Design Thesis: FoodPrint

FoodPrint Transitioning towards a sustainable food system through holistic thinking and design.

Will Brown Master of European Design Glasgow School of Art

Word count: 8070 [8933 with quotes] Supervisors: Kirsty Ross (studio) Nicholas Oddy (thesis)

FoodPrint Transitioning towards a sustainable food system through holistic thinking and design.

Will Brown Master of European Design Glasgow School of Art

Foodprint

4

Synopsis

Synopsis

Hidden behind the smooth veneer of the developed world’s convenience food shopping experience is a global food system that is struggling to feed the entire population, whilst highly damaging the natural ecosystem that sustains it. Instead of sitting around idly whilst time runs out, this thesis sets out to answer the questions of to what extent can design solve the problem of an environmentally damaging and humanly unjust food system. In doing so, it will explore the role that design can serve in this kind of problem; the qualities of design that are relevant and useful; and design’s methods and ways of thinking that need to be expanded in order to rise to the challenge of said problem. It will be structured much like a design process: from describing and framing the problem; to defining an alternative to the current situation; and finally, how to facilitate a transition to the proposed alternative. The reason for this is so that the appraisal of methods can be carried out in tandem with working through the problem as a design process. To explore how design can play a role in this challenge, this thesis will analyse the problem from a holistic perspective, and examine theories of design thinking, social practice theory, behavioural psychology and systems thinking.

5

Foodprint

6

Contents

Contents

5

Synopsis

9

Image list

10

Introduction

14

Chapter 1: Rising to the challenge

22

Chapter 2: A holistic view of the food system

28

Chapter 3: A new perspective: Symbiotic Citizens

40

Chapter 4: Transitioning to a desirable future

44

Conclusion

48

Bibliography

7

Foodprint

8

Image list

Image list Fig. 1.

Google Earth View. (2016). Satellite picture of patchwork industrial agriculture next to the desert.

Fig. 2.

Donella Meadows. (1999). Places to intervene in a system.

Fig. 3.

Raj Patel. (2007). Concentration of power and players in European Union food system.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. NASA. (1972). Famous ‘Blue Marble’ photo of Earth, taken by the astronauts aboard the Apollo 17.

Fig. 5.

Grant McCracken. (1986). Movement of Meaning.

Fig. 6.

Japan Times. (2013). 16th century Ido tea bowl in the aesthetic style of Wabi-Sabi.

Fig. 7.

Shalom Schwartz. (2012). Values Circumflex diagram.

Fig. 8.

Will Brown. (2016). Ethnographic street engagement, ‘Brownie for a Blether’, exposing shoppers to the mock packaging graphics provocations.

Fig. 9.

Will Brown. (2016). Mock packaging that shows the amount of grain fed to a cow in relation to the consumable meat as a result. Used during ‘Brownie for a Blether’ street engagement.

Fig. 10.

Will Brown. (2016). Mock packaging that shows the amount of water used to grow one almond. Used during ‘Brownie for a Blether’ street engagement.

Fig. 11.

Guardian. (2015). The failed Modernism project, the Red Road highrise flats in Glasgow are demolished.

9

Foodprint

Introduction

Our food system is broken, and it needs fixing. The question is how we might go around doing this. A problem like this might [1] Rittel, H., Webber, M. Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. p.160.

[1]

be defined as a “wicked problem”, by Rittel and Webber’s understanding, and therefore requires a multifaceted approach from a large number of stakeholders to even begin to tackle.

In recent years, design has grown to take on increasingly large and complex problems. What methods exist out there already, and what new disciplines can be integrated into the design process to approach such wicked problems? This thesis will explore these questions, with the addition of a modest attempt at proposing at least one approach we might take in framing this challenge.

To the average person in the UK, my claim of our food system being broken might seem provocative and unjustified. Let’s take a moment to examine that. Whilst there is an abundance of food available to the majority of us, our choices, the means of which it is produced and the impact of that is troublesome in both the short and long term. The increasing price of food and dependence on food banks by those bearing the brunt of the recession are merely symptoms of the challenges our outdated food system is facing. Currently we are seeing an upsurge of the middle class in developing countries, such as the BRIC and MINT nations. With this upsurge in middle class comes an emulation of Western middle class eating preferences; largely

[2] Henning, S. Livestock’s Long Shadow. p.6.

a shift from a predominantly grain and vegetable-based diet, to one featuring a lot more meat and dairy.

10

[2]

This uses a lot

Introduction

[3] Henning, S. Livestock’s Long Shadow. p.24.

more resources, in the form of land

[4] Mekonnen, M., Hoekstra, A. A Global Assessment of the Water Footprint of Farm Animal Products.

carbon dioxide.

[3]

and water,

[4]

and emits a

lot more emissions, in the form of methane, nitrous oxide and [5]

To give a simple example of the difference

that food choices can make, the estimated carbon emissions from a beef burger is 2.5kg CO2e versus 1kg CO2e embodied in a vegetable burger equivalent.

[6]

In addition to the higher emissions of greenhouse gases, there is also a loss of energy in using land to grow grain to feed livestock, resulting is a potential loss of calories for 3.5 billion people.

[7]

To add to these problems, the world population is expected to grow to 9.7 billion by 2050.

[8]

The result of this, even

in a world of globalised trade is that “925 million people experience hunger: they lack access to sufficient major macronutrients (carbohydrates, fats Fig. 1. Satellite picture of patchwork industrial agriculture next to the desert. Photo: Google Earth View [5] Henning, S. Livestock’s Long Shadow. p.112-114.

[6] Berners-Lee, M. How Bad Are Bananas? p.86.

[7] De Schutter, O. Report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food. p.4.

[8] United Nations.

World Population Prospects. [data] [9] Foresight. The Future of Food and Farming. p.9.

and protein)” and a further 1 billion without sufficient access to major micronutrients, according to the UK Government Office for Science in their 2011 paper ‘The Future of Food and Farming’.

[8]

Therefore, the consumption habits of those in

developed and developing societies increases scarcity on the rest, and contributes an ever increasing amount of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere.

The central premise here is that in order to achieve biosphere symbiosis, food consumption habits of the UK have to change towards a more local, plant-based, and low greenhouse gas emitting diet. However, the argument of this thesis is around how might we approach this from a design perspective. We live in a democratic society where citizens possess the free will to pursue the kind of lifestyle they want to lead. Therefore, the major behavioural change needs to come from the consumers and suppliers in the form of a paradigm shift in thinking. This

11

Foodprint

is preferable to us collectively getting dragged kicking and screaming into a resource scarce future, through impositions in the form of policy by a perceived ‘authoritarian’ government.

This thesis sets out to answer the question of to what extent can design solve the problem of an environmentally and humanly unjust food system. In doing so, it will explore the role that design can serve in this kind of problem; the qualities of design that are relevant and useful; and design’s methods and ways of thinking that need to be expanded in order to rise to the challenge of said problem. It will be structured much like a design process: from describing and framing the problem; to defining an alternative to the current situation; and finally, how to facilitate a transition to the proposed alternative. The reason for this is so that the appraisal of methods can be carried out in tandem with working through the problem as a design process. To explore how design can play a role in this, I will analyse the problem from a holistic perspective, and examine theories of design thinking, social practice theory, behavioural psychology and systems thinking. Chapter one, ‘Rising to the Challenge’, will outline the current state that the design industry is in, followed by an appraisal of systems thinking. The key sources that have particularly inspired my thinking on systems is Richard Buchanan’s Wicked Problems in Design, Jake Chapman’s analysis of systems thinking and policy, and Donella Meadow’s thinking around leverage points of change, as a means of framing the problem. Chapter two, ‘A Holistic View of Food’, will then use this way of thinking to expose the flaws in the current food system and uncover the opportunity area to mitigate the problem. Raj Patel’s analysis of the global food system, and Daniel Goleman’s proposal for an Ecological Intelligence in his book of the same name are both highly influential here. This will be followed up in chapter 3, ‘A New Mindset: Symbiotic Citizens’, defining what will influence the current system to counteract the problem. This will be

12

Introduction

explored by looking at the link between meaning, objects and individuals in McCracken’s work on cultural meaning; this will be compared with Elizabeth Shove’s definition of social practice theory; building on this with an exploration behavioural psychology in the form of Thaler and Sunstein’s ‘nudge’ theory; and an understanding of values that ties everything together from The Common Cause Foundation and the Public Interest Research Centre. This will be rounded up in the final chapter, ‘Transitioning to a Desirable Future’: understanding the limitations of Dunne and Raby’s Speculative Design; and proposing how new areas of design, such as Cameron Tonkinwise’s Transition Design can facilitate a progression towards preferable future food systems. This will then be analysed against the question in the conclusion.

13

Discover & define Ch a pter 1 :

Rising to the challenge Expanding role of design Design as a profession is continuously changing and expanding its role over the decades. Its capabilities grows with the ambitions of those leading designers who are driven by both a desire to stay competitive and a growing awareness of the interconnected complexity of the kind of problems that we as a species need to solve if we are to continue tenancy of this planet that our bodies are perfectly adapted for. The changing nature of design has made plenty news recently. Many of the world’s most prominent design studios, such as Lunar, Fjord and Method, are being bought up by larger corporations, such as [10] Hurst, N. Big Corporations are Buying Design Firms in Droves. [online] Wired.

[11] Lockwood, T. Why Are Design Firms Stagnating? [online] FastCo Design.

McKinsey, Accenture and GlobalLogic respectively.

[10]

This has

resulted in the typical media overhype of the series of events being dubbed the “stagnation� of design firms.

[11]

However,

this is less to do with any levelling out of the value of design, indeed it is the opposite. Multi million pound acquisitions are not made on a whim, and the reasons why a successful management consultancy firm might buy design capabilities and culture for a huge sum illuminates the value of design in solving new problems. Firstly, the landscape of society and economics that affects the scale of challenges companies and governments face is changing - primarily in the direction

[12] Hausmann, R., et al.

The Atlas of Economic Complexity. p.18.

of increasing complexity.

[12]

Secondly, due to the increased

level of complexity that large companies such as management consultancy firms are now facing, they have found that some of their core competencies are lacking in thinking and communicating tangibly. A primary output of such companies

14

Rising to the challenge

is written reports and verbal presentations - both of which lack the visual clarity of the problems they are addressing and hard to act upon. Another key point is that they primarily engage and deal with organisations rather than end users.

[13] Burns, C., et al. Red Paper 02: Transformation Design. p.8-9.

[13]

This results

in a natural bias towards satisfying the needs of a business - a perspective that the business is naturally going to have already.

The third point is that the core competencies common to most designers lend themselves naturally to the areas in which management consultancies and policy makers fall short. These are, according to the Design Council: “looking from the point of view of the end user”, or in other words empathising through ethnography; “mak[ing] problems and ideas visible; creating frameworks to make visual sense of complex information”; and “building little mock-ups or prototypes before they commit

[14] Burns, C., et al. Red Paper 02: Transformation Design. p.18-19.

resources to building the real thing”.

[14]

Another reason to buy

design capabilities is the need for framing problems better to bring together everyone involved together towards the same shared vision, and that there is also just more to design due to an increase in technology and services being created that

[15] Cooper, A. A UX Legend On The MuchRumored Death Of The Design Firm. [online] FastCo Design.

compete with each other for the attention of the user.

[15]

The

final reason behind the interest in the capabilities of design is that recently, over the past decade in particular, design has proved itself to be integral to the success of tech companies, according to John Maeda. He gives the examples of Airbnb and Nest, both of which are multibillion dollar companies that were [16]

[16] Howarth, D. Designers are adding billions of dollars to the tech industry. [online] Dezeen.

founded by designers.

[17] kyu.com, IDEO Joins the kyu Collective. [online]

who joined Kyu Collective in early 2016,

Not all design firms are following this path, namely IDEO, [17]

a collective of

independent partners that “shares a belief that creative collaboration yields new solutions to the world’s toughest

[18] kyu.com, Overview. [online]

problems”.

[18]

IDEO CEO and founder, Tim Brown, gives “our

current interest in designing complex systems” as the rationale behind this move. Indeed, he cites this as a natural progression for a company with the core ethos to “start with questions and

15

Foodprint

[19] Brown, T. The Next Big Thing in Design. [blog] Medium.

look at problems holistically”.

[19]

By this, Brown refers to what

is most often called ‘systems thinking’ as a latent instinct of design thinking that is becoming more relevant as the need to tackle increasingly complex problems that threaten our existence is required. Incidentally, this is not a new occurrence.

Since the 1970s, Victor Papanek has proclaimed - most notably in his seminal ‘Design for the Real World’ - that designers

[20] Papanek, V. Design For The Real World. p.54-58.

need to “increase their share of the problem”.

[20]

The recent

events of acquisitions as major non-design-driven companies now integrate design into their organisational structure, and IDEO’s move to join a collective with the intent to solve tougher problems are all symptoms of the wider trend of designers increasing their “share of the problem”.

Can design frame the problem?

In order to rise to the challenge of increasing our share of the problem by taking on greater complexity, design needs to be able to frame that complexity. To do so, it has begun borrowing methodologies from systems thinking, which arose out of a need to understand complex problems. The complexity lies not in the sheer physical size, or number of parts within it - instead what makes a problem complex and therefore systemic in nature is the interrelated relationship between the parts and the often unexpected, or at least hard to predict, outcomes

[21] Axelrod, R. and Cohen, M. Harnessing Complexity. p.14.

of these interactions on the elements within the system.

[21]

Environmental scientist, Donella Meadows, succinctly takes this definition a step further to include a sense of purpose:

[22] Meadows, D. Thinking in Systems: A Primer. p.11.

“A system is an interconnected set of elements that is coherently organized in a way that achieves something. If you look at that definition closely for a minute, you can see that a system must consist of three kinds of things: elements, interconnections, and [22] a function or purpose.”

If the above description is a definition of a system, then what makes it a systemic problem? As some have discovered

16

Rising to the challenge

when attempting to understand and design to change a system, there are conflicting interests and ambiguities that make conventional analysis challenging. This, according to an excerpt from the design theorist, Horst Rittel, famed for coining the term ‘wicked problem’, in Richard Buchanan’s paper ‘Wicked Problems in Design’, is defined as a problem that is “ill-formulated, where the information is confusing, where there are many clients with conflicting values and where the [23] Buchanan, R. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. p.15.

ramifications in the whole system are thoroughly confusing.”

[23]

The ambiguity creates problems in identifying even what the characteristics of the problem even is, let along how to come up with answers to it. Jake Chapman defines as a ‘mess’ (as opposed to simply a ‘difficulty’ in which you know what the problem might be) for which you need to engage in systems

[24] Chapman, J. System Failure. p.26-27.

thinking to solve.

[24]

Due to the conflicting values between actors, the complexity and the ability for interrelations in the system to have effects on elements elsewhere in the system calls for the practitioner to view the problem holistically. By doing so, it reduces the chances of unintended consequences occurring due to not considering a connection that influences the elements that are being looked at. In order to appreciate the qualities of holism, in this area, it can be compared to the more conventional approach, reductionist thinking, used to understand such problems. Reductionist thinking, argues Chapman, is when faced with complexity, one uses analytical methods to break down the problem into smaller parts to be able to solve it [25] Chapman, J. System Failure. p.26.

individually

[25]

- as seen in the traditional profession breakdown

of medicine or science. This, however, encounters difficulties when the problem lies in the relationships between the elements, that lose their meaning when looked at in isolation.

Whereas systems thinking embraces the holistic nature of the problem and considers it as a set of interconnected relationships that give their meaning when looked at as

17

Foodprint

a greater whole. Indeed, this seems appropriate where problems struggle to be broken apart for analysis, due to their interrelated and interdependent parts. For sure, food system would fall into this category due to the diverse set of professions that exist within it, yet are interconnected and affecting each other by their actions. Attempting to look at one singularly would fail, as it would ignore the rest that influence it and are influenced by it.

Taking a holistic, or systems, view of the problem brings with it its difficulties. Meadow’s definition of a system stated earlier is ambiguous and wide reaching, and it could be argued that anything is a system, interrelated with everything through an elaborate series of relationships with other systems and subsystems. For designers in particular this is both a challenge of not getting lost in ever expanding complexity and its merit as a tool for being able to look at the problem outside of the silos of disciplines, as “the subject matter of design is potentially universal in scope, because design thinking may be applied to [26] Buchanan, R. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. p.16.

any area of human experience.”

[26]

Due to this transcendence

between traditional disciplinary boundaries, designers are able to adopt this holistic view of a problem more easily than highly departmentalised disciplines that rely on a huge pillar of specialised knowledge, like sciences or professions specific to particular industries. Especially since a core capability of design is empathising with others. Then viewing a problem holistically from the many different points of view of each stakeholder in it should be easier where empathic skills are encouraged as practice.

Through this ‘all-encompassing’ view of the problem, the goal is to look for opportunity areas. To borrow another method from systems thinking, these opportunity areas resemble “leverage points of change” that can be defined as intervention points that have wide implications elsewhere in the system. Meadows

18

Rising to the challenge

Places to Intervene in a System (in increasing order of effectiveness)

12. Constants, parameters, numbers (such as subsidies, taxes, standards).

11.

The size of buffers and other stabilising stocks, relative to their flows.

10. The structure of material stocks and flows (such as transport networks, population age structures).

9.

The length of delays, relative to the rate of system change.

8.

The strength of negative feedback loops, relative to the impacts they are trying to correct against.

7.

The gain around driving positive feedback loops.

6.

The structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information.

5.

The rules of the system (such as incentives, punishments, constraints).

4.

The power to add, change, evolve, or self-organise system structure.

3.

The goals of the system.

2.

The mindset or paradigm out of which the system– its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters–arises.

1.

The power to transcend paradigms.

Fig. 2. Places to intervene in a system.

Chart: Donella Meadows

19

Foodprint

lists these in ascending order of how much they influence other elements in the system, and therefore their effectiveness (see fig. 2). The leverage points that are most effective are also the [27] Buchanan, R. Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. p.16.

most high level, such as the structure and goals of the system itself.

[27]

It therefore reinforces the importance of being able to

view the problem outside of a particular specialism within it.

To summarise, for design to be able to understand and frame a systems problem, the relationships between the elements are important to look at, and a holistic perspective should be adopted to do so. This requires a practitioner that is not confined to a single discipline, that would otherwise result in influencing factors not being taken into consideration, which would result in a less complete picture of the behaviours driving the elements of the problem. Due to the nature of design as a practice touching many different fields and industries, there is potential that design is able to make this leap. Specifically how the problem will be framed to so that it can be further tackled by design will be explored in the next chapter.

20

Rising to the challenge

21

Foodprint Ch a pter 2 :

A holistic view of the food system If we were to apply the holistic approach, as outlined in chapter 1, to the food system, it highlights the relationship between consumer decisions and environmental impact as a key opportunity area, or leverage point, for design intervention.

This relationship can be seen by exploring three essential aspects: 1.

Different foods have different environmental impacts,

2.

There is a lack of consumer-facing data to inform consumer in their food choices,

3.

This is due to a power imbalance, known as the ‘supply-chain hourglass’.

True cost of food It is estimated that the world could sustain a population of 10 [28]

yet one third are starving whilst another third is

[29]

The problem is not too many people or a lack

[28] Cassidy, E., et al.

Environmental Research Letters, Volume 8(3), p.1.

to 11 billion,

[29] Murray, C., and Ng, M. The Lancet, Volume 384(9945), p766-781.

of food - it is that we produce too much of some kinds of foods

[30] Oppenlander, R. Comfortably Unaware.

Location 436-439.

[31] Oppenlander, R. Comfortably Unaware.

Location 229-230.

overweight.

over others.

[30]

A simple example is the production of livestock.

To get a sense of scale, the number of animals raised for meat consumption per year is 65 billion.

[31]

These animals require a

lot of resources to grow and maintain, which requires 30% of the earth’s total arable land to grow the grain and vegetables to feed these 65 billion animals. In addition to that, a further

[32] Oppenlander, R. Comfortably Unaware.

Location 436-439.

26% of the ice-free surface is used for grazing.

[32]

Due to a feed

conversion ratio for beef for example of between 5-20:1, energy

22

A holistic view of the food system

[33] National Research Council. Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. p.232.

value of feed to consumable meat product

[33]

- the energy lost

in the process of raising these animals results in less people being adequately fed on a meat-based diet than if that land was used to grow food to directly feed people. More disturbingly, there is evidence that millions of acres of land in the third world is being used to grow grain to feed livestock in developed

[34] Oppenlander, R. Comfortably Unaware.

Location 507-511.

countries, such as the EU.

[34]

Unfortunately the future trends do no look promising. A FAO report states that “the global production of meat is expected to more than double from 229 million tonnes in 1999/01 to 465 [35] Henning, S. Livestock’s Long Shadow. p.xx.

million tonnes in 2050”

[35]

in line with increasing population

and demand. Largely this is due to some developing countries becoming richer and emulating the Western diet of a higher consumption of meat. The comparison of this is elegantly highlighted by Vaclav Smil in Population and Development Review:

[36] Smil, V. Eating Meat. p.619.

“[A] revealing approach is to compare the overall land claims between largely vegetarian and highly carnivorous societies. An overwhelmingly vegetarian diet produced by modern high-intensity cropping needs no more than 800 m2 of arable land per capita.

A fairly balanced Chinese diet of the late 1990s, containing less than 20 kg of meat, was produced from an average of 1,100 m2/capita; the typical Western diet now claims up to 4,000 m2/capita (Smil 2000). Implications of the last rate are clear: today’s world’s population eating the Western diet whose meat would be produced with feeding efficiencies prevailing during the late 1990s would need about 2.5 billion hectares of agricultural land, that is, 67 percent [36] more than the existing total.”

From the above explanation it is clear that a meat-intensive diet uses more resources per capita than is available on the planet.

Indeed, one could go further and imply that a western, meatintensive diet actually uses resources that could be available for others. Clearly, the choice of what to eat has a huge impact elsewhere in the world. This might not be apparent on an

23

Foodprint

individual level, but many individual decisions that are aligned by cultural norms, culminate into the actions of billions. The fact that different foods have different impacts becomes an issue of choice, which leads into the next problem: availability of information.

Lack of consumer data To clarify, nobody buys food to deliberately punish the environment and lives of other - they simply do not know about it. Recent trends demonstrate this, showing an increase in [37] Rumsey, J., et al. Food Statistics Pocketbook 2015. p.21.

consumption of sustainably labelled products.

[37]

However, as

evidenced in the impact of Western diets on resource usage, consumers are still making food choices that are not in balance with the amount of resources available. This is due to a lack of transparency around the embedded energy and emission costs in food products. Currently, consumers are only faced with two complete metrics that they can base their decision making on: price and nutritional value. This has created two outcomes: a long-term trend of a race to the bottom in an effort to lower price and a separate trend of growth in interest and availability of nutritionally-focused products. With price being the primary comparison factor between food products, the overemphasis on price has resulting in farmers being forced to increase yields year-on-year at the expense of the soil that sustains it, and mass-farming animals in huge numbers in cramped conditions, putting them and us at risk of disease outbreaks, as historically evident in BSE (or ‘mad cow disease’), H1N1 (or ‘swine flu’), and

[38] Roberts, P. The End of Food. p.177-178.

H5N1 (or ‘bird flu’).

[38]

On a positive note, since updating the

user friendliness of food nutrition labelling, there has been a surging awareness in recent decades around the nutritional

[39] Foster, R., and Lunn, J. Food availability and our changing diet. p.208-209.

content of food.

[39]

However, this falls short when comparing

the environmental impact of foods. A growth of interest in environmentally-beneficial products is evidenced in the growth of information on labels such as locality, chemical use and in some cases the carbon dioxide value that begin to describe the

24

A holistic view of the food system

environmental impact. Unfortunately, this is not universal, and not consistent across products so that they can be compared.

More notably, there is a danger of ‘greenwashing’ consumers into becoming complacent around the environmental impact of their food with labels touting one aspect, yet not owning up to a more significant factor. Recent examples of this include [40] mcdonalds.com, McDonald’s unveils free tool to give beef farmers a digital advantage. [online]

McDonalds so-called ‘Sustainable Beef Club’,

[40]

that explores

how to increase efficiencies in the production of beef without addressing the real issue - it is not possible to reduce the land use, water consumption, and CO2e emissions enough to address the issue - that can only be addressed by producing less beef. By focussing the attention of consumers on the increase in inefficiencies, it distracts from the elephant in the room, which is the impact of beef itself in comparison to other meat and vegetarian alternatives. Another example of positive action without addressing the real issue is the introduction of the 5p plastic bag charge in the UK. This was hugely successful

[41] Press Association.

Plastic bag usage down 78%. The Guardian. [online]

in reducing bag usage by 78%,

[41]

however, again distracts from

the real issue that it is the thing in our shopping bags that we should be concerned with - not the plastic bag that represents one thousandth of the carbon emission compared to the

[42] Thackara, J. How to Thrive in the Next Economy. p.160.

contents in it.

[42]

When consumers are unable to make food choices informed by the impact that it will have on the planet, it means that food producers and retailers do not compete with each other on this [43] Goleman, D. Ecological Intelligence. p.73.

metric.

[43]

These two points together - consumers are provided with information around different food choices having different environmental impacts - can be considered an area for intervention by Meadows’ standards: her sixth leverage point, “the structure of information flows (who does and does not have access to what kinds of information)” (see fig. 2). This scores nicely as an intervention point compared to the results

25

Foodprint

of a reductionist approach, where outcomes are usually focused on improving efficiencies of elements within the system (which could be attributed to point 10, “the structure of material stocks and flows”; or point 12, “Constants, parameters, numbers”). However, instead of stopping here, we can ask what is the cause behind a lack of transparency for consumers?

By taking another step higher, the underlying behaviour and embedded purpose of the food system is revealed.

