Core Sustainable Values: Examining the Consideration and Influence of Social Factors within Sustainable Technologies

Abstract:

Sustainable technologies appears to focus, as the name suggests, on the technological considerations, following more of a ‘how it works’ or ‘can do’ approach to sustainability. As sustainable concerns appear increasingly prevalent within engineering and design developments, immense practical knowledge is being developed which advances this area further. Moreover, users are progressively aware of the importance of sustainability and are driving demand further, commercially, to develop outcomes with a sustainable label attached. This paper draws from various multi-disciplinary research and theoretical concepts to examine the social influence within sustainable technologies. From this, debate surrounding sustainability can be opened up to a more rounded and responsible perspective. Social considerations are seen in this paper as fundamental to sustainable technology, not only in being classified as sustainable but also producing effective and understandable technical solutions for users.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 419-420)
• Pages: 773-776
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.419-420.773
• Online since: October 2009
• Authors: Phillipa Marsh
• Keywords: Design, Social Factors, Sustainability, Sustainable Technology

References

[1] V. Papanek in: The Green Imperative: Ecology and Ethics in Design and Architecture, Thames and Hudson, London UK (1995).

[2] H. Dodds in: Pathways and Paradigms for sustaining human communities, edited by R. J Lawrence in: Sustaining Human settlement: A challenge for the new Millennium, The Urban International Press, North Shields, pp.28-54 (2000).

[3] H. Rochracher, M. Ornetzeder in: Green Buildings in Context: Improving Social Learning Processes between Users and Producers, edited by S. Guy, vol. 28, 1, Built Environment Journal, Alexandreine Press (2002).

[4] D. Norman in: The Invisible Computer: Why good products can fail, MIT Press (1999).

[5] O. Pedgley and B. Sener in: Core values, edited by S. Welch issue 67 of New Design, DWB Associates Ltd, pp.32-35 (2009).

[6] L.H. Tasaki & A.D. Ball: Journal of Consumer Psychology, vol. 1, 2, pp.155-172 (1992).

[7] M. Csikszentmihalyi & E. Rochberg-Halton in: The Meaning of Things: Domestic symbols and the self, Cambridge University Press (1981).

DOI: 10.1017/cbo9781139167611

[8] G. McCracken in: Culture and Consumption: 'ew Approaches to the Symbolic Character of Consumer Goods and Activities, Indiana University Press (1990).

[9] A. Lymberis, in: European Commission's work on wearable Microsystems and smart textile systems, from Smart Fabrics Conference, Rome (2009).

[10] D. Norman, in: Emotional Design: why we love (and hate) everyday things, Basic Books (2005).

[11] D. Liddle, in: Adopting Technology, from Designing Interactions, edited by Bill Moggridge pp.239-251 (2007).

[12] P. Hekkert & P. Desment: International Journal of Design, vol. 1, 1, pp.57-66 (2007).

[13] J. Cagan & C. Vogel: Creating Breakthrough Products, Financial Times Prentice Hall. (2002).

[14] H. Dittmar: the Psychologist journal, vol. 16, 4, pp.206-210 (2004).

[15] C. Overbeeke, J. Djadjadiningrat, S. Wensveen, C. Hummels, in: Beauty in Usability: forget about ease of use!, in P. Jordan and W. Green (editors) Pleasure with Products: Beyond Usability, London and Philadelphia: Taylor Francis, pp.9-19 (2002).

DOI: 10.1201/9780203302279.sec1