深度译文| 社会设计与新殖民主义Social Design and Neocolonialism（bilingual）

Original Cinnamon Janzer Upbeing行动村 2023-06-04

收录于合集 #城乡融合&合作经济 46个

www.actionvillager.com

个人与社区的共生式转型

Up章小鱼：从2017年开始我们强调“社区式成长”和“整全商”，先从沉浸式个人成长地图和系统感知入手，而不愿强调“社会设计”这个词，也是对“创新”和“创造”的反思。
项目式学习的全链条中，我们提炼了“新场景、内驱力、社会影响力”三个基本节点，新场景对于社会边界的解构与重构，内驱力对于身心灵整全的要求，社会影响力对于从知识管理到产业化的孵化性质等，都在超越项目式学习放在学校场景甚至社区场景的内涵和外延。教育与社会变革总是绑定的，我们对于“真实”的理解是，当下的真实需要被重构，所以需要建构新场景、新服务、新社会影响力模型。

社会设计，不是设计一个产品和服务出来就可以，不是创新就可以，不是服提供服务就可以。下文为我们提供了一种内部视角，阐述了适合社会设计的基本方法，我们希望可以同大家一起，从内部视角，而不是以外来入侵殖民者的视角去为社区设计强行设计。

摘要 Abstract

This article examines the current field of social design: its claims, practices, and methodologies. Findings discovered through qualitative research illuminate the current application of social design practices and offer critique around their use in the social sphere. This article argues that designers must be sensitive to a variety of complex social and cultural cues and structures or they risk contributing to, or practicing, design neocolonialism. The article offers two key theoretical suggestions to further the emerging field’s progress. First, social design must shift its focus from one that is human-centered to one that is situation-centered. Second, it is imperative that social design develops a shared framework for understanding, executing, and evaluating its initiatives and interventions. Additionally, this article introduces a matrix to serve as an early iteration of a shared framework.

本文检阅了现有的社会设计，包含社会设计的主张、做法以及方法论。定性的研究启发了现有社会设计的实践，也为其在社会领域的应用带来许多批评。本文讲述设计师应当对身边各种各样复杂的社会和文化信号和结构敏感，否则他们这样有可能会导致设计殖民主义。本文也提供了两个关键的理论建议，来推动现有领域的深入。首先，社会设计必须必须将自己的核心从以人类为中心的设计转向为以情况为中心的设计。其次，社会设计必须发展出一种共享的机制，来帮助对其的理解、执行以及评估其倡议和是否该干预。除此以外，本文也介绍了一种矩阵作为共享框架的早期迭代。

KEYWORDS: social design, design colonialism, human-centered design, design thinking, design methodology, framework, matrix

关键词：社会设计，设计殖民主义，以人为本的设计，设计思维，设计方法论，机制，矩阵

重构一种新兴的实践
Reframing an Emerging Practice

Social design is, in its broadest sense, the use of design to address, and ultimately solve, social problems. Currently, social design practice runs the gamut from policy development to Information Communication Technology (ICT) systems design and much in between. In addition to “social design,” a number of different terms are used to refer to this type of work, including but not limited to: design for social innovation, design for social change, creative changemaking, co-design, service design, empathetic design, and humancentered design. As the meaning and terminology of social design itself has yet to be concretely understood or collectively accepted (Kimbell 2011: p. 288), this article will use the term “social design” to capture all facets of design applied to the social realm with the intent of addressing and/or solving social problems.

社会设计，广义地来说，是运用设计来处理并且最终解决一些社会问题。今天，社会设计的实践运用在从政策研制到信息交流科技系统设计中的各个领域。除了“社会设计”这一词之外，许多其他词汇同样指的也是这件事，包括并不仅限于：社会创新设计、社会创变设计、创新创变、共同设计、服务设计、共情设计以及以人为本的设计。鉴于社会设计本身一词以及其涵义已经被广泛地承认和理解，本文也将继续使用“社会设计”一词来探讨设计的各个方面是如何运用到社会领域，来处理并解决社会问题。

In designing social situations, as social design aims to do, a different set of processes and research methodologies must be used than those employed in designing objects. If social designers want to create social change and solve social issues, they must first understand that solutions cultivated from afar must be considered subordinate to the beliefs, knowledge, and perspectives of the people affected by said issues.

当社会设计旨在设计社会情境，就必须用到和设计物品时不同的一系列步骤和研究方法。如果社会设计师想要创造社会变革并解决社会议题，首先他们就必须理解，根植于远方的解决方案必须从属于被这些议题影响到的人们，服务于他们的信念、知识和立场。

As designers enter the social realm – and shift from designing objects to designing social change – the need for capable and ethical social practice must be acknowledged and developed. The field of social design must adopt new, more appropriate practices and modify – even disregard if necessary – methods that are unsuitable for designing situations. Social design must reorient its theoretical philosophy away from traditional human-centered priorities (which tend to be object centric) and shift instead toward new situationcentered (social centric) priorities.

当设计师进入社会领域——从物品设计进阶到社会设计，他们就必须承认和发展一种社会实践，使设计能够胜任且符合伦理。社会设计的领域必须采纳新的，更恰当的做法，并修改那些已不适合设计时的形势的方法——必要时甚至可以不理会它们。社会设计必须改变它的理论导向，远离传统的以人为中心（它们同时也是以对象为中心的），并转而趋向以情境为中心（社会中心的）。

In order to cultivate a practice with a situation-centered focus, a complex, multidimensional understanding of people and their environments is essential. As Brazilian educator Paulo Freire wrote in Pedagogy of the Oppressed: One cannot expect positive results from an educational or political action program which fails to respect the particular view of the world held by the people. Such a program constitutes cultural invasion, good intentions notwithstanding. (Freire 2005: 95)

为了培养这种实践方法（它的目标是以情境为中心来考虑的），一种复合的，多维度的对人与其环境的理解就有必要了。正如巴西教育家Paulo Freire在《被压迫者教育学》中提及的，当一个教育性或政治性项目不能够尊重人们特定的世界观，那人们就无法期待从中得到有利的结果。这种项目反而构成了文化入侵，即使它本意是好的。(Freire 2005: 95)

A holistic understanding is essential for the sustainability and efficacy of social design initiatives. Design must prioritize community ownership and inclusive participation to ensure that the sustainability of a project’s future is embraced by the end user. Design work applied within the social realm must be collaborative, culturally relevant, socially applicable, and empowering rather than imposing and removed. Relevant stakeholders and communities must be given a highly regarded and considered voice, otherwise designers and their projects run the risk of being ineffective, at least and negatively

impactful, at worst.