The ‘Supply Chain Hourglass’ In the supply chain, from producer to shipping to processing to retailer to consumer, there is a huge imbalance of power to the middle of the supply chain, at the expense of producers and consumers. In his book ‘Stuffed and Starved: Markets, Power and the Hidden Battle for the World Food System’, Raj Patel uses the metaphor of an hourglass to illustrate the numbers of [44] Patel, R. Stuffed and Starved. p.14.

players at each stage (see fig. 3).

[44]

It shows that where there

are few players at a specific stage, there is an imbalance of power in their favour to control the process. Due to the power shift and consumer demand mediated by available information,

[45] Patel, R. Stuffed and Starved. p.13.

Fig. 3: Concentration of power and players in European Union food system. Diagram: Raj Patel.

food is geared towards what is convenient and profitable for the middlemen, away from fair prices for producers, and a good deal for consumers in terms of value, nutrition and environmental impact.

[45]

26,669,000

People working in agriculture

13,700,400

Farm holdings

50,400

Number of farm holders

46,300

Agricultural wholesale enterprises

308,300

Food and beverage manufacturers

210,300

Wholesaling food and beverage enterprises

914,500

Food and beverage retail locations

499,800,000 Consumers

26

A holistic view of the food system

In a sense, the food system is a reflection of our own selves.

We have allowed a food system to develop that places cost and convenience above environmental stewardship due to a lack of priorities. The time spent on cooking the evening meal in the UK has dropped from 1 hour to 30 minutes from 1980 to present day, citing “no time” as one of the main reasons why [46] Kantar Worldpanel.

Appetite for Change?

Nutrition and the nation’s obesity crisis.

they spend less time cooking each night.

[46]

Interestingly, this

fact can be compared with the fact that we also spend 4 hours on average every day watching TV, and overall over 8 hours with digital devices - which is more than the average time spent

[47] ofcom.org.uk. The Communications Market 2015. [online]

sleeping.

[47]

It can be assumed that time spent cooking is also

a proxy for time invested in the process of thinking about and buying food. What this indicates is that there is not less time for individuals to think about and prepare food, but that priorities lie elsewhere. The result is a food system that we just expect to work without acknowledging the environmental consequences of our choices, as articulated by Mark Buchanan in reference to Capra and Luisi’s book The System’s View of Life:

[48] Buchanan, M. All systems Tao: Holistic view of life’s networks.

New Scientist. [online]

“Capra and Luisi argue that many of the most important problems we face today – from financial instability to climate change and ecological degradation – reflect our collective inability to appreciate just how the world operates as a holistic, networked system in which every part depends on [48] every other.”

This point – that the food system stems from a mindset that does not value the connection between choices and environmental consequences – scores even higher than point six on Meadow’s list of effective places to intervene in a system. Point two, “the mindset or paradigm out of which the system–its goals, structure, rules, delays, parameters–arises” accurately reflects the problem statement of the food system, and therefore serves as a effective frame in which to intervene and redesign with great potential to instigate change.

27

Foodprint Ch a pter 3:

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens If we want to change the mindset of users of the food system in order to realise one that functions within the limitations of the planet’s available resources whilst addressing everyone’s needs, then what might that mindset be and how can design contribute to reaching this goal?

In 1972, during the midst of the surging environmental counterculture, one of the astronauts turned back to take a photo of Earth as a whole entity that would become a symbol [49] Petsko, G. The Blue Marble. Genome Biology, [online] 12 (4).

[50] Planetary Collective. Overview. [video] Vimeo.

of the movement: the ‘Blue Marble’.

[49]

One of the astronauts

aboard described the significance moment as: “When we originally went to the moon, our total focus was on the moon, we weren’t thinking about looking back at Earth. But now that we have done it, that may well have been the most important reason [50] we went.”

It was important because it allowed us as a species to view ourselves as a complete entity rather than a disparate collection of nationalities, ethnicities, species, flora and fauna.

At this scale, it becomes apparent how interconnected and dependent on each other we all are. Indeed, Astronauts who have been to space and viewed the earth as a whole, are said to have experienced what has been dubbed the ‘overview effect’, describing the feeling as a “truly transformative experience including a sense of wonder and awe, unity with nature,

[51] Trenchard, M., et al. Psychology of Space Exploration. p.29

transcendence, and universal brotherhood.”

28

[51]

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens

Fig. 4. Famous ‘Blue Marble’ photo of Earth, taken by the astronauts aboard the Apollo 17.

Photo: NASA

29

Foodprint

What this means in the context of food and consumption, is that individuals make the connection between their consumption and the environmental impact; to become [52] Steffen, A. What Does Planetary Thinking Mean? [blog] alexsteffen.com.

Alex Steffen, a renown futurist, argues that our bodies have developed to be perfectly suited to this planet, and tied to it microbially, chemically and hormonally; and now our minds must collectively do the same, by viewing Earth as a “living planet.”

[53] Tonkinwise, C., Kossoff, T., Irwin, T. Transition Design. p.10.

planetary thinkers.

[52]

Tonkinwise et al. describe this as an

appreciation for the everyday, ‘mundane’ actions that make up our daily lives: “Everyday life, the entangled and interconnected activities, mundane or otherwise, through which people sustain themselves and strive to satisfy their needs, is a fundamental level of human experience. It is therefore the basic context within which transition to a sustainable society needs to be conceptualised, designed and enacted: the sustainable modes of living toward we must transition should be ones in which everyday life is more integrated and valued, and in which the relationship between everyday life and larger systems has been clarified and [53] ameliorated.”

These attributes take the form of a hypothetical person, who I will refer to as the ‘symbiotic citizen’. They see the connection between the impact of their daily actions, like taking a shower or buying dinner, and the impact of that on the lives of people elsewhere in the world. They feel this because they view the world holistically, understanding that they are part of a larger system that is intrinsically connected in its actions:

[54] Thackara, J. How to Thrive in the Next Economy. p.168.

“[T]he Earth no longer appears to us as a repository of inert resources. On the contrary: the interdependence between healthy soils, living systems, and the ways we can help regenerate, finally addresses the ‘why’ of economic activity we’ve been lacking. This narrative points to the one kind of growth that makes sense, and that we can afford: the regeneration of life on Earth. The core value of this emerging economy is [53] stewardship, rather than extraction” The above quote from John Thackara’s How to Thrive in the Next Economy points to a narrative shift in how we perceive the world as a means of signifying change. He describes it as a “belief system” that has the power to change the larger

30

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens

system we live in by encouraging individuals to “reconnect – [55] Thackara, J. How to Thrive in the Next Economy. p.167-8.

with each other, and the biosphere”.

[55]

The symbiotic citizen

as an embodiment of this narrative might be considered, by cultural anthropologist Grant McCracken’s definition, as a representation of “cultural meaning”. He describes cultural meaning as “a system of distinctions that organises the phenomenal world” in the mind of the individual through principles, rules and values. These are embodied in objects of consumption, what McCracken refers to as “goods”, as a means

[56] McCracken, G. Journal of Consumer Research 13 (1). p.72-73.

of mediating the message to the individual (see fig. 5).

[56]

This is

important to the role of design in helping realise this symbiotic citizen cultural meaning. Since design is particularly concerned with material goods, it is possible to be not only designers of objects, but of cultural meanings.

Whilst I agree with McCracken’s description of objects acting as mediators of meaning, I believe it should not be limited to the world of consumer goods and the advertising/fashion system.

Movement of Meaning Culturally Constituted World Advertising System

Fashion System Consumer Goods

Possession Ritual

Exchange Ritual

Grooming Ritual

Individual Consumer Fig. 5. Movement of Meaning. Chart: Grant McCracken.

Key:

Location of Meaning Instrument of Meaning Transfer

31

Divestment Ritual

Foodprint

This connection between meaning and objects it is also an idea central to Practice Theory; which builds on this to include actions and behaviour to be influenced by objects as a result of the communication of meaning. Practice Theory explores human actions shaping the infrastructure of around them, which in turn shapes the actions of humans within it. This infrastructure is broken down into three elements of practice: materials (objects, tools, and infrastructure), competence (knowledge and embodied skill), and meanings (cultural conventions, expectations and socially shared [57] Shove, E., et al.

Interventions in practice. p.5.

meanings).

[57]

The important point to consider is that this

is a reciprocal relationship, not just one effecting the other without consequences to itself. As Bill Moggridge once said,

[58] Tischler, L. In Remembrance of Bill Moggridge, 1943-2012. [online] FastCo Design.

“everything is designed”,

[58]

including this infrastructure that

facilitates certain behaviours and actions to be more likely to happen than others. Therefore it could be argued that by considering the human-made world as a potential domain of designers, they are able to not only design new cultural meanings, as established earlier, but also behaviours and actions.

In the context of influencing the food system, this means rethinking the food purchasing experience so that consumers are ‘nudged’ into making more sustainable food choices. Nudge theory concerns itself with how “choice architects” encourage individuals to make decisions that are beneficial to themselves and others - even if it is not apparent in the moment. A nudge can be thought of as any factor that creates an influence or bias

[59] Thaler, R., and Sunstein, C. Nudge. p.4

in choice architecture.

