RESEARCH | PEDAGOGYClimate Design Activism: Lessons from environmental pioneers of the late 60s and 70s.
Graphic designers make daily decisions that have the potential to address climate change—from the seed of an idea and the design of a new product or package to the intended audience and the messages conveyed. At each point in the process, there is an opportunity to make greener decisions, create reciprocity, cultivate regeneration, or eliminate waste. Given the transient nature of environmental stability today, we know that systemic shifts are required to secure the future well-being of biosystems (Brundtland Commission 1987, 15). Recent discourse often centers around the adoption of sustainability, ecological design practices, and the designer’s role as a change-maker. Yet, one of the challenges graphic designers face is that sustainability is often at odds with packaging products and persuading customers to buy more. Design can feel like another cog in capitalism’s environmentally exploitative system (Baer 2012). Designers design packages and market products so companies can sell more, add to profit margins, and, in turn, contribute to the perpetuation of excessive capitalism. How can a designer manage this antagonistic relationship between sustainability’s balanced design and capitalism’s financial growth and profit margins?
The writings of environmental design pioneers from the 1960s and ‘70s, when issues of environmentalism and ecology began to migrate to other disciplines, including design, offer some ideas (Lie 2016, 1). This paper identifies key messages, tools, and takeaways from Victor Papanek, Tomás Maldonado, and R. Buckminster Fuller, three early environmental design pioneers whose ideas 21st century graphic designers can apply to design thinking and practice today. It proposes that graphic designers can address different aspects of design tasks (see diagram 1: parts of the design process) through an eco-mindset, and they can practice climate design activism using a sustainable design lens.
In this paper, climate design activism suggests a push toward sustainable and ecologically sound design solutions. While sustainable design is a more holistic approach that factors in the impact on people, the planet, the ability to prosper, and culture, ecological design emphasizes design that minimizes destructive environmental effects (Van Der Ryn and Cowan 1996, x). The intersection of these two ideas emphasizes earth-friendly design. Graphic designers often struggle to realize such a holistic approach to design, one that fosters inclusivity and reciprocity between people and the planet.
Victor Papanek’sDesign for the Real World: Human Ecology and Social Change(published in 1971), Tomás Maldonado’sDesign, Nature, and Revolution: Toward a Critical Ecology(first published in Italian in 1970, and in English in 1972) and R. Buckminster Fuller’sOperating Manual for Spaceship Earth(published in 1969)offer suggestions for design practice.To contextualize the work of these pioneers, an abbreviated timeline highlights additional key environmental texts and events (diagram 2: key environmental texts and events, an abbreviated timeline). Theseinclude Rachel Carson’sThe Silent Spring, published in 1962, alerting the public to what one writer has more recently called the “poisonous legacy of pesticides” (Radford 2011); the popularization of the termAnthropocene c. 2000, which unofficially definesa new geologic epoch characterized by our massive impact on the planet (National Geographic Society); and the first International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, titled “Human-Generated Climate Change,” published in 1990 (twenty years after Fuller, Papanek, and Maldonado wrote their groundbreaking texts sounding the alarm bells for designed systems and objects). The IPCC’s 6thAssessment report, published in 2021, warns of the possibility of catastrophic change (IPCC 2021). In the face of our current crisis, Fuller, Papanek, and Maldonado’s texts propose paths forward for graphic designers.
Victor Papanek’sDesign for the Real Worldis now considered the “seminal text of twentieth-century design” (Clarke 2013, 151). Published in 1971, the book helped to propel a new generation of socially conscious designers (Lie 2016,2).With his ideas originating in “participatory design activism” (Clarke 2013, 151) in 1960s Scandinavia,Papanek is a critic of frivolous modern objects and postwar excess. Hecondemns Western society’s “Kleenex culture,” a term he used to refer to the ease with which consumer societies discard objects. He criticizes the overconsumption of material goods, primarily in the United States, and the lack of inclusive design as a failure of design to recognize social inequality (Clarke 2013, 154).He finds fault with designers who pursue the quest for beauty in objects and design trivial items, and proposes that designers instead pursue practical design with social and moral purpose (Clarke 2013,153). Although the environment is not his primary focus, Papanek advocates for ecological responsibility through cross-collaboration,conscientious consumption, and the valuation of social needs over personal wealth (Papanek 1971, 212-213;Lie 2016, 2).
