Defining ‘Resilient Design’ in the Context of Consumer Products

Abstract

In recent decades, a widely discussed means of achieving environmental sustainability is to design more durable products, thereby reducing the need for the production of new products. In particular, the emotional perspective on product durability has received attention in recent design literature, since consumer products are often replaced long before they become physically non-functioning. The literature includes many accounts of causes of product replacement and means for making products more durable. Such classifications, however, include different sets of causes and means, making 'product durability' a concept that involves different understandings, depending on the underlying literature. Furthermore, this paper argues that only using the term 'durability' may cause certain aspects to be neglected in the effort to make consumer products longer lasting. The paper addresses these issues by defining the concept of 'resilient design', providing a detailed classification of causes of product replacement and organising means to extend product longevity. With this, the paper offers a more structured basis for designers to design resilient consumer products and for researchers to engage in further studies.

Ageing (dis)gracefully: Enabling designers to understand material change

“…Contamination, degradation and 'traces of use' can reduce the uptake of key circular economy strategies including re-use, sharing and leasing (Baxter, Aurisicchio and Childs, 2017). In the context of cars, stains, scratches, cigarette odours and sticky residues are all indicators of prior use, therefore, specification of highly durable materials with restorative self-cleaning or scratch-resistant surfaces (Haug, 2018) may overcome such barriers. Alternatively, triggered material change could influence the consumer to return products at optimal points in the product life cycle, for upgrade or replacement, with recovery of the original components into a closed loop (Wilson et al, 2015).…”

Psychologically Durable Design – Definitions and Approaches

“…Van Nes and Cramer (2005) 1) Wear and tear; 2) Improved utility; 3) Improved expression; 4) New desires Mugge et al (2005) 1) Performance decrease (function and appearance); 2) Technological obsolescence; 3) Legislation change; 4) New features/technology; 5) Fashion; 6) Family/financial circumstances Burns (2010, 45) 1) Aesthetic; 2) Social; 3) Technological; 4) Economic Hebrok (2014) 1) Changing life phases of users; 2) Use of materials that age poorly; 3) Products that are difficult, time-consuming and/or costly in maintenance and repair; 4) Poor repair and maintenance services; 5) Missing knowledge about and motivation for maintenance and repairs; 6) Stylistic features that violate desired ones; 7) Negative emotional ties to a former owner Haug (2017) 1) Product (a. Physical durability; b.…”

“…Closely related, however, is 'emotionally durable design', which aims to increase product longevity through stronger emotional bonds to products (Chapman 2005(Chapman 2009. Furthermore, several of the other classifications also include dimensions related to psychologically durable design, for example: aesthetic durability (van Nes et al 1999); meaningful product relationships (Batterbee and Mattelmäki 2004); design for product attachment (van Nes and Cramer 2005); symbolism (Odom et al 2009); extending product-user relations (Fuad-Luke 2010, 147); less distracting use patterns (Walker 2011); and extrinsic durability/resilience-building means (Haug 2017).…”

“…In relation to the first contribution, in particular, the definition of instrumental psychological durability stands out in comparison to the existing literature. More specifically, durable instrumental value is normally associated only with absolute or technological obsolescence (see review by Haug, 2017), but as shown through argumentation and references to empirical examples, products may also be appreciated and kept, even if new products that in many ways are technologically superior emerge.…”

“…Since consumer products are often replaced long before their physical function is compromised, psychological durability has received increased attention in the design literature (Cooper 2004;van Nes and Cramer 2005;Chapman 2009;Fletcher 2012;Hebrok 2014;Haug 2017). The literature includes several explanations of why wellfunctioning consumer products are replaced as well as a range of design strategies to increase product longevity.…”