Written by Tinik Chiu.

So much of futuring is reliant on one’s ability to prepare and anticipate with the tools they are given. With the rise of global crises and projected problems from the future, it is important to be able to confront the future in ways which are meaningful and effective. Tony Fry’s “Design futuring: sustainability, ethics and new practice” engages with this emerging school of thought but provides a refreshing take on common approaches.

Fry draws an interesting, yet key distinction between the concept of ‘design scenarios’ and ‘scenarios of design’. Design scenarios are, according to Fry,  “projections of possibilities by design as currently understood” whilst Scenarios of Design are “an exploration of how design could be other than it is”. (Fry 2009) This perspective offers a unique challenge to the school of futuring, questioning some current methods of futuring such as “Used Futures” according to Sohail Inayatullah in his “Six pillars: futures thinking for transforming“. These Used Futures are ways of applying tried-and-tested methodologies to new situations (Inayatullah 2007), yet Fry argues that by engaging with Scenarios of Design, better methodologies can be achieved or invented, by recreating the structure within which we reside. Within the framework of Love, it is important to understand how love, in all its facets, will change, and how we can better approach its nuanced appearance.

For our futuring scenario, my group has decided to explore the impacts of genetic modification (GM), and the potential dangers that may arise from a misuse of its technology. Genetic modification is one particular avenue of Scenarios of Design, changing the very landscape of organisms. According to Nicole J. et al in “When is genetic modification socially acceptable? When used to advance human health through avenues other than food“, a research report written in 2017, there were overwhelmingly more supporters for genetic modification if it provided benefits for human medicine and health. Whilst only 31% of respondents agreed with GM in crops, 68% agreed with GM’s use in human health (N,J et al 2017). Not only does this demonstrate the growing acceptance of technologies affecting love, such as GM, it also shows the implementation of Scenarios of Design in Love. It is only fair to conclude that these technologies will continue to grow, in order for mankind to improve standards of living amidst a multitude of global issues regarding climate change, disease ridden countries and poverty stricken countries.

It is crucial for us to understand that we should avoid staying within the boundaries that have been placed around us; to begin to consider different approaches to impacting the future. Fry’s concept of Scenarios of Design will be impactful in changing our view of futuring amidst Love. As my group begins its inspection of Genetic Modification, we would do well to consider what possible structural changes may occur in the future. I believe this will enrich our understanding, research and final project.

References:

• Fry, T. 2009 ‘Design futuring: sustainability, ethics and new practice‘, Berg, Oxford

• Inayatullah, S., 2008. Six pillars: futures thinking for transforming.
  Foresight, 10 (1), 4-21.

• Olynk Widmar, NJ. et al 2017 ‘When is genetic modification socially acceptable? When used to advance human health through avenues other than food’
  PloS ONE 12 (6), 1-7

How futuring begins?

by Xingyu Gao (Nicole)

Research is what every scholar has to do and which is the quickest to gain knowledge from others. There are various of ways to do research which depend on different occasions. In the journal of Australian studies (Martin, 2003), authors looked at the research problem from their own positions. The study is about what the indigenous people view of the theory put forward by westerners. The method is put oneself in a part of the other, and the other is a part of oneself, by doing this answers of research questions can be more critical and objective. As an indigenous herself, environments of society, history, culture and policy provide contexts to shape positions and future. The process of researching always repeats again and again, re-visit, re-connect, re-present, etc.

To futuring, it requires basis of present reality, possibilities and feasibility. Time is a significant tool to help designing future, it tells what has happened and places that may otherwise remain invisible or meaningless. It was used in Tony Fry’s article (2009), the main methodology in this journal is standing in the stream of time and learning from it. In addition, also requires skill and practice which tell more potentials and future determinants. As Fry states out, future imagination shouldn’t be just a fiction with sensational predictions as there are multiple complex problems in the future scenario. Instead, deep-researched sources and critical analysis are desired.

Imagination is more like an indispensable tool for me to build my future scenario. In order to imagine possibilities in the future, one way is list related elements in the scenario, select some typical things out. After this, you can take them to a coordinate, there are two parameters can go to their different extremes each. This method seems like a combination of mathematics and mapping. In my view, the intersection is where we stand right now and the start of imagination. In the class, we’ve discussed what will our lives be like when wealth and time go to different values. What we end up with was pretty dynamic. People imagine the best and the worst condition normally based on their experiences and desire from inside. When met something not familiar with, we might referenced others’ experiences around. At this point, it can be seen a method “user’s story”. Every person tells their own stories which provide a large number of data to consider from aspects. One thing I find interesting is that paradox always exists in futuring. Theoretically, we may prefer the situation “++”the most and situation “–”is the most-unwanted. However, the outcome is that the last thing we want is about “-+”zone. That is why we were told to concrete analysis of specific problems. By asking “flourishing or being exploited?” to identify barriers and understand issues (Brown, 2017). In different fields of studies may not work the same but focus on same ideology. For instance, in business understanding the stakeholders and their desires involves analyzing various groups of people involved in economic activity. There is always no answer to please everyone, the more you consider, the more people benefit.

 

Research about autonomous cars:

References:

Fry, Tony. “Design futuring: sustainability, ethics and new practice”. ‘Methods of Change 2 — Designing in Time’ in Design Futuring, Oxford : Berg, c2009 pp.145-155