M a barendse m11 researchreport

DESIGN PROBING TO UNDERSTAND PEOPLE THEIR FRAME OF REFERENCE ABOUT BIODIVERSITY

Design Research Semester Manon Barendse s119828 M1.1 Industrial Design TU/e Eindhoven Januari 2015 Coach: Aarnout Brombacher

2

MANON BARENDSE

“ A research with the aim to explore where to trigger people to join activities concerning the improvement of nature and biodivesity by investigating their frame of reference with the help of cultural probes. “

Manon Barendse s119828 M1.1 Industrial Design TU/e Eindhoven Januari 2015 Coach: Aarnout Brombacher

M1.1 RESEARCH

CONTENT OF THIS DESIGN RESEARCH 02 1. OPENING UP 06 2. CREATION OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 14 3. OPENING UP AGAIN Including intermediate reflection 20 4. FOCUSING IN DESIGN 32 5. ENTERING TUNING-IN

Including intermediate reflection 50 6./7. COLLECTING DATA 70 8. ANALYSIS 88 9. EVALUATION - REFLECTION

3

MANON BARENDSE

4

“

‘We just don’t care’ This mindless degradation of the planet is driven by many factors, not the least of which is our inability to take seriously the implications of our rapidly growing populations and of our unsustainable consumption, largely by people in industrialized countries, of its resources. Ultimately, our behavior is the result of a fundamental failure to recognize that human beings are an inseparable part of Nature and that we cannot damage it severely without severely damaging ourselves.

- Chivian, 2002

The overall aim of design research is to develop an accessible, robust body of knowledge that enhances our understanding of design processes, applications, methods and contexts. Often, this knowledge helps to define best practice and workable methods in dealing with design and design-related problems. It therefore has considerable potential for improving our use and management of design.

- Cooper and Press, 2007

M1.1 RESEARCH

5

STAGE ‘OPENING UP’

1.

MANON BARENDSE

8

“

Research is what I am doing when I do not know what I am doing -

Wernher von Braun

OPENING UP In the ‘opening up’ stage of my research project, I will direct the reader through the decisions made to create an conceptual framework. I will start with the exploration of the character of the Theme ‘Out of Control’ and I will end with my learning objectives.

EXPLORE CASE AND PROJECT I have done my research semester in ‘Out of Control’. This theme is about systems design in a world that is no longer in control, and actually never has been. Reality is complex and people do not want to be fully controlled. Out of Control is about dealing with a complex boundary between physical and digital worlds in bottom-up and self-organizing ways and designing for the challenges that arise in the new public domain, both urban and eco, both crafty and post-digital.

I have an interest in societal developments and I like to move people to think differently. In my vision, the power of a designer is to show new perspectives to people and to provide energy to deploy a change. This is an important skill when you have to deal with complex social problems.

The reality of the theme ‘Out of Control’ is full of this complexity and therefore the perfect ‘environment’ for me to explore how to develop this skill. For me, the theme ‘Out of Control’

BEES IN THE GARDEN OF ERIC VAN OOIJ Worker bees are flying on and off

M1.1 RESEARCH

9

has the most to offer do research within the framework of social trends, people’s behavior and design – exactly what I was looking for.

CHOICE FOR THE NEW GREEN NOW Like what can be read in the project description of ‘Out of Control’, the complex challenges of reality ask for a more dynamic approach with strong elements of empowering citizens and inspiring bottom-up action.

The project within ‘Out of Control’, what I personally found the most inspiring, was ‘The New Green Now’. This project is about everyday sustainability and bio-diversity in the local urban environment, and offers the opportunity to design for GREEN in relevant real-life contexts given by our external clients.

The initiators of the project state that design for green is a popular topic these days, but concrete opportunities beyond ecologic packaging and material are rare. Especially the indepth validation of such designs requires external expertise and a good match with biological, societal and technological needs.

Lots of projects have been established which were all about connecting people and the environment to make them more sustainable. Though, many initiatives struggle to make the aim

MANON BARENDSE

10

of the projects – sustainable change - durable as well, merely by holding on too strictly to a top-down approach.

“Sometimes it is better to simply show what can be done and let the policy-makers take up the leads of grass-roots initiatives.” This is where the aim of our project comes in: finding out how design can contribute to a sustainable and better future. The outcome of the project should provide new insights on how design could contribute to discussions on change on a systemic and strategic level.

The subject of this project feels relevant to me, because of the contradictive trends I see happening in society concerning ‘GREEN’. People seem to be more involved with sustainability – they are buying sustainable water bottles and ecologic bread and meat -, but at the same time, people are more remote from nature than ever – nature has become something ‘exotic’. I think that this contradiction could mean that people are only motivated to do things for a sustainable future, when the action also directly and personally benefits them (think about status, identity, money). This project provides me with a context in which I can validate this interesting thought and build a research upon.

Together with the personal relevance, I like to join this project because it has ‘real’ clients. During my work for The Thinktrain (now: FourMore, www.fourmore.eu) I have experienced how valuable it is to gain input from the case provider, the user and the design team from the beginning of the process. I have never had this possibility in an Industrial Design project before, so I am thrilled to have it now.

CHOICE FOR FOOD FOR BEES

IMPLEMENTATION P BUSINESS PLAN

Within The New Green Now, they gave us the opportunity to choose a client out of four different options: Food4Bees, GardenMania, Buurtkracht and EUPHORIA.

BUSIN

I have made the choice for Food4Bees, because they surprised me with a story I was not completely familiar with. On the one hand this was positive, it made me curious to investigate the subject. On the other hand, the story they told was so obvious,

FOO 4BE BEES

BIOLOGICAL

ENVIRONMENT NUTRITION

M1.1 RESEARCH

that I found it rather foolish of myself that I did not know it (which was also a reason to go research it). Concluding, From both ‘sides’, I felt the urge to dive into the context .

Story Food4Bees.

In our cities and suburban areas we live, work, travel and connect together in connection with nature, or what we think is natural life. Most of the time nature is not really there anymore as it was replaced by agricultural areas, new housing developments, and artificial parks and zones, which seem to be green and natural, but for bees they resemble deserts in which no food can be found. Our client “Food4Bees” is a regional initiative of beekeepers and others interested in bio-diversity and a healthy population of bees. By the way, in places where bees feel good, humans are also quite happy.

CHOICE FOR SOCIO/BUSINESS FOCUS WITHIN FOOD FOR BEES

PLAN STRUCTURE CELLS

NESS

LOCAL INITIATIVES

Who is the client -Food4Bees- exactly?

Development and support of activities concerning maintaining and expanding natural environment for pollen and nectareating insects. Food4Bees works according to the principle of cell proliferation. Per region, a cell is set up to undertake local initiatives in. If a region has sufficient organizational strength than the Foundation assists in the creation of a new cell.

Improve food availability for honey bees and other pollinators through the proactive and constructive connecting landowners, environmental associations and other stakeholders. Improve biodiversity.

After interviews with two of the directors of Food4Bees - one with Eric van Ooij and one with Eric Sessink – , I was able to map the activities of Food4Bees in 4 main directions: - Bees & Plants - Bio - People - Socio - Business (local initiatives) - Business

OD EES

BEHAVIOR SOCIAL

UNDERSTANDING MOTIVATION

VOLUNTEERS

11

MANON BARENDSE

12

1.

Substantive learning objective

Seek to further own knowledge of the topic and explore relevant theory to it.

The learning has substance as opposed to me merely learning about a process - New knowledge about bees, business, people - One half of the project: the substance - I wish to learn more about the social/business side of food4bees ‘ missing research about understanding of (effects) biodiversity

LEARNING OBJECTIVES This made me consider where my place as designer is; where can and should I make the difference? With keeping in mind that the primary aim of this semester is to enhance my own learning, I have made this decision by reflecting on four learning objectives (Collins, 2012) 1. Substantive learning objective 2. Processual skills and concepts 3. Methodological skills and processes 4. Self-knowledge It was useful to define the objectives, it has made it easier to move to a research topic.

2.

Processual skills and concepts

Reflect on problems and solutions; implementing techniques, concepts and models.

Better understanding of potential barriers and problems involved in implementation, which could inform you about how to approach other in similar circumstances - Testing new designs/services to see how people react (think about an implementation toolbox) - Design as archetype

M1.1 RESEARCH

3.

Methodological skills and processes

4.

Self-knowledge

Focus on the way in which research is undertaken by using methodological skills and processes ( how knowledge is generated from data)

Focus mainly on self-knowledge, expanding my thinking and reflective abilities in order to understand my own learning and actions.

- I wish to gain understanding how to collect subjectively meaningful information, using qualitative design research and how to analyze it.

- Reflect on own skills and development - Fast through process

- Carefully considered research approsal - Remove the constrains from the commercial sector that define normative design processes.

- Use models and prototypes at the heart of the enquiry - Instead of analysis, “design proposals” are arrived at through a series of tactics rather than systematic analysis - Focus on associations, metaphors and poetic aspects of life - Aim of the fieldwork (prototype) is to provide stories, some of which are highlighted as ‘beacons’ that tell about how people experience the designs and what trains of though they elicited.

- User focused - Business element (business minded/integral design approach) - Creative research approach

13

STAGE ‘CREATION OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK’

2.

16

MANON BARENDSE

“

The tricky part is to make sure that you don’t get confused about your phenomenon of interest when formulating a specific research question - Hillary Collins

CREATING A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK In this ‘focussing in’- stage of the research project, I have identified the focus of my research, founded on the learning objectives I have written down in chapter one. Within this focus, ideas are identified and created from which a research proposal, including the research question and hypothesis, can be written.

