The Sustainability Studio Proposal for a Workshop at Bezalel Academy of Art and Design Soumitri Varadarajan Melbourne, 2008
Proposition
The past decade has seen a some fundamental realignments of the way sustainability is handled in education and design practice. The 90s saw a mass acceptance of the material aspects of sustainability in phenomena such as ecodesign and energy efficient buildings. This was easy for designers and architects trained in the logical rational traditions of the decades before the 90s. In other words the methods of design were the same what changed was the design criteria impacting upon such things as the material selection in design. Today we accept the existence of good sustainable at the material level – and every sector will give us examples of good practice. While it is true much of the unsustainable persists – it is also true that the leaders in practice and industry have embedded sustainability as a core agenda issue. The future from this point forward is a bit different. For one the old ways of designing may not be as effective when we go about demanding more and more from our designed artefacts and environments, and for another the ways we have of designing may not be appropriate or effective in delivering the design outcomes we want. We live a in a world where we have three paradigms functioning simultaneously; one the art and design context that comes from the 1850s, the technological innovations from the post WWII years and the socialinnovation which is more recent. While all three can deliver us artefact outcomes what distinguishes them is their systems of value and the ideologies. Each paradigm was born at a particular time and has a methodology and notion of practice that works best for delivering the outcomes that particular ideology demands. So in effect the art and design construct demands a primarily visual and poetic outcome, the technical innovation demands a functionally efficient outcome and the social demands an inclusive outcome that balances the benefits all around.
It is at this juncture that we design academics – who all trained a few decades ago – need to reflect and re-fashion our practice so that our voice and actions are in tune and have integrity within the overall global discourse of sustainability and equity. I have constructed a two day workshop which relies on reflective practice as the primary method – to get a group of people to collectively reflect and formulate a local course of action \that works for them and their peers.
Schedule 2 days – April 2009 Day 1 The focus of the first session is to collectively look at the future and share an attitude to it. This is followed with a session of individual reflections and sharing of common methods and agendas. 1. 2.
3.
Warm up and introductions Presentations (AM) a. Sustainability and Challenges b. Social Innovation c. Mapping Strategies i. Traditionalist ii. Maintainer iii. Radical Innovator Break outs (PM) a. Reflections b. Reviewing a colleague c. Personal Agendas d. My Method
Day 2 The day is broken into four parts – the first is a creative period of visualizing projects that can be set up as studios and projects. To be followed by a presentations of the designs of studios. The third session of the workshop is a documentation of the workshop and the studios into a shared resource. The last session is an action planning – looking into the short and long term of the colaborarive practice – to make shared goals and commitments. 1.
2. 3.
4.
Constructing Projects a. Collaborative practice b. 5 Projects c. Scenario develop the outcomes Presentations a. Studio Scenarios b. Evaluation Documentation (Reflection) – Course material tool kits a. Presentations b. Method c. Course handouts d. Case Studies Action Planning
Soumitri Varadarajan, Associate Professor, Industrial Design Program, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia soumitri.varadarajan@rmit.edu.au, http://campaignprojects.wordpress.com