整全性的理解对于社会设计这一倡议的可持续性与有效性是必不可少的。设计必须把社区的所有权和全纳性参与置于优先地位，来确保一个规划的永续性的未来为末端的用户所接受。在社会领域内应用的设计作品必须是协力的，是嵌入文化中的，是具有社会应用价值的，是充能的，而不是庄严并隔绝的。利益相关者与社区的声音必须被给予高度的重视和考虑，否则设计师和他们的项目就会冒着至少是低效的风险，甚至最糟糕的时候会带来负面影响。

Edward Said stated in Orientalism that “ideas, cultures, and histories cannot seriously be understood or studied without their force, or more precisely their configurations of power, also being studied”(Said 1979: 5). Those intent on changing elements of situations, or entire situations, must cultivate a thorough understanding of a situation’s various underlying social factors – its economy, sociopolitical context(s), the views of its various constituents, and its history – what Said refers to as “force” (ibid.). As social design stands now, a Saidlike understanding is absent from theory and practice.

萨义德在《东方主义》中曾提及，“理念，文化和历史”不能孤立于它们的效力而被严肃地理解或研究。更精确来说的话，还要研究它们的权力配置。如果想要改变情境中的某些元素或整体情境，对于构成情境的各种基础的社会要素——它的经济，它的社会政治环境，分析它成分的各种见解，以及它的历史（萨义德称之为效力），人们必须养成对这些要素的完整理解。社会设计正遭遇这样的问题，在它的理论和实践中，萨义德提及的这种理解路径还是缺席的。

Situation-centered design must hold the same concentrated, end-user prioritization that human-centered design does. However, the “end-user” in situation-centered design is social milieu which is comprised of many, often varied, “end-users” as well as the delicate systems and structures in which these “users” interact. A shift in such thinking would serve as an acknowledgment of the complexity of the social spaces this form of design aims to occupy. Inexorably, social change encompasses and affects much more than human interaction with an object.

情境中心的设计必须和以人为本的设计一样优先考虑集中的，终端的使用者。然而情境中心的设计考虑到的“终端使用者”指的是一种社会环境，它包括多种多样的终端用户，以及他们互动时周遭脆弱的体系与结构。这种思考的转变正使设计师承认社会空间的复杂性，这些空间是社会设计意在占领的。不可避免的是，社会改变包含并影响的事物远不只是人与客体的互动。

Our systems’ challenges and their root causes must be considered, and ultimately redesigned, to yield positive impact. As sociologist Allan Johnson suggests: People, of course, will have to change in order for systems to change, but the most important point is that changing people isn’t enough. The solution also has to include entire systems, such as capitalism, whose paths of least resistance shape how we feel, think, and behave as individuals, how we see ourselves and one another. (Johnson 2005: 38)

我们的体系受到的挑战与其根本原因必须得到考虑并最终被重新设计，以产出积极影响。正如社会学家Allan Johnson所建议的(Johnson 2005: 38)：

为了改变整个体系，人们将不得不改变，但最重要的在于改变人们还不够。解决方案还必须包括整个体系，比如资本主义，它的路线受到最微小的抵抗，却形塑了我们感受、思考的方式，形塑了我们像个体一样行动的方式和我们看待自身与彼此的方式。

Many social design interventions actively seek to participate in this redesign. If social design strives to positively reshape the social realm, then social design study, practice, and practitioners must consider, and be able to consider, the macro and micro political, economic, and cultural systems that contribute to the issues and ills that social design seeks to change.

许多社会设计的干预积极参与到这一重新设计的过程中。如果社会设计努力去积极地重塑社会领域，那么社会设计的研究、实践与从业者必须考虑且必须有能力考虑到引发这一议题的，宏观与微观的政治-经济-文化体系，考虑到社会设计试图去改变的弊病。

社会设计：方法与实践

Social Design: Methodologies and Practices

There are two primary and ubiquitous methodological tools employed within social design: design thinking and human-centered design. The concept of design thinking was introduced by several mid-century design theorists including Peter Rowe and Nigel Cross in their books Design Thinking and Designerly Ways of Knowing, respectively. Recently, however, design thinking has become popularized in the social design world after IDEO CEO Tim Brown wrote an article on the topic in Harvard Business Review (Brown 2008). Brown (2009) subsequently authored a book on the same subject entitled Change by Design. Within social design, design thinking is considered to be an effective method for conceiving of and producing innovative solutions to social problems (Kimbell 2011: 292).

有两种基础的又无处不在的教学法工具在社会设计中得到采用：设计思维与以人为本的设计。设计思维的概念最初由几位中世纪的设计理论家，包括Peter Rowe 和Nigel Cross 分别在他们的书Design Thinking 和Designerly Ways of Knowing 之中引入。然而最近设计思维的概念在社会设计的世界中普及开来，在IDEO的CEO Tim Brown于《哈佛商业评论》上发表了关于该主题的文章（2008年）之后。Brown在2009年接着又就相同主题写了一本题为Change by Design的书。在社会设计中，设计思维被认为是一种有效的方法，用于构想并产出针对社会问题的创新解决方案(Kimbell 2011: 292)。

Design thinking purportedly has a diverse range of functions such as a cognitive style, a general theory and practice of design, and an approach toward organization management (Kimbell 2012: 141).

设计思维理应具备各种各样的功能，比如一种认知风格，一种综合理论与设计实践，以及一种通向组织管理的途径。

Similarly within the world of social design, human-centered design (HCD) is considered to be a process that transitions innovative ideas from cerebral concept to “actionable” reality; ideas relating to social change particularly included (IDEO 2009: 4). HCD has been deployed and popularized through publications like IDEO’s “HCD Toolkit,“ frog’s “Collective Action Toolkit,” the American Institute of Graphic Arts’“Ethnography Primer,” and Helsinki Design Lab’s “Design Ethnography Fieldguide.”