I aim for as much clarity of terms as possible, hence I am going to try to explain my use of words as comprehensive as possible.

TOPIC AREA (THEME, PROJECT, CLIENT, CONTEXT) The new Green Now is the topic area I am doing design research in/for. This area represents a complex reality in sense of social structures and the challenges that arrive in the public domain, in a ‘green’ framework. Everyday sustainability and biodiversity in the local urban environment.

To slightly narrow it down, I will take the story, goal and mission of my client Food4Bees as starting point of my research: Improve food availability for honey bees and other pollinators through the proactive and constructive connecting landowners, environmental associations and other stakeholders. Improve biodiversity.

As Industrial/Interaction Designer with a special interest for social dynamics, I think the place to position myself is along the social ‘axe’. In line with my (M1.1) goal to do a project with a close cooperation with a client and the (system) context of the

Limitation Time

Ten weeks with module weeks inbetween

Limitation Space

Food4Bees activities in Brabant I have no car, I have an OV card and bike

Limitation Money

I cannot spend more than 150 Euro’s on this project

Requirements ID

Mentoring (coach) meetings Research proposal Presentation (demo days)

Methodological

Qualitative design approach (field or showroom) Developed skills in Human Geography and Module

skills

Process skills

Fast decision process In close cooperation with client Focus on methodology over results

M1.1 RESEARCH

‘Out of Control’-theme, I have chosen to combine the social focus with a business focus.

Foundation Nature of research

Social trends Psychology Perception

This basically means that I will do research about a social business topic within a framework of everyday sustainability and biodiversity in a/the new complex reality ; with as starting point the goals and mission of Food4Bees.

Social focus

Practice of client Implementation plan Working together

Business focus

Altruistic or Self-interest

Green behavior

Context mapping Broad exploration Own style

17

Own Identity

NATURE OF MY PROJECT The prefered nature of my project is practical and subject/topic based. Practical foundations are for example the requirements of Industrial Design for a research project, the methodological and process skills I like to develop and elaborate, and the limitations of the context of research. The mapping of all these foundations and thereby the definition of the nature of my project, has helped me to create a realistic research proposal.

ISSUES THAT I LIKE TO EXPLORE In this preliminary stage of my research I have done a lot to understand the context and to see the context in perspective. I have read project descriptions and literature, I have had discussions with my fellow TNGN students and I have done interviews with people from Food4Bees, as well as with an independent beekeeper.

While doing this context mapping, I have consciously tried to resist quick decisions to have a broad range of interesting is-

MANON BARENDSE

18

UNDERSTANDING BIODIVERSITY CHARACTERISTICS VOLUNTEERS CREATING AWARENESS

MOTIVATION TO PARTICIPATE IN LOCAL INITIATIVES

SUSTAINABLE INITIATIVES

BARRIERS NOT WANT TO BE A CELL

LIMITATIONS FOOD4BEES

NETWORKING

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TOOLBOX

sues, which I can explore and possibly relate with each other.

THE ISSUES I FIND INTERESTING WITHIN MY RESEARCH TOPIC ARE: • • • • • • •

Understanding biodiversity Motivation to participate in local initiatives Sustainability initiatives Implementation plan/toolbox Barriers – not to want to be a cell Creating awareness Networking

I have a special interest in the missing research of Food4Bees about the understanding of biodiversity. Firstly, because this issue addresses the contradiction I mentioned in chapter one (involvement – exotic nature). Secondly, in the interviews I had with both the founders of Food4Bees, I got the impression that they expected an intrinsic motivation of people to act for biodiversity. When I confronted them with the question if they are aware of the understanding of biodiversity among the people in their cells, they answered negative. Since then, a question kept on hovering in my head: “how do you know how to approach people effectively when you don’t have an understanding of their understanding?”

“ Do people understand why Food4Bees is in town? “

M1.1 RESEARCH

19

RESEARCH STRATEGY At this moment in the design research process it is too early to define a research strategy, but it is possible to explore my options and eliminate the ones which are not applicable to my topic and issues.

I have experienced that it is useful to have the range of possible strategies in mind, because it provided direction in the next stage in which I had to focus on the design/research proposal (and theory behind it).

PURPOSE OBJECTIVE USEFUL FEASIBILITY

DEVELOPMENT

MAKING CLEAR

IMPROVEMENT

INFORMATION

FORMULATION

STRATEGY

CLARIFICATION DESIGN SOLUTION REPORT PROBLEMS RECOMMENDATIONS

BY

GIVING AN OVERVIEW PROVIDING INSIGHT MAKING ANALYSIS DRAWING COMPARISON GIVING A RATING

STAGE ‘OPENING UP AGAIN ’

3.

MANON BARENDSE

22

“

The task of putting public awareness of environmental issues into practice is inseparable from that of working to enhance political solidarity

OPENING UP AGAIN In the third stage of my research process, I am opening up again. This means that I will view my map of issues from different perspectives out of literature study and a closer look at the practice (activities and needs) of Food4Bees.

VALIDATION OF IMPORTANCE MAP “The key to the realization of power in society is through the ability to define what constitutes the common sense reality that applies to the field of practice “

(Brulle, 2010: 86) With the knowledge I have required in my former study, Human Geography, I recognized that Food4Bees is trying to make local environmental claims about biodiversity through the establishment of cells. To explain what this means, I will state Hannigan’s (1995: 40) three key tasks that characterize the construction of an ‘environmental claim’.

First, is must be assembled using particular types of knowledge and information, notably scientific data. Second, the claim needs to be effectively presented in order for it to achieve legitimacy (the use of a variety of information channels e.g. the media, are integral to this process). Finally, once an environmental claim has transcended the legitimacy threshold, it will be subject to on-going contestation as claim makers seek to ensure

- Brulle, 2010: 92

23

M1.1 RESEARCH

UNDERSTANDING BIODIVERSITY CHARACTERISTICS VOLUNTEERS CREATING AWARENESS

MOTIVATION TO PARTICIPATE IN LOCAL INITIATIVES

SUSTAINABLE INITIATIVES

BARRIERS NOT WANT TO BE A CELL

LIMITATIONS FOOD4BEES

NETWORKING

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN TOOLBOX

that ameliorative action is taken. Crucially, these three tasks are not temporally distinct, but ‘interweave constantly’.

All three’ tasks’ are present in Food4Bees work. Their story is based on scientific facts, they are doing their upper best to use the media (Facebook, Twitter, website) and are constantly debating how to improve their work .

Though, this does not say that the environmental claims made

by Food4Bees are successful by all means. The interviews with Eric Van Ooij, Eric Sessink and Immy Braam all revealed that they struggle to make the cells and therefore the environmental claim sustainable. In other words, the biggest challenge Food4Bees encounters is not recruiting and establishing new cells, but maintaining the existing cells.

And here, the importance of my ‘issue map’ or design research space is getting exposed.

Morris & Wragg (2003) argue that there are six factors* that are necessary to create a sustainable environmental claim. At least three of the 6 factors* have to do with engagement and understanding of the public in order to get ‘sustainable support’. They include the creating of meaning and value, the translation into a popular discourse (get is out of the esoteric and into the proactive realistic) and the enrollment of people in the claim. And this is exactly what I am missing in Food4Bees way of working/ procedure/claims and why I believe it is so hard for them to make the cells sustainable.

MANON BARENDSE

24

Based on this assumption, I think that Food4Bees has focused too much on the institutional level (creating a structure), while leaving behind the action and assistance/help in the ‘sustainable support’ of the public within the cells; which is, according to the literature, as important as the structure.

For me this validates that people’s understanding of biodiversity is important for Food4Bees, because: 1. They need understanding and engagement to construct and conduct environmental claims, and 2. They need to know what exactly is the understanding, to know how to approach, motivate and activate people.

* 6 factors to success.

1. Dependence on scientific authority for validation 2. The need for ‘popularisers’ to translate the science of environmental claims for a wide range of public 3. Carefully framed media coverage 4. Symbolic and visual dramatization of the problem’s must be presented in a stimulating and comprehensible format 5. The identification of economic incentives for taking action 6. Institutional sponsors are required, ‘to ensure both legitimacy and continuity … especially once a problem has made the policy agenda.

M1.1 RESEARCH

THE GREEN CORRIDOR The Green Corridor is a Food4Bees initiative. .

The initiative contains the establishment of a green structure with wild flowers that contain ‘food for bees and other pollinators’ The photograph represents Food4Bees reality very well. There is a lot going on, but people do not understand it and even throw their rubbish next to the pole.

25

MANON BARENDSE

26

FIRST ATTEMPT TO MAKE A MODEL/ RESEARCH

FIRST ATTEMPT RESEARCH MODEL

This small theoretical framework contained enough ground to start contemplating about a (concept) design research proposal.

I began with what I learned in the module I had participated in about design research (“Constructive Design Research”). For all three methods ‘Lab, Field and Showroom’, I have made a research plan with a research objective and strategy:

1.

Method Lab (Quantitative, Designer is separate, general izing Strategy ) Hypothesis testing “A caring context is needed to understand, motivate and participate” Design objective add a ‘chapter’ to Food4Bees (or not) 2.

Method Field/Showroom (Qualitative, Designer as part research/active) Strategy Diagnostic research “How is the understanding in general?

Design objective Inspiration for engagement design (content) 3.

Method Field (Qualitative, Designer can be part, exploring) Strategy Test different techniques to make people understand “which method is most effective concerning the understanding of biodiversity” Design objective Find the best method to make people understand (tool).

