Reflective Design Explorations
Task Two - Speculative Design of Cameron Shea
#10885790
How might we design an economy to drive better design for the future?
Following on from the production of my design manifesto, I had this "how might we" question running through my mind. Over and over.
The economic system of the past has driven the behaviours that drives the environmental outcomes that we see. The current economic system is not dramatically different, being primarily being centered around unfettered growth (accepting inflation).
We hear often about zero emissions, recycling, reuse. But these only focus on minimising current damage to the environment, and do not address past issues. Given the accelerating nature of human damage to the environment, what are the potential solutions?
What if we could create an economy where consumption was accompanied by creation?
There are four post pandemic scenarios created by the Institute for the future. Each attempts to look forwards by looking back at historical occurrences of pandemics in the past and how the world rebounded differently. Two of the scenarios deal with how to deliver growth and how to help remove constraints on the future economy.
A post pandemic world is a great time to consider new means for growing the economy.
My speculative design is about rebirthing the economy post pandemic in such a way that we incorporate mechanisms to address past and future issues with design. Building social solidarity by ensuring that economic systems address social costs is one key aspect of this.
What might future stakeholders want us to do post pandemic?
I used a persona to examine what the future stakeholders might wish had occurred in the intervening years between the pandemic in 2020 due to COVID19, and a significant period into the future (50-70 years). Actually, I used myself, artificially aged - under the assumption that due to the law of accelerating returns technology would find a way to extend my lifespan such that I live until past that time as predicted by Kurzweil.
How do we change what design behaviours are incentivised by the economy?
An economic model is a simulation of reality. It attempts to abstract the complex interactions between people (households) and firms (businesses) in the economy and the trades of labor, goods and services for money. An economy itself is designed in the abstract and then created in the physical, and each of the outputs of design has an impact in the economy.
There are positive and negative externalities. Externalities can lead to a market failure as the price of a product does not reflect the impact on the economy.
Reincorporation of negative economic externalities into the economy is the role of governments, and can help to make sure that economies aren't incentivising bad behaviours. A good example of a government intervention to address an externality is a carbon tax, or tradeable pollution permits.
Externalities are generally viewed as a positive reason for government intervention by economists. This is because some external action is required to rebalance the economy, and pure market forces won't achieve balance. Governments main role is to "price" the externality.
But the incorporation of current externalities doesn't address past market failures. We need to go above and beyond to address human history, and also deal with unknown futures.
So in my speculative design I create an economy where creation accompanies consumption, where all of the current externalities are priced and included in to the economy. And this allows for our economy to rebuild post pandemic while addressing our past harms.
I utilised feedback from friends and family to incorporate adjustments into the design, adjustments such as including a broader range of externalities, and putting the pricing of externalities in control of an independent a-political body.