在社会设计的世界中与之相似的是，以人为本的设计（HCD）被认为是一种把革新理念从脑中的概念转变为“可行动的“现实的过程；这也特别包括了与社会变迁相关的理念(IDEO 2009: 4)。HCD通过这些出版物得到展开和普及：IDEO的”HCD工具包“，frog的”共同行动工具包“, 美国平面艺术学院的”民族志初级读本“与赫尔辛基设计实验室的”设计民族志实地指南“。

Social design practice operates on the basis of the notion that design-based creative processes, such as design thinking and human-centered design, can and should be used to generate (presumably useful) solutions to social change problems, and therefore social change itself. Both human-centered design and design thinking have been given significant credit and credibility within the world of social design – they are continually relied upon as processes that can produce “new solutions for the world” (ibid.:6) and that yield innovative, empathetic, user-centric results. However, the designers employing these practices are “not always working in close collaboration with public service specialists” (Kimbell 2011: 286), or the very actors within the domains they seek to improve.

社会设计的实践基于这样的见解而行动：基于设计的创造过程，比如设计思维与以人为本的设计，能够且应当被用于形成（大致是有用的）社会变迁所致问题的解决途径，从而引发社会变迁本身。以人为本的设计和设计思维都已经在社会设计世界中被给予重大的信任和信度——作为能够产出“世界的新解决方案“(ibid.:6)，能够产出创新的，有同理心的，以用户为本的结果的方法，它们被持续依靠着。然而，采用这些做法的设计师们”不总是在与公共服务专家的合作中工作“(Kimbell 2011: 286)，也不总是在他们试图去改进的领域中与在地的行动者合作。

社会设计"简化版"

Social Design “Lite”

Human-centered design and design thinking are applicable methods for designing products that will be used or consumed by humans. However, social design is now functioning in a different environment – the social – which is a multidimensional, complex, and delicate space, whose expansive and nuanced nature is no longer adequately covered by “human-centered.” The problem with employing object-centered methodologies to work that is based in the social is that the latter remains an immaterial space; it consists of intangibles, such as Michel Foucault’s “always-already” pervasive power structures (Foucault 1979: 82). Object-centered practices are suited for use in creating tangible objects but, logically enough, are less suitable for creating social change, which is often largely intangible.

以人为本的设计和设计思维都是在设计为人们所使用和消费的产品时可以用到的方法。然而，社会设计正在一种不同的环境中运作——社会的，也就是多维度的，复杂而脆弱的空间。社会空间开阔与微妙的特性使得“以人为中心的“视角不再能涵盖它。采用”以对象为中心“的方法做基于社会的工作的问题在于，社会依然是非物质的空间；它由不可见之物，比如米歇尔福柯提及的”无时无刻不在的“，无处不在的权力结构而构成(Foucault 1979: 82)。以对象为中心的实践适合用于创造有形的物品，但逻辑上不那么适合创造社会变迁，因为它很大程度上是无形的。

While the practices and materials of HCD and design thinking do allude to potentially relevant methodologies, they have been adopted in problematically diluted, or “lite,” iterations. These augmentations render potentially relevant practices insufficient for use within the social because they remove the critical facets that make these methods useful in the first place.

当以人为本的设计和设计思维确实间接提及（与社会设计）潜在相关的方法时，这些方法已经在有问题地稀释过的或“简化“的反复过程中被拣选过了。这些扩充使得潜在相关的实践不足以在社会设计中得到使用，因为它们首先就移除了让这些方法有用的关键侧面。

Design thinking and HCD quite problematically lack the credible, unbiased, qualitative and quantitative support necessary to back up the bold claims surrounding their efficacy when applied to the social.

设计思维与人本设计缺乏可信而公正的，质量和数量上的必要支持，这就使得这些方法不能被充分证明应用于社会也会有效。

For example, ethnography is a fundamental tool in anthropological and sociological research, leveraging in-depth relationships with the community or communities that the ethnographer is involved in, and these relationships continue over long periods of time – years, even decades. Such rigorous forms of ethnography are excluded from HCD and design thinking materials and processes. The ubiquitously perceived value and pervasive use of design thinking and HCD within social design are problematic because, with the most key and robust components of social science practice missing, design thinking and HCD remain too fundamentally callow for application within the social realm.

举例来说，民族志是人类学与社会学研究中的一种基本工具，它影响了民族志学者与其所涉及到的社区之间的深度介入关系，并且这种关系会持续很长的时期——几年，甚至几十年。民族志这样的严格方法被排除在人本设计和设计思维的材料与过程之外。而现在在社会设计中，设计思维与人本设计的价值被普遍接受，其方法被到处使用，这是有问题的。因为其缺失了社会科学实践中最关键且最强健的组成部份，设计思维与人本设计还是羽翼未丰，不足以应用在社会领域中。

The weaknesses of design thinking and HCD, specifically with respect to their usefulness as processes that solve problems surrounding social change, can be summarized in three ways:

1. Research is deemphasized, devalued, and simplified. The necessary context required to inform effective problem definition and relevant concepts is removed.

2. There is no emphasis on ensuring or checking that solutions are appropriate, informed by context, or that issues are thoroughly understood prior to the design and implementation of solutions.

3. The agenda of the designer and freedom of creativity are prioritized over more paramount components such as end-user empowermentand a deep understand 1ding of the end-user’s worldviews.

设计思维与人本设计的弱点能用以下三种方法概括：（就是当它们在解决社会变迁相关问题时作为方法的有效与否）

1、研究被轻描淡写，贬值并简化了。用于给出问题的有效定义的必要上下文和相关的概念都被移除了。

2、没有强调确保和检查。解决方案是否合适，是否经上下文的调查而获得；在设计与解决方案的应用之前，议题是否得到彻底的理解。

3、设计师的日程与创造力的自由被置于更重要的事项之前。比如对终端使用者的赋权和对终端使用者世界观的深度理解。

If design-based social change is going to be effective and lasting, it must not be dependent upon the designer; rather, it must be rooted in empowerment. If social issues are to be addressed, processes must start with a solid foundation of in-depth, contextual research as exemplified by practices within relevant social science fields such as anthropology and sociology.

