Studi Komparasi Partisipasi Dalam Proses Perancangan Material Terbarukan

  • Eka Arifianty Puspita telkom university
  • Kahfiati Kahdar

Abstract

The participation approach has long been recognized in sustainable design projects. Some recent material innovations strive for demonstrating community participation in their design process to achieve a sustainable outcome. However, the terminology of participation can be perceived and implemented differently for actors involved in the process. Responding to the diverse understanding of participation, this paper tries to examine the implementation of participation in the making of two well-known renewable materials innovations, namely Totomoxtle and Pinatex. The methodology used in this research is a comparative descriptive which is analyzed through literature and comparative studies by referring to the ladder of participation theory by Arnstein, the form of participation by White, and the participation in design by Lee. Based on the analysis, there are different levels of participation held by actors and also various forms of participation occur in the design process. Moreover, the comparative studies also show that the actors who occupy a similar level of participation do not directly comprise a similar form and function of participation. However, the diverse forms and levels of participation in sustainable innovation establish a different type of relation and space for interaction between designers and other actors involved.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1]. Wittmayer, Julia Maria, Schäpke, Niko, van Steenbergen, Frank, et al. 2014. Making sense of sustainability transitions locally: how action research contributes to addressing societal challenges. Critical Policy Studies; 8: 465–485.
[2]. Loorbach, D, & Frantzeskaki, N., Avelino, F. Sustainability Transitions Research: Transforming Science and Practice for Societal Change. Annual Review of Environment and Resources.
[3]. Wahl, Daniel Chirstian, & Baxter, Seaton. The Designer’s Role in Facilitating Sustainable. MIT press journals; Volume 24,.
[4]. Elkington, John. 2013. Enter the triple bottom line. The Triple Bottom Line: Does it All Add Up; 1: 1–16.
[5]. Ekong, E. Introduction to rural sociology. Dove publishers, Akwa-Ibom, Nigeria.
[6]. Ofuoku, AU. 2011. Effect of community participation on sustainability of rural water projects in Delta Central agricultural zone of Delta State , Nigeria. 130–136.
[7]. Burns, D, Heywood, F., Taylor, M, Wilde, P, et al. Making community participation meaningful: a handbook for development and assesment. 2011. Bristol: The Policy Press.
[8]. World development report 1999-2000:Enteringthe21 Century. 2000.
[9]. Alexiou, Katerina, Zamenopoulos, Theodore & Alevizou, Giota. 2013. Connected communities: Valuing community-led design. 14.
[10]. Comerio, Mary C. 1984. COMMUNITY DESIGN?: IDEALISM AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP Author ( s ): MARY C . COMERIO Source?: Journal of Architectural and Planning Research , December 1984 , Vol . 1 , No . 4 Published by?: Locke Science Publishing Company , Inc . Stable URL?: https://www.jst. 1: 227–243.
[11]. Arnstein, Sherry R, & Arnstein, Sherry R. 2007. 10.1080@01944366908977225.Pdf. 37–41.
[12]. White, Sarah C. 1996. Depoliticising development: The uses and abuses of participation. Development in Practice; 6: 6.
[13]. Lee, Yanki. 2008. Design participation tactics: the challenges and new roles for designers in the co-design process. CoDesign; 4: 31–50.
[14]. Laposse, Fernando. Totomoxtle, http://www.fernandolaposse.com/projects/totomoxtle/.
[15]. Hijosa, CA. Pinatex: The design development of a new sustainable material. 2015. Royal College of Art London.
[16]. Haule, R. Assessment of factors affecting community participation towards water projects sustainability in Kinondoni municipal. 2017.
[17]. Vardouli, T. 2015. Who designs?. InEmpowering users through design. Springer, Cham; 13–41.
[18]. Mansuri, Ghazala, & Rao, Vijayendra. 2004. Community-based and -driven development: A critical review. World Bank Research Observer; 19: 1–39.
[19]. Salinas, Lara, Thorpe, Adam, Prendiville, Alison, et al. Civic engagement as participation in designing for services. ServDes2018 - Service Design Proof of Concept, http://www.servdes.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/26.pdf (2018).
[20]. Purbaningrum, Dini Gandini. 2019. Tipologi Kepentingan dalam Partisipasi Masyarakat Pada Pembangunan Ruang Publik Terpadu Ramah Anak Kenaga di Kelurahan Cideng Jakarta Pusat. Kajian Ilmu Sosial; 30: 6–18.
[21]. Lee, Yanki. Design Participation Tactics: Enabling People to Design their Built Environment. 2007.
[22]. Lee, Yanki, & Cassim, Julia. 2009. How the inclusive design process enables social inclusion. Proceedings of the IASDR 2009 Conference; 18–22.
Published
2021-12-31
How to Cite
PUSPITA, Eka Arifianty; KAHDAR, Kahfiati. Studi Komparasi Partisipasi Dalam Proses Perancangan Material Terbarukan. JURNAL RUPA, [S.l.], v. 6, n. 2, p. 99-111, dec. 2021. ISSN 2503-1066. Available at: <//journals.telkomuniversity.ac.id/rupa/article/view/3788>. Date accessed: 27 apr. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.25124/rupa.v6i2.3788.
Section
Article