80
W. Chu et al.
products and services. Over the past decade, design for sustainable behavior has
become a significant constituent of the social perspective in circular consumption
and eco-design (Wever 2012). With the specific goal to help design practitioners
to better support users in performing desired environmentally sustainable behavior,
various design tools and methods, such as Design with Intent Method (Lockton
et al. 2010) and Behavior Change Design Sprints (Colusso et al. 2018) have been
developed and evaluated by researchers from the design for sustainable behavior and
circular design field.
However, one major challenge which has been neglected in the development
process of these tools is that the user-product/service interaction models and users’
corresponding behaviors are not static. Rather, they are under a constant dynamic
development and transition process. Furthermore, as today’s products are often
product–service combinations, function in networks with other products and other
people (Wever et al. 2008), users’ doings (the term doings here refers to behaviors,
habits, and practices) can, to a large extent, be influenced by changes within the physical environment, socio-cultural background, and the presence of other available
products and services (Chu et al. 2018).
The lack of consideration of the dynamic users’ needs and behaviors has already
become a significant contributor to the problem of rapid obsolescence (Kaptelinin
and Nardi 2012) and rebound effects (Hilty et al. 2011). In other words, a product or
service which aims to influence users’ environmental and social behavior towards a
more sustainable direction at a specific point in time does not always necessarily
lead to a sustainable outcome in a long run. To address this particular challenge,
we believe what is currently lacking is a design-focused theoretical perspective that
incorporates the understanding of the interaction between users and products/services
with users’ long-term and dynamic behavior into the sustainable behavior and circular
design process (Kaptelinin and Nardi 2012; DiSalvo et al. 2010).
In recent design research practices, the activity-centered design (ACD) approach
and its theoretical foundation—activity theory (AT), have been applied as a promising
way to inform sustainable design implications in transformative design studies
(Kaptelinin and Nardi 2012). What distinguishes AT from most of other dominant
social or psychology theories is its particular focus on the changing nature of human
activity systems and the role that artefacts (and consequently, the design of the artefacts) play in such dynamic systems (Kuutti 2011). Drawing on this theoretical focus,
ACD offers a unique perspective that informs how user activities can be mediated,
changed, retained, and transformed by designed artefacts used in both individuals’
daily life and the broader cultural-historical context (Kaptelinin and Nardi 2006;
Norman 2005).
However, despite the fact that AT & ACD has been used in a wide range of design
studies to guide design interventions, due to its rich but complex theoretical nature in
social and phycological disciplines, it provides little support for design practitioners
to apply this lens in their actual design practices, especially for the design explorations
of sustainability issues (Williams 2009; Li and Landay 2008; Duignan et al. 2006).
In this ongoing study, we aim to explore the practical insights and implications that
an activity theoretical lens can offer for sustainable behavior design. In this paper, we
W. Chu et al.
products and services. Over the past decade, design for sustainable behavior has
become a significant constituent of the social perspective in circular consumption
and eco-design (Wever 2012). With the specific goal to help design practitioners
to better support users in performing desired environmentally sustainable behavior,
various design tools and methods, such as Design with Intent Method (Lockton
et al. 2010) and Behavior Change Design Sprints (Colusso et al. 2018) have been
developed and evaluated by researchers from the design for sustainable behavior and
circular design field.
However, one major challenge which has been neglected in the development
process of these tools is that the user-product/service interaction models and users’
corresponding behaviors are not static. Rather, they are under a constant dynamic
development and transition process. Furthermore, as today’s products are often
product–service combinations, function in networks with other products and other
people (Wever et al. 2008), users’ doings (the term doings here refers to behaviors,
habits, and practices) can, to a large extent, be influenced by changes within the physical environment, socio-cultural background, and the presence of other available
products and services (Chu et al. 2018).
The lack of consideration of the dynamic users’ needs and behaviors has already
become a significant contributor to the problem of rapid obsolescence (Kaptelinin
and Nardi 2012) and rebound effects (Hilty et al. 2011). In other words, a product or
service which aims to influence users’ environmental and social behavior towards a
more sustainable direction at a specific point in time does not always necessarily
lead to a sustainable outcome in a long run. To address this particular challenge,
we believe what is currently lacking is a design-focused theoretical perspective that
incorporates the understanding of the interaction between users and products/services
with users’ long-term and dynamic behavior into the sustainable behavior and circular
design process (Kaptelinin and Nardi 2012; DiSalvo et al. 2010).
In recent design research practices, the activity-centered design (ACD) approach
and its theoretical foundation—activity theory (AT), have been applied as a promising
way to inform sustainable design implications in transformative design studies
(Kaptelinin and Nardi 2012). What distinguishes AT from most of other dominant
social or psychology theories is its particular focus on the changing nature of human
activity systems and the role that artefacts (and consequently, the design of the artefacts) play in such dynamic systems (Kuutti 2011). Drawing on this theoretical focus,
ACD offers a unique perspective that informs how user activities can be mediated,
changed, retained, and transformed by designed artefacts used in both individuals’
daily life and the broader cultural-historical context (Kaptelinin and Nardi 2006;
Norman 2005).
However, despite the fact that AT & ACD has been used in a wide range of design
studies to guide design interventions, due to its rich but complex theoretical nature in
social and phycological disciplines, it provides little support for design practitioners
to apply this lens in their actual design practices, especially for the design explorations
of sustainability issues (Williams 2009; Li and Landay 2008; Duignan et al. 2006).
In this ongoing study, we aim to explore the practical insights and implications that
an activity theoretical lens can offer for sustainable behavior design. In this paper, we