992) Subversive rationalization: technology, power, and democracy. Inquiry 35(3–4):301–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feenberg A (2002) Transforming technology. A critical theory revisited. Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Floridi L (2005) Information technologies and the tragedy of the good will. Ethics Inf Technol 8:253–262

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman S (2006) The law of peoples, social cooperation, human rights, and distributive justice. Soc Philos Policy 23(1):29–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman B (1996) Value-sensitive design. Interactions 3(6):16–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman B, Nissenbaum H (1996) Bias in computer systems. ACM Trans Inf Syst 14(3):1–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman B, Kahn PH Jr, Borning A (2005) Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Zhang P, Galletta D (eds) Human-computer interaction in management information systems. M.E. Sharp, New York, pp 348–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Fung A (2005) Deliberation before the revolution toward an ethics of deliberative democracy in an unjust world. Polit Theory 33(3):397–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardiner SM (2011) A perfect moral storm: the ethical tragedy of climate change. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gosseries A (2008) On future generations future rights. J Polit Philos 16(4):446–474

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood M (2007) Stakeholder engagement: beyond the myth of corporate responsibility. J Bus Ethics 74:315–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grønbæk K, Kyng M, Mogensen P (1997) Toward a cooperative experimental system development approach. In: Kyng M, Mathiassen L (eds) Computers and design in context. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 201–238

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1971) Knowledge and human interests. Beacon Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1984) The theory of communicative action vol. I: reason and the rationalization of society (trans: McCarthy T). Beacon, Boston (German, 1981, vol 1)

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1987) The theory of communicative action vol. II: lifeworld and system (trans: McCarthy T). Beacon, Boston (German, 1981, vol 2)

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1990) Moral consciousness and communicative action. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1993) Justification and application: remarks on discourse ethics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas J (1994) Three normative models of democracy. Constellations. Int J Crit Democr Theory 1(1):1–10

    Google Scholar 

  • Heidegger M (1977) The question concerning technology, and other essays. Harper & Row, New York (orig. 1953)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman SM, High-Pippert A (2005) Community energy: a social architecture for an alternative energy future. Bull Sci Technol Soc 25(2):387–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hosanagar K, Fleder D, Lee D, Buja A (2014) Will the global village fracture into tribes? Recommender systems and their effects on consumer fragmentation. Manag Sci 60(4):805–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hösle V (1994) Philosophie der ökologischen Krise: Moskauer Vorträge. CH Beck, München

    Google Scholar 

  • Hösle V (2004) Morals and politics. University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame

    Google Scholar 

  • Howard PN, Duffy A, Freelon D, Hussain M, Mari W, Mazaid M (2011) Opening closed regimes: what was the role of social media during the Arab Spring? Project on Information Technology & Political Islam, Seattle, working paper, 2011.1

    Google Scholar 

  • Introna LD, Nissenbaum H (2000) Shaping the web: why the politics of search engines matters. Inf Soc Int J 16(3):169–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Introna LD (2005) Disclosive ethics and information technology: disclosing facial recognition systems. Ethics Inf Technol 7:75–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson DG (1997) Is the global information infrastructure a democratic technology? In: Spinello RA, Tavani HT (eds) Readings in cyberethics, 2nd edn. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, Sudbury, pp 121–133

    Google Scholar 

  • Jonas H (1979/1984) Das Prinzip Verantwortung. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main/The imperative of responsibility. In search of an ethics for the technological age. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Kensing F, Blomberg J (1998) Participatory design: issues and concerns. Comput Supported Coop Work 7:167–185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kensing F, Simonsen J, Bodker K (1998) MUST: a method for participatory design. Hum Comput Interact 13(2):167–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khondker HH (2011) Role of the new media in the Arab Spring. Globalizations 8(5):675–679