Overall Goal

The research will contribute to finding a solution how to make the cells more (1.) self-sustained, (2.) sustainable and (3.) legitimit.

Design Opportunity/Objective Inspiration for: • Toolbox for cells • implementation Plans • Content activities Food4Bees • Support

M1.1 RESEARCH

Design Research Space (explanation) My research is about the understanding of Food4Bees story.

The story is about biodiversity (what is quite a complex term).

The understanding influences the level of engagement to participate in/contribute to Food4Bees activities.

A good understanding of the meaning/value of the story, probably means that people are more willing to do an effort for a longer time.

This means that good understanding leads to a more sustainable cell.

It has to become logical & easy that you do something/undertake action for biodiversity.

I want to examine what Food4Bees does to make people understand what they are doing (and why), if people do understand it and to find ways to increase the understanding.

In other words; does Food4Bees contribute to the understanding of Biodiversity?

Usergroup

People in the cells (potential volunteers or participants)

Design Research Strategy

Diagnostic research or problem signalizing research (.. but is the problem already recognized?)

Phase 1.

Phase 2.

Contextual research to activities of Food4Bees concerning understanding and engagement; what does it mean to have Food4Bees in town?

Research the difference in understanding of people in the cells between:

• • • • • •

To shape the research Motivation Activities Frequency Local activities Support

- DATA 1: understanding people before Food4Bees presence (Den Bosch, brand new cell) - DATA 2: understanding people after Food4Bees presence (Oirschot, ‘success cell’)

27

28

MANON BARENDSE

REFLECTION ON THE MODEL – DESIGN CONSTRUCTION (STRATEGY) I have discussed this concept research proposal with both students and my coach Aarnout Brombacher to reflect on the content, as well as the practical implications.

The insight that has been most useful from my fellow students is that I have to be careful not perform a user research instead of a design research. It might be hard to develop an accessible, robust body of knowledge that enhances our understanding of design processes, applications, methods and contexts (goal design research, by Cooper & Press (2007)), by emphasizing on just the people in the cells of Food4Bees in my usertests and by aiming at an outcome that merely concentrates on Food4Bees practices and influence.

I have discussed this point with Aarnout Brombacher, and we came practically to the same conclusion that this research proposal was too particular and narrow focused. Thereby, he highlighted that design research does not have to have a direct value for client. This means that the aim and result of my research don’t have to be closely tied to Food4Bees activities and future plans and that I should generalize my research objective.

Realistically, the design research I proposed, was too extensive as well. I did not have a huge amount of time to execute and analyze the research, plus to be able to get valid & credible results, I should make the research objective as small as possible.

These three evaluation and reflection insights have guided me to a new research framework that has an objective that is smaller, less context-specific and more design research. Though, the overall “ The research will contribute to finding a solution how to make the cells more (1.) self-sustained, (2.) sustainable and (3.) legitimit” goal and design opportunity “Design inspiration”, will remain the same.

M1.1 RESEARCH

29

I have made the decision to just focus on the understanding of biodiversity in a general context. My aim will be to explore where to trigger people to join activities concerning the improvement of nature and biodiversity by investigating their personal reference frame.

A reference frame could be defined as “ a structure of concepts, values, customs, views, etc., by means of which an individual or group perceives or evaluates data, communicates ideas, and regulates behavior (frame of reference. (n.d.). Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. Retrieved January 05, 2015, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/frame of reference).

As such, I believe that out of the information of the frame of references, I can convert with what people can be triggered to act for biodiversity.

Food For Bees

MAKE Local Environmental Claims About BIODIVERSITY

BEST IF Claims are Sustainable Legitimit

Client.

What is people their frame of reference concerning biodiversity? social structure, foundation of behavior.

To explore how and where people can be intrinsically motivated to support biodiversity (claims) Qualitative, Field research.

Cultural Probes as tools for design and understanding; Engage deeply with participant and enquire around her sense of what is personally meaningful;

NEEDED Understanding Engagement of Wider Audiance

Gain understanding and inspiration to inform designs around a particular theme or issue.

[Hannigan, 1995 , Environmenta sociology ]

DEMO DAY POSTER

30

MANON BARENDSE

FOOD FOR BEE

Environmental Claims Morris, Wragg, 2003)

LEGITIMIZE: NEEDED FA 1. SCIENTIFIC AUTHORIT 2. POPULIZERS 3. MEDIA COVERAGE 4. ECONOMIC INCENTIVE 5. INSTITUTIONAL SPON

Hann

SIMPLIFIED MODEL. Derived from the reflection on the first ‘Try Out’ model

M1.1 RESEARCH

31

ES

ACTORS TY

ES NSORSHIP

DESIGN SPACE Civic Participation

Local level

Understanding Engagement Wider public

nigan, 1995)

Engendering support Need for popularization

Theory Motivation (Forgas, 2005)

Where to trigger people to support and act for biodiversity?

BIODIVERSITY Where to start for Food4Bees?

How to approach the wider public?

People’s Framework Biodivesity

STAGE ‘FOCUSING IN DESIGN’

4.

MANON BARENDSE

34

“

Nearly everything we do is done for a reason

FOCUSING IN DESIGN, THE RESEARCH PROPOSAL The fourth stage is one of the most significant in my design research, because I have created my design strategy and design proposal in it. In this chapter I will basically describe the skeleton or structure of my research and therefore it is the most extensive of all.

RESEARCH STRATEGY

Research question and hypothesis The research question that derives from the model in stage 3 of my research is: What is inside people their frame of reference concerning biodiversity ?

Subsidiary questions: - Do people care about biodiversity?

- Do people understand biodiversity?

- What triggers people to undertake action for biodiversity?

- Forgas, 2005

M1.1 RESEARCH

35

RESEARCH APPROACH Before I start with creating my research proposal, I have defined what kind of research approach fits the nature of my research project. I have experienced that this is useful to do, because it helps to make decisions about the design research and research strategy.

My research falls in the category ‘Question >> Answer >> Use’ Such research would result in the generation of knowledge, which would then be applied to a practical situation (Collins, 2010).

I like to collect data about people their frame of reference concerning biodiversity to understand it and to provide insight.

In other words, the purpose of my research is to understand the nature of a ‘problem’ and then make sense of the data I obtain. This purpose fits in an inductive research approach. Within most inductive research approached, a theory is formed once the data is accumulated and analyzed.

Although there is a theory present (about environmental claims) in my research framework, this theory does not function as foundation for a proposition, like in deductive research approaches.

MANON BARENDSE

36

Within inductive research, the emphasis is on qualitative data.

This means that there will be less need to generalize the results and that I, as researcher, am part of rather than separate from the research process.

The inductive research approach is more concerned with values, meanings and context than the deductive approach, what partly intends that a small sample is sometimes more suitable than a large sample. I have to pay attention to this notion when I am considering my methodology.

The last important thing I have to keep in mind when designing my research was that an inductive research approach usually takes more time when the data arises and the time for collection of the data can be difficult to predict.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY - DESIGN PROBES I am going to research people their frame of reference or in other words, people’s personal significance, values and meaning. This subject asks for a specific kind of research. Together with the preferred nature of my research (defined in chapter 2), this has directed me to the use of Design Probes.

INDUCTIVE APPROACH QUALITATIVE DESIGN RESEARCH

PROVIDE INSIGHT EXPLORATORY & INSPIRATION

UNDERSTANDING BIODIVERSITY

CUSTOMS VALUES

PERSONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE SOCIAL TRENDS USER RESEARCH BUSINESS

MEANING VIEWS

DESIGN PROBING

‘

Directed craft objects used in empathic engagements with individuals around issues centered on self-identity and personal significance. They have to gain understandings and inspiration to inform designs around a particular theme or issue.

M1.1 RESEARCH

PROBE RESEARCH – FIND HOOKS OF INSPIRATION

What exactly is a Cultural Probe?

Traditionally, cultural probes (also known as diary studies) provide a way of gathering information about people and their activities. Unlike direct observation (like usability testing or traditional field studies), the technique allows users to self-report. Information gathered from cultural probes is particularly useful early in the design process (Gaffney, 2006).

A slightly different way of considering Design Probes is as tools for design and understanding. As such, design probes are objects that are usually small in scale, whose materiality and form are designed to relate specifically to a particular question and context, posing a question through gentle, provocative, creative means offering a participant intriguing ways to consider a question and form a response through the act of completing the probe creatively (Wallance et al.,2013).

Wallance et al. regard probes as directed craft objects used in empathic engagements with individuals around issues centered on self-identity and personal significance. They have to gain understandings and inspiration to inform designs around a particular theme or issue.

Form and aesthetics are critical in many senses. Probe design is about the physicality of the probe object, sensitively echoing the question being asked in innovative ways that open up many different channels for creative response and reflection.

It is useful to also integrate lighter weight probes: Involve lighter questions and direct, simple, physical acts of response. Such probes become breathing spaces, offering relief from probes that are proving challenging, and significantly, they can act as catalysts, the completion of which may trigger further responses to more challenging probes (Wallace et al. 2013) A probe set should show a participant that a researcher has thought hard about the nature of the enquiry, has designed a set of poignant ways to think about different aspects of the

37

MANON BARENDSE

38

CONTEXT MAPPING

topic, has invested herself in this process and has created a unique environment through which to have a dialogue together.

PRELIMINARY MAPPING

As tools for self-reflection, probes have clear and valuable properties. Probe object and action have the means to reveal to a participant something new about her own experiences.

