Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Joint Centre for Bioethics, Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Sci Eng Ethics. 2021 Aug 19;27(5):57. doi: 10.1007/s11948-021-00329-2.
A variety of approaches have appeared in academic literature and in design practice representing "ethics-first" methods. These approaches typically focus on clarifying the normative dimensions of design, or outlining strategies for explicitly incorporating values into design. While this body of literature has developed considerably over the last 20 years, two themes central to the endeavour of ethics and values in design (E + VID) have yet to be systematically discussed in relation to each other: (a) designer agency, and (b) the strength of normative claims informing the design process. To address this gap, we undertook a structured review of leading E + VID approaches and critiques, and classified them according to their positions on normative strength, and views regarding designer agency. We identified 18 distinct approaches and 13 critiques that met the inclusion criteria for our review. Included papers were distributed across the spectrum of views regarding normative strength, and we found that no approaches and only one critique represented a view characteristic of "low" designer agency. We suggest that the absence of "low" designer agency approaches results in the neglect of crucial influences on design as targets of intervention by designers. We conclude with suggestions for future research that might illuminate strategies to achieve ethical design in information mature societies, and argue that without attending to the tensions raised by balancing normatively "strong" visions of the future with limitations imposed on designer agency in corporate-driven design settings, "meaningful" ethical design will continue to encounter challenges in practice.
各种方法出现在学术文献和设计实践中,代表了“先伦理”的方法。这些方法通常侧重于澄清设计的规范性维度,或概述将价值观明确纳入设计的策略。虽然这一文献在过去 20 年中已经有了相当大的发展,但设计中的伦理和价值观(E+VID)努力的两个核心主题尚未系统地相互讨论:(a)设计师的代理,以及(b)规范主张在设计过程中的强度。为了解决这一差距,我们对主要的 E+VID 方法和批评进行了结构化审查,并根据它们在规范强度方面的立场以及对设计师代理的看法对它们进行了分类。我们确定了 18 种不同的方法和 13 种批评,这些方法和批评符合我们审查的纳入标准。纳入的论文分布在关于规范强度的观点范围内,我们发现没有方法,只有一种批评代表了“低”设计师代理的观点。我们认为,缺乏“低”设计师代理方法导致了对设计的关键影响的忽视,这些影响是设计师干预的目标。我们最后提出了未来研究的建议,这些建议可能会阐明在信息成熟社会中实现道德设计的策略,并认为,如果不关注通过在公司驱动的设计环境中平衡规范性“强”的未来愿景与对设计师代理的限制来平衡这些问题,“有意义”的道德设计将在实践中继续面临挑战。