Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Processes for Just Products: The Capability Space of Participatory Design

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover The Capability Approach, Technology and Design

Part of the book series: Philosophy of Engineering and Technology ((POET,volume 5))

Abstract

This chapter explores the relationship between the process and product of participatory design. It argues that there is an unhelpful dichotomy that pushes the thinking and practice of participatory design through two separate schools of thought: planning versus design. This chapter suggests that advancements in overcoming such challenge can be reached by perceiving design through the lens of the capability approach. The concept of ‘capability space’ is proposed to explore the process and product components of freedom associated to participatory design. The chapter then elaborates on a series of normative values based on concepts from radical democracy and social production of space literature that aims at supporting the application of the concept of capability space. Design is embedded in the processes of deepening democratic practices by revealing power relations and navigating through dissensus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Alkire, S. (2007). Choosing dimensions: The capability approach and multidimensional poverty (Chronic Poverty Research Centre Working Paper 88). OPHI, QEH, Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bevan, R. (2006). The destruction of memory: Architecture at war. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blundell Jones, P., Petrescu, D., & Till, J. (Eds.). (2005). Architecture and participation. London: Spoon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C. (2009). Housing anxiety, paradoxical spaces and multiple geographies of post tsunami housing intervention in Sri Lanka. Disasters, 33(4), 762–785.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C. (2011). Violent spaces: production and reproduction of security and vulnerabilities. Journal of Architecture, 16(1), 37–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C., & Hunter, W. (2011). Risks in post disaster housing: Architecture and the production of space. ABACUS International Journal on Architecture, Conservation and Urban Studies, 5(2). Available at http://bitmesra.ac.in/cms.aspx?this=1%26mid=776%26cid=560

  • Boano, C., Hunter, W., & Wade, A. (2011a). BUDD design map. A visual essay. London: Development Planning Unit. Unpublished document.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C., LaMarca, M., & Hunter, W. (2011b). The frontlines of contested urbanism mega-projects and mega-resistances in Dharavi. Journal of Developing Societies, 27(3&4), 295–326.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C., & Hunter, W. (2012). Architecture at risk (?): The ambivalent nature of post-disaster practice. Architectoni.ca, 1(1), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boano, C., Garcia-LaMarca, M., & Hunter, W. (2012). Mega-projects and mega-resistances in contested urbanism: Reclaiming the right to the city in Dharavi. In I. Boniburini, L. Moretto, H. Smith, & J. Le Maire (Eds.), The right to the city. The city as common good: Between social politics and urban planning (Cahier de la Cambre n°11) (forthcoming).

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B. (2001). The socio-psychological limits of participation? In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: The new tyranny? London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooke, B., & Kothari, U. (Eds.). (2001). Participation: The new tyranny? London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, D. (2008). Ethics of global development. Agency, capability, and deliberative democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cuthbert, A. (2007). Urban design: requiem for an era – review and critique of the last 50 years. Urban Design International, 12, 177–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • d’Auria, V., De Meulder, B., & Shannon, K. (2010). The nebulous notion of human settlements. In B. De Meulder & K. Shannon (Eds.), Human settlements: Formulations and (re)calibrations. Amsterdam: SUN Architecture Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, M. (2006). Planet of slums. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1997). Politics of friendship. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dong, A. (2008). The policy of design: A capabilities approach. Design Issues, 24(4), 76–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dovey, K. (1999). Framing places: Mediating power in built form. London/New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dovey, K. (2010). Becoming places. Urbanism/architecture/identity/power. Oxford: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1979). Abnormal. Lectures at the Collège de France, 1974–1975 (G. Burchell, Trans.) (p. 373). New York: Picador.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault, M. (1984). Different spaces. In J. D. Faubion (Ed.), Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (Aesthetic, epistemology, methodology, Vol. II). New York: New York Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frediani, A. A. (2007). Amartya Sen, the World Bank, and the redress of urban poverty: A Brazilian case study. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 8(1), 133–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frediani, A. A. (2010). The capability approach as a framework to the practice of development. Development in Practice, 20(2), 173–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fuad-Luke, A. (2009). Design activism, beautiful strangeness for a sustainable world. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaventa, J. (2006). Deepening the ‘Deepening Democracy’ Debate (IDS Working Paper 264), Sussex

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, T. (1994). Showing what you mean (not just talking about it), PLA notes, Issue 21, pp. 41–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamdi, N. (2004). Small change. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamdi, N. (2010). The placemaker’s guide to building community. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harries, K. (1997). The ethical function of architecture. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • hooks, b. (1990). Choosing the margin as a space of radical openness. In b hooks (Ed.), Yearnings: Race, gender, and cultural politics. Boston: South End.

    Google Scholar 

  • hooks, b. (1994). Outlaw culture. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kemeny, J. (1992). Housing and social structure. Towards a sociology of residence (Working Paper No.12). Bristol: SAUS publication/University of Bristol.

    Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Enquiry, 30(2), 225–248.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madanipour, A. (1996). Design of urban space: An inquiry into a socio-spatial process. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madanipour, A. (Ed.). (2010). Whose public space? International case studies in urban design and development. London/New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miessen, M. (2010). The nightmare of participation. Berlin: Sternberg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mohan, G. (2001). Beyond participation: Strategies for deeper empowerment. In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: The new tyranny? London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mosse, D. (2001). “People’s knowledge”, participation and patronage: Operations and representations in rural development. In B. Cooke & U. Kothari (Eds.), Participation: The new tyranny? London: Zed Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (1996). Democracy, power, and the ‘political’. In S. Benhabib (Ed.), Democracy and difference. Princeton: University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oosterlaken, I. (2009). Design for development: A capability approach. Design Issues, 25(4), 91–102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rancière, J., & Corcoran, S. (2010). Dissensus on politics and aesthetics. Continuum London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Riha, R. (2010). Architecture and new ontologies. In J. Bickert (Ed.), Project architecture: Creative practice in the time of global capitalism. Ljubljana: Architecture Museum of Ljubljana.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, A. (2006). Praxis in the time of empire. Planning Theory, 5(1), 7–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sanoff, H. (2000). Community participation methods in design and planning. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanoff, H. (2005). Origins of community design. Progressive Planning, 166, 14–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanoff, H. (2007). Multiple views on participatory design. International Journal of Architectural Research, 2(1), 57–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, T., & Till, J. (2009). Agency in architecture: Reframing critically in theory and practice, Spring, pp. 97–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. Minneapolis/London: UMP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Till, J. (2009). Architecture depends. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. F. C. (1976). Housing by people. London: Marion Boyars.

    Google Scholar 

  • West, C. (1994). Keeping faith: Philosophy and race in America. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Development Planning Unit, University College London, London, UK

    Alexandre Apsan Frediani & Camillo Boano

Authors
  1. Alexandre Apsan Frediani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Camillo Boano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandre Apsan Frediani .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. , Philosophy section, Faculty of TPM, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, Delft, 2628 BX, Netherlands

    Ilse Oosterlaken

  2. , Philosophy section, Faculty of TPM, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, Delft, 2628 BX, Netherlands

    Jeroen van den Hoven

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Frediani, A.A., Boano, C. (2012). Processes for Just Products: The Capability Space of Participatory Design. In: Oosterlaken, I., van den Hoven, J. (eds) The Capability Approach, Technology and Design. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 5. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-3879-9_12

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation