IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cog/socinc/v9y2021i4p130-142.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Co‐Design and the Collective Creativity Processes in Care Systems and Places

Author

Listed:
  • Cristian Campagnaro

    (Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

  • Nicolò Di Prima

    (Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

  • Sara Ceraolo

    (Department of Architecture and Design, Politecnico di Torino, Italy)

Abstract

This article examines the topic of participatory design processes (co‐design, co‐creativity, co‐creation, and co‐production) as tools to promote models of inclusion that benefit people experiencing marginality, and as means to solicit the public dimension of the spaces in which they live and where they have access to their health and welfare services. The topic is addressed through four case studies drawn from the experience of participatory action research aiming at social inclusion and cohesion through an approach based on design anthropology. Following Jones and VanPatter’s (2009) four design domains (DD), the projects discussed in this article are the following: participatory design of devices for people with multiple sclerosis (DD 1.0); participatory renovation of shelters for homeless people (DD 2.0); design and craft led lab aiming at social inclusion (DD 3.0); and innovation of public services for a city homeless population (DD 4.0). All these projects are driven by stakeholders’ demands for a transformation that improves the quality of users’ lives, the quality of caring services, and that they modify, temporarily or permanently, the venues where they take place. In order to support and facilitate this “desire for change,” the projects are based on wide participation and collaboration between many different stakeholders in every phase of their design processes. Methods, tools, and results will be analysed from the points of view of both users (beneficiaries and social operators/caregivers) and designers. Furthermore, the interaction between spaces, co‐design processes, and attendees will be investigated to determine how they contribute to turning those venues into citizenship environments, permeated with greater care and attention.

Suggested Citation

  • Cristian Campagnaro & Nicolò Di Prima & Sara Ceraolo, 2021. "Co‐Design and the Collective Creativity Processes in Care Systems and Places," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 130-142.
    • Handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:130-142
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/socialinclusion/article/view/4503
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sherry R. Arnstein, 2019. "A Ladder of Citizen Participation," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 85(1), pages 24-34, January.
    2. Paul R. Carlile, 2002. "A Pragmatic View of Knowledge and Boundaries: Boundary Objects in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 13(4), pages 442-455, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daniele T. P. Souza & Eugenia A. Kuhn & Arjen E. J. Wals & Pedro R. Jacobi, 2020. "Learning in, with, and through the Territory: Territory-Based Learning as a Catalyst for Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-19, April.
    2. Matthew Hawkins, 2018. "Researching and marketing to consumption collectives," Post-Print hal-01809954, HAL.
    3. Beth A. Bechky, 2006. "Gaffers, Gofers, and Grips: Role-Based Coordination in Temporary Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 17(1), pages 3-21, February.
    4. Marco Tortoriello & Ray Reagans & Bill McEvily, 2012. "Bridging the Knowledge Gap: The Influence of Strong Ties, Network Cohesion, and Network Range on the Transfer of Knowledge Between Organizational Units," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1024-1039, August.
    5. Maggie Chuoyan Dong & Yulin Fang & Detmar W. Straub, 2017. "The Impact of Institutional Distance on the Joint Performance of Collaborating Firms: The Role of Adaptive Interorganizational Systems," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 309-331, June.
    6. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    7. Anne Seneca Terkelsen & Christian Tolstrup Wester & Gabriel Gulis & Jørgen Jespersen & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen, 2022. "Co-Creation and Co-Production of Health Promoting Activities Addressing Older People—A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    8. Richard J. Boland & Kalle Lyytinen & Youngjin Yoo, 2007. "Wakes of Innovation in Project Networks: The Case of Digital 3-D Representations in Architecture, Engineering, and Construction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 631-647, August.
    9. Stefan N. Groesser & Niklas Jovy, 2016. "Business model analysis using computational modeling: a strategy tool for exploration and decision-making," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 27(1), pages 61-88, February.
    10. J-G Cegarra-Navarro & M-T Sánchez-Polo, 2008. "Linking the individual forgetting context with customer capital from a seller's perspective," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(12), pages 1614-1623, December.
    11. Fran Ackermann & Colin Eden & Igor Pyrko, 2016. "Accelerated Multi-Organization Conflict Resolution," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(5), pages 901-922, September.
    12. Paola Perez-Aleman, 2011. "Collective Learning in Global Diffusion: Spreading Quality Standards in a Developing Country Cluster," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 173-189, February.
    13. Anne Kokkonen & Pauli Alin, 2015. "Practice-based learning in construction projects: a literature review," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(7), pages 513-530, July.
    14. Moshe Farjoun & Christopher Ansell & Arjen Boin, 2015. "PERSPECTIVE—Pragmatism in Organization Studies: Meeting the Challenges of a Dynamic and Complex World," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(6), pages 1787-1804, December.
    15. Torugsa, Nuttaneeya (Ann) & O’Donohue, Wayne, 2016. "Progress in innovation and knowledge management research: From incremental to transformative innovation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(5), pages 1610-1614.
    16. Lionel Garreau & Serge Perrot, 2012. "Comprendre la dynamique de la socialisation organisationnelle: Une approche par le sensemaking," Post-Print halshs-00949067, HAL.
    17. Smita Prashant Chattopadhyay & Madhuchhanda Das Aundhe, 2021. "Vendor boundary spanning in Indian Information Technology (IT) companies," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 1139-1177, September.
    18. Hilda Bø Lyng & Eric Christian Brun, 2018. "Knowledge Transition: A Conceptual Model of Knowledge Transfer for Cross-Industry Innovation," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(05), pages 1-23, October.
    19. Kerr, Clive & Phaal, Robert, 2018. "Directing the technology intelligence activity: An ‘information needs’ template for initiating the search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 265-276.
    20. Eden, Colin & Ackermann, Fran, 2018. "Theory into practice, practice to theory: Action research in method development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(3), pages 1145-1155.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cog:socinc:v:9:y:2021:i:4:p:130-142. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: António Vieira (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.