基于设计的社会变迁要想有效且持久，就必须不依赖于设计师，而是以赋权为根基。如果要强调社会议题，设计过程就必须奠基于深入展开的，学术脉络中的研究，例如相关的社会科学领域（人类学，社会学）中的实践。

社会科学对一种新出现的实践的贡献

The Social Sciences’ Contribution to an Emerging Practice

In the vein of social science fields, a shared framework for theory and practice must be developed and implemented as social design progresses. It is imperative that this framework facilitates an understanding of the differences between situation-centered and objectcentered design work. One size does not fit all in terms of approach – what is useful for creating an object is likely not useful for creating social change. Therefore, it is critical that practitioners become equipped to identify the best and most suitable project-specific practices, which might often be a mix of multiple, relevant methods.

在社会科学领域的脉络中，当社会设计有所进展，理论与实践共有的框架一定会得到发展和生效。很必要的是，这一框架有助于理解情境中心的与对象中心的设计工作之间的区别。不存在万能的方法——对于创造物品有用的，很可能对于创造社会变迁没有用。因此，从业者具备这样的能力就很关键——识别最好的，最适合特定项目的做法，这种做法常常是多种相关方法的混合。

The process of selecting an appropriate method or methods must begin by first understanding, then considering, the differences in scope and capability amongst the menu of methodologies available to social designers. Without understanding why certain approaches are more appropriate for certain applications, different methodologies can be misappropriated and ineffectively applied – as is certainly the case with design thinking and HCD. To more appropriately incorporate and differentiate the necessary perspectives and methodologies of the social sciences when designing social change, the authors have developed a diagrammatic matrix. This matrix functions as an initial iteration of a pedagogical framework for understanding the widely varying audiences, attributes, and research needs of social design, so often missing from education and practice. The variety of different foci among social design projects warrants and requires the use of various methodologies dependent upon the context in which they are operating. This matrix is used to differentiate between the various spheres of operation, which can then inform context-specific decisions around relevant and appropriate method selection. Using this matrix as a guide towards relevant implementation approaches, designers can then differentiate research needs based on the type, context, and scope of a particular project.

选择合适方法的步骤必须首先始于理解，接着考虑社会设计师面前各种备选方法，它们适用范围与能做到的事的差异。如果不去理解特定情况下为什么某些方法更合适，不同的方法就会被挪用并被无效地应用——当然比如设计思维和人本设计的案例。为了在设计社会变迁的时候更适当地合并与区分社会科学的必要观点与方法，作者构造了一张图表坐标系。这一图表起到一个教学法框架的初始迭代的功能，这个框架用于理解社会设计的广泛而不同的受众、属性与研究需要，这些常常被教学和实践遗漏。在不同社会设计项目之中，焦点的多样性使得人们在使用各种方法时可以且必须依靠实施时的具体环境进行选择。这一坐标系用于区分不同设计所处的坐标范围，然后就能提供信息让人们选择符合具体环境的，相关且合适的方法。把这一图表作为相关执行方法的指导，设计师就能根据具体项目的种类、情境与规模来区分研究时的需求。

图表1

As seen in Figure 1, the social design matrix has two axes. The y‑axis represents the spectrum of design intervention, ranging from situations to objects, from intangible to tangible. These binaries address the current social design trend to move beyond object-centered design and into situation-centered design. The x-axis represents the spectrum of the designer’s solidarity with a given community in which they seek to work. To articulate the xaxis binaries, the words outside and inside are used.5 An outside perspective refers to an intervention in which designers are not embedded in the community for whom they are designing. Outside perspective projects are characterized by “parachute” designs where solutions are proposed for, and even implemented within, communities from which the designer is heavily, or even completely, removed. Conversely, an inside perspective refers to a context in which designers have developed a strong sense of solidarity with the community being addressed. Inside perspectives demonstrate a high level of earned trust from the community.

正如我们在图表1中所看到的，社会设计坐标系有两根坐标轴。Y轴代表设计干预的光谱，范围从情境到对象，从无形的到有形的。这些二元划分强调如今的社会设计趋势是超越以对象为中心的设计而进入以情境为中心的设计。

X轴代表设计师与一个他们试图在其中工作的特定社区之间的团结程度的光谱。

为了明确x轴的划分，我们用了“内部”和“外部”这两个词。一个外部的坐标指的是当设计师通过设计进行干预时，他没有嵌入（深入）这一社区。处于外部坐标的项目以“从天而降的”设计为代表，这些案例中问题的解决方式是由严重甚至完全远离社区的设计师来提出甚至推行的。相反地一个内部的坐标指的是在此情景中，设计师已经培养出了与目标社区之间强烈的团结感。内部的坐标显示了（设计）从社区获得的高度信任。

Using this matrix, social designers can better understand the various forms of their practice through a series of case studies, which have been identified for each quadrant in order to illustrate their different characteristics, namely their parameters, specific functionalities, and purposes. As seen in Table 1, useful and context-appropriate research methods are also provided to guide work within each quadrant.

使用这一图表，社会设计师能更好地通过一系列个案研究来理解他们实践的各种形式，分为4个象限来识别并描绘出它们的不同特点，包括它们的参数、特殊功能与目的。

我们在表格1中可以看到，每一列都给出了有用且适于环境的研究方法来指导工作。

Table 1 Selected appropriate research methods organized by matrix quadrant

图表1 把经过挑选的合适研究方法按照图表1中的四个象限来排列

Quadrant1

象限1

Approach Objective

实现的目标

Gather extensive situational and social understanding. Develop honest relationships.

获取广泛适用的，从情境与社会的角度出发的理解。建立坦率的关系。

Possible Research Methods and Approaches

研究方法与路径

Ethnographic Research, Participant Observation, Literature Review, Case Studies, Interviews, Problem Driven Iterative Adaptation, Preliminary Desktop Research, Surveys, Social Work Intervention Process, Community Organizing Intervention Process,Praxis Model, Participatory Action Research.

民族志研究，参与式观察，文献综述，个案研究，访谈，(PDIA）由问题驱动的迭代适应，预备的桌面研究，(问卷)调查，社会工作介入方法，社区组织干预方法，实践模型和(PAR)参与式行动研究。

Quadrant2

象限2

Approach Objective

实现的目标

Gather extensive research on the enduser, beneficiary, and their use experience.

收集（结论）广泛适用的，对于终端用户，受益人与他们使用中的经验体会的研究。

Possible Research Methods and Approaches

研究方法与路径

Human-Centered Design, Design Thinking, Probes, Diaries, Design Ethnography, Case Studies, User Personas, User Testing, Desirability Testing, Experience Sampling, Generative Research, Participatory Design Research, Interviews, Picture Cards, Surveys and Questionnaires.

