to second that,
The same argument is part of the 'wicked problem' description by Rittel:
"For any given tame problem, an exhaustive formulation can be stated
containing all the information the problem-solver needs for
understanding and solving the problem - provided he knows his 'art,'
of course.
This is not possible with wicked problems. The information needed
to *understand* the problem depends upon one's idea for *solving* it.
[...]" (1)
The fact that funding - let's be frank: the existence of activity -
is today increasingly tied to programs and criteria that are defined
based on very dubious assumptions of the world and its processes and
what the outcomes of research, design and development are useful for,
makes this a very central problem indeed. It is sad and detrimental
that the funding systems are not analyzed or criticized more, and
especially from the point of view of whose interests are in reality
served by the current definitions in those programs of 'what the
problem is'.
(1) Rittel, H. W. J., and Webber, M. M. (1973), 'Dilemmas in a
general theory of planning', Policy Sciences, 4, 155-69. Reprinted in
Cross, N. (ed.) (1984), Developments in Design Methodology, Wiley &
Sons, London. ... A great resource - available as a a Books on Demand
facsimile from UMI, for example through amazon)
At 14:11 +1030 7.3.2003, Jan Coker wrote:
>David,
>I am going right to the end of your email, and reaffirming that asking the
>question whose interests' does research or for that matter anything else serve
>is an exceedingly good question. Carol Bacchi in her book, Women, Policy and
>Politics which is a discussion of the construction of policy problems (not
>their solutions) clearly argues that the construction of the problem statement
>defines the solution. Who determines what the statement is, who is a
>participant in that process, who is not a participant (often the subjects of
>policy) predetermines the direction of the problem solving. It is essential in
>design that the problem statement be understood to have immense power to
>direct, and that an analysis of the statement must precede any design activity
>if a designer is serious about dealing with design which reaches beyond
>self-gratifying object design. Just my opinion of course.
>Jan
|