If you look at the world from the point of view of a product designer, it is clear that the world is, in fact, two years ahead and moving in a forward trajectory. The nature of this trajectory goes beyond what is practical at the moment and addresses the designer’s duty, as both a human and a creator, to design sustainable products for “the tomorrow”. I would state that all great art and design must look to the future – particularly stressing the importance of sustainability; and that part of a designer’s job is not only to create but also to consider the future chapters of a product’s life. As product designers, we were originally tasked with creating products that were made to fulfil a need in people’s lives. At what point, however, did we start to forget the needs of people and move towards preying on their desires? In today's day and age, the ‘best’ product designers are typically considered to be the ones that partake in the latter but I would argue that the ‘best’ and certainly the future’s product designers must engage in the contrary. In doing this, I will also explore whether it is solely the product designer’s responsibility to create products that are going to be beneficial to the future or whether it is down to the consumer to control the consumption of these products. I will explore this by looking at sustainability, morality and aesthetics regarding the design of products.
The modern consumer is most likely to consider a product initially by its aesthetics and then consider the products functionality as an afterthought. This is proven in a study done by Creusen and Schoormans, where they found that “sixty-five percent of the subjects mentioned an attractive product appearance as a choice reason.” (Creusen and Schoormans, 2005). The idea of putting a massive importance on the form of a product was initially started by the Bauhaus movement in 1919 with modernist architecture. The Bauhaus movement was founded by Walter Gropius in Weimar, Germany. This movement sought to integrate fine art and industrial design into one. It was said that ‘Bauhaus designs permeate the larger movement known as Modernism.’ (Jones, 2013). The argument behind this ethos is that a good designer shouldn't be considered as someone that can create the most appealing product - in order to generate sales - but should instead be someone that considers a products purpose in society rather than just an improvement on its aesthetics. Kieren Long justifies this by posing an intriguing question. He says “I just wonder if designers have the passion and desire to go out and design the things that define our lives as citizens and human beings.” (Long, 2013). Essentially, what Long is asking is: do designers today still care about designing products to better our future or are we just obsessed with the materialistic objective of improving aesthetics?
In terms of sustainability within product design, there are two separate arguments: (1) the environment, and (2) the product. The former has undergone an irreversible transformation due to our current usage and wastage of products. In his book, ‘The Wealth of Nature: Environmental History and the Ecological Imagination’, Donald Worster talks about how humans need “a greater awareness of the materiality of the planet, its limits, diversity and dynamics.” (Worster, 1994). Humans have disregarded the wealth of our planet through unsustainable production methods and this has had a debilitating effect on our natural resources. For example, the extraction of oil from our earth is one of the most harmful processes to our environment. Is this something we should continue to do? If the future of Earth is to be considered, then it is imperative we explore alternative methods.
Methods such as; finding renewable materials, or recycling old materials are good examples. Yet, it must be noted that both options come with a good and bad. On one hand, finding new renewable materials would be of great benefit to the industry. It would allow this notion of innovation and creation without limits to continue, and be sustainable as it is using resources that are not finite. It would also open up new possibilities in design, for example the new material would probably work in a different way to existing materials, allowing new structures and thought processes to take place. Despite this, there are factors holding back further research into this, such as cost. Continuing to use current methods is cheaper and will also guarantee a constant quality. New materials must be tested and designed, which is costly, and finding the right quality in this exact time-period may not be possible for the designer.
In terms of recycling, reusing materials means that we are not diminishing finite resources and that less waste is created, reducing the material footprint of the product. In addition, it takes “two thirds less energy to make products from recycled plastic than virgin plastic” (Cernansky, 2009). At his Ted Talk the architect Micheal Murphy posed an interesting statement: “What is the environmental footprint?" -- an important question -- but what if we also asked, What is the human handprint of those who made it?” (Murphy, 2016). This is an interesting statement because Murphy acknowledges that; not only do we need to consider how we are affecting those that will interact with the product, but we must equally consider how we will affect the environment. The downside to recycling materials is that the more you use the them, the lower quality they become and thus; there is only a certain lifespan to be had with many recycled materials currently used in product design. This inevitably means that, in many cases, if a new product is to be created, a new material must be used and therefore, we cannot completely eliminate the use of non-renewable materials.