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiran AH (2012) Does responsible innovation presuppose design instrumentalism? Examining the case of telecare at home in the Netherlands. Technol Soc 34(3):216–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowalski E (2002) Technology assessment : Suche nach Handlungsoptionen in der technischen Zivilisation. vdf Hochschulverlag AG, Zürich

    Google Scholar 

  • Kurzweil R (2005) The singularity is near: when humans transcend biology. Viking, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (1979) The social construction of scientific facts. Sage, Beverly Hills

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (1992) Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts. In: Bijker WE, Law J (eds) Shaping technology/building society: studies in sociotechnical change. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 225–258

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour B (2005) Reassembling the social: an introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Law J (1999) Actor network theory and after. Blackwell/Sociological Review, Oxford/Malden

    Google Scholar 

  • Levidow L (1998) Democratizing technology-or technologizing democracy? Regulating agricultural biotechnology in Europe. Technol Soc 20(2):211–226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis JI, Wiser RH (2007) Fostering a renewable energy technology industry: an international comparison of wind industry policy support mechanisms. Energ Policy 35(3):1844–1857

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim M (2012) Clicks, cabs, and coffee houses: social media and oppositional movements in Egypt, 2004–2011. J Commun 62:231–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manders-Huits N (2011) What values in design? The challenge of incorporating moral values into design. Sci Eng Ethics 17:271–287

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massa P, Avesani P (2007) Trust metrics on controversial users: balancing between tyranny of the majority and echo chambers. Int J Semant Web Inf Syst 3(1):39–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marx K (1938) Capital. London: Allen & Unwin

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill JS (1859) On liberty. In: Robson JM (ed) Collected works of John Stuart Mill, vol 18. University of Toronto Press, Toronto, pp 213–310, 1963ff

    Google Scholar 

  • Mill JS (1861) Considerations on representative government. Prometheus Books, Buffalo, p, 1991

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitcham C (1990) Three ways of being-with-technology. In: Ormiston GL (ed) From artifact to habitat: studies in the critical engagement of technology. Bethlehem, PA, Lehigh University Press, pp 31–59

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitcham C (1994) Thinking through technology: the path between engineering and philosophy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Morozov E (2011) The net delusion: the dark side of Internet freedom. PublicAffairs, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel T (2005) The problem of global justice. Philos Public Aff 33:113–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagenborg M (2005) Search engines, special issue of International Review of Information Ethics, vol 3

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieusma D, Riley D (2010) Designs on development: engineering, globalization, and social justice. Eng Stud 2(1):29–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noble DF (1984) Forces of production. A social history of industrial automation. Knopf, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Noveck BS (2009) Wiki government: how technology can make government better, democracy stronger and citizens more powerful. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Oosterlaken I (2009) Design for development: a capability approach. Des Issues 25(4):91–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ornetzeder M, Rohracher H (2006) User-led innovations and participation processes: lessons from sustainable energy technologies. Energ Policy 34(2):138–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palm E, Hansson SO (2006) The case for ethical technology assessment (eTA). Technol Forecast Soc Change 73:543–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pariser E (2011) The filter bubble: what the Internet is hiding from you. Penguin Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Pogge TW (2002) World poverty and human rights: cosmopolitan responsibilities and reforms. Polity Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1971) A theory of justice. Harvard University Press, Harvard, 1999 revised edition

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls J (1999) The law of peoples. Harvard University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Robertson T, Wagner I (2013) Ethics: engagement, representation and politics-in-action. In: Simonsen J, Robertson T (eds) Routledge international handbook of participatory design. Routledge, New York, pp 64–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth SK (1994) The unconsidered ballot: how design effects voting behaviour. Visible Lang 28(1):48–67

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseau J-J (1750) The social contract and discourses. Everyman, London (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  • Savulescu J, Bostrom N (2009) Human enhancement. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Scanlon T (1998) What we owe to each other. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneier B (2013a) The US government has betrayed the internet. We need to take it back. The Guardian, 5 Sept 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/05/government-betrayed-internet-nsa-spying. Accessed 2 Apr 2014

