Participation in co-design: In search of a recipe for improved cookstoves in urban Indian slums
In 2015 we set to explore methods of breaking down the conventional dichotomies of ‘givers’ and ‘receivers’, ‘developers’ and ‘underdeveloped’, ‘experts’ and ‘users who need to be taught‘. The context of exploration? Urban Indian slums. The central actors? Residents of slums, designers and engineers, and us, the researchers. Main topic? Reducing indoor air pollution, designing efficient improved cookstoves, facilitating cooking and household chores, exploring participatory methods – really, it depends on who you asked within the community of practice. The challenge was to connect the interests of all involved, and to translate them within an inclusive project.
The first step was disputing the reliance on traditional spaces often automatically assigned to different actors, design activities, or stages of projects. To this extent, building and testing stoves was not limited to vacuumed, sterilized laboratories in research centres or in designers’ offices, but mainly in community owned laboratories set up in community housing. We sought to transfer decision-making regarding the direction of the project from university offices to community gatherings in front of local schools or at pathways’ crossings in the slums. At times, ‘users’ became ‘inquirers’ and ‘designers’, ‘designers’ became ‘field researchers’, and ‘researchers’ became ‘users’ and ‘project implementers’. Yet, such blurring of lines between actors did not succeed in removing them entirely, and the continuous exploration of methods to collaborate was often focused more on technical outputs, which legitimised certain types of participatory activities over others: the co-designing model, in spite of its celebration in literature, carries its own assumptions about spaces, actors, and collaboration. We highlight the need to depart from co-designing models as envisioned in Western settings, towards approaches that ground activities to a higher extent in the realities, experiences and knowledge of local communities.
While this can be a starting point in re-thinking the dominant discourses in tackling indoor air pollution, moving forward is by no means simple or easy. Thus, we are concluding with an open invitation for readers and practitioners to reflect on and share ways to move ahead, whether informed by theoretical reflection or practical lessons – or both.
Thank you, and looking forward to hearing from you!
Team Exhale
(Cristian T Ghergu, Agnes Meershoek, Preeti Sushama, Onno CP van Schayck, Luc P de Witte)
Blog post written by Cristian T Ghergu
We invite you to learn more about this experience by reading our article HERE. Free 30-day access is available for this article beginning 7 May 2018
After you’ve had a chance to read this piece, please share your thoughts, ideas, or experiences with our community in the comments below so we can continue this discussion!
Columbia Embury
www.wright.edu
www.wright.edu
Latest posts by Dusty Columbia Embury (see all)
- Making Public Deliberations Inclusive with Mixed Methods AR - October 26, 2020
- Participatory action research with Aboriginal Elders: Ngulluk Koolunga Ngulluk Koort project - October 12, 2020
- Bringing the relational self to ART: Interview with Dr. Yvonne Skipper - October 1, 2020