Towards practice-oriented design for sustainability: the compatibility with selected design fields

References

• Akrich, M. 1992. “The De-scription of Technical Objects.” In Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, edited by W. E. Bijker and J. Law, 205–224. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Beck, E. E. 2002. “P for Political: Participation is Not Enough.” Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems 14 (1): 77–92.
   Google Scholar
• Brezet, H., and C. van Hemel. 1997. Ecodesign: A Promising Approach to Sustainable Production and Consumption. Paris: UNEP.
   Google Scholar
• Brynjarsdóttir, H., M. Håkansson, J. Pierce, E. P. S. Bayner, C. DiSalvo, and P. Sengers. 2012. “Sustainability Unpersuaded: How Persuasion Narrows Our Vision of Sustainability.” Paper presented at CHI 2012, Austin, Texas, May 5–10.
   Google Scholar
• DiSalvo, C., J. Redström, and M. Watson. 2013. “Commentaries on the Special Issue on Practice-Oriented Approaches to Sustainable HCI.” ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction 20 (4): 26:1–26:15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Doyle, R., and A. R. Davies. 2013. “Towards Sustainable Household Consumption: Exploring a Practice Oriented Participatory Backcasting Approach for Sustainable Home Heating Practices in Ireland.” Journal of Cleaner Production 48: 260–271.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehn, P. 2008. “Participation in Design Things.” In Proceedings of the Tenth Anniversary Conference on Participatory Design 2008 (PDC’08), 92–101. Indianapolis, IN: Indiana University.
   Google Scholar
• Elias, E., E. Dekoninck, and S. Culley. 2009. “Quantifying the Energy Impacts of Use: A Product Energy Profile Approach.” Paper presented at 16th CIRP International Conference on Life Cycle Engineering, Cairo, Egypt, May 4–6.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, K. 2003. “Theory Construction in Design Research: Criteria: Approaches, and Methods.” Design Studies 24 (6): 507–522.
   Google Scholar
• Gaver, B., T. Dunne, and E. Pacenti. 1999. “Cultural Probes.” Interactions 6 (1): 21–29.
   Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. 2010. “Ontologies, Socio-technical Transitions (to Sustainability), and the Multi-level Perspective.” Research Policy 39 (4): 495–510.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guba, E. G., and Y. S. Lincoln. 1994. “Competing Paradigms in Qualitative Research.” In Handbook of Qualitative Research, edited by N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln, 105–117. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Hielscher, S., T. Fisher, and T. Cooper. 2007. “How Often Do You Wash Your Hair? Design as Disordering: Everyday Routines, Human Object Theories, Probes and Sustainability.” Paper presented at the 7th European Academy of Design Conference (EAD07): Dancing with Disorder: Design, Discourse and Disorder, Izmir, Turkey, April 11–13.
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, J., E. Shove, and M. Watson. 2007. “Products and Practices: Selected Concepts from Science and Technology Studies and from Social Theories of Consumption and Practice.” Design Issues 23 (2): 3–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ISO 9241–210. 2010. Ergonomics of Human–System Interaction – Part 210: Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems. Geneva: International Organization for Standardizations.
   Google Scholar
• Jégou, F., L. Joëlle, and G. Wallenborn. 2009. “Collaborative Design Sessions of Objects Proposing Energy-Saving Practices.” Paper presented at Joint Actions on Climate Change (JAOCC), Aalborg, Denmark, June 8–10.
   Google Scholar
• Jelsma, J., and M. Knot. 2002. “Designing Environmentally Efficient Services; A ‘Script’ Approach.” The Journal of Sustainable Product Design 2 (3–4): 119–130.
   Google Scholar
• Julier, G. 2007. “Design Practice Within a Theory of Practice.” Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal 1 (2): 43–50.
   Google Scholar
• Kimbell, L. 2011. “Designing for Service as One Way of Designing Services.” International Journal of Design 5 (2): 41–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kimbell, L. 2012. “Rethinking Design Thinking: Part II.” Design and Culture 4 (2): 129–148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korkman, O. 2006. “Customer Value Formation in Practice: A Practice-Theoretical Approach.” PhD thesis, Swedish School of Economy and Business Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Kuijer, L. 2014. “Implications of Social Practice Theory for Sustainable Design.” PhD thesis, TU Delft.
   Google Scholar
• Kuijer, L., and A. de Jong. 2012. “Identifying Design Opportunities For Reduced Household Resource Consumption: Exploring Practices of Thermal Comfort.” Journal of Design Research 10 (1/2): 67–85.
   Google Scholar
• Kuijer, L., A. de Jong, and D. van Eijk. 2013. “Practices as a Unit of Design: An Exploration of Theoretical Guidelines in a Study on Bathing.” ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction 20 (4): 21:1–21:22.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lawson, B. 1997. How Designers Think: The Design Process Demystified. 3rd ed. Oxford: Architectural Press.
   Google Scholar
• Matsuhashi, N., L. Kuijer, and A. de Jong. 2009. “A Culture-Inspired Approach to Gaining Insights for Designing Sustainable Practices.” Paper presented at EcoDesign 2009, Sapporo, Japan, December 7–9.
   Google Scholar
• Mazé, R., J. Gregory, and J. Redström. 2011. “Social Sustainability: A Design Research Approach to Sustainable Development.” In Diversity and Unity: Proceedings of IASDR2011, the 4th World Conference on Design Research, Delft, The Netherlands, October 31–November 4, edited by N. F. M. Roozenburg, L. L. Chen, and P. J. Stappers, 1–13. Delft: IASDR and TU Delft.