Lastly, the sustainability of the product, is also a subject to think about. Products are currently being made to consume, and the consumers are being encouraged to buy. This results in a system where products are being consumed at an alarming rate. Consumers are frequently told about new emerging trends; what the new ‘must have’ is and that how they won’t be happy without it. This encourages designers to create new designs quicker, and causes a lack of ‘preciousness’ to these objects because they are replaced long before the lifespan of the material is over. For example, the mobile phone market is one of the worst culprits. In 2013 it was estimated that people “hang on to phones for just 3 years and in the United States just 20 months.” (Kremer, 2013). However, new phones are being produced where each part is replaceable, therefore increasing the lifespan of the phone, both in terms of actual technology and aesthetic design. A good example of this is Google’s Project Ara. This is a project that encourages parts to be replaced so you don’t need to buy an entirely new phone. Instead you replace broken parts by simply clicking in and removing parts. Despite this, consumers are unfortunately still swayed by big brand names which encourage them to replace their phones every year. Apple for example, just recently released the iPhone 7. The iPhone 6s, the 7’s predecessor, was only released a year before.
This ties into the point of aesthetics and our need to always have the newest, most flashy or most interesting looking product. Our idea of aesthetics and our understanding of what is ‘cool’ and looks good is ultimately what could potentially lead to our downfall. As mentioned before Apple have hugely taken advantage of this with their iPhone range; releasing new phones every year, with very slight changes in the design and speed of the phone. They then market and sell it as a ‘brand new’ product. We as consumers have been brainwashed into believing that we need to always keep up to date with such trends. Although, it is not solely down to the consumer. The designer also plays a massive part in influencing how regularly we buy new products. Planned obsolescence is something that we as product designers include in products to keep demand high. Washing machines are a good example.
It is said that over time the quality of the wash in washing machines starts to diminish and that is due to a fault in a part that can’t be replaced. The argument for this planned obsolescence is that if you had a washing machine that never decreased in wash quality would you ever buy a new one? Simply, no. If people didn't buy new washing machines, the washing machine market would surely go bust because demand would not be high enough. This is where the counter argument for planned obsolescence comes in. Philip Kotler puts a very interesting spin on it. He says “planned obsolescence is the working of the competitive and technological forces in a free society—forces that lead to ever-improving goods and services.” (Kotler, 2008). What he is saying is that planned obsolescence is needed because if it did not exist people would never improve goods and services.
On one hand, I agree that planned obsolescence can lead to more innovation - which is needed in a world that is always moving in a forward trajectory. Also, in order to have a successful business you need to have high demand, but surely a phone starting to break after 4 years of use is too wasteful. “Phone technology is advancing so fast that multiple components, though still functional, feel outdated after a couple of years.” (Kremer, 2013) This is where, as product designers, we have a responsibility. We must ensure that we are using planned obsolescence as a tool for encouraging technological advancement where it is needed, and not for exploiting the consumer. As well as this, we need to make sure that if we are encouraging planned obsolescence we are also considering the correct disposal of the product we are recalling or replacing. Schemes such as ‘trade in’ or ‘upgrade’ rewards can be put in place to encourage people not to throw away their old products but to recycle or take it back to the producer.
In conclusion, as designers in this era we are faced with a high level of demand for products that we haven't seen before. Thus, we must create products to match this demand. However, in order to plan for the future, we have to make sure that we are making these products out of the right materials and using processes that are sustainable and will not be harmful to the environment in the long term. Weas designers also have a responsibility to plan for the end-of-life of a product, so we can reuse materials that are being thrown away. Doing this now and setting it as a foundation for all products to come will ensure that future generations have a basis to continue to have sufficient, if not better, resources and will be able to enjoy a range of products the way we have.