Dear colleagues
I would like to add some thoughts to the discussion about design policy.
Is design policy an economic policy? Jean offered two hypotheses
(opportunistic issues and the place of design in economy). I would like to add
one more hypothesis: history and power of example. In the past two decades
we have been witnessing the rise of Asian economies together with some
incredible investments in design and apparent success of their design policies.
These design policies (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan...) were developed primarily
for the improvement of the national industry. I believe these examples have
been driving design policies around the world towards “industry-led design
policies” channelling design’s contribution towards economy. The impact of
design within industry is more easily measured than design’s contribution for
education, for example (as Ann mentions, there is little data about this).
This brings us to the inevitable pragmatic aspect of policy-making. From the
UK National School of Government: “Professional policy making needs to be:
evidence based, inclusive, joined-up, measurable, innovative and creative,
outward looking, forward looking...”. (This sounds like a design brief!?!).
Currently design policies seem to be restricted to economic issues due to the
pragmatic, evidence based requirements. However, this is something that can
be changed. As Jean quotes, design might be greater than what designers do.
The good news here is that there is a lot of potential for expanding the scope
of design policies. We are just starting to develop this practice. Public Health,
aging, education and security (as suggested by Ann), social and urban issues
(as described by Professor Ranjan) are just some of the areas design can
influence. In particular, I believe that trained designers can contribute for
policy-making teams with their “inclusive, forward thinking, innovative and
creative” approach. Could we aim for bringing designers into these teams?
This brings me to another point: is design policy working for designers (e.g. for
the improvement of the design professional sector) or is design policy working
to advance the contribution that design brings to the world? One option
doesn’t cancel the other. They can work together. However, the policy
proposal must state clearly who is going to benefit from the policy
implementation, in the risk of jeopardising the proposal. The design policy
approach should be a unique decision to the country/region/municipality, which
will place this c/r/m or its design sector in an advantageous position in relation
to the competitors or simply standing out for excellence in a specific area.
These are some thoughts about design policy in general. I would not dare to
question the content of the American design policy proposal because (1) I am
not American and therefore I don’t have this right, (2) I appreciate the
difficulty in setting up 10 priorities for design in any country, even more within
USA dimensions, (3) I truly admire the initiative. More than everything, design
policy is not a static document (at least shouldn’t be). Therefore,
congratulations for this first step. I reinforce Ken’s point: this is how the world
moves forward!
Best regards
Gisele
|