To realize these values, Papanek suggests studying basic principles in nature to merge design processes with humankind’s needs.While much of Papanek’s polemic features social design activism, he also dwells on what he termsbionics: “the use of biological prototypes for the design of man-made synthetic systems” (Papanek 1971,185).With ideas such as this, his writing helped fuel a generation of design practitioners and students seeking alternatives to commercial work following postwar excess (Margolin 1997, 83). It is also relevant to our current, 21stcentury moment.
Papanek created a “general case” work flowchart while participating in a design conference for the Scandinavian Student Design Organization in Copenhagen in 1969 (Papanek 1971, pullout diagram). His flow chart identified his ideal “minimal” design team, comprised of disciplines including social and behavioral science, ecology, anthropology, psychology, architecture, engineering, biology, math, media, and design. The chart proposes that design problems should be tackled through cross-disciplinary collaboration to meet societal needs and integrate comprehensive design solutions (Papanek 1971, 278). While this sort of collaborative approach to design suggests an idealistic model, the reality is that design work flow doesn’t always happen this way. Still, graphic designers, with their transferrable and creative problem-solving skills should advocate for bigger roles in design planning. To quote Papanek, “Design must become an innovative, highly creative, cross-disciplinary tool responsive to the true needs of men. It must be more research-oriented, and we must stop defiling the Earth itself with poorly-designed objects and structures.” (Papanek 1971, xxii)
Like Papanek, Tomás Maldonado was critical of excessive, capitalist-driven design, design solely for style, design without consideration of eco-systems, and complex systems that contribute to planetary destruction. In Design, Nature, and Revolution, Toward a Critical Ecology, Maldonado urges a reckoning with humanity’s impact on the environment. He attributes problems within the “human environment” (Maldonado 2019, 3) to the “ethical failure in modern human activity” (Busbea in Maldonado 2019, viii), pointing out “the relationships of men to objects [which] has reached an exasperating degree of irrationality” (Maldonado 2019, 6). In response to this, he proposes an innovative design praxis and process that is free from subjectivity. He suggests working within the framework of capitalism by using a critical design consciousness—a balance of function and design praxis—in the service of innovation. Maldonado’s proposal builds on R. Buckminster Fuller’s call for a design revolution that aligns technical structures and management of natural resources in the service of equitable distribution and mindful use of resources, which would thus eliminate the need for war or politics (Maldonado 2019, 29).
The distribution of resources is central to R. Buckminster Fuller’s 1969 book, Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth, in which he provides a broad overview of world systems. Fuller stresses that the Earth has finite resources, and they are unevenly distributed, meaning that the world doesn’t work for 100% of humanity (Fuller 2008, 7). Taking the equitable distribution of earth’s resources as a foundational premise, he asks, “How may we use our intellectual capability to higher advantage?” (Fuller 2008, 65). Moving between macro and micro views, Fuller stresses the importance of doing more with less and hypothesizes that Earth provides enough resources for all of humankind (Fuller 2008, 10, 18). For example, he encourages using regenerative energy—wind, sun, and water—instead of fossil fuels that took billions of years to materialize (Fuller 2008, 94). Additionally, he promotes solving the world’s problems with “powerful thought tools,” (Fuller 2018, 83). Fuller’s “tools”— innovative problem-solving approaches in the 1960s—include topology and geodesics (cue his infamous geodesic dome design) and synergistics, a “systematic study of space” (Edmondson 2007, xxiii).