   Google Scholar
• McHardy, J., J. W. Olsen, J. Southern, and E. Shove. 2010. “Makeshift Users.” In Design Research: Synergies from Interdisciplinary Perspectives, edited by J. Simonsen, J. O. Bærenholdt, M. Büscher, and J. D. Scheuer, 95–108. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pantzar, M., and E. Shove. 2010. “Understanding Innovation in Practice: A Discussion of the Production and Re-production of Nordic Walking.” Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 22 (4): 447–461.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pettersen, I. N. 2013. “Changing Practices: The Role of Design in Supporting the Sustainability of Everyday Life.” Doctoral theses at NTNU, 2013:130, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), 558 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Pettersen, I. N., C. Boks, and A. Tukker. 2013. “Framing the Role of Design in Transformation of Consumption Practices: Beyond the Designer–Product–User Triad.” International Journal of Technology Management 63 (1/2): 70–103.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce, J. 2012. “Undesigning Technology: Considering the Negation of Design by Design.” Paper presented at CHI 2012, May 5–10.
   Google Scholar
• Pierce, J., Y. Strengers, P. Sengers, and S. Bødker. 2013. “Introduction to the Special Issue on Practice-Oriented Approaches to Sustainable HCI.” ACM Transactions on Computer–Human Interaction 20 (4): 20–20:8.
   Google Scholar
• Quist, J., W. Thissen, and P. Vergragt. 2011. “The Impact and Spin-Off of Participatory Backcasting: From Vision to Niche.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 78: 883–897.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reckwitz, A. 2002. “Toward a Theory of Social Practices: A Development in Culturalist Theorizing.” European Journal of Social Theory 5 (2): 243–263.
   Google Scholar
• Redström, J. 2006. “Towards User Design? On the Shift from Object to User as the Subject of Design.” Design Studies 27 (2): 123–139.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W. J., and M. M. Weber. 1973. “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Sciences 4: 155–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sanders, E. B. N., and P. J. Stappers. 2008. “Co-creation and the New Landscapes of Design.” CoDesign 4 (1): 5–18.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. 1996. Social Practices: A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schön, D. 1993. “Generative Metaphor: A Perspective on Problem-Setting in Social Policy.” In Metaphor and Thought, edited by A. Ortony. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, K., C. Bakker, and J. Quist. 2012. “Designing Change by Living Change.” Design Studies 33 (3): 279–297.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E. 2003. Comfort, Cleanliness and Convenience: The Social Organization of Normality. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E. 2011. “On the Difference Between Chalk and Cheese – A Response to Whitmarsh Et Al'S Comments on ‘Beyond the ABC: Climate Change Policy and Theories of Social Change’.” Environment and Planning A 43 (2): 262–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E. 2014. “Putting Practice Into Policy: Reconfiguring Questions of Consumption and Climate Change.” Contemporary Social Science: Journal of the Academy of Social Sciences 9 (4): 415–429.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., M. Pantzar, and M. Watson. 2012. The Dynamics of Social Practice: Everyday Life and How It Changes. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., and M. Watson. 2006. “Practice Oriented Product Design Manifesto.” Accessed December 19, 2013. http://www.lancaster.ac.uk/fass/projects/dnc/wkshpjul06/popd%20manifesto.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., M. Watson, M. Hand, and J. Ingram. 2007. The Design of Everyday Life. Oxford: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Silverstone, R., and L. Haddon. 1996. “Design and the Domestication of Information and Communication Technologies: Technical Change and Everyday Life.” In Communication by Design: The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies, edited by R. Mansell and R. Silverstone, 44–74. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Spaargaren, G. 2003. “Sustainable Consumption: A Theoretical and Environmental Policy Perspective.” Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal 16 (8): 687–701.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steen, M. 2011. “Tensions in Human-Centred Design.” CoDesign 7 (1): 45–60.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukker, A. 2004. “Eight Types of Product-Service System: Eight Ways To Sustainability? Experiences from SusProNet.” Business Strategy and the Environment 13 (4): 246–260.
   Google Scholar
• Tukker, A. 2014. “Product Services for a Resource-Efficient and Circular Economy – A Review.” Journal of Cleaner Production. doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.049.
   Google Scholar
• Tukker, A., M. J. Cohen, K. Hubacek, and O. Mont. 2010. “The Impacts of Household Consumption and Options for Change.” Journal of Industrial Ecology 14 (1): 13–30.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tukker, A., and U. Tischner. 2006. “Product-Services as a Research Field: Past, Present and Future. Reflections from a Decade of Research.” Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (17): 1552–1556.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). 2009. Design for Sustainability: A Step-by-Step Approach. Paris: UNEP  Accessed November 13, 2012. http://www.unep.fr/scp/publications/details.asp?id = WEB/0155/PA.
   Google Scholar
• Vargo, S. L., and R. F. Lusch. 2008. “Service-Dominant Logic: Continuing the Evolution.” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science 36 (1): 1–10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasantha, G. V. A., R. Roy, A. Lelah, and D. Brissaud. 2012. “A Review of Product-Service Systems Design Methodologies.” Journal of Engineering Design 23 (9): 635–659.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Warde, A. 2005. “Consumption and Theories of Practice.” Journal of Consumer Culture 5 (2): 131–153.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, M. 2012. “How Theories of Practice Can Inform Transition to a Decarbonised Transport System.” Journal of Transport Geography 24: 488–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wilhite, H. 2008. “New Thinking on the Agentive Relationship Between End-Use Technologies and Energy-Using Practices.” Energy Efficiency 1 (2): 121–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar