 |
 |
chris, historically, environmental advocacy/action groups were a nuisance to designers at a time when few were aware of how the environment was affected. they made a noise, took actions, encouraged legislation and now are, as you say useful contributors. i mentioned the example only in response to taking a legalistic view of stakeholders by distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate stakeholders. another good example is the gay movement in the u.s. gays started as outcasts. even legitimate psychiatric manuals considered them mentally ill. when the HIV virus emerged, most god fearing people thought this to be gods way to eliminate a deviant population. then the organized themselves, advocating equality, supporting candidates that would favor equal rights, now pushing marriage rights, etc. in many medical, cultural and political decisions, this is a stakeholder group that shifted from being the voice of the illegitimate to a formidable voice that shifted legitimacy. yes, doing things is more important than mere arguing. but in my view, advocacy includes both and that is what stakeholders can do. the financial interest that terry advocates is only secondary to the political voice klaus -----Original Message----- From: PhD-Design - This list is for discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Rust Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 6:45 AM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: Interests - Legitimacy - Research Klaus Krippendorff wrote: > regarding ecological advocacy groups. i think most designers are now > aware that this is a stakeholder group one doesn't want to have as an > opponent, > But such a group may not be a very USEFUL stakeholder for a designer. Arguably they represent the tame end of the problem - "we need less of this or more of that". That's a useful starting point but it doesn't take you very far towards an effective new design. Valid stakeholders might be those who would lose or gain practically from changes, those who would have to adapt their behaviour, those who need to adapt their thinking. One of my personal (not professional) interests is the development of urban cycling - it's a very complex arena involving the law, road engineering, urban planning, every kind of road user, public transport operators, employers etc etc. Comparing countries where urban cycling is normal (eg Japan, Netherlands, Switzerland) with those where it is emerging and those where it is hardly possible reveals a rich stew of contradictory ideas and behaviours. Almost all the important stakeholders are those who are doing things or might do things in future - advocacy groups don't really count but action groups can. I used to be a member of a city cycle campaign group in the 1980s and we realised we were achieving very little by making a fuss - so we started organising fun cycling activities instead and that started to get real people moving in our direction because they were riding their bikes more. We also became stakeholders because we were on the streets (and the country lanes around the city) acting and learning rather than advocating. best wishes from Sheffield Chris ********************************** Professor Chris Rust Chair of Design Research Society Council Head of Art and Design Research Centre Sheffield Hallam University Psalter Lane, Sheffield S11 8UZ, UK [log in to unmask] www.chrisrust.net