人本设计，设计思维，调查，日记法，设计民族志，个案研究，用户画像，用户测试，合意性测试，经验抽样，生成性研究，参与式设计研究，访谈，图片卡，调查和问卷。

Quadrant3

象限3

Approach Objective

实现的目标

Generate creative, innovative ideas.

生成原创的，革新的理念。

Possible Research Methods and Approaches

研究方法与路径

Design Thinking, Creative Processes Collage, Thinking Wrong, Design Charette, Image Boards, Role Playing.

设计思维，创作过程拼贴，“想错了”（不先入为主地思考），设计方案审核法，图象板/匿名版，角色扮演。

Quadrant4

象限4

Approach Objective

实现的目标

Research methods not suggested, as work in this quadrant is not recommended.

不建议使用的研究方法，这种类型的成果不用理会。

Possible Research Methods and Approaches

研究方法与路径

As the priority in quadrant four projects is one’s own beliefs derived from personal experience, research is usually less often embraced.

It is not suggested that projects operate with quadrant four perspectives. No methods are recommended.

由于象限4中的项目以从个人经验中得到的个人信念为优先，它们通常不怎么会包括调查研究。我们不建议项目依照象限4中的想法运转。不推荐这部分的方法。

象限一: 革新性的社会变迁：以内部视角设计情境

Quadrant One, Transformative Social Change: Designing a Situation with an Inside Perspective

Transformative social change values holism and considers the multiple systems at play within a particular situation, including but not limited to: people, culture, values, environments, history, power dynamics, socioeconomics, and future impact (Nelson and Prilleltensky 2010). Transformational social change often occurs on multiple levels (ibid.), and desired outcomes of such interventions often include increasing competency, independence, self-sufficiency, and access to resources (ibid.). Quadrant one encompasses projects in which designers cultivate an inside perspective, characterized by actions such as working with, living with, having first-hand experience with, or studying the social groups and societal contexts associated with the initiative for an extended period of time. Work conducted in this quadrant requires that the designer achieves a high level of trust from the community, has completed intensive and relevant research, and has developed a thorough understanding of all relevant complex social issues and systems – whether this is a task designers take on themselves or they solve by adding members to their team. The designers working in this space dedicate a serious amount of commitment to the (often long term) creation, implementation, and evaluation of the project.

革新性的社会变迁重视整体性，并在一个特定的情境中考虑到多个参与其中的体系——包括且不限于民族、文化、价值观、环境、历史、权力关系的动态变化、社会经济学与未来的影响。革新性的社会变迁常常发生在多个层次，而这些干预措施所希望达成的结果通常包括：增加竞争力、独立性、自给自足自主和获取资源的能力。

象限一指明了那些设计师在其中培养出一种内部视角的项目，项目以这些行动为特征：设计师在相当长的时间内，和有关的那些社会群体在相应的社会环境中一起工作、生活，一起得到亲身体会，或对这些群体与环境进行研究。这一象限中实施的工作，要求设计师从社区中取得高度的信任，完成精细且相关的调研，且对所有相关的复杂社会议题与系统都形成了透彻的认识——无论设计师是靠自己还是让团队增加成员来解决这一任务。在这一路线上工作的设计师们为（通常是长期的）项目的创立，执行与评估倾注了大量的心血。

个案研究：用自行车对抗贫困

Case Study: Bicycles Against Poverty

Bicycles Against Poverty (BAP) began as a student project undertaken by an interdisciplinary team of young thinkers, spearheaded by Muyambi Muyambi, a civil engineer from Uganda and collegeeducated in the United States (“Muyambi Muyambi ’12” 2009). Many of the students included in the original development group now hold

professional positions within the BAP nonprofit, exhibiting a high level of commitment to the cause and organization (Bicycles Against Poverty [n.d.]). BAP collaborated with local community partners and earned a Community Organization status from the government in order to cultivate trust between the organization and the community (ibid.). Consequently, the community welcomes BAP’s efforts and plays an active role in informing the organization’s progress and outcomes (ibid.). BAP’s purpose is to alleviate poverty through fostering selfsufficiency by increasing access to resources rather than simply providing the resources themselves. Understanding that bicycles can serve as a vehicle for access to water, jobs, healthcare, and ultimately self-empowerment, BAP designed a system for making bikes an achievable option for people in Ugandan villages through

micro finance lending for bike ownership (ibid.). However, the nonprofit’s work extends well beyond providing opportunities for bike access in northern Uganda. BAP believes that, for the system to work effectively, a holistic set of strategies should be incorporated

including bike repair seminars, entrepreneurship technical training, money management workshops, and mechanisms for community feedback (ibid.). BAP’s understanding of cultural specifics, level of continued commitment to the cause, and effort to design a holistic and multidimensional system for social change exemplify a quadrant one initiative.

“用自行车对抗贫困“（BAP）始于一个由跨学科青年思考者们发起的学生项目，带头人是Muyambi Muyambi，一位在美国接受过大学教育的乌干达土木工程师。初创团队中的很多学生如今在BAP这个非营利组织中担任专业职位，显示出他们为这一组织及其事业付出了很多。BAP与当地社区的伙伴进行合作，它也为了培养组织与社区间的信任从政府那里得到了”社区组织“这一地位。因此，社区欢迎BAP做出的努力，并积极（向成员，向外界）告知这一组织的发展与成果。

BAP的主旨是授人以鱼不如授人以渔，通过培育人们自给自足获取资源的能力从而减轻贫困。认识到自行车能够成为人们获取水源、工作、健康保障，以至于自我赋权的工具，BAP设计了一个针对自行车的小额贷款系统来使乌干达村落中的人们得以有条件使用自行车。

图为乌干达的自行车所有者在进行维修和维护。

不管怎样，这一非营利组织的工作远不只是向北乌干达提供获取自行车的机会。BAP相信，为了这个体系能高效运作，应该包括一整套战略——自行车维修讲座，创业技巧训练，理财工作坊，以及回馈社区的机制。BAP对于具体文化的理解，对这一事业的持续投入程度，以及设计一个周全、多维度的体系来实现社会变迁这一努力，使它成为了第一象限的首创行动的一个范例。

第二象限:以人为中心的设计：以内部视角设计物品。

Quadrant Two, Human-Centered Design: Designing an Object with an Inside Perspective

Quadrant two encompasses projects and interventions aiming to design objects with a heavy emphasis on the end-user. Designers working on these projects employ inside perspectives, have a deep understanding of the end-user, or even incorporate the user throughout the design process. Work in this quadrant uses traditional human-centered design processes and methodologies; it is a space where designers prioritize and understand the end-user with the intent of designing relevant objects. Efforts in this space can positively contribute to social change through object design.