DIAGRAM 1: DIAGRAM 2DIAGRAM 3Though some (including Maldonado) critiqued Fuller for failing to provide actionable steps instructing how to use powerful thought tools to do more with less, his ideas, along with those of Maldonado and Papanek, can help graphic designers today evaluate their practices to create design solutions through a sustainable lens. While Fuller proposed that, “We must realize that we have all reached a turning point where we can no longer afford to make money rather than good sense” (Fuller, quoted in Zung 2002, 348), many designers wish to make sense but are also in a position where they must make money in order to live. So, how can a designer work within capitalism while also respecting the environment? Diagram3: design workflow: thinking sustainably, offers some ideas for how designers can bring a sustainable lens to every aspect of their process.
First, a designer can evaluate the client for fit. Typically, a client’s goal is to sell more product—this is especially true for large corporations, which are the professional designer’s bread and butter—and thus, designers are engaged in persuading people to buy more and use more, an endless cycle. Designers can ask themselves: Is the client committed to transitioning to sustainable design solutions? Does the client value inclusivity and positive narratives? Does the client value mindful consumption as opposed to rampant consumerism? In some cases, practicing climate design activism might require reframing and rethinking the client’s initial design request. Rather than solely designing a product’s identity—color, form, message—can graphic designers collaborate earlier in the design process? For example, instead of designing the label of a plastic shampoo bottle, the product could be reimagined completely to be made from organic, sustainable ingredients, and to be packaged in a biodegradable or refillable bottle. As Papanek points out, the real problem is often much bigger than a design brief lets on (Papanek 1971, 47). Designers can be selective with who they want to work with and choose clients who acknowledge this bigger picture.
A sustainable thinking process may be one of the best practices a designer can use today. If we take cues from our three environmental pioneers, a sustainable design process should factor in people, planet, prosperity, and culture. Papanek urged designers to understand the needs of people. Additionally, designers can develop a creative brief that includes the pillars of sustainability, which may ultimately yield better solutions. For example, if designers use the creative brief—one of the first steps within a design process—to identify the impact of a project on the environment, the final solution can yield a more sustainable solution. Additionally, a designer might ask if they are promoting or advertising products through a lens of responsible consumption. Because designers are engaged in the promotion of capitalist consumption, they have a moral and ethical responsibility to design responsibly. Maldonado urged designers to be critically aware of design choices. No matter if the final solution is digital or print, the designer might ask: Is it possible to do “more with less”?
Papanek advocated for holistic design practice, which can extend to narratives. He advocated for design with a moral and social purpose, and that was inclusive of all people. Designers can create positive impact with the stories they tell. If designers craft authentic stories about real people and mindfully sell things that were made through a sustainable process and that people genuinely need, they can practice Design for the Real World. Designers have a responsibility to create transparent and honest narratives. While honesty is important, designers can use their creativity to tell the truth without amplifying fears. For example, people are already stressed about climate change. According to a poll from the American Psychological Association, 68% percent of adults in the United States experience “‘eco-anxiety’ defined as any anxiety or worry about climate change and its effects” (American Psychological Association 2020). Alarmist“doom and gloom” messages tend to get ignored. Fear undoubtedly gets our attention, although, in the long term, the threat of imminent fear subsides (Ornish 2014). Creating positive and hopeful narratives may garner more acceptance. After all, we have the technology and the solutions to make a dent in climate change (IPCC 2022). Designers have the power to convey positive actions towards sustainability.
Designers will always consider form and style in their design solutions. Papanek said that “design must be meaningful. And ‘meaningful’ replaces the semantically loaded noise of ‘beautiful,’ ‘ugly,’ ‘cool,’ ‘abstract’” (Papanek 1971, 5) and so on. Beauty can still have a seat at the table in sustainable design, but it may come with a new aesthetic. With many green physical materials available today—think, for example, of paper made from waste and recycled content, alternatives to plastic, biodegradable stickers, and algae ink—designers can easily do better with print. Green materials are rapidly becoming the new norm and sustainable resources are much easier for a designer to specify on a print job today. Designers should also take note of a product’s supply chain, meaning material extraction, production, and distribution, and, as Papanek suggested, aim to use local materials and simple methods when possible (Papanek 1971, 12). Today’s designers also need to consider digital output. The ethics of digital output is perhaps more convoluted than that of print. Though we don’t need to think about material waste, digital output does depend on server farms and energy use. Using a carbon calculator for websites is a good start, and green hosting services are available, too. Though the design pioneers were not confronting the complexities of the digital realm, Fuller’s mantra of doing more with less remains relevant in this sphere. Increasing internet speeds lead to larger bandwidth and energy consumption (Stefanski 2018). For example, dithered images on a website are ten times less resource intensive than hi-res full color ones (De Decker et al. 2022). Additionally, digital applications can be optimized by relying less on animation—typically more data-intensive and energy-intensive—and instead making better use of typography, which can offer faster loading times. Using default browser typefaces also significantly reduces loading times (Sharrock 2018). An excellent example of efficient and innovative website design comes from Low-Tech Magazine. Described as “a solar-powered, self-hosted version of Low-Tech Magazine,” it was conceived and designed to “radically reduce the energy use” required to engage the magazine (De Decker et al., 2022).
