Collective Interest Matrix: Can design be sustainable within capitalism?

Résumé En

In the second edition of Design for the Real World, Papanek describes the design establishment's hostile reception of his book, whereby concepts like energy efficiency, and alternative, renewable energy sources were labeled "idiosyncratic pipedreams" and "an attack on Detroit mixed with utopian concern for minorities." While Papanek may have the satisfaction of being on the right side of history, he conceded that "we learn best from disasters." (1985, xv-xvi) In Objects of Desire, Forty (1986) explains design's pivotal role in reducing British consumer resistance to "progress," while reinforcing social class, gender roles, and most importantly, the capitalist economy. Recent focus on "design for good" has tried to answer Papanek's call to benevolent design intervention, beyond design's mass-consumer business-as-usual. However, design for the disenfranchised rarely gets the talent, time, attention, and funding it deserves precisely because of its low priority, influence or appeal in a corporate capitalist economy (Noble 1979). Unbridled capitalism-and the designers that lubricate its gears-hastens the depletion of our resources, environment, or social cohesion. If designers avoid questioning capitalism's limits, our role within the system, or rethinking desirable futures (Alexander 2020, Latour 2017 & 2019), "design for emergency" will face the same hurdles that "design for good" currently faces. When designing for adaptation, are we blind to the economic interests of our interventions? How do we reconcile conflicts between the human and environmental impact of design interventions? Should discussions of collective versus individual interests be positioned against public and private profits, against beneficial and adverse human and environmental impacts ? How do we resolve conflicts and identify our assumptions, bias, and blind spots that may limit the full exploration of possibilities? Should these discussions become the norm in design education, and if so, what methods should we employ? This paper proposes a Collective Interest Matrix for positioning design interventions.