象限二指明了那些旨在设计物品，以终端使用者为重心的项目与做法。这些项目中的设计师采用内部视角，对终端使用者有深入认识，甚至会在设计过程中让使用者参与进来。这一象限中的工作使用传统的一套以人为中心的设计方法与过程；它是一条设计师理解终端使用者并以他（的诉求）为优先，意在设计相关物品的路线。通过对象（物品）设计，这一路线上的努力也能带来积极的社会变迁。

个案研究：NeoNurture——“汽车配件“育婴箱

Case Study: NeoNurture – The “Car Parts” Incubator

Design that Matters sought to address the fact that a lack of hospitable environments for newborns in developing countries contributes to 1.8 million infant deaths yearly (“NeoNurture” [n.d.]). To address this they designed NeoNurture: The “Car Parts” Incubator, a device used to reduce newborn deaths caused by a lack of warmth postdelivery. The design team developed the concept through finding answers to critical, culturally relevant questions about sustainability, use, and maintenance to make their product successful in the context in which it was to be deployed (ibid.). Research guided their decision to design an incubator out of used and discarded car parts, an abundant resource in the developing countries in which they were working. The result was an affordable, accessible, and sustainable option for a sanitary incubator that can be used in rural areas and repaired by anyone who knows how to repair a car. NeoNurture contrasts with conventional incubators, which are financially inaccessibleand impossible to be repaired by the populations most affected by this phenomenon (ibid.).NeoNurture is characteristic of a quadrant two inside perspective because it used human-centered design to create a culturally relevant and viable object. Both the project and design exhibit an informed point of view, cultivated through interviews, qualitative data quantitative data, and first-hand experience and observations (ibid.).

Design that Matters(2001年由MIT学生创建的设计方面的社会企业，关注发展中国家人们的基本需求)力求强调这一事实：发展中国家新生儿医疗条件的缺乏，导致了每年1800万婴儿的死亡。为了解决这一问题，他们设计了NeoNurture汽车配件育婴箱，这一设备用于减少产后恒温箱的缺乏所导致的新生儿死亡。设计团队通过寻找有关可持续性、使用与维护这些方面的，在文化上适宜的关键问题的答案，发展出这一概念，让他们的产品在它部署的环境中成功。研究引导着他们决定了设计出由使用过或废弃的汽车部件制成的育婴箱，这些部件在他们正工作的国家里有着充分的资源。成品是一个能让人买得起用得上的，可持续使用的公共育婴箱，人们能在农村区域使用它，而且任何会修车的人都能维修它。常规的育婴箱的对于受到医疗条件匮乏而感到困扰的人群来说是难以负担且很难维修的，而NeoNurture避免了这些状况。

Neonurture是第2象限内部视角的典型，因为它使用了以人为本的设计来创造一件文化上适宜且可行的物品。项目和设计都是基于访谈，定性数据，定量数据，第一手的经验与观察之上的。

第三象限:传统的设计：以外部的视角设计物品

Quadrant Three, Traditional Design: Designing an Object with an Outside Perspective

Quadrant three encompasses projects aiming to design objects as well, however, designers working on these projects are characterized by employing an outside perspective. Work in this space may have socially focused content, but the social groups addressed are not intensively studied or included by the designer and are not necessarily represented and reflected in the design process or outcome. The designer is not embedded in the community the design addresses and, therefore, the target community has less trust in and interaction with the designer, if any. Social design work in this space often manifests in two ways. The first is that organizations interested in bringing awareness to a certain issue hire a designer and provide them with relevant content. Second, particularly inspired designers feel inclined to practice or contribute to socially focused work on their own accord. This quadrant aligns with strategic consultant David Berman’s message in do good design: But rather than sharing our cycles of style, consumption, and chemical addictions, designers can use their professional power, persuasive skills, and wisdom to help distribute ideas that the world really needs: health information, conflict resolution, tolerance, technology, freedom of the press, freedom of

speech, human rights, democracy … (Berman 2009: 39)

第3象限指向了同样旨在设计物品，然而，在这些项目中工作的设计师，以持有外部的立场为特征。这一路线上的工作可能也会有一些社会关切，但是它所提及的社会群体并没有被设计师深入地研究过或没有被研究涵盖到，也没有在研究的过程或结果中得到必要的描绘或经过必要的反思。设计师并没有深入设计所指向的社区，因此，目标社区和设计师之间没什么信任或互动，甚至可能完全没有。

这一路线中的社会设计工作常以两种面目出现。第一种是想让人们关注特定议题的组织雇佣了设计师并向他们提供相关内容。第二种，特别有灵感的设计师有意练习或为有着社会关怀的作品自愿做贡献。这一象限与战略顾问David Berman在do good design这本书中提到的一段话不谋而合了：

但是比起分享我们周期循环的时尚风格、消费习惯与药物成瘾，设计师还能够使用他们的专业权力、劝说技术与智慧来传播世界真正需要的那些想法：健康信息，武装冲突的解决方案，宽容，技术，新闻自由，言论自由，人权，民主。。。。。。

个案研究：由John St.设计的战争儿童运动

Case Study: War Child Campaign Designed by John St.

War Child “works with children all over the world to reduce the effects of poverty, provide an education, and to defend and promote child rights” through awareness efforts and nine international projects (War Child [n.d.]). As a not-for-profit project, the Torontobased design firm John St. designed print, film, and social media elements for a War Child campaign (John St [n.d.]). The campaign was designed to promote awareness around, and raise funds for, child soldiers. The campaign received much attention and several accolades, particularly for its mock child soldier camp held in North America. John St.’s work brought an important issue to public attention, using the firm’s talents and power of persuasion as a design agency to assist a charity organization in their efforts to better inform public thought and opinion. As John St. was not embedded in the community of child soldiers which the campaign addressed and received information from the non-profit with which it partnered rather than cultivating theinformation for its campaign itself, John St., in this example, exemplifies an outside perspective. However, it is noteworthy to mention that design projects such as these do contribute in an impactful way to cultivating social change. These types of projects are important and accessible avenues for designers with socially focused intentions who want to work within the social realm and contribute to positive social change, but perhaps may be without the available amount of commitment and expertise required of projects in quadrants one and two.

“战争儿童”项目“与全世界的孩子们一起减少贫困，提供教育，捍卫并推动孩子的权利”，通过努力吸引关注，由九个国际项目推进。作为一个非盈利项目，以多伦多为据点的设计公司John St.为“战争儿童”运动设计了印刷品，影片与社交媒体元素。这些是为了引起人们对儿童士兵的关注，并为他们募捐。这一运动引起了许多关注并获得了一些荣誉，尤其是它反讽了在北美的儿童兵营。John St.的工作把这一重要议题提到了公众的眼前，利用它们作为设计机构的才能与说服力来支持慈善组织，以协助它们更好地向公众普及这些事实从而对公众产生积极影响。

John St.一系列关于儿童士兵的运动的海报之一

John St.并没有深入这次宣传中所突出的儿童士兵社群中，它们从合作的非营利组织处获取的信息并不是第一手信息。在这个例子中的John St.呈现为外部的视角。然而值得注意的是，这些设计项目确实也有效地培养了社会的改变。这些类型的项目对于这样的一些设计师是可行且重要的路径：有着社会关切，想在社会领域中工作并为积极的社会改变做贡献，但可能没有第1、2象限中所提及的足够的投入与专业技能，

第四象限:设计的新殖民主义：以外部视角设计情境

Quadrant Four, Design Neocolonialism: Designing a Situation with an Outside Perspective

Quadrant four encompasses projects that, like quadrant one, aim to design situations. However, the designers in this space employ an outside perspective. Due to these inherent contradictions, quadrant four becomes a very precarious space in which to work; the outside perspective that defines this quadrant does not allow for the necessary components of effective situation design (such as trust and deep understanding) to exist. An outside perspective means that problem definitions and their solutions are identified and created in isolation from the addressed community and their particular social context(s); therefore, interventions in this space often exhibit a disconnect between the people involved and the social phenomena addressed. Consequently, there is a very high risk of cultural bias (Lasky 2013: 12) as well as what the authors define as deign neocolonialism in this quadrant. Neocolonialism is defined as “the continued exercise of political or economic influence over a society in the absence of formal political control” (Ritzer 2007). Further distilled, neocolonialism can be understood as influence over a population, community, or society in the absence of direct, obvious or formal control. History shows that instances of neocolonialism can provide tangential social “benefits,” such as the creation of schools. However, we must question the cost of such tangential “benefits.” For example, if schools are developed as a result of neocolonialism, it is likely that the curriculum will be influenced, either partially or completely, by the culturally enforced educational ideals of the implementer, not those of the people being “served”. Despite laudable intentions or seemingly beneficial outcomes, negative impacts at the communities’ expense often result. Providing education that doesn’t include a community’s culture, norms, or values serves to erase community and replace it with a “neocolony” of the creator. These negative impacts are why neocolonialism is a force for change that is fundamentally imposing rather than empowering. Design projects that fall into quadrant four are considered design neocolonialism. Unfortunately, contemporary social design initiatives often operate in this quadrant. While designers likely do not actively seek to impose their values or ideas on others, “influence happens organically” (Altbach 2013). Seeking to create social change while employing an outside perspective is incredibly problematic and morally flawed; such approaches do not facilitate or create culturally sensitive, empowering, or lasting (and therefore successful) social change. Projects that do not understand, consider, or respect users’ values, socioeconomic contexts, or the inherent agency end-users rightfully should have over their own situations are neocolonial in nature and are characteristic of quadrant four initiatives.

第四象限指向了如象限1那样旨在设计情境的项目。然而，这条路线上的设计师却持有着外部视角。由于这些内在的矛盾，象限4成为了非常不稳固的路线；限制了这一象限的外部视角，使得对于情境设计来说必不可少的组成部份（比如信任与深入的认识）不复存在。外部的立场意味着对于问题的定义与解决方案都是孤立于相应社区及其特定环境而提出和制造的；因此，这种干预常常显现出它提及的社会现象与它所涉及的人群之间的分裂。结果就是，这一象限中出现文化偏见以及“设计的新殖民主义”的风险很高。

新殖民主义被定义为“不通过正式的政治控制手段进行，但持续给某一地区施加政治经济影响的行为”。进一步提炼，新殖民主义可以理解为不通过直接，明显，正式的控制手段而对某一人口，社区或社会施加了影响。历史表明新殖民主义的例子可以带来外围的社会“好处”，比如学校的创设。然而，我们必须质问这些外围“好处”的代价。举例而言，如果学校因新殖民主义而发展，很有可能它的课程安排就会受到部分或全部的影响，是由制订人在文化层面推行的教育理念，而不再受“服务对象”的理念左右。无论它的意图是否可嘉，结果看上去是否有益，社区付出的代价常常会带来负面后果。它提供一种教育，这种教育不包括社区的文化，规范或价值观，而用来抹除社区并以创造者的“新殖民地”取而代之。这些负面效应使得新殖民主义是一种根本上衣冠楚楚的力量，而不是赋权的变迁力量。

落入象限4中的设计项目被认为是设计的新殖民主义。不幸的是，当代的社会设计创意常常落入其中。尽管设计师可能没有主动把自己的价值与理念强加于人，“影响会有机地发生”。试图在置身其外时制造社会变迁，这种行为难以置信地成问题并且在道德上有缺陷；这些做法不会协助或创造有文化敏感度的，赋权的，或持续性的（从而是成功的）社会变迁。那些不去理解、考虑或尊重使用者的价值观、社会经济环境或终端使用者对于其自身处境本应具有的内在能动性的项目，在本质上是新殖民主义的，而这是象限4中的做法的特征。

案例研究：让每个孩子拥有一台电脑

Case Study: One Laptop Per Child

One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) is a nonprofit organization working to provide rugged, low cost laptops to children in developing countries. The OLPC initiative’s mission is to “empower the world’s poorest children through education” (One Laptop Per Child [n.d.]). The OLPC initiative is a quadrant four project because it illustrates employing an outside perspective in an effort to change a situational context; OLPC highlights the dangers associated with quadrant four initiatives. Although a physical laptop is the design vehicle, the aim of the project is to improve education and increase information access through a situation-centered design. The laptop was developed in isolation from the end-using communities and was employed via, “almost in every way, a traditional top down” approach (Nussbaum 2007). The project has been described as a “parachute” effort where “cultural disconnects kept kids from benefitting from the machines” (“Peru’s One Laptop Per Child” 2012). Aiming to “transform communities” through education and information access is a situational context that requires a deep understanding of the existing education system, context(s) surrounding information access, cultural values, and political landscape(s) (One Laptop Per Child [n.d.]). Because the project was exclusive of these necessary elements which would have provided the OLPC creators with the insight to make their product culturally relevant, the laptop was subsequently not embraced by or useful to the communities it intended to serve. Unfortunately, OLPC exemplifies the design neocolonialism that occurs frequently when designers attempt to change situations they do not sufficiently understand, or are not able to know if they sufficiently understand.