Relevancy use of design probes & nature of my research The characteristics of the design probe methods fits very well to the nature and aim of my research. I don’t want to have factual knowledge as result, but subjective, personal stories (people might be unconscious of). I want to extricate meanings and values that people are not even conscious of and inspire myself and other designers with it – to create an understructure for the creations of products or systems.

FRAMEWORK

I believe in reciprocity within research between participant and researcher. I think the probe method is a method that mirrors this very well. When I design a well-balanced, coherent and aesthetically pleasing set of probes ánd invest time/effort in the interaction between myself and the participants, my user group will be more committed to the research.

QUESTIONS

PROBES

Personal significance (Meaning &Value)

SELF DOCUMENTATION

SELF REFLECTION

QUESTIONAIRE

• • • • • • • •

I want simple but creative response Different aspects of same topic, but still not boring I want a dialogue Self-ethnography Experience will stimulate other emotions than just writing Exploratory - phase of research User perspective Designing the methodology

Relevancy of design probes & own learning objectives My general learning objective concerning methodological skills was to understand how to collect and analyze subjectively meaningful information by using a qualitative research approach. Like Anthony Dunne argues in his book Hertzian Tales,

ANALYSIS

CONCLUSION

DESIGN INSPIRATION

M1.1 RESEARCH

I believe that the aim of [fieldwork] qualitative research is to provide stories, some of which are highlighted as ‘beacons’ that tell about how people experience the designs and what trains of thought they elicit. Design probes have the right characteristics to have the results I am after.

Another learning objective was to have models and prototypes as heart of the enquiry. As such, the research is not only inspiration for design, it is also design itself.

USER RESEARCH

Usergroup • • • •

Related to Food4Bees Reflection of society Motivated to spent some of their time to the research (committed) No friends or family (‘Real participants’)

My user group does not have to have specific characteristics in person. I am aiming for a broad range of people; a reflection of society. Descriptive of Geographical and social factors are more applicable. In the best possible way, my participants live in an area that is related to Food4Bees, but not yet convinced of being a cell. As such, my research results can directly be used in Food4Bees activities.

Furthermore, it would be convenient if all participants live in the same area, so I can present, explain and hand out the sets of probes at the same time.

MATTELMAKKI, 2006

39

40

MANON BARENDSE

METHODS TO ANALYSE Once I have collected my data, I will perform multiple affinity mapping sessions to discover meaningful groups of ideas within a raw list. I have made the decision to use affinity mapping to refine the big pile of qualitative data into something that makes sense - to pull the material out of the ambiguous.

This analysis will focus on a couple of subjects: • • • • •

Relationship with nature (where, when, who, how and why) What motivates people to go and act for flora and fauna?

What are hooks for inspiration?

Translation of information to design Self-reflection of the candidates

To draw conclusions, I will interview my participants again. This interview will be based on the conclusions out of the first affinity diagram, together with their own answers/completed probes.

M1.1 RESEARCH

41

AFFINITY DIAGRAMMING ANALYSIS PLAN Purpose Categorizing and analyzing a huge pile of data from qualitative research Finding of hooks for inspiration – Where to trigger people to join activities concerning nature/biodiversity?

Target audience: Designers (myself) Food4Bees (client)

Process Protocol

Time 30 minutes per round

Relationship nature Meaning nature Value nature Context Experience

Materials Markets, Post-its, Masking Tape

Clearly identify a problem/challenge

PEOPLE’S PERSONAL FRAME OF REFERENCE CONCERNING FLORA&FAUNA

Brainstorm hunches and hypotheses 1. Classifications 3. Create Header and agree on a concise sentence that combines the grouping’s central idea 4. Divide large groupings into subgroups, if needed, and create subheadings 5. Draw the final affinity diagram connecting ideas to the header cards

42

MANON BARENDSE

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Background

As Industrial/Interaction Designer with a special interest for social dynamics, I think the place to position myself is along the social ‘axe’. In line with my (M1.1) goal to do a project with a close cooperation with a client and the (system) context of the ‘Out of Control’-theme, I have chosen to combine the social focus with a business focus.

This basically means that I will do research about a social business topic within a framework of everyday sustainability and biodiversity in a/the new complex reality ; with as starting point the goals and mission of Food4Bees.

Purpose This research aims to clarify people’s understanding of biodiversity by providing insights in their frame of reference. Rather than exposing people their factual knowledge, this research at-

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

The new Green Now is the topic area I am doing design research in/for. This area represents a complex reality in sense of social structures and the challenges that arrive in the public domain, in a ‘green’ framework. Everyday sustainability and biodiversity in the local urban environment.

To slightly narrow it down, I will take the story, goal and mission of my client Food4Bees as starting point of my research: “Verbeteren voedselaanbod voor honingbijen en andere bestuivers door het proactief en constructief verbinden van grondeigenaren, natuurverenigingen en andere belanghebbenden.

Verbeteren biodiversiteit. “

M1.1 RESEARCH

43

tempts to find personal significance, values and meanings that are the foundation of behavior. Ultimately, the results of the research are hooks for design inspiration in the context of how to trigger people to act for (improving) biodiversity.

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

Aside from the research being part of the Master program of Industrial Design, my main purpose was to increase my personal skills and knowledge in order to do original, valid and credible design research in the social domain. To discover and experience how I can extract very personal unconscious stories/feelings in a simple and fun way ánd to make people reflect on it.

These research skills and knowledge will help me to find novel approaches and starting points in the explorative stage of my future design projects.

Keywords People-centered, context mapping, explorative research, biodiversity, frame of reference, Food4Bees, design probes, environmental claims, understanding, engagement

Assumptions Harrison, Laverty & Sterling (…) Definition of Biodiversity, OpenStax-CNX: The variety of life on earth and all its levels, from genes to ecosystems, and the ecological and evolutionary processes that sustain it.

In popular usage, the word biodiversity is often used to describe all the species living in a particular area. If we consider this area at its largest scale – the entire world – then biodiversity can be summarized as “life on earth”.

44

MANON BARENDSE

The term biodiversity covers all the flora and Fauna on the earth. Food4Bees focusses with biodiversity on what we usually consider as nature: ‘green’ and animals.

Food4Bees is conducting environmental claims on local level * 6 factors to success.

1. Dependence on scientific authority for validation 2. The need for ‘popularisers’ to translate the science of environmental claims for a wide range of public 3. Carefully framed media coverage 4. Symbolic and visual dramatization of the problem’s must be presented in a stimulating and comprehensible format 5. The identification of economic incentives for taking action 6. Institutional sponsors are required, ‘to ensure both legitimacy and continuity … especially once a problem has made the policy agenda.

Sustainable and legitimate claims can only be made when there is understanding and engagement of the people who live in the area in which the claim is made.

Second, the loss of biodiversity has no immediate impact on human lifestyles in the First World nations where the resources that could be applied to acting upon the problem are concentrated. Indeed, with the exception of a small number of ‘charismatic megafauna’ – whales, gorillas, whooping cranes, bald eagles – most threatened organisms consist of creatures such as

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

First, it must be assembled using particular types of knowledge and information, notably scientific data. Second, the claim needs to be effectively presented in order for it to achieve legitimacy (the use of a variety of information channels e.g. the media, are integral to this process). Finally, once an environmental claim has transcended the legitimacy threshold, it will be subject to on-going contestation as claim makers seek to ensure that ameliorative action is taken. Crucially, these three tasks are not temporally distinct, but ‘interweave constantly’.

M1.1 RESEARCH

45

INFOGRAPHIC ABOUT THE LOSS OF BIODIVERSITY Made by The World Bank

MANON BARENDSE

46

fungi, insects and bacteria that most people would not hesitate to step on (Mann and Plummer 1992: 49). This problem is even more exaggerated at the system level where, as Noss (1990) has sardonically observed, ‘you can’t hug a “biogeochemical” cycle’.

(Hannigan, 1996)

Given sufficient motivation and ability, people can bring their behavior in line with their explicit intentions, which may often differ from the implicit intentions directing established habits.

(Wood& Quinn - Forgas, 2004)

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

People don’t understand (the loss of) biodiversity very well or they just don’t care?

“ When individuals are provided with full information regarding a particular risk, and are then included in the development of responses to it, they are more likely to engage in taking action than if given only limited information of responsibility”

(Brulle, 2010: 93) The knowledge how to approach people is essential when aiming for engagement

Aims and Objectives The overarching aim of this research is exploratory and design inspiration for understanding and engagement in the context of biodiversity. The direct goal is to contribute to finding solutions the environmental claims of Food4bees (cells) more (1.) self-sustained, (2.) sustainable and (3.) legitimit.

Area’s to look into to reach the goal: • • •

Explore people their ‘blanco’ knowledge of biodiversity Investigate motivation and engagement Uncover how the content of frame of references influence people’s behavior

M1.1 RESEARCH

47

Approach The approach taken in answering the research question affects the process of the research. In my case, it is going to be useful to use an inductive approach: theory follows (merely qualitative) data collection; it does not precede it.

For example, within probe research, I as designer will design the probes with in my head a certain answering direction and guide them as such. Furthermore, I will have to build a trustrelationship with the participants to (1.) let them know that their personal answers are safe with me and (2.) that they are willing to spend some time on the quite intensive ‘physical questionnaire’ that design probes basically are.

Method To gather data, I am going to use the design probe method. I am researching issues centered on self-identity and personal significance (frame of reference), what makes design probes the perfect way to gain understandings and inspiration to inform designs around the theme/issue of biodiversity in combination with engagement.