[59]

The choice architecture associated

with picking what to eat is immensely complex and problematic - a contributing reason why there is so much misunderstanding around the topic of food sustainability and the current attempts by food brands to label themselves as ‘green’ has been largely unclear to consumers (as will be explained later). Thaler and Sunstein, in the chapter “when do we need a nudge” describe 3

32

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens

principles that are applicable to sustainable food consumption in describing the complexity behind decision making: benefits [60] Thaler, R., and Sunstein, C. Nudge. p.79-84.

now - costs later, feedback, and difficulty.

[60]

Benefits now -

costs later is quite evident in that the environmental impacts of what we eat occurs slowly over years and decades, whereas the feeling of satisfaction is quite instantaneous. This links to feedback around what constitutes a ‘more sustainable’ food choice being poor due to a lack of data in the food purchasing process of the environmental impact of different foods. Finally, the difficulty of choosing food that is harmonious with our planet’s natural ecosystems is high due to the many factors that need to be taken into consideration: land use, water use, feed conversion ratio, pesticides side-effects, fertiliser runoff, distance, ethics of wages - the list goes on. By applying these three principles to the food purchasing process, it is apparent that with the aim of a sustainable food system, this moment is in need of intervention, namely by creating transparency around the environmental impact.

Tonkinwise argues against nudging “wayward individuals” into making environmentally conscious decision at the risk of creating negative emotions of guilt when they only have

[61] Tonkinwise, C., Kossoff, T., Irwin, T. Transition Design. p.13.

“limited degrees of freedom or choice” anyway.

[61]

Whilst

agreeing with Tonkinwise’s sentiment, I don’t believe that guilt-tripping is the desirable motivator for this nudging behaviour. Instead, interventions should appeal to a positive shared human values, such as those described of the symbiotic citizen as discussed earlier. This can be achieved through an understanding of how values impact human action, which has been explored by a number of psychologists as the study of values. These values relate to each some, yet also oppose others when invoked, forming a circumflex arrangement (fig 7.) based on two matrices: self-enhancement versus self

[62] Holmes, T., et al.

The Common Cause Handbook. p.12-19.

transcendence, and openness to change versus conservatism.

[62]

Strong evidence suggests that values are found to influence

33

Foodprint

[63] Holmes, T., et al.

The Common Cause Handbook. p.8-9.

our attitudes and resulting behaviours in life.

[63]

There is a link

between external stimuli and their ability to influence values (and therefore behaviour) momentarily:

[64] Sanderson, B. Food Values Positioning Paper. p.2.

“Values can be engaged by language and experience.

Engaging a value can make it seem temporarily more important, shaping how we respond to the situations [64] we’re in.”

This aligns itself with the Practice Theory of infrastructure influencing human action and vice versa - focusing specifically in the area of meanings. By thinking carefully about communication qualities, like language, imagery and tone, it is possible to ‘nudge’ a user towards a desired outcome.

An example that I will use as a means of exploring the link between meaning and material is how the Wabi Sabi movement

[65] Koren, L. Wabi-sabi: For Artists, Designers, Poets & Philosophers. p.21-23.

brought about a perspective shift in 16th century Japan. Wabi Sabi is a philosophical and aesthetic movement that celebrates simplicity and austerity (Wabi) through the appreciation of the beauty of that which is impermanent, imperfect and incomplete (Sabi).

[65]

The

lead thinker in aiding this shift was Sen no Rikyu, a Zen philosopher who was at odds with then-Japan’s obsession with money and image. Rikyu applied this thinking to various elements of the tea ceremony as a means of encouraging a shift in values. Through his position as the tea master for a powerful shogun, he elevated objects of simple aesthetics above Chinese treasures. The teahouse, Fig. 6. 16th century Ido tea bowl in the aesthetic style of Wabi-Sabi Photo: Japan Times

once grand and extravagant in showing off one’s wealth, was reimagined as a small farmer’s hut surrounded by nature that one had to duck in order to get in through the low door as an act of humility. Folk craft tea cups with imperfections in their form or finish were revered above expensive tea cups from

34

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens Fig. 7. Values Circumflex Diagram: Shalom Schwartz

Universalism Understanding, appreciation, tolerance and protection for the welfare of all people and for nature.

Power Social status and prestige, control or dominance over people and resources.

Benevolence Preservation and enhancement of the welfare of people with whom one is in frequent personal contact.

Achievement Personal success through demonstrating competence according to social standards.

Tradition Respect, commitment and acceptance of the customs and ideas that traditional culture or religion provide the self.

Hedonism Pleasure and sensuous gratification for oneself.

Conformity Restraint of actions, inclinations and impulses likely to upset or harm others and violate social expectations or norms.

Stimulation Excitement, novelty and challenge in life.

Security Safety, harmony, and stability of society, of relationships, and of self.

Self-direction Independent thought and action— choosing, creating, exploring.

35

Foodprint

[66] School of Life.

HISTORY OF IDEAS - Wabi-sabi. [video] Youtube.

China adorned with intricate perfection.

[66]

It was not through a

single piece of writing or work of art that Rikyu challenged the dominant ideology of power and status, but through applying the values to a series of objects and experiences that are meant to engage with individuals everyday lives. The result formed a world view that would influence the course of Japanese society for four centuries until the post-war occupation by the Americans and steady infiltration of Western values to create the contemporary Japan that we recognise today. Sen no Rikyu’s Wabi Sabi serves as an interesting case study in the link between objects and values as a means of facilitating change.

The food purchasing experience should be imbued with values that encourage individuals to consider the integrated nature of our food system. A report by the Public Interest Research Centre, found in a number of social psychology research papers that: “People who have greater ‘universalism’ values (meaning they are particularly concerned with the welfare of people and the environment) tend to: “1. Make more sustainable food choices – e.g. be vegetarian, eat less meat or choose free-range meat and choose organic products.

“2. Show greater appreciation for health and quality over convenience/microwave meals and avoid genetically modified products.

[67] Sanderson, B. Food Values Positioning Paper. p.6.

“3. Consider the country of origin; boycott untrusted retailers; avoid excess packaging, and consider [67] whether packaging can be recycled.”

It shows a direct link between values of universalism and sustainable food consumption habits. What is more, it goes on to conclude that it is possible to engage values in the moment to encourage individuals to act on those values. Therefore, by connecting an experience “with universalism values we are [68] Sanderson, B. Food Values Positioning Paper. p.7.

more like to act in an environmentally friendly way.”

[68]

This

finding can be illustrated with an example of when values are

36

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens

not present during a decision making experience, thereby causing confusion due to mixed messages.

Many attempts have been made over the years to promote food that is more beneficial to the environment. Love it or hate it, nowhere is this more present in our lives than the Organic food label - a widely recognised standard. However, what that standard represents to consumers is not so universally well understood. The organic label indicates food that is grown without use of chemical fertilisers and pesticides, representing production methods that are beneficial to biodiversity and [69] Gov.uk, Food labelling and packaging. [online]

natural ecosystems.

[69]

This message and its meanings are lost

along the way, and instead there is a confusion of connotations such as higher product quality, added-health benefits,

[70] Jowit, J. Soil Association confronts image of organic food as elitist and expensive.

The Guardian. [online].

elitism and expensiveness.

[70]

As a result, there has been a

small backlash against organic, as seen in Helen Browning’s decision to distance the Soil Association’s image away from these connotations. Instead, she wants to reinforce what they originally stood for: helping communities and promoting production methods that “safeguard humanity’s time on

[71] Gray, L. Soil Association ditches rockstars to go back to its roots. The Telegraph. [online].

Earth.”

[71]

This is a good example of how inconsistent messages

can cause confusion in users, slowing down the potential of a strategy for change.

Through ethnography, I exposed a similar reaction from users as a result of a lack of values in a communication experience.

As a provocation and embodiment of research, I made a series of mock packaging graphics that displayed factual information about the embodied environmental impact of the food product (see fig. 8, 9, and 10). Disappointingly, the reactions to it were not as imagined, where participants in the activity did not feel that the information would do much to encourage a wholesale shift in there behaviour. Whilst acknowledging the limitations of this kind of research task (small number of users, short exposure time and lack of quantitative evaluation), it did

37

Foodprint

Fig. 8. Ethnographic street engagement, ‘Brownie for a Blether’, exposing shoppers to the mock packaging graphics provocations.

Photo: Will Brown.

highlight that simple facts by themselves are not enough, and that an additional layer of contextual information that engages users’ values is required.

Through an examination of the link between values, objects and behaviours, it is apparent that designers can, through the design of objects and experiences, encourage a paradigm shift in thinking around perceptions towards the food system. By embodying values of universalism in the various touchpoints that encapsulate the experience of choosing between different food items, it is possible to encourage more sustainable actions. However, due to the interconnected nature of the food system, of which there are various stakeholders, this can not be achieved in isolation through the will of the designer alone.

