作为可持续设计的一种方法,“情感持久的设计通过增加消费者产品之间建立的关系的弹性来减少自然资源的消耗浪费[1]

根据这一理论,不可持续性危机是一种行为危机,而不仅仅是材料能源危机。情感持久的设计超越了可持续设计的方法,例如拆卸设计、回收设计或低影响材料的规格。相反,它着眼于我们与物质世界的短期和不满意接触的行为驱动因素,并制定战略,使更持久的产品能够被珍惜和保存更长时间。通过这种方式,“情感持久的设计重新构建了环境范式,通过延长产品的使用寿命来提高资源生产力并减少浪费。”。[2]情感持久设计理论最早由布莱顿大学文学院的英国学者Dr Jonathan Chapman(生于1974年)发表在《情感持久设计:对象、体验与同理心》一书中。[3]

今天,情感持久设计理论在书籍、期刊和一系列流行的国际出版物和广播媒体中被广泛引用和评论,包括新科学家[4] CNN 国际、[5] 新政治家[6]上议院,[7] 纽约时报[8] 电讯报[9] 独立报[10]和 BBC Radio 4 [11]的一些特写和采访。[12]“emotionally durable design”、“emotionally durable”和“emotional durability”等术语已被世界各地的设计师、学生和教育工作者广泛采用;成为确定给定对象的价值意义的持久性的复杂和多方面因素的简写。

Enduring meaning and value

作为一种战略方法,“情感持久的设计提供了一种有用的语言来描述设计负责任、制作精良、触觉产品的当代相关性,用户可以长期了解并赋予其价值。” [13]根据纽约帕森斯新设计学院的 Hazel Clark 和 David Brody 的说法,“情感持久的设计呼吁专业人士和学生优先考虑设计与其用户之间的关系,作为一种发展更可持续的方式对设计事物的态度和设计事物的态度。” [14]

在情感持久的设计环境中,产品的耐用性与欲望、爱、迷恋和依恋一样重要,因为它是断裂的聚合物、破裂的屏幕或烧毁的电路;它是“一件物品之所以经久不衰是因为它与用户的情感联系,而不是因为它的物理耐用性”。[15]它通过开发设计工具、方法和框架来增强人与物之间建立的关系的弹性,从而与我们的一次性社会形成战略对比;支持的不是耐用“产品”本身的设计,而是耐用意义价值的设计,产品交付。

在Emotionally Durable Design (Earthscan,2005 年)一书中,作者描述了我们如何通过探索产品寿命更充分地参与可持续发展将此与用户的情感需求联系起来。它描述了设计如何能够提供“随着时间的推移深入人心的深刻而复杂的用户体验”;[16]给出了用墨水重新填充钢笔或“在磨损的磨刀石上重新磨寿司刀的刀刃”的例子。[17]这种缓慢而宣泄的经历描述了“在很长一段时间内进行的修复和护理,并证明了查普曼所描述的对我们选择使用的产品有同理心”。[18]

To understand why we have become so profligate in our consumption, "we should look to the underlying motivations of consumers; following the notion of emotionally durable design, there is likely to be a move away from mass-production and towards tailor-made articles and products designed and manufactured with greater craftsmanship".[19] Dr Kate Fletcher of London College of Fashion describes how, "emotionally durable design explains appropriateness as a function of a product's emotional presence, evolution and growth; it is not enough for a product to provoke an emotional response within the user on one occasion; it must do this repeatedly. In effect, a relationship with an object must be developed over an extended period of time."[20]

6-point framework for emotionally durable design

Dr Chapman was invited to present his theory of emotionally durable design at the House of Lords (2008) to support their Enquiry into Waste Reduction (2008). He explained that "the 'design for durability' paradigm has important implications beyond its conventional interpretation, in which product longevity is considered solely in terms of an object's physical endurance—whether cherished or discarded".[21] There is little point designing physical durability into products, if people lack the desire to keep them.

To support the House of Lords in their enquiry, he provided the following 6-point experiential framework (and supporting annotations), as follows:

  1. Design for Narrative: users share a unique personal history with the product; this often relates to when, how and from whom the object was acquired
  2. Design for Detachment: users feel no emotional connection to the product, have low expectations and thus perceive it in a favorable way due to a lack of emotional demand or expectation (this also suggests that attachment may actually be counterproductive, as it elevates the level of expectation within the user to a point that is often unattainable)
  3. Design for Surface: the product is physically ageing well, and developing a tangible character through time, use and sometimes misuse
  4. Design for Attachment: users feel a strong emotional connection to the product, due to the service it provides, the information it contains and the meaning it conveys
  5. Design for Fiction: users are delighted or even enchanted by the product as it is not yet fully understood or know by the user; these are often recently purchased products that are still being explored and discovered by the user
  6. Design for Consciousness: the product is perceived as autonomous and in possession of its own free will; it is quirky, often temperamental and interaction is an acquired skill that can be fully acquired only with practice

Source: House of Lords[22]

Toward longer lasting products

Commercial interest in the lifespans of manufactured objects can be traced back to Bernard London's introduced of the term planned obsolescence in 1932, made popular by Vance Packard in his book The Waste Makers. Packard's dualistic theories of functional obsolescence and psychological obsolescence assert that "the deliberate shortening of product lifespans was unethical, both in its profit-focused manipulating of consumer spending, and its devastating ecological impact through the nurturing of wasteful purchasing behaviours".[23]

