No abstract

No abstract

This paper follows the form of an essay, it offers a narrative review inquiring conceptually about opening futures. The main research question is: What concepts could help elucidate the new position of designers when futures are open? Four branches of literature from design are addressed, considering their core approaches: participation, infrastructures, systems thinking, and narratives. Focus on these four approaches could lead to profound discussions about what it means to open futures and the current relevance of expert design.

In the fall of 2019, Trøndelag County Council, Norway, organized a Climate Workshop for children and youth. The intention of the workshop was to include children’s and youth’s perspectives as a foundation for a policy document titled “How we do it in Trøndelag. Strategy for transformations to mitigate climate change”. The workshop involved a range of creative and discussion tools for input on sustainable development and climate politics. In this article, we aim to (1) describe and discuss innovative practices that include children and youth in policymaking related to climate action, and (2) discuss the theoretical implications of such policymaking in relation to children’s rights, young citizenship, and intergenerational justice. We employ a generational framework and perceive climate politics as inherently ingrained in intergenerational justice, where no generation has a superior claim to the earth’s resources, yet power is unfairly concentrated and accumulated among adult generations. We draw on contributions by various stakeholders involved: Two young workshop participants, two county council policymakers, and an interdisciplinary team of researchers from Childhood Studies and Design.

The circular economy (CE) concept has recently entered the public discourse. A CE should contest the reproduction of a so-called linear economy. However, it is largely promoted as a normative top-down fix for business models and waste management. A branch of CE research calls for critical revisions of the concept to support the integration of social aspects. A related shortcoming is the lack of definition of the change that CE can bring about. Two research questions guide the work presented in this article: (1) What should be included in a socio-cultural and institutional framing to study CE? (2) What could leverage an alternative CE? We address the first question by proposing practice-driven institutionalism as a relevant perspective, focusing on studying consumption practices — practical engagements and alternative logics. We further apply a practice-driven institutional framework to an empirical study of cases from sources in a city in Norway, where consumption and production practices are highly embedded in consumerism. For the second question, we describe consumerism and its institutional dimension as the backdrop against which practical engagements are negotiated. Finally, we identify aspects of alternative logics bundled with these practical engagements. In conclusion, the article proposes a practice-driven institutional approach to socio-culturally frame CE and to identify grammars of practice that can leverage change that does not rehearse consumerism. In the specific case of our study, we highlight contextualizing use-value through social relations as a critical part of an alternative CE.