It is necessary to examine the role that design plays in the implementation of sustainable strategies for a wicked problem like the food system.

38

A new mindset: Symbiotic Citizens

Fig. 9. Above, mock packaging that shows the amount of grain fed to a cow in relation to the consumable meat as a result. Used during ‘Brownie for a Blether’ street engagement.

Graphic: Will Brown.

Fig. 10. Right, mock packaging that shows the amount of water used to grow one almond. Used during ‘Brownie for a Blether’ street engagement.

Graphic: Will Brown.

39

Foodprint Ch a pter 4 :

Transitioning to a desirable future

[72] Meadows, D. Leverage Points. p.18.

“You could say paradigms are harder to change than anything else about a system, and therefore this item should be lowest on the list, not second-tohighest. But there’s nothing necessarily physical or expensive or even slow in the process of paradigm change. In a single individual it can happen in a millisecond. All it takes is a click in the mind, a falling of scales from eyes, a new way of seeing. Whole societies are another matter. They resist challenges to their paradigm harder than they resist anything else. Societal responses to paradigm challenge have included crucifixions, burnings at the stake, [72] concentration caps, and nuclear arsenals.”

As dramatically outlined in the above quote from Donella Meadows, changing paradigms, such as the one proposed in chapter 3, is hard due to the resistant nature of societies to accept a new mindset. How might design play a role in facilitating a paradigm shift in thinking? Chapman suggests that “individuals will not change their mode of thinking or operating within the world until their existing modes are proved

[73] Chapman, J. System Failure. p.14.

beyond doubt, through direct experience, to be failing.”

[73]

This is a role that speculative design seeks to occupy. The practice, popularised by Dunne and Raby, aims to highlight and critique aspects of the present, to instigate a dialogue

[74] Dunne, A., Raby, F. Speculative Everything. p.2.

around propositions for new realities.

[74]

However, critical

design has its limitations as a means of instigating change on the scale of systemic problems and within the short timeframe that we have to change tack. Most notably, it is restricted by the audience it reaches through the exposure of projects that

[75] Tonkinwise, C. Just Design. [Blog] Medium.

mostly get displayed in art galleries, and publicised in designoriented news platforms.

40

[75]

For a practice that aims to spark

Transitioning to a desirable future

debates, it falls short in getting the right stakeholders involved in those conversations. Instead, the role of design should be, as articulated by Tonkinwise, to not just expose the flaws in the present system, but to work with relevant stakeholders to visualise a preferable future system as a means of mitigating feelings of risk in the ‘gatekeepers’ of that future:

[76] Tonkinwise, C. 21st Century: Design After Design. p.4.

“[T]he practice of design is actually about persuading a wide range of actors – fellow designers, suppliers, investors, logistics managers, users in households, workplaces or public spaces, etc – to work together on materialising a future in which such an artefact exists… The expert skill of a designer is in convincing [76] people to subscribe to a vision despite its risks.”

As discussed in chapter one, the merits of design’s ability to

[77] Tonkinwise, C. 21st Century: Design After Design. p.3.

[78] Brown, W. and McMaster, R. Discussing role of design in aiding GFPP. [interview]

be applied to any domain is that it can cut across disciplines.

That ability is as useful to framing the problem as it is to facilitating conversations between various stakeholders from different disciplines or even industries. In addition to facilitating conversations between stakeholders, designers also champion the point of view of the end user - as a result of ethnographic research practices. This is incredibly valuable in evaluating the potential risks of futures visions with the very people that will inhabit them - a flaw of the “insufficient risk analysis [that] was done on modernist visions for modern ways of living, and we now live in the socio-ecological consequences.”

[77]

It is understanding what these future visions feel like at the individual level Fig. 11. The failed Modernism project, the Red Road highrise flats in Glasgow are demolished. Photo: Guardian.

that is missing from many efforts in facilitating change towards sustainable futures.

[78]

This is often due to the nature in

which non-design practitioners, such as policy makers, often communicate their research findings: namely in the form of

41

Foodprint

written reports. The problem with this is the ability to evaluate them on stakeholders and end users, as summarised by Todd Zaki Warfel in his book Prototyping: A Practitioner’s Guide:

[79] Warfel, T. Prototyping: A Practitioner’s Guide. p.10.

“Nobody wants to read a 60–200-page written specification. There’s really no joy in it. If you can’t get them to read it, you won’t get them to fully understand it. Written documentation doesn’t allow you to see the “big picture.” Instead, you’re forced to see one line at a time. Words leave too much room for interpretation. Prototypes, on the other hand, have a number of advantages that help reduce misinterpretation: You experience how the system would work, rather than just read about it. Prototypes encourage play. When you get someone to play with your prototype, you increase the likelihood that [79] they’ll understand it.”

The more visual and tangible a vision of the future can be, the easier it is for end-users to understand, and therefore engage with it as a means of evaluating it. Due to the risk, difficulty and investment involved in attempting to influence complex systems, this is where a designer can be particularly valuable.

If design can be used to expose the flaws in the present system, and to visualise a preferable future, then it can, as proposed by MIT’s Banny Banerjee, imagine how we bridge the gap between the two. At a lecture at the Politecnici di Milano, he proposes that this can be done by imagining a desirable future vision and then “marching back from that in order to work out what the

[80] Alta Scuola Politecnica. Banny Banerjee - Design Thinking. [video]

next step should be.”

[80]

Irwin, Tonkinwise and Kossoff propose

an expanded definition of design that facilitates this deliberate progression from present to future systems as Transition Design:

[81] Tonkinwise, C. Transition Design as Postindustrial Interaction Design? [Blog] Medium.

“Transition refers to phased change – not revolution or sudden shifts, but a sustained process of multifaceted transformation. To transition means not only having a sense of what you want to transition toward, but also what you are transitioning away from. It means having a capacity to function in current [81] systems in ways that also begin to transform them.”

42

Transitioning to a desirable future

The process of “phased change� is important due to the inertia of shifting paradigms or mindsets. Since a system can not be overhauled, only influenced and guided towards certain outcomes, then a strategic approach for how that will play out over time is vital to ensuring it maintain course. If the future vision creates a shared goal among various stakeholders and partners, then the transition phase intends to maintain that collaboration.

Overcoming the immense inertia in influencing a change in societal mindset requires a collaborative approach that places values at the centre of a strategy for transition. This is an task that design can support stakeholders relevant to the domain of the topic with through the communication and prototyping skills involved in mitigating risk of desirable futures; and through knowledge of how to mediate a shift in values through the design of objects, and experiences.

43

Foodprint

Conclusion

In setting out to answer the central question of this thesis, to what extent can design solve the problem of an environmentally and humanly unjust food system, has to begin with a key caveat: design can not solve the problem alone. Due to the tangled, interconnected nature of systemic problems, no single stakeholder (including the designer) can solve the problem because of the lack of perspective of the unknownto-them, and perhaps conflicting needs of other stakeholders within the domain of the problem. So, by acknowledging that no single stakeholder can solve the problem alone, being able to answer the question focuses on: what is the role that design can serve the other stakeholders of the problem; what qualities of design are relevant and useful to the problem; and where does design need to adopt emerging ways of thinking suitable for the task?

A holistic approach is required, framing the challenge, so as to consider the perspective of all involved in the problem. As established in chapter 1, design is actually in a relatively good position compared to other professions to adopt this approach due to its universal scope of being applied to different levels of human experience, as highlighted by Buchanan, and its capability to empathise with others, as stated by the Design Council. In framing the problem in chapter 2, we find that an effective point for intervention, by Donella Meadows’ standards, is changing the mindset of individuals within the food system: from a convenience-driven mindset that does not

44

Conclusion

consider the wider implications of food choices; to a planetary thinking mindset that appreciates the interconnected nature of the food system, and the impacts our choices have on the environment - what I have defined in chapter 3 as the ‘symbiotic citizen’. While not immediately apparent, through the analysis of social practice theory, behaviour psychology and values theory, it is clear that design capabilities can influence a mindset and behavioural shift, therefore proving itself as being useful in tackling a systemic problem like the food system.

What is central to the separate theories explored in chapter 3, of McCracken’s cultural meaning, Shove’s social practice theory, Thaler and Sunstein’s nudge theory and values theories from the Common Cause Foundation is that they share the point of view that objects and infrastructure, through their use, influence human action. This is important, as it takes the intervention point of shifting mindsets, which seems abstract and intangible to influence as a medium, and embeds it in the grounded world of things and experiences - for which there is a whole profession dedicated to the understanding and delivery of: design. What I believe this means for designers, is a framework for creating visions of future users that hold key values expressed across the various touchpoints they would interact with as part of their daily lives. Instead of fruitlessly attempting to tell individuals to adopt values of universalism that are conducive to a sustainable future, these values should be embedded into products and experiences, that through their use, fosters these values in their users.

If chapter 3 proves that there is a possible solution to aim for, chapter 4 deals with the messy issue of how that might actually be made real. This admits the shortcoming of design proposals requiring support and buy-in from the various actors relating to the issue, for example: policy makers, investors, users. An idea, even if it is a great one, is but an idea until it is in place to affect individual’s lives. However, what places design in an

45

Foodprint

effective position to involve those partners is communication skills and prototyping methods. Through visual communication skills, visions can be made approachable and understandable.

This enables two important points: the comprehension gained from its approachable form means it can be exposed to non-experts for testing and evaluation; which leads onto the second point that through evaluation, the vision’s risk of the unknown is mitigated, thus encouraging the likelihood of buyin from the necessary stakeholders to implement that vision.

This is in contrast with the predominant practice of verbal presentations and written reports. Since a systems problem can not be solved alone, it would be beneficial to have the involvement of a practitioner that can facilitate the expertise of others, through collaboration a shared vision for multiple stakeholders that takes account of many different points of view, and is accessible and clearly understood. I believe in Tonkinwise’s definition of Transition Design, stated in chapter 4, as a means of achieving this. It offers a process that ideates not only around the preferred goal, but ideates also around the means of getting there. This prevents design outcomes from becoming stranded in theory and dialogues, but enables them to engage with the individuals who will actually be affected by said outcomes. This is necessary if design for the future is to move beyond the white walls of exhibition spaces, or the glossy pages of design magazines.

Had this thesis been written many decades ago, during the height of the Modernism movement, the conclusion to the question of to what extent design can solve the problem of an environmentally and humanly unjust food system, might have been naively overambitious. Through living with the consequences of visions of modernity, we understand that such complex problems require more than a single mastermind to generate a solution. While design is powerless to solve the problem of the food production system without cooperating

46

Conclusion

with others, it does play a role as part of a wider collaborative effort involving many stakeholders. Through an analysis of how design can increase its capabilities, it is possible to understand what role design may have in collaborating with and facilitating change towards a sustainable future. Namely, this is through visualising futures through the creation of tangible artefacts embodying values that foster sustainable behaviours. This should be done with the vigour of the Modernist’s vision for the future, but executed with humility and an understanding an empathy of the individual’s lives that it touches.

47

Foodprint

Bibliography Books Axelrod, R. and Cohen, M. (1999). Harnessing Complexity: Organizational implications of a scientific frontier. New York: The Free Press.

Barber, D. (2014). The Third Plate: Field Notes on the Future of Food. London: Little Brown.

Berners-Lee, M. (2010). How Bad Are Bananas? The Carbon Footprint of Everything. London: Profile Books Braungart, M., and McDonough, W. (2009). Cradle To Cradle: Re-making the way we make things. London: Vintage.

Brown, T. (2009). Change By Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organisations and Inspires Innovation. New York: HarperCollins.

Common Weal (2015). Common Weal: A Book of Ideas 2016-2021. Glasgow: Common Print.

Duhigg, C. (2012). The Power of Habit. London: Random House.

Dunne, A., Raby, F. (2013) Speculative Everything. MIT Press.

Goleman, D. (2010). Ecological Intelligence: The Coming Age of Radical Transparency. London: Penguin Books.

Hill, D. (2012). Dark Matter and Trojan Horses: A Strategic Vocabulary. [e-book] Moscow: Strelka Press.

Holmes, T., Blackmore, E., Hawkins, R., and Wakeford, T. (2011). The Common Cause Handbook. Machynlleth: Public Interest Research Centre.

Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking Fast and Slow. London: Penguin.

Kelley, T. (2006). The Ten Faces of Innovation: Strategies for heightening creativity. London: Profile Books.

Kelley, T. and Kelley, D. (2013). Creative Confidence: Unleashing The Creativity Within Us All. London: WilliamCollins.

Koren, L. (2008). Wabi-Sabi: for Artists, Designers, Poets & Philosophers.

Imperfect Publishing.

Koren, L. (2015). Wabi-Sabi: Further Thoughts. Imperfect Publishing.

Meadows, D. (1999). Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System. Hartland: The Sustainability Institute.

Meadows, D. (2009). Thinking in Systems: A Primer. London: Earthscan.

48

Bibliography Oppenlander, R. (2012). Comfortably Unaware - Global Depletion and Food Responsibility. 1st ed. [ebook] New York: Beaufort Books.

Papanek, V. (1977). Design For The Real World. St Albans: Paladin.

Patel, R. (2007). Stuffed and Starved: The Hidden Battle for the World Food System. Brooklyn: Melville House.

Rifkin, J. (2009). The Empathic Civilisation: The Race to Global Consciousness in a World in Crisis. New York: Penguin.

Roberts, P. (2008). The End of Food: The Coming Crisis in The World Food Industry. London: Bloomsbury.

Senge, P. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: The Art & Practice of The Learning Organisation. London: Random House.

Thackara, J. (2005). In The Bubble: Designing in a Complex World.

Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Thackara, J. (2015). How to Thrive in the Next Economy. London: Thames and Hudson.

Thaler, R., and Sunstein, C. (2009). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. London: Penguin Books.

Trenchard, M., Olson, V., Baskin, P., Willis, K., Fiedler, E., Bishop, S., Robinson, J., Slack, K., and Harrison, A. (2011) Psychology of Space Exploration: Contemporary Research in Historical Perspective. Washington: NASA. Warfel, T. (2009). Prototyping: A Practitioner’s Guide. Brooklyn: Rosenfeld Media.

Papers / journals Banerjee, B. (?). Designer as Agent of Change: A Vision for Catalyzing Rapid Change. [PDF]. Stanford: ChangeLabs. Available at: http://changelabs.stanford. edu/sites/default/files/Banny%20Banerjee-Designer%20as%20Agent%20of%20 Change.pdf [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Bland, J., Westlake, S. (2013). Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow: A Modest Defence of Futurism. [PDF]. London: Nesta. Available at: http://www.nesta.org. uk/publications/dont-stop-thinking-about-tomorrow-modest-defence-futurology [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Buchanan, R. (1992). Wicked Problems in Design Thinking. 1st ed. [PDF].

Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press. Available at: http://web.mit.edu/jrankin/ www/engin_as_lib_art/Design_thinking.pdf [Accessed 3 Fed. 2016] Burns, C., Cottam, H., Vanstone, C., and Winhall, J. (2006). Red Paper 02: Transformation Design. [PDF] Design Council. Available at: http:// www.designcouncil.org.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/red-papertransformation-design.pdf [Accessed 21 Mar 2016] Cassidy, E., West, P., Gerber, J., and Foley, J. (2013). Redefining agricultural yields: from tonnes to people nourished per hectare. Environmental Research Letters, [PDF] Volume 8(3). Available at: http://iopscience.iop.org/ article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/3/034015/pdf [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Chapman, J. (2002). System Failure. [PDF] London, UK: Demos. Available at: http://www.demos.co.uk/files/systemfailure.pdf [Accessed 2 May 2016]

49

Foodprint De Schutter, O. (2010). Report submitted by the Special Rapporteur on the right to food. [PDF] United Nations. Available at: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/ food/docs/A-HRC-16-49.pdf [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Foresight, The Future of Food and Farming (2011). Final Project Report. [PDF].

London: The Government Office for Science. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/ government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/288329/11-546future-of-food-and-farming-report.pdf [Accessed: 28 Feb 2016] Foster, R., and Lunn, J. (2007). 40th Anniversary Briefing Paper: Food availability and our changing diet. [PDF] London: British Nutrition Foundation. Available at: https://www.nutrition.org.uk/attachments/144_Food%20availability%20and%20 our%20changing%20diet.pdf [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Hausmann, R., Hidalgo, C., Bustos, S., Coscia, M., Chung, S., Jimenez, J., Simoes, A., Yıldırım, M. (2007). The Atlas of Economic Complexity. 1st ed. [PDF].

Science. Available at: http://atlas.cid.harvard.edu/media/atlas/pdf/HarvardMIT_ AtlasOfEconomicComplexity_Part_I.pdf [Accessed 25 Mar. 2016].

