Prototyping and the new spirit of policy-making

References

• Bailey, J., and P. Lloyd. 2016. “The Introduction of Design to Policymaking.” Paper presented at DRS2016: Design Research Society Conference, Brighton, June 27–30.
   Google Scholar
• Bason, C., ed. 2014. Design for Policy. Aldershot: Gower.
   Google Scholar
• Binder, T., E. Brandt, P. Ehn, and J. Halse. 2015. “Democratic Design Experiments: Between Parliament and Laboratory.” CoDesign 11 (3–4): 152–165.10.1080/15710882.2015.1081248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Björgvinsson, E., P. Ehn, and P.-A. Hillgren. 2010. “Participatory Design and ‘Democratizing Innovation’.” Paper presented at 11th Participatory Design Conference (PDC 2010), Sydney, November 29–December 3.
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, L., and E. Chiapello. 2005. The New Spirit of Capitalism. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Breckon, J. 2015. Better Public Services Through Experimental Government. London: Alliance for Useful Evidence.
   Google Scholar
• Buchenau, M., and J. F. Suri. 2000. “Experience Prototyping.” Proceedings of DIS ‘00. Brooklyn, New York, August 17–19.
   Google Scholar
• von Busch, O., and K. Palmås. 2016. “Designing Consent: Can Design Thinking Manufacture Democratic Capitalism?” Organizational Aesthetics 5 (2): 10–24.
   Google Scholar
• Chow, R. 2013. “The RIP + MIX Method and Reflection on its Prototypes.” In Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century, edited by L. Valentine, 155–168. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Christiansen, J., and L. Bunt. 2014. “Innovating Public Policy: Allowing for Social Complexity and Uncertainty in the Design of Public Outcomes.” In Design for Policy, edited by C. Bason, 41–56. Aldershot: Gower.
   Google Scholar
• Civil Servant. 2016. Unpublished interview with Lucy Kimbell.
   Google Scholar
• Clarke, C. 2014. The ‘Too Difficult’ Box: The Big Issues Politicians Can’t Crack. New York: Biteback Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Corsín Jiménez, A. 2014. “The Prototype: More Than Many and Less Than One.” Journal of Cultural Economy 7 (4): 381–398.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coughlan, P., J. F. Suri, and K. Canales. 2007. “Prototypes as (Design) Tools for Behavioral and Organizational Change.” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 43 (1): 1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Design Commission. 2013. Restarting Britain 2. Design and Public Services. London: Policy Connect.
   Google Scholar
• Design Council. 2013. Design for Public Good. Accessed April 4, 2016. http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/resources/report/design-public-good
   Google Scholar
• Drew, C. 2016. Prototyping a New Health and Work Service. Published February 17, 2016. https://openpolicy.blog.gov.uk/2016/02/17/prototyping-a-new-health-and-work-service/
   Google Scholar
• Dunleavy, P., H. Margetts, S. Bastow, and J. Tinkler. 2005. “New Public Management Is Dead: Long Live Digital-era Governance.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 16 (3): 467–494.10.1093/jopart/mui057
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehn, P., E. M. Nilsson, and R. Topgaard. 2014. Making Futures: Marginal Notes on Innovation, Design, and Democracy. Boston, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013. Implementing an Action Plan for Design-Driven Innovation. Brussels: European Commission.
   Google Scholar
• Floyd, C. 1984. “A Systematic Look at Prototyping.” In Approaches to Prototyping, edited by R. Budde, K. Kuhlenkamp, L. Mathiassen, and H. Zullighoven, 1–18. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Franzato, C. 2011. “Design as Speculation.” Design Philosophy Papers 9 (1): 23–39.10.2752/144871311X13968752924392
   Google Scholar
• Gero, J. S. 1990. “Design Prototypes: A Knowledge Representation Schema for Design.” AI Magazine 11 (4): 26–36.10.1109/62.63160
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Government Digital Service. 2016a. Agile Delivery. Accessed December 4, 2016. https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/agile-delivery
   Google Scholar
• Government Digital Service. 2016b. Start by Learning User Needs. Published April 4, 2016. https://www.gov.uk/service-manual/user-research/start-by-learning-user-needs
   Google Scholar
• Halse, J. 2014. “Tools for Ideation: Evocative Visualization and Playful Modelling as Drivers of the Policy Process.” In Design for Policy, edited by C. Bason, 199–209. Aldershot: Gower.
   Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. 2014. Seventeen Contradictions and the End of Capitalism. London: Profile Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hatchuel, A. 2001. “Towards Design Theory and Expandable Rationality: The Unfinished Programme of Herbert Simon.” Journal of Management and Governance 5 (3–4): 260–273.10.1023/A:1014044305704
   Google Scholar
• Hillgren, P.-A., A. Seravalli, and A. Emilson. 2011. “Prototyping and Infrastructuring in Design for Social Innovation.” CoDesign 7 (3–4): 169–183.10.1080/15710882.2011.630474
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hobday, M., A. Boddington, and A. Grantham. 2012. “Policies for Design and Policies for Innovation: Contrasting Perspectives and Remaining Challenges.” Technovation 32: 272–281.10.1016/j.technovation.2011.12.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houde, S., and C. Hill. 1997. “What Do Prototypes Prototype?” In Handbook of Human–Computer Interaction. 2nd ed., edited by M. Helander, T. Landauer, and P. Prabhu, 367–381. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B. V.
   Google Scholar
• Howlett, M. 2015. “From Tools to Toolkits in Policy Design Studies: The New Design Orientation Towards Policy Formulation Research.” Policy and Politics 43 (2): 291–311.10.1332/147084414X13992869118596
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howlett, M., and M. Ramesh. 2003. Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles and Policy Subsystems. Toronto: OUP.