“让每个孩子都拥有一台笔记本电脑”(OLPC）是一个致力于向发展中国家的孩子提供平价电脑的非营利组织。OLPC倡议的任务是“通过教育为世界上最穷的孩子赋权”。OLPC的倡议落在第四象限是因为，他试图改变具体的使用情境，却描绘并采用了外部的立场与视角；OLPC提醒了人们象限4中的倡议带来的危险。尽管笔记本电脑在物理上是这一设计的媒介，可别忘记这一项目的主旨是通过以情境为中心的设计来改善教育并提高（孩子们）获取信息的能力。电脑的开发过程中完全不与目标社群交换信息，使用时，则是“传统的自上而下分发的所有方法都用了一遍”。这个项目被描述为“像降落伞一样”，使“孩子们在文化上与它相隔绝，一直无法从这些机器中受益”。

通过教育和信息联通旨在“转变社区”，要实现这一具体情境，是需要有对既有的教育体制，对获取信息的环境，对文化价值观与政治景观都进行深入理解的。因为这一项目不包含这些必要的元素，（它们本可以带给OLPC创立者使产品与文化相适宜的洞察力），结果使笔记本电脑没能被它原本可以服务的社区接受，没能对这些孩子有用。不幸的是，OLPC呈现了那些常见的设计新殖民主义的典型--在设计师并没有充分理解具体环境的时候就给到解决方案。

结论与不足

Conclusions and Limitations

Social design has forged, somewhat haphazardly, into a new space where the design of social systems has become an equal opportunity focus for a variety of design disciplines. Without first considering processes, methodologies, frameworks, ethics, and foundations for the field, the freedom and dynamism currently present within social design weaken the legitimacy and potential efficacy of the field. Continuing this mode of practice can and does contribute to causing harm and negatively impacting populations in an attempt to make social change.

社会设计（或是杂乱地）打造了一条新的路线，在这里社会体系的设计成为了与各种设计学科等量齐观的焦点。没有去首先考虑过程、方法、框架、学科伦理、领域基础等问题，如今社会设计内部的自由放任与活力削弱了这一领域的合理性和潜在的效力。继续这么做，就会在试图引起社会改变时，导致对目标人群的伤害与负面影响。

Since addressing all aspects requiring improvement within the social design field (or developing a comprehensive critique of social design practice) is beyond the scope of this article, this work is primarily research and pre-design focused. The authors do not argue that the suggestions previously discussed are a panacea for the issues surrounding social design. To the contrary, it is believed that these ideas will need further refinement over time via collaborative dialogue and constructive augmentation among social design educators, practitioners, and students.

既然面面俱到是需要社会设计领域内部的改进的（或对社会设计实践展开综合批评），这超出了本文的视野，那么本文就聚焦于研究和设计前的准备这部分。本文作者不主张上述讨论过的建议是对社会设计相关议题的灵丹妙药。相反，这些想法需要长时间的后续调整，通过社会设计教育者、从业者与学生之间的合作型对话与建设。

The bias of the authors is rooted firmly in social science and grass-roots development perspectives – a view is held that there are certain paramount traditions within the social sciences (such as rigorous research and comprehensive problem definition) which social design will need to adopt and adapt to as it continues to merge design and the social. However, the fact that social design is a developing field can be a potential strength, if approached thoughtfully. Social design has the opportunity to learn from the history and mistakes that fields like anthropology (playing a hand in colonialism) have made and avoid repeating them. Social design can also benefit immensely from the increasing populations of well-intentioned practitioners who are passionate about and committed to this sector of

design work. The growing social design community shows promise of ambition, talent, and laudable aspirations on top of a desire to address our ever-increasing list of social challenges. That said, social change is no small feat. If social design seeks to educate students or provide practitioners with tools to create transformative change, social design must become rooted in a strong, well-developed, socially focused foundation.

一些偏见植根于社会科学与基层发展的观点——认为社会科学中有一些最重要的传统（比如严格的研究与综合的问题定义），而社会设计需要采用并适应这些传统，因为它继续使设计与社会相融合。然而，如果其方法经过深思，社会设计的不成熟也是它潜在的优势。社会设计有机会从历史与一些领域所犯过的错误中学习（比如人类学曾成为殖民主义的帮凶），避免重蹈覆辙。社会设计还可以从越来越多具有良善愿望的从业者中受益无穷，他们对社会设计的工作热情满满且致力于此。日益壮大的社会设计社群展现出了雄心和才能，还有关注（我们生活中）日益增长的社会挑战这一渴望，以及更在此之上的可嘉抱负。有一种说法是，改变社会是个不小的壮举。如果社会设计意图教育学生或向从业者提供工具，从而带来大的转变，社会设计就必须植根于坚实的，良好发展的，以社会为本的基础之上。

译：李耀东

校对：Ellen

你可以点击这里了解更多我们开展的社区设计方法：

服务设计在社区场景下的应用 01- 社区调研

服务设计在社区场景下的应用 02- 发现洞见

社区PBL课程案例：学校X社区X社会

最近我们搭建了一个线上行动学习平台，对于在成功学所构建的暴力下喘息的你，行动村是一座陪伴你失败的学校。通过立项、找伙伴、协作、自组织，在行动村上试错与实践。

www.actionvillager.com

👇

行动村是什么？

开放式协作学习 | 我们做了一个后现代开源众包平台：行动村

Upbeing 教育矩阵，个人如何参与 (进阶式）