I like to consider Design Probes is as tools for design and un-

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

The purpose of an inductive approach is to understand the nature of a ‘problem’ (quite literally in my research: understanding the nature of the understanding of biodiversity) and then make sense of the data I obtain. After that, I will form a kind of theory based on the data I have obtained.

Although there is a theory present (about environmental claims) in my research framework, this theory does not function as foundation for a proposition, as in deductive research approaches.

Within inductive research, the emphasis is on qualitative data.

Primarily, the effects using merely qualitative data is that the researcher is part of rather than separate from the research process and that there is less need to generalize results.

MANON BARENDSE

48

Once I have collected my data, I will perform an affinity mapping session to discover meaningful groups of ideas within a raw list. I have made the decision to use affinity mapping to refine the big pile of qualitative data into something that makes sense (pull it out of the ambiguous).

To draw conclusions, I will interview my participants again. This interview will be based on the conclusions out of the affinity diagram, in relationship with their own answers/completed probes.

Part of the conclusions will presented in persona’s.

Usergroup • • • •

Related to Food4Bees Reflection of society Motivated to spent some of their time to the research (committed) No friends or family (‘Real participants’)

THROUGH PROBING, I LIKE TO GAIN ...

CREATIVE RESPONS PERSONAL STORIES PERSONAL SIGNIFICANCE SELF - ETHNOGRAPHY EXPERIENCE THAT STIMULATE EMOTIONS FOCUS ON USER PERSPECTIVE SKILLS TO DESIGN A METHODOLOGY HOOKS FOR INSPIRATION

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

derstanding. As such, design probes are objects that are usually small in scale, whose materiality and form are designed to relate specifically to a particular question and context, posing a question through gentle, provocative, creative means offering a participant intriguing ways to consider a question and form a response through the act of completing the probe creatively (Wallance et al.,2013).

M1.1 RESEARCH

49

Ethics I will try to treat my participants as ethical as possible. This stands for the protection of the rights of the participants:

•

People should knowingly and voluntary participate Participants must be fully informed about the procedures and risks of the research Protection of privacy of research participants - guarantee anonymity

Limitations To already think about the limitations of my research before I even start with is beneficial, it will give me the opportunity to anticipate on it.

1. preliminary • time to search the right participants • making/conceptualizing of the probes 2. data collection • commitment participants • flexible attitude • hard to monitor the participants

3. analysis • hard to not be biased, to stay impartial • no team to have discussions and dialogue with • information might not be as rich as I thought 4. conclusions • again: hard to not be biased, to stay impartial • can I make generalizations from personal information?

RESEARCH PROPOSAL

• •

STAGE ‘ENTERING TUNING IN’

5.

MANON BARENDSE

52

“

The level of care that is put into the conceptual and design aspects is palpable and as such evident to a participant communicating the level of investment and respect.

- Wallace, 2013

ENTERING “ TUNING IN ” – PRELIMINARY MAPPING Within this stage of the research process, I am tuning-in the design probe research with adaptation to creative work, and definition of the uses, purpose and subject for probes. Of course I do already know the topic, issue and objective of my research, but it still has to be translated into the probing ‘method’.

In this chapter I will basically describe the design process of the probes. From the preliminary mapping (observing one’s experience and preconceived ideas, ideating, interviews) to the final design of the probes (look, feel, interaction) GENERAL EXPLORATION & RESEARCH BIODIVERSITY FRAMEWORK When I am doing projects, I like to immerse myself in the subject of the project in order to find unexpected connections and inspiration. So the first thing I did when my research proposal was assessed positively, was the creation of a wall of inspiration. This over time expanding source of inspiration has helped me when I got stuck in the process or when I was searching for new keystones.

Especially one - very low-fi – info graphic kept on inspiring and motivating to do my research: “WE DON’T CARE”. I perfectly sums up the importance of acting for biodiversity.

The second action I have undertaken was to make blanco frames of reference, which a usergroup (that consisted out of

FRAMEWORK - SHEETS

M1.1 RESEARCH

53

friends and family from all kind of ages) had to fill in. What do people tell out of themselves when you confront them with a blanc sheet of paper? Do they know what kind of information they have to fill in and how personal will this information be?

The goal of this was that I got to know people their preconceived ideas, which facilitates preparing the instructions and elaborating the research findings at later stages. When the things already known have been documented before the study, one can clearly distinguish between what was already known and what insights resulted from the research findings, and justify this distinction (Mattelmaki, 2006).

The main finding was that most of the people I asked to fill in the sheet, did not know what was expected from them. They either did not truly understand what a frame of reference meant, or what the term biodiversity implies.

I had to provide some clues and ‘cross-passes’ , before they started to write or draw things that belonged to a frame of reference about biodiversity. This suited my prior estimation that the terms are too abstract and that (especially ‘biodiversity’) they are positioned too far away from their direct life.

Nonetheless I was happy with the results. Although I had pull the information out of my participants, they had wrote down some pretty interesting personal stories which showed perfectly what they relate to nature & biodiversity and what not. Furthermore, it confirmed that there is more needed when I want to extract information that they write down out of themselves: probes!

MANON BARENDSE

54

Concluding, by comparing the information out of the frames with the research about biodiversity, I gained knowledge about which subjects people think about immediately and which subjects have to triggered indirectly through the use of probes.

Out of this knowledge I have created primarily open questions that could serve as the foundations or ‘design spaces’ for the probes. Gaver et al. (2004) want to emphasise that the philosophy of the probes is fundamentally associated with accepting ambiguity. It is possible and pleasant to do the probing with an open mind, asking open questions in the name of inspiration and playfulness.

Some have a more self-reflective function, while others have an emphasis on documenting of story-telling.

MAKING OF THE PROVES While working on the frame of references, I filled up my wall with interesting sketches of interesting objects I could use as metaphors or symbols for my probes. So I could later match them with the issue I like to address, the nature, properties and purpose of the probes: what kind of object suits the question that is going to be asked?

I have made several iterations of mapping the questions/issues to address and the objects, where after I discussed the final version with Immy, who is part of the board of Food4Bees. She gave me some valuable feedback about motivation, commitment and sociology which I – last minute – have integrated in the design of my probes.

While designing the objects, I kept in mind the following process directed insights I have learned reading the article of Wallace et al. (2013) about ‘Making design probes work’:

1. Not everybody is creative

Probes are not an arbitrary set of objects; their materiality is crucial to both framing a question in a particular way and creating a structure that facilitates a participant’s creative ability and response.

2. Form and aesthetics

Form and aesthetic are critical in many senses. Probe design

M1.1 RESEARCH

is about the physicality of the probe object, sensitively echoing the question being asked in innovative ways that open up many different channels for creative response and reflection. The level of care that is put into the conceptual and design aspects is palpable and as such evident to a participant communicating the level of investment and respect.

3. Thematic openness

Try to give participants ways of thinking about a theme that they have not experienced before, and in this is the gentle challenge to enter into the probe activity.

4. The importance of tangibility

Not just that the probes can be evocative objects to reflect through, but that the material properties of the probe can structure the reflection itself.

5. Relationships and reciprocity – Initiating probes

When done well, probe sets show a participant that a researcher has thought hard about the nature of the enquiry, has designed a set of poignant ways to think about different aspects of the topic, has invested herself in this process and has created a unique environment through which to have a dialogue together. The relationship between researcher and participant is central to the method.

Per probe I will try to explain how I have integrated some of these aspects in them (end of the chapter).

Before I had the final package of probes, I have gone through three iterations that all had a different purpose. The first batch I have made was mostly a try-out of look & feel. I have made changes based on my own opinion and the one of my fellow designers.

In the second batch I have created, I have included these alternations. This set of probes has been send out to my mom to test if she was able to complete it and if I would receive answers in the desired track. In other words, with the second batch I examined if the probes were properly working or not. This kind of pilot

55

56

MANON BARENDSE

study may provide some feedback onthe number of exercises, their functionality, comprehensibility and language (Mattelmaki,2010) The third and last iteration of the probe package consisted out of thirteen open ended objects; aesthetically pleasing and effective.

SEARCH FOR PARTICIPANTS “REACHING OUT TO TARGET GROUP” The only thing left in this stadium was reaching out to the target group. For qualitative design research as probe design is, it is not (always) meaningful to choose a large targetgroup. For my research, a targetgroup of 5-10 people is an adequate size. Determining the exact number of users is associated with recruitment opportunities and appropriateness affecting the research (Mattelmaki, 2010). For example, I had the possibility to have a relatively large number of participants through Food4Bees, but in the end they could not ‘deliver’ them in time, so I had to cut down the number for my convenience sample. Nevertheless, a small target group is sufficient in my case, because (1.) probe research is time consuming, (2.) it is about understanding phenomena and individual people and (3.) as little as one individual can point out a need or a base the solution concept on.

My user group does not have to have specific characteristics in person. I am aiming for a broad range of people; a reflection of society. Descriptive of Geographical and social factors are more applicable. In the best possible way, my participants live in an area that is related to Food4Bees, but not yet convinced of being a cell. As such, my research results can directly be used in Food4Bees activities.

Furthermore, it would be convenient if all participants live in the same area, so I can present, explain and hand out the sets of probes at the same time.

I acknowledge that the stricter the definition of the user group, the sharper the focus of the research is. Though, I deliberately choose for a broad range of characteristics within my usergroup, because of the explorative and inspirational nature of my research. I am not after an specific outcome, I like to be open for all kinds of input; to in the end present a broad and balanced picture.