  • Schneier B (2013b) Why the NSA’s attacks on the internet must be made public. The Guardian, 4 Oct 2013. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/04/nsa-attacks-internet-bruce-schneier. Accessed 2 Apr 2013

  • Schot J, Rip A (1997) The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technol Forecast Soc Change 54:251–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schudson M (1998) The good citizen. A history of American civil life. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Sclove RE (1995) Democracy & technology. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Sen A (1999) Development as freedom. Knopf, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley C (2012) Fairness in technological design. Sci Eng Ethics 18:663–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singer P (1973) Democracy and disobedience. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Snow C (1959) The two cultures and the scientific revolution, The Rede lecture, 1959. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Spahn A (2010) Technology. In: Birx H (ed) 21st century anthropology: a reference handbook. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, pp 132–144

    Google Scholar 

  • Steen M (2011) Upon opening the black box of participatory design and finding it filled with ethics. In: Proceedings of the Nordic design research conference no 4: Nordes 2011: making design matter. Helsinki, 29–31 May

    Google Scholar 

  • Stilgoe J, Owen R, Macnaghten P (2013) Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Res Policy 42:1568–1580

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein C (2001) Republic.com. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland S (1992/2007) Irrationality: the enemy within. Constable and Company/Irrationality. Pinter and Martin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Swierstra T, Rip A (2007) Nano-ethics as NEST-ethics: patterns of moral argumentation about new and emerging science and technology. Nanoethics 1:3–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taebi B, Correljé A, Cuppen E, Dignum M, Pesch U (2014) Responsible innovation as an endorsement of public values: the need for interdisciplinary research. J Responsib Innov 1(1):118–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavani H (2014) Search engines and ethics. In: Zalta EN (ed) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Spring 2014 edition. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/ethics-search/. Accessed 15 July 2014

  • Thompson DF (2010) Representing future generations: political presentism and democratic trusteeship. Crit Rev Int Polit Philos 13(1):17–37

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hove S (2006) Between consensus and compromise: acknowledging the negotiation dimension in participatory approaches. Land Use Policy 23(1):10–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van den Hoven J (2005) E-democracy, E-contestation and the monitorial citizen. Ethics Inf Technol 7:51–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van der Velden M (2009) Design for a common world: on ethical agency and cognitive justice. Ethics Inf Technol 11:37–47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vico G (1709) De nostri temporis studiorum ratione Lateinisch-Deutsche Ausg. Wiss. Buchges., Darmstadt (1974)

    Google Scholar 

  • Winner L (1980) Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus 109:121–123. Also in 1986. The whale and the reactor: a search for limits in an age of high technology, 19–39. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Winner L (1992) Introduction. In: Winner L (ed) Democracy in a technological society. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 1–14

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Yetim F (2011) Bringing discourse ethics to value sensitive design: pathways to toward a deliberative future. AIS Trans Hum Comput Interact 3(2):133–155

    Google Scholar 

  • Young IM (1990) Justice and the politics of difference. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Young IM (2006) Responsibility and global labor justice. J Polit Philos 12(4):365–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported the MVI research programme “Biofuels: sustainable innovation or gold rush?”, financed by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Innovation Sciences, Eindhoven University of Technology, 513, 5600 MB Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Auke Pols & Andreas Spahn

Authors
  1. Auke Pols
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andreas Spahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Auke Pols .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Philosophy Section, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Jeroen van den Hoven

  2. Delft University of Technology Dept. Philosophy, Delft, The Netherlands

    Pieter E. Vermaas

  3. Department of Philosophy Sch. of Techn. Policy & Management, Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands

    Ibo van de Poel

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this entry

Cite this entry

Pols, A., Spahn, A. (2014). Design for the Values of Democracy and Justice. In: van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, P., van de Poel, I. (eds) Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_13-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-6994-6_13-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-007-6994-6

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation