Stephanie, I'm worried if you are trying to smash all these different
stories into one. It's like trying to write the history of humankind through
just one cultural lense. In our world, there are many cultures, many
histories. Sometimes, these cultures interacts and their history intersects,
but their values remain distinct, at least, if they're not killed by the
encounter.
Participatory Design emerged in a very specific political condition in
Scandinavia. At the same time, or even before, as Terence mentioned, similar
movements arose in different contexts. Then, more recently, we're seeing
business trends on Design Thinking, Crowdsourcing, Co-Design. Each one of
this movements had it's own motivation and concerns. You can't say that they
evolved into each other because, in most of the time, they weren't even
aware of each other.
If are you planning to compare those histories, you should first pay
attention to the context, otherwise you won't fully understand what they
mean. If you were not part of this history, you should hear from people that
made part of it, like our fellow Norman. But don't hear just one side.
As an example of a comparative historical account of Participatory Design in
Scandinavia and US, I'll point you to Peter Asaro paper's:
Transforming society by transforming technology: the science and politics of
participatory design
http://www.peterasaro.org/writing/Asaro%20PD.pdf
And for a broad overview of different participatory approaches, see:
MULTIPLE VIEWS OF PARTICIPATORY DESIGN, Henry Sannof
http://jfa.arch.metu.edu.tr/archive/0258-5316/2006/cilt23/sayi_2/131_143.pdf
And specifically about your concern on how methods changed by the
intersecctions of those histories, you should check the concept of hybridism
that Michael Muelller used in his paper:
Participatory Design: The Third Space in HCI
https://hec.unil.ch/docs/files/53/322/ch7-_participatory_design_muller.pdf
Hope this helps!
--
.
.{ Frederick van Amstel }.
http://fredvanamstel.com
http://usabilidoido.com.br
http://faberludens.com.br
|