M1.1 RESEARCH

57

In case Food4Bees couldn’t provide me with participants, I had shaped a ‘plan B’. Plan B contained an Convenience Sampling, what can be defined as “Convenience sampling is a non-probability sampling technique where subjects are selected because of their convenient accessibility and proximity to the researcher” (https://explorable.com/convenience-sampling). Practically, this meant that I had a group of friends who were willing to join my research as back-up plan. Sadly, I had to take the decision to realize my plan B, because Food4Bees took a very long time to search for participants (although I have tried to rush them kindly).

The limitation for my research by using plan B is that all participants were in the same range of age (25-30) and have the same (high) educational level. This has undoubtedly effects on variety of results.

Positively, they are my friends and therefore committed to helping me and my research.

Though, on reflection, it is an interesting target group. People who are smart enough to know something about biodiversity and to understand the risks of the loss of biodiversity. Still, they might not undertake action to improve it. Where can they be triggered as members of the Y-generation?

GROUP OF PARTICIPANTS

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Woman

Woman

Woman

Man

Man

27 years old

24 years old

26 years old

30 years old

32 years old

Communication management

Planning studies

Human Geography

Business Administration

Communication management

Studying Working

Working

Working

Dutch

Dutch

Working Working Dutch Dutch Dutch

58

MANON BARENDSE

REFLECTION In this stage of opening up again, the most complex decision to take was to link the objects to the question, or, the conceptualization of the probes. Probably because this decision is one of a heavy weight: it defines the success of the rest of the research.

The probe design gave me the opportunity to not only research for design, but also design the research. This places the design in the heart of the research, something that make design research stand out in comparison to research in other academic fields. Moreover, within the probe method I could show of my own identity and style in the design of the probes - a valuable exercise to develop my own style further.

As designer I have gone multiple times through the whole process. For example, I have done three iterations before I reached the final design of the probes and before that I had already done a lot of research to the content/subjects of the objects.

This investment and involvement in the method has positively influenced my understanding of the whole process, including what the participants will experience. In fact, the probing is a shared process; a shared creation in which I as designer have made a start and the participant the completion.

When Food4Bees told me there were no participants, I realized again that this research is not purely about the outcomes; just as important is the process (like in usual design semesters) as well as the paths I choose. In this case, I could have decided to keep on pushing and waiting for Food4Bees to deliver participants with favored characteristics. In contrary, I chose to proceed with a convenience sample, to be able to keep up with my time-schedule and have the chance to go through whole research cycle.

I have experienced that on the moments you have to take these process directing actions, you learn the most about research; these are the actions that make or break your research.

M1.1 RESEARCH

59

60

MANON BARENDSE

M1.1 RESEARCH

BIODIVERSITY HERO

61

“ What kind of people are perceived as biodiversity hero’s? ” Probe as breathing space

‘Realness’ Although not from very high quality, this probe is something that people can truly use as bangle.

This is a significant characteristic of the probe, because it probably increases the use of the probe.

FACEBOEK

“ What doe people like to share about nature?” ” Probe for self-documentation

Physicality This probe is the physical version from something we are very familiar with in the digital world.

I wonder if the participants will use it in the same way as they usually do.

62

MANON BARENDSE

BOOKLET

“ What are people’s arguments to support actions for nature ” Probe for self-documentation

Dialogue & Materiality This probes provides the opportunity to give your opinion by using stickers. I have experienced that the (simple) use of stickers make the whole experience more fun. ... And more fun means more results.

I expect a huge dfference in what people say and what people do .

This will serve as very valuable food for thought .

MAP OF GARDEN

“ How do people like to have nature in their direct environment? ” Probe for self-documentation Creative ability The map of garden is a simple but effective probe. I have created the outlines of a garden and the participants can fill in it the way they want. It triggers creativity, but does not ask for ‘too much’.

M1.1 RESEARCH

BIRDMASK

63

“ If distance was not a restraint, where would people like to go to? ” Probe for self-documentation

Thematic openess This probe is design to add some ‘weirdness’ to the set. The participants can decide by themselves if and how they will link it to biodiversity.

JAR OF SECRETS

“What are people their secrets with nature? ” Probe for self-reflection and self-documentation Materiality Within this probe you put your secrets in the jar and close it again.

The secrets are now ‘barried’ under a stone.

Dialogue Because this asks for very personal answers, they are the perfect starters for a rich dialogue.

64

MANON BARENDSE

POLAROIDS

“ What are people’s most valuable moments with nature? ” Probe for self-reflection

Creative ability I give the participants the choice to be very creative, or to just write their memory down. This lowers the threshold to complete the probe.

Physicality Though, the physicality of something what is usually an image, encourages the participants to sketch/fiddle.

FRUIT IN DANGER

“ Do people know/care about flora and fauna on the verge of extinction? ” Probe as breathing space Thematic openess 1. I give them something tasty that they can consume, what raises the question why it is in the set 2. I ask them if they would care about that piece of fruit not existing aymore.

I explicitly say nothing about the context; I let the participants think for themselves what could be the cause and the effects.

M1.1 RESEARCH

CAMERA

65

“ What is the range people perceive as nature ? ” Probe for self-documentation

Thematic openess By leaving the space open for own interpretation and associations, I assume this probe to have a variety of results.

Commitment The quantity of results will depend on the commitment of the participants.

LIST OF DEATHS

“ Are people conscious of their influence on biodiversity? ” Probe for self-reflection

Dialogue With this somewhat provocative probe, I hope to trigger conversation and discussion.

By ‘checking’ the list of animals who potentially have died because of their knowledge (what is quite ambiguous), the participants will reflect and discuss. ßßßßßßß

66

MANON BARENDSE

LEAVES

“ How do people experience nature through their senses? ” Probe for self-documentation

Thematic openess This probe invites the participants to write down and categorize their sensorial experiences on fragile leaves.

Tangibility The tangibility plays a big role, as well as the relatively small answering space. It lets the participants know that it is OK to give a short answer.

QUESTION CARDS

“ What is de emotional meaning do people assign to nature? ” Probe for self-documentation

Dialogue This probe aims to document people their feelings in relation to nature. Hence, they have to hold an inner dialogue and find words to put onto paper.

M1.1 RESEARCH

BODY CHECK

67

“Are people aware of the effects of nature on their body and health? �

Probe as breathing space

Simple This probes makes it easy to make clear if my participants know that nature has positive effects on their body.

68

MANON BARENDSE

M1.1 RESEARCH

69

STAGE ‘COLLECTING DATA’

6/7

MANON BARENDSE

72

“

There’s a whole load of stuff in life that is worth documenting. You see it every day but don’t even notice.

-

- Jan Chipchase

COLLECTING THE DATA Now I have my sets of probes and my participants, everything is arranged for the data collection to begin. I am still in some degree of uncertainty whether the probes will result in a load of useful material once I have sent them out and I take the advice of DeLongis (1992) with me to minimize the uncertainty by contacting the users and asking about the latest news at this stage in order to maintain their motivation.

Wallace (2013) states that a probe process is one of bi-directional reciprocity. For the process to really work there needs to be an investment from both researcher and participant. To boost their motivation and commitment to the research, I have decided to do as much effort as possible in the logistics – I have personally brought the sets of probes to the participants, I have presented my story face-to-face, I have sent a document with the instructions of every probe per email and I have picked up the sets after the data collection period. Although the personal meetings demanded more resources, they have strengthened the dialogue and have offered the opportunity for observation and monitoring. For example, I have had a couple of telephone conversations in which I explained something unclear and at the same tame I could give a reminder of the time schedule.

The instructions I have provided the participants with had a very open character. It is important that the probing contains a certain amount of freedom to trigger a personal experience, self-

PERSONAL DELIVERY

73

M1.1 RESEARCH

Cultural Probes

In dit documentje zal ik ongeveer omschrijven wat jullie per ‘object’ moeten doen. Ik zeg ‘ongeveer’, omdat ik graag wat ruimte wil overlaten aan eigen interpretatie en associatie. Bij de één zal dat meer van toepassing zijn dan bij de ander.

Wees zo eerlijk en persoonlijk mogelijk en denk niet te lang na bij het voltooien van de acties.

Nou, daar gaan we: 1. Een klein pakketje met vragen op kaartjes.

Beantwoord de vragen (jaja zo simpel kan het zijn) 2. Een boekje waarin je je oordeel moet geven Geef je oordeel - verdere aanwijzingen in het boekje zelf 3. The jar of secrets Dit wordt al ietje lastiger. Ik wil van je vragen om hierin je diepste geheimen te vertellen en onder de steen te verstoppen, over: 1. Slechte dingen die je met/tegen dieren hebt gedaan.

2. Slechte dingen die je de natuur hebt aangedaan.

‘What happens in the jar, stays in the jar; ik zal het niet verder vertellen!

4. Fysieke Facebook Share momenten Ja, dit heb je uiteraard al duizend keer gedaan op de digitale wijze.

Wat voor natuur-momentjes zou je willen delen en met wie?

Teken/plak/schrijf het in het ‘fotovakje’ en schrijf onderaan de personen 5.De mandarijn is aan het uitsterven!

Vind je dit erg? Eet hem dan op. Niet zo heel erg? Geef hem dan maar terug.

6. Beleven van Flora & Fauna Schrijf op dit kaartje iets op over hoe je de natuur beleefd met het zintuig wat voor op het kaartje getekend staat.

interpretation and self -reflection. Probe object and action have the means to reveal to a participant something new about her own experiences and communicate it through the probe to herself and to me as researcher.