Henning, S. (2006). Livestock’s Long Shadow. [PDF]. Rome: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available at: ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/010/ a0701e/a0701e.pdf [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Kantar Worldpanel. (2013). Appetite for Change? Nutrition and the nation’s obesity crisis. [PDF] Kantar Worldpanel. Available at: http://www. kantarworldpanel.com/dwl.php?sn=news_downloads&id=287 [Accessed: 16 May 2016] McCracken, G. (1986) “Culture and Consumption: A Theoretical Account of the Structure and Movement of the Cultural Meaning of Consumer Goods”. Journal of Consumer Research 13 (1). Oxford University Press. Available at: http://www.jstor. org/stable/2489287 [Accessed: 13 May 2016] Mekonnen, M., Hoekstra, A. (2012). A Global Assessment of the Water Footprint of Farm Animal Products. [PDF]. Ecosystems. Available at: http://waterfootprint. org/en/resources/water-footprint-statistics/#CP1 [Accessed: 28 Feb 2016] Murray, C., and Ng, M. (2013). Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. The Lancet, [online] Volume 384(9945). Available at: http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/ PIIS0140-6736(14)60460-8/abstract [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

National Research Council. (2000). Nutrient Requirements of Beef Cattle. [online] Washington: National Academy Press. Available at: http://www.nap. edu/catalog/9791/nutrient-requirements-of-beef-cattle-seventh-revised-editionupdate-2000 [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Petsko, G. (2011). The Blue Marble. Genome Biology, [online] 12 (4). Available at: http://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/gb-2011-12-4-112 [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Rittel, H., Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. 1st ed. [PDF]. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Available at: http://www.uctc.net/mwebber/ Rittel+Webber+Dilemmas+General_Theory_of_Planning.pdf [Accessed: 28 Feb 2016] Rumsey, J., Lee, D., Riley, L., Hayes, I., and Scaife, A. (2015). Food Statistics Pocketbook 2015. [PDF] London: DEFRA. Available at: https://www.gov. uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/512112/ foodpocketbook-2015report-31mar16.pdf [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Sanderson, B. (2014) Food Values Positioning Paper. [PDF] Public Interest Research Centre. Available at: http://valuesandframes.org/downloads/ [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Shove, E., Spurling, N., McMeekin, A., Southerton, D., and Welch, D. (2013)

50

Bibliography Interventions in practice: re-framing policy approaches to consumer behaviour.

1st ed. [PDF]. United Kingdom: SPRG. Available at: http://www.sprg.ac.uk/ uploads/executive-summary-sprg--report-sept-2013-.pdf [Accessed: 23 Mar 2016] v Smil, V. (2006). Eating Meat: Evolution, Patterns, and Consequences. Population and Development Review, [online] Volume 28(4). Available at: http://www. colostate.edu/Dept/GDPE/Distinguished_Ecologists/2006/Smil/Eating%20Meat. pdf [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Tonkinwise, C., Kossoff, T., Irwin, T. (2015). Transition Design: The Importance of Everyday Life and Lifestyles as a Leverage Point for Sustainability Transitions.

Pennsylvania: Carnegie Mellon University.

Tonkinwise, C. (2016). 21st Century. Design After Design. 1st ed. [PDF]. Milan: Trienniale Design Museum. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/25208645/ Cameron_Tonkinwise_Responses_for_21st_Century._Design_After_Design_XXI_ Triennale_di_Milano [Accessed: 14 May 2016]

Blogs / articles / websites Brown, T. (2016). The Next Big Thing in Design. [blog] Medium. Available at: https://medium.com/ideo-stories/the-next-big-thing-in-design-513522543a6f [Accessed 11 Feb 2016] Buchanan, M. (2014). All systems Tao: Holistic view of life’s networks. New Scientist. [online] Available at: https://www.newscientist.com/article/ mg22229710-800-all-systems-tao-holistic-view-of-lifes-networks/ [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Cooper, A. (2015). A UX Legend On The Much-Rumored Death Of The Design Firm. [online] FastCo Design. Available at: http://www.fastcodesign.com/3051871/ a-ux-legend-on-the-much-rumored-death-of-the-design-firm [Accessed 11 Feb 2016] Gov.uk, (2016). Food labelling and packaging. [online] Available at: https://www. gov.uk/food-labelling-and-packaging/organic-food [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Gray, L. (2011). Soil Association ditches rockstars to go back to its roots. The Telegraph. [online] Available at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/ earthnews/8711349/Soil-Association-ditches-rockstars-to-go-back-to-its-roots. html [Accessed: 5 May 2016] Howarth, D. (2015). Designers are adding billions of dollars to the tech industry, says John Maeda. [online] Dezeen. Available at: http://www.dezeen. com/2015/03/18/john-maeda-silicon-valley-design-businesses-worth-billionsdollars-tech-industry-design-in-tech-report/ [Acessed: 3 May 2016] Hurst, N. (2015). Big Corporations are Buying Design Firms in Droves. [online] Wired. Available at: http://www.wired.com/2013/05/accenture-fjord/ [Accessed: 15 Mar 2016] Jowit, J. (2010). Soil Association confronts image of organic food as elitist and expensive. The Guardian. [online]. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/ environment/2010/feb/01/soil-association-organic-food-elitist [Accessed: 5 May 2016] kyu.com, (2016). IDEO Joins the kyu Collective. [online] Available at: https://kyu. com/news/ideo-joined-kyu/ [Accessed 1 Mar. 2016] kyu.com, (2016). Overview. [online] Available at: https://kyu.com/overview/ [Accessed 3 May 2016]

51

Foodprint Lockwood, T. (2015). Why Are Design Firms Stagnating? [online] FastCo Design.

Available at: http://www.fastcodesign.com/3048192/why-are-design-firmsstagnating [Accessed: 15 Mar 2016] mcdonalds.com, (2013). McDonald’s unveils free tool to give beef farmers a digital advantage. [online] Available at: http://www.mcdonalds.co.uk/ukhome/Aboutus/ Newsroom/news_pages/Carbon_Tool.html [Accessed: 16 May 2016]. ofcom.org.uk (2015). The Communications Market 2015. [online] Available at: http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/market-data-research/market-data/ communications-market-reports/cmr15/ [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Press Association. (2015). Plastic bag usage down 78% since introduction of 5p charge, says Tesco. The Guardian. [online] Available at: http://www.theguardian. com/environment/2015/dec/05/plastic-bag-usage-down-78-since-introduction-of5p-charge-says-tesco [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Steffen, A. (2015). Retro-Futurecraft and Rethinking Tomorrow. [blog] alexsteffen. com. Available at: http://www.alexsteffen.com/retro_futurecraft_and_rethinking_ tomorrow [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Steffen, A. (2015). What Does Planetary Thinking Mean? [blog] alexsteffen.com.

Available at: http://www.alexsteffen.com/what_does_planetary_thinking_mean [Accessed: 1 May 2016] Tischler, L. (2012) In Remembrance of Bill Moggridge, 1943-2012. [online] FastCo Design. Available at: http://www.fastcodesign.com/1670751/in-remembrance-ofbill-moggridge-1943-2012 [Accessed: 16 May 2016] Tonkinwise, C. (2014) Transition Design as Postindustrial Interaction Design?

[Blog] Medium. Available at: https://medium.com/@camerontw/transition-designas-postindustrial-interaction-design-6c8668055e8d#.er135pufq Tonkinwise, C. (2015). Just Design. [Blog] Medium. Available at: https://medium. com/@camerontw/just-design-b1f97cb3996f#.m0cggx2ew [Accessed: 13 May 2016]

Datasets United Nations, Department of Economics and Social Affairs, Population Division.

(2015). World Population Prospects: The 2015 Revision. [online]. Available at: http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Graphs/Probabilistic/POP/TOT/ [Accessed: 16 May 2016]

Videos / films Aalto University. (2014). Peter Senge: “Systems Thinking for a Better World” - Aalto Systems Forum 2014. [video] Youtube. Available at: https://youtu. be/0QtQqZ6Q5-o [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

Alta Scuola Politecnica (2012) Banny Banerjee - Design Thinking: An approach to Strategic Transformations. [video] Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=-sVR9_2dL24 [Accessed: 1 May 2016] Cowspiracy: The Sustainability Secret. (2014). [film] Los Angeles: Kip Andersen Barber, D. (2010). How I Fell In Love With A Fish. [video] TED. https://www.ted. com/talks/dan_barber_how_i_fell_in_love_with_a_fish?language=en [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

52

Bibliography

Planetary. (2015). [film] Guy Reid Planetary Collective. (2013). Overview. [video] Vimeo. Available at: https://vimeo. com/55073825 [Accessed: 14 May 2016] Planetary Collective. (2015). Call to Earth - A Message from the World’s Astronauts to COP21. [video] Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=NN1eSMXI_6Y [Accessed: 17 May 2016].

School of Life. (2015). EASTERN PHILOSOPHY - Sen No Rikyu. [video] Youtube.

Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZpE-XL0u5yI [Accessed: 16 May 2016] School of Life. (2015). HISTORY OF IDEAS - Wabi-sabi. [video] Youtube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QmHLYhxYVjA [Accessed: 16 May 2016] We Feed The World. (2005). [film] Alstetten: Erwin Wagenhofer

Interviews Brown, W. and McMaster, R. (2016). Discussing role of design in aiding GFPP in imagining a sustainable food system in Glasgow

53