Emotionally durable design is a call for professionals and students alike to "prioritise the relationships between design and its users, as a way of developing more sustainable attitudes to, and in, design things".[24] In 2008, the UK was disposing of "1.1 million tonnes of electronic waste per year, and it has been forecast that this will double within the next 15 years".[25] "Between 1994-2004 the consumption of household goods and services in the UK rose by 67%, and household energy consumption by 7%. Consumption is not only growing in magnitude, but the throughput of manufactured goods is also developing pace; the pattern of consumption with many types of consumer goods is to shorten their functional lives, as goods are predestined as waste"[26]

According to Dr Chapman, "the process of consumption is, and has always been, motivated by complex emotional drivers, and is about far more than just the mindless purchasing of newer and shinier things; it is a journey towards the ideal or desired self, that through cyclical loops of desire and disappointment, becomes a seemingly endless process of serial destruction".[27] Products may thus be described as illustrative of an individual's aspirations, and serve to define us existentially. As such, "possessions are used as symbols of what we are, what we have been, and what we are attempting to become",[28] whilst also providing an archaic means of possession by enabling the consumer to incorporate[29] the meanings signified to them by the object. Emotionally durable design "seeks to overcome our preoccupation with box-fresh experiences in order to develop a material culture where there is a continuous narrative of progressive change and meaningful, mutual growth".[30] Taking us toward sustainable consumption, through intelligent product design.

See also

References

  1. Chapman, J., 'Design for [Emotional] Durability', Design Issues, vol xxv, Issue 4, Autumn, pp29-35, 2009
  2. Chapman, J., Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences & Empathy, Earthscan, 2005, p24
  3. Chapman, Jonathan (June 5, 2005). Emotionally durable design : objects, experiences and empathy (Repr. ed.). London: Routledge. pp. 224. ISBN 978-1844071814. Retrieved 26 March 2012.
  4. 'How to do your bit for the planet', New Scientist, 15th October, 2008, p7
  5. Charlie Devereux, 'Disposing of our throwaway culture', CNN International, October 21, 2007
  6. Lois Rogers, 'Consumer Adultery - the new British vice', New Statesman, 05 February, 2007, pp31-32
  7. Chapman, J., 'Evidence Paper', in House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 1: Enquiry into Waste Reduction, House of Lords, London, February 2008, pp56-58
  8. Jon Mooallem, 'The Afterlife of Cell phones', The New York Times, 13 January, 2008, pp12-13
  9. Sarah Lonsdale, 'Sustainable design ideas from young designers', The Daily Telegraph, 12th July 2011, UK, p21
  10. Will Anderson, 'The Green House', The Independent, July 26, 2006, p13
  11. 'You and Yours', BBC Radio 4 (July 9, 2008)
  12. 'Click-On', BBC Radio 4 (January 28, 2007)
  13. Lacey, E. (2009). Contemporary ceramic design for meaningful interaction and emotional durability: A case study. International Journal of Design, 3(2), 87-92
  14. Clark, H. & Brody, D., Design Studies: A Reader, Berg, New York, US, 2009, p531
  15. "Made to Measure". The Red Carpet Project. 15 May 2011.
  16. Chapman, J., Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences & Empathy, Earthscan, 2005, p83
  17. Chapman, J., Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences & Empathy, Earthscan, 2005, p83
  18. Lacey, E. (2009). Contemporary ceramic design for meaningful interaction and emotional durability: A case study. International Journal of Design, 3(2), 87-92
  19. Ed Douglas (January 6, 2007). "Better by design: battling the throwaway culture". New Scientist. p. 31-35.
  20. Fletcher, K. (14 March 2008). "Sustainable Fashion & Textiles: Design Journeys". London, UK: Earthscan. p. 168. ISBN 978-1844074815. Retrieved 26 March 2012.
  21. Chapman, J., 'Evidence Paper', in House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 1: Enquiry into Waste Reduction, House of Lords, London, February 2008, pp56-58
  22. Chapman, J., 'Evidence Paper', in House of Lords Science and Technology Committee 1: Enquiry into Waste Reduction, House of Lords, London, February 2008, pp56-58
  23. Chapman, J., 'Design for [Emotional] Durability', Design Issues, vol xxv, Issue 4, Autumn, pp29-35, 2009
  24. Clark, H. & Brody, D., Design Studies: A Reader, Berg, New York, US, 2009, p531
  25. "Producer Responsibility : Waste Electrical and Electronic Equiment (WEEE}". protecting Scottsland's environment. Scottish Environmental Protection Agency. 6 May 2008. Retrieved 26 March 2012.
  26. Ginn, F., Global Action Plan Consuming Passions: Do we have to shop till we drop 10 years of consumption in the UK Global Action Plan, London, 2004.
  27. Chapman, J., Emotionally Durable Design: Objects, Experiences and Empathy, Earthscan, London, 2005
  28. Schultz, S. E., Kleine, R. E. and Kernan, J. B., 'These are a few of my favourite things: Toward an explication of attachment as a consumer behaviour construct', Advances in Consumer Research, Vol. 16, 1989, pp359-366
  29. Fromm, E., To Have or To Be, Abacus, London, UK, 1979
  30. Professor Stuart Walker, 'After Taste – The Power and Prejudice of Product Appearance', The Design Journal, vol 12, Issue 1, Berg, 2009, p19
Page data
Published 2015
License CC-BY-SA-4.0
Ported from https://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emotionally_Durable_Design [see first revision]
Impact Number of views to this page and its redirects. Updated once a month. Views by admins and bots are not counted. Multiple views during the same session are counted as one.4,141
Issues Automatically detected page issues. Click on them to find out more. They may take some minutes to disappear after you fix them.No main image
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.