I had calculated one week as data collection period, but I experienced that there was a bit more flexibility needed about the timetable. Some participants didn’t finish everything in time. To still be able to obtain the information, I have given them a couple days more. I will reflect on this situation with regard to the 8. Het vogelmasker Doe het masker voor om de oren) en droom weg over vluchten naar de success of (stiekjes the probes.

7. De envelop met de wegwerpfotocamera.

Deze is leuk! Ik wil jullie vragen deze hele week de fotocamera overal naartoe mee op sleeptouw te nemen en elk moment dat je beleefd in/met/op/om/over/etc. de natuur vast te leggen.

Wat is voor jou natuur?

mooiste bestemmingen.

Doe het weer af en scrhrijf op de achterkant waar je over hebt gedroomd.

Waarom juist deze bestemming?

De creatievelingen onder jullie mogen het masker inkleuren.

9. Polaroidjes Ja, doe eigenlijk maar gewoon wat erop staat!

10.De plattegrond van je toekomstige tuin Vul de plattegrond in hoe je je toekomstige tuin graag in wilt richten, Mag met de zwarte pen, mag ook met je kleurtjes die je thuis hebt liggen!

11. Je lichaam en de natuur Stickeren! Plak stickers waar de natuur jou goed doet.

12.. De biodiversiteits HELDEN armband.

Geef deze armband an iemand die veel doet voor de biodiversiteit. Aan een echte held. A 13, De lijst Spreekt voor zichzelf!

Manon Barendse M1.1 Design Research

74

MANON BARENDSE

OPENING UP AFTER COLLECTING In stage seven, the probes have been returned to me and I can start analyzing them . Though, at this point in the design process, It is wise to open up again and recapitulate my focus and theory (research proposal) to keep on moving in the correct direction. I have accumulated a huge pile of material that already can be used as a source of inspiration, but the intension of my research is to look for new paths of thought and common behavior triggers. To be able to do so, I have to use a method in which I can combine, extent, supplement, categorize and compare all the material in order to draw conclusions about people their frame of reference concerning biodiversity.

As I have already mentioned in my proposal, I will use affinity diagramming as method. This sorting ‘device’ empowers me to rapidly group ideas and thoughts that belong together . The groupings will result in an image of topics that represent the most interesting content of the frame of reference of my participants.

I will do multiple affinity diagramming sessions. The first one is a result of only the completed probes, the second session is after personalized interviews or questionnaires with the participants and the third one is together with someone else. Because I am doing this research alone, I am limited in discussing my results with other people to exchange interpretations and create dialogues. With three affinity diagramming sessions, I am trying to still possess other people their input and employ it in my analysis.

I have designed the personal questionnaires in order to reach even more richness and depth.

M1.1 RESEARCH

75

76

STAGE ‘ANALYSIS’

77

8.

MANON BARENDSE

78

“ ANALYSING THE DATA In this chapter, I will write down the conclusions of my analysis.

I have analyzed both the content and the success of the probes.

In the figure on the next page, I have tried to structure and visualize this analysis. It shows the effectiveness, the quantity, the quality and the success of the probes.

I will explain a bit more about the six which score the highest and lowest on ‘success’, in order to let you understand how I came to the results.

The rest of this chapter is a documentation of the analysis that is purely concentrated on the content. First, I will describe the results out of the three different affinity diagramming sessions, where after a general conclusion will follow.

Within the analysis and conclusions I try to answer my research question: What is inside people their frame of reference concerning biodiversity ?

HUMAN IN NATURE

Subsidiary questions: - Do people care about biodiversity?

- Do people understand biodiversity?

- What triggers people to undertake action for biodiversity?

BOND WITH NATURE

Y - GENERATION

INTERVIEWS QUESTIONNAIRES

THIRD PARTY CATEGORIZING

79

1

120

PROBE SUCCESS

QUANTITY OF DATA

QUALITY OF DATA

EFFECTIVENESS

PROBE

TAKEN IN

SUPPLY

USED

M1.1 RESEARCH

Question Cards

115

120 100 80

100

90

2

100 70

70

80

2

5

Booklet

5

3

5

Jar of Secrets

3

5

70

60

70

60

4

25

Facebook post

13

25

30

40

60

40

5

5

Fruit

5

0

20

0

0

0

6

12

Sense leaves

6

6

70

60

50

60

5

50

60

50

50

7

5

Photo camera

4

8

5

Bird mask

5

5

40

70

90

70

9

10

Polaroid pic’s

10

10

70

80

80

80

10

5

Map of garden

5

5

90

80

90

70

11

5

Body check

5

5

30

10

70

30

12 13

5 5

Biodiversity hero List of killings

5 5

5 5

30 60

20 30

40 70

30 50

USER

1

EFFECTIVENESS

The degree to which something is successful in producing a desired result

QUALITY OF DATA

The standard of something as measured against other things of a similar kind; the degree of excellence of something:

QUANTITY OF DATA

The amount or number of a material or abstract thing not usually estimated by spatial measurement:

PROBE SUCCESS

The accomplishment of an aim or purpose:

2

3

4

5

6

GOOD:

BAD:

Question cards A lot of written information Personal information Variety of information

Fruit Not very good results, I did not receive any personal information out of it.

But, the probe functioned as breathing space – data does not say everything

Booklet Best focused on my research objective Direct useful information Good foundation for questionnaire Polaroid Best insights in bond with nature Combination of drawing & text provided rich information Comparison between two polaroid was valuable

Body check Also a breathing space; But, was not useful at all – not even as foundation of the questionnaire Biodiversity hero Too hard to perform/complete; only half of the participants gave one away Needed more time or a reminder?

80

MANON BARENDSE

AFFINITY DIAGRAM 1 - PROBES

Awareness but exotic and separate Within the first affinity diagram I have made, I found a focus on ‘the human in the nature’ with the human and nature as separate entities. Being part of nature had a minor presence in the information that derived from the probes. The participants say a lot about how they experience nature. Nature is a separate place where they can experience other (unique) things they do not encounter in their everyday places/life. Why? Because nature has something frank and gives a sense of freedom and purity. Like one of them described nicely: “Nature is like a hobby”.

I found a lot of links between memories and family/places where people used to live as well. Where I explicitly asked about memories, the participants dived deep in their memory and came up with a recall from years ago. Values and meaning has a lot to do with who your ‘teacher’ was.

Also family related, my participants were very keen on sharing ‘nature’ with their family. Apparently the family still takes in a solid part in people their lives.

The participants refer to ‘big’ abstract problems like global warming, CO2 emission and that we are running out of raw recourses, but they do not particularly link that to themselves. I would argue that they are aware of the problems they read/see in the media, but they do not layer it down to their own lives (in the probes at least).

I used this affinity diagram as foundation for my personalized inquiries to acquire more information about the relationship between my participants with nature.

M1.1 RESEARCH

81

MANON BARENDSE

82

AFFINITY DIAGRAM 2

Personal bond with nature The enquire has given me more insights in the role nature has in the participants lives and how they deal with the implications.

Without a lot of steering, all of my participants were writing merely about (1.) how nature could benefit them and (2.) priorities/responsibility and (3.) awareness.

The enquiries tell me that the participants like to do something for nature/biodiversity, but that it has to go along with other priorities and/or it has to have a direct effect on their own lives.

The information gives the impression that people are aware of their actions and it seems that they are willing to take responsibility. Though, they want to have the possibility to take the responsibility for themselves (for example: not separating of waste because the others in house are not willing to) and they want it to have a direct beneficial effect on their own life & nature. In other words, there is not a lot of altruism regarding to nature; it is all about give and take. An example is or that most of the participants want a vegetable garden, because they like to be self-sufficient or, less evident, that a participant feels proud when he/she is making an effort for nature.

By reading the probes and the enquiry again, I believe that the best direct benefit people like to gain is in food or experience.

Furthermore, the benefit to nature has to be very clear and the process has to be very transparent. That is part why some of the participants like local initiatives over big charities: they can almost see what happens with their effort/money/.. A perfect example is to buy local food. It is transparent, it is supposed to be healthy and it is hip.

Then, it was conspicuous that taking responsibility had to go hand in hand with their other priorities, and if not, it diminished a lot. One participant even stated that she does what makes her happy, even though she is aware that that’s not always positive for nature. The most common argument I have read not to undertake action for biodiversity is the lack of time.

M1.1 RESEARCH

83

MANON BARENDSE

84 AFFINITY DIAGRAM 3

New paths of thought – design inspiration 1.

Family as social context to share with, to take care for, relating of risks to family

Nature as object or space activities in

Lack of time as origin to do things differently of to be innovative - Buying balance?

2.

Experience is merely egoistic Awareness as argument to act for biodiversity/nature Family as a header without content

3.

Sharing with yourself and others

Own responsibility derives from self-interest and (dis) trust

Pure nature is what you experience and what you see and hear on the radio/tv/classroom 4.

Awareness as origin of sharing & doing activities in nature

Status & proud - that’s why you want to do good

- that also defines what exactly you are able to do 5.

Experience the division of being aware of problems in nature on the one side and doing nothing

on the other side.

M1.1 RESEARCH

85

MANON BARENDSE

86

OVERALL RESULTS

Design-direction recommendations 1.

Find out what the activities, priorities and identity of

people are and try to weave acts for biodiversity through

it. Meld personal goals with activity’s goals.

2.

The act for biodiversity should not only benefit biodiver

sity, but also people themselves 3.

People are struggling with being aware of the problems,

but not finding the time/effort to do something. Take

this as starting point.

4.

Experience could be a means/tool for doing good for biodiversity 5.