   Google Scholar
• Huppatz, D. 2015. “Revisiting Herbert Simon’s ‘Science of Design’.” Design Issues 31 (2): 29–40.10.1162/DESI_a_00320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IHI. 2017. How to Improve. Accessed February 3, 2017. http://www.ihi.org/resources/Pages/HowtoImprove/default.aspx
   Google Scholar
• Jasanoff, S. 2004. States of Knowledge: The Co-production of Science and the Social Order. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203413845
   Google Scholar
• Julier, G. 2017. Economies of Design. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Kimbell, L. 2015. Applying Design Approaches to Policymaking: Discovering Policy Lab. Brighton: University of Brighton.
   Google Scholar
• Kimbell, L. 2016. “Design in the Time of Policy Problems.” Paper presented at DRS2016: Design Research Society Conference, Brighton, June 27–30.
   Google Scholar
• Kruth, J. P., M. C. Leu, and T. Nakagawa. 1998. “Progress in Additive Manufacturing and Rapid Prototyping.” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology 47 (2): 525–540.10.1016/S0007-8506(07)63240-5
   Google Scholar
• La Region 27. 2016. A Lab to Transform Public Policies. Accessed December 3, 2016. http://www.la27eregion.fr/en/
   Google Scholar
• Lash, S., and J. Urry. 1988. The End of Organized Capitalism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Law, D. 1985. Prototyping: A State of the Art Report. Manchester: NCC.
   Google Scholar
• Liker, J. 2004. The Toyota Way. New York: McGraw Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Lodato, T., and C. DiSalvo. 2016. “Issue-oriented Hackathons as Material Participation.” New Media and Society 18 (4): 539–557.10.1177/1461444816629467
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayhew, P. J., and P. A. Dearnley. 1987. “An Alternative Prototyping Classification.” The Computer Journal 30 (6): 481–484.10.1093/comjnl/30.6.481
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mintrom, M., and J. Luetjens. 2016. “Design Thinking in Policymaking Processes: Opportunities and Challenges.” Australian Journal of Public Administration 75: 391–402.10.1111/aupa.2016.75.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mulgan, G. 2009. The Art of Public Strategy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholls, A. 2008. Social Entrepreneurship: New Models of Sustainable Social Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nicholls, A., and A. Murdock, eds. 2011. Social Innovation: Blurring Boundaries to Reconfigure Markets. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, E., and J. Rutter. 2016. Learning the Lessons from Universal Credit. Institute for Government. Accessed December 3, 2016. http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/publications/learning-lessons-universal-credit
   Google Scholar
• Opening Governance. 2016. MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Opening Governance. Accessed December 3, 2016. http://www.opening-governance.org
   Google Scholar
• Osherson, D. N., and E. E. Smith. 1981. “On the adequacy of Prototype Theory as a Theory of Concepts.” Cognition 9 (1): 35–58.10.1016/0010-0277(81)90013-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ries, E. 2011. The Lean Start Up. How Relentless Change Creates Radically Successful Businesses. New York: Crown Business.
   Google Scholar
• Robert, G., and A. Macdonald. 2017. “Co-Design, Organisational Creativity and Quality Improvement in the Healthcare Sector: ‘Designerly’ or ‘Design-like’?” In Designing for Service: Key Issues and Directions, edited by D. Sangiorgi and A. Prendiville, 117–129. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Rosenqvist, T., and C. Mitchell. 2016. “Redesigning Governance – A Call for Design Across Three Orders of Governance.” Paper presented at DRS2016: Design Research Society Conference, Brighton, June 27–30.
   Google Scholar
• Sabatier, P. A., ed. 2006. Theories of the Policy Process. 2nd ed. Boulder: Westview Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N. 2013. “Prototyping for the Design Spaces of the Future.” In Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century, edited by L. Valentine, 59–74. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N., and Pieter Jan Stappers. 2014a. “Editorial.” CoDesign 10 (1): 1–4.10.1080/15710882.2014.896584
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders, Elizabeth B.-N., and Pieter Jan Stappers. 2014b. “Probes, Toolkits and Prototypes: Three Approaches to Making in Co-Designing.” CoDesign 10 (1): 5–14.10.1080/15710882.2014.888183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sangiorgi, D., and A. Prendiville. 2017. Designing for Service: Key Issues and Directions. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Schrage, M. 2014. The Innovator’s Hypothesis: How Cheap Experiments are Worth More Than Good Ideas. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schwartz, F. J. 2013. “Prototopia: Craft, Type and Utopia in Historical Perspective.” In Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century, edited by L. Valentine, 115–124. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Simonsen, J., and T. Robertsen, eds. 2012. International Handbook of Participatory Design. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stappers, Pieter Jan. 2013. “Prototypes as a Central Vein for Knowledge Development.” In Prototype: Design and Craft in the 21st Century, edited by L. Valentine, 85–98. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Stephens, A., and L. Downe. 2016. “Government as a Platform.” Government Digital Service Blog. Published July 22, 2016. https://gds.blog.gov.uk/category/government-as-a-platform/
   Google Scholar
• Thrift, N. 2005. Knowing Capitalism. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Wilkie, A. 2013. “Prototyping as Event: Designing the Future of Obesity.” Journal of Cultural Economy 7 (4): 476–492.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilkie, A., and I. Farias, eds. 2015. Studio Studies: Operations, Topologies & Displacements. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Wood, D., and K. Kang. 1992. A Classification and Bibliography of Software Prototyping. Pittsburgh, PA: Software Engineering Institute, Carnegie Mellon University.
   Google Scholar
• Womack, J. P., D. T. Jones, and D. Roos. 1990. The Machine that Changed the World. New York: MacMillan Press.
   Google Scholar