Awareness & responsibility & self-interest are the three

main factors to take into account and map for every

user group - See example for Y-generation 6.

Make people accountable in a context in which they are

able to make a change (provide them with activities/

knowledge.

The people in my usergroup were all part of the Generation Y. Members of this generation are all born between 1982 and 2002 and are the first ones who don’t know a world without digital applications.

Now the most of the youngsters on the business market are from this generation, researchers and businesses increasingly investigate the characteristics of the Y Generation, in order to know how to attract and employ them in the best way, as well as how to do marketing for Generation Y. After having read some of these researches, I noticed -not completely surprised- that the results of my affinity mapping had lots of intersections with the their results. Based on this, I recommend organizations like Food4Bees to drink out of this pool of inspiration to involve Generation Y in activities concerning biodiversity. Correspondingly, when I would build a design project on this research, I would make the comparison between the business strategies directed on the Y Gen and the results of my Affinity Mapping the foundation and underlying structure of my project.

But, for inspiration and novelty, I would go back to the individual stories documented on the probes or written down in the questionnaires; in there is a rich treasury of original entrances that can be used as starting point for a design.

M1.1 RESEARCH

87

INSIGHTS ABOUT GENERATION Y 1. Generation Y are most comfortable when they are engaged simultaneously in multiple activities such as listening to music, texting and writing. This is simply a way of life for them.

2. They value interaction, networking, active participation and staying connected 3. As much as the younger generation wants to be directed, they also want to know why they are being told to do what they are being told to do. They want to know why certain decisions were made and why particular rules were established.

4. Gen Y’ers don't bow to authority just for authority's sake. They need to know who's making the rules, how they got into the rule-making position and the principles behind the rules being established.

5. Generation Y is committed to work they believe can make a real difference in the world. When these individuals are connected to the vision and purpose of the organization, and they clearly see how their individual efforts contribute to moving that purpose forward, they become committed and loyal.

(Scofield & HonorĂŠ, 2009) (Durkin, 2008)

HUMAN IN NATURE

BOND WITH NATURE

Y - GENERATION

INTERVIEWS QUESTIONNAIRES

THIRD PARTY CATEGORIZING

STAGE ‘EVALUATION & REFLECTION’

9.

MANON BARENDSE

90

“

Use design not to craft a solution but to explore what can be

- Anthony Dunne

EVALUATION OF/REFLECTION ON THE RESEARCH PROCESS In this last chapter of the research report, I look back at my process and reflect on what I consider as the most important variables.

Introduction I think the value of this research is very clear with regard to inspiration and foundation of design products or systems. To find novel paths that function as understructure for the creation of a product/system. The origin of the topic of my research came from my client Food4Bees, where after I have funneled it down until the purpose focused on all four learning objectives: substantive learning, processual skills and concepts, methodological skills and concepts and self-knowledge. This means that I have executed a research that was in the context of my client, but guided by my goals, interests and skills development.

The aim was to know more about people their frame of reference concerning biodiversity in order to understand where to trigger and motivate people to act for biodiversity.

LITERATURE REVIEW I believe that the literature I have used underpins the theory related to my project. I have related different insights from multiple perspectives, like sociology, human geography, psychology

PRESENTATION FINAL DEMO DAY

91

M1.1 RESEARCH

CULTURAL PROBES DESIGNED FOR SELF-DOCUMENTATION AND SELF-REFLECTION

Het volgende is weleens dood gegaan door mijn medeweten: Vul een in de hokjes!

Wat houdt natuur voor jou in?

Teken of/en schrijf hier wat je graag zou delen uit/over de natuur en met wie je dat zou willen doen. www.natuur.nl

Friends

Cancel

neem het als context voor de volgende kaartvragen!

Houdt dit in je achterhoofd en

How would you like to help nature?

How would you like to experience nature?

Do you want to share nature?

Who do you think is a biodiversity hero?

What are your best memories about nature?

Schrijf hier in!

What is nature for you?

Beer

Pissebed

Worm

Muis

Schaap

Hond

Paard

Fuut

Salamander

Geit

Sprinkhaan

Mier

Fruitvlieg

Spin

Kwal

Slak

Kameel

Koala

Mus

Wesp

Bloedzuiger

Motje

Varken

Schildpad

Eend

Hert

Giraffe

Bij

Miereneter

Vis

Rups

Mug

Gans

Slang

What are the negative things you did to harm nature?

Hier kom je naar buiten!

Voorbeeldje

En hier is de poort

Share de natuur!

On your own timeline

Say something about this....

What role does nature have in your close environment?

If you were a bird, where would you go to?

Are you aware of the risks of the loss of biodiversity?

How and where does nature keeps you healthy?

Do you feel a relationship between yourself and the loss of biodiversity?

What kind of memories about nature do you wish for?

and environmentalism to shape a validate the value and use of my research direction.

Process wise, I have tried to acknowledge all work of others accurately, as well as formulate my quotes pertinent and relevant.

Research methodology & data collection/analysis The choice of methodology and technique for data-collection is based on the nature of my research.

This nature implied an qualitative approach, that is more flexible and prone to subjectivity in comparison to the quantitative approach. I have experienced that the technique I have used, Design probes, was very valuable to use to acquire personal information about values and meanings. Though, with regard to reliable and valid results, it would have been better to have a project team at my side (to have more dialogue and discussion about the constructed conclusions). My own personal biases will now always play part in interpreting and expressing data.

‌ But maybe reliability, validation and fluency (scientific procedure) are losing it from the value of the facilitation of the understanding of the subject. Like I have mentioned before, by doing this research, I have been searching for clues, similarities and triggers that could function as hooks for design inspiration.

Structuring the probe material systematically should not have served this purpose of supporting the creative design process.

Still, I have performed multiple sessions of affinity diagram-

How does nature influence your life?

92

MANON BARENDSE

ming in which I have tried to interpret the information out of the probes more scientifically. I have done this to be able to create a sequence in general significance in order to produce convincing and practical recommendations; what is the most substantial ‘design inspiration’?

Conclusions and analysis I think that my conclusions are a fair assessment of my results.

Though, I kept on querying about the right level of objectivity and subjectivity to embrace.

I was very enthusiastic about all the results and connections made, but it still felt a bit like I, Manon Barendse, had generated them by myself. This was obviously not the case, the web of connections was constructed out of the probe material.

I think that being part a group of people doing this research would have changes this feeling in a positive sense

General considerations I think that the best test for the the question if this research has contributed to for example understanding, knowledge or practice is to if I would be able to build a design project on it.

My answer is; “Yes I can”. This research has provided me with a solid underlying structure (out of the affinity diagramming) and lots of personal and rich stories that I can use for inspiration.

M1.1 RESEARCH

93

94

MANON BARENDSE

M1.1 RESEARCH

95

96

MANON BARENDSE

REFERENCES Assessment, M. E. (2001). Feiten over Biodiversiteit, Samenvatting van het Millennium Ecosysteem Assessment Biodiversiteitsrapport.

Beatly, T. (2009). Biophilic Urbanism: Inviting Nature Back to Our Communities and Into Our Lives.

B rulle, R. (2010). From Environmental Campaigns to Advancing the Public Dialog: Environmental Communication for Civic Engagement.

Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture.

Bruns Alonso, M., Hummels, C., Keyson, D., & Hekkert, P. (2011).

Measuring and adapting behavior during product interation to influence affect.

Chivian, E. (2002). Biodiversity: Its Importance to Human Heatlh, Interim Executive Summary, A project of the center for Health and the Global Environment Harvard Medical School .

Collins, H. (2010). Creative Research. The Theory and Practice of Research for the Creative Industries. Lausanne : AVA Publishing SA. Desmet, P., Hekkert, P., & Hillen, M. (2000). Values and Emotions.

Delft University of Technology.

Dunne, A. (2005). Hertzian Tales, Electronic Products, Aesthetic Experience and Critical Design. Massachusetts: MIT Press Books .

Durkin, D. (2008). Youth Movement. Communication World.

Edelenbos, J., & Monnikhof, R. (2001). Lokale interactieve beleidsvorming. Utrecht: Lemma.

Forgas, J. (2005). Social Motivation, Conscious and Unconscious processes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gaffney, G. (2006). Cultural Probes .

M1.1 RESEARCH

Gaver, W. (2004). Cultural probes and the value of Uncertainty . New York: ACM Press.

Gaver, W., Dunne, T., & Pacenti, E. (1999). Cultural Probes.

Gibson, J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception.

Hannigan, J. (1995). Environmental Sociology; a Social Constructionist Perspective. . London: Routledge.

Harrison, I. (2011). Definition of Biodiversitiy .

Kahn, P. (1997). Developmental Psychology and the Biophilia Hypothesis: Children’s Affiliation with Nature.

Lipset, S. M. (1959). Some Social Requisites of Democracy: Economic Development and Political Legitimacy. The american Political Science Review, 69-105.

Mattelmäkki, T. (2006). Design Probes. Helsinki .

Newton, K., & Norris, P. (1999). Confidence in Public Insitution . Cambridge: Harvard University.

Qeusenbery, W. (2012). Global UX: design and research in a connected world. Waltham: Morgan Kaufmann.

Reumer, J. (2012). Referentiekader.

Scofield, C., & Honoré, S. (2009). Generation Y and learning. 360, 2633.

Wajcman, J., & MacKenzie, D. (1999). Introductory essay: the social shaping of technology.

Wilson, E. (1996). ‘Introduction’ in: Biodiversity 2: Understanding and Protecting our Biological Resources.

97