Critiques are a natural part of the design process, and they typically center around the formal qualities of a design solution. To be climate design activists, graphic designers must expand the evaluation process. Taking cues from Fuller, Papanek, and Maldonado, designers can ask if the solution (1) meets the needs of people; (2) factors in ecological impact (supply chain, waste, distribution); and (3) creates prosperity for all. Assessing these factors may mean referring back to an expanded version of a design brief that factors in sustainable pillars at the onset of a project.
In 1970, Maldonado wrote “Society and nature belong to the same order of problems.” (Maldonado 2019, 75). Yet this lesson is only now coming to be embedded in the ethos of mainstream graphic design. Sustainable thinking and ecology should be integral to the process of design. They should not an afterthought but instead a natural part of design methodology and inquiry. And they can be. Maldonado, Fuller, and Papanek offer not only lessons but also strategies for realizing a holistic design practice—one that factors in social purpose, ecological best practices, and ideal systems thinking. Graphic designers curious about how to incorporate sustainable thinking into their practices can use these pioneers as guides because, as I have shown, their concepts can help designers to probe and rethink all aspects of their workflow. By weaving sustainable thinking and ecology concerns into the way they work, graphic designers can practice climate design activism after all.
References
American Psychological Association. 2020. “Majority of US adults believe climate change is most important issue today” [Press release]. February 6. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2020/02/climate-change.
Baer, Hans A. 2012. Global Capitalism and Climate Change: The Need for an Alternative World System. Lanham: AltaMira Press.
Brundtland Commission. 1987. Our Common Future (The Brundtland Report), United Nations Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Clarke, Alison J. 2013. “‘Actions Speak Louder’: Victor Papanek and the Legacy of Design Activism.” Design and Culture 5, no. 2: 151-166.
De Decker, Kris, Marie Otsuka, Roel Roscam Abbing, and Kathy Vanhout. 2022. “About Low<-Tech Magazine.” April 22. https://solar.lowtechmagazine.com/about.
Edmondson, Amy. 2007, A Fuller Explanation, The Synergetic Geometry of R. Buckminster Fuller, Pueblo, Colorado: Emergent World Press.
Fuller, R. Buckminster. 2008. Operating Manual for Spaceship Earth. Edited by Jaime Snyder. Zurich, Switzerland: Lars Müller Publishers.
IPCC. 2022.“The evidence is clear: the time for action is now. We can halve emissions by 2030.” April 4. https://www.ipcc.ch/2022/04/04/ipcc-ar6-wgiii-pressrelease/.
IPCC. 2021. “Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change” [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M.I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J.B.R. Matthews, T.K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press. Accessed January 3, 2023. http://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896.
Lie, Ida Kamilla. 2016. “‘Make Us More Useful to Society!’: The Scandinavian Design Students’ Organization (SDO) and Socially Responsible Design,” 1967–1973.” Design and Culture 8, no. 3: 327-361. https://doi.org/10.1080/17547075.2016.1223363.
Maldonado, Tomás. 2019. Design, Nature, & Revolution, Toward a Critical Ecology. Translated by Mario Domandi.Forward by Larry Busbea. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Margolin, Victor. 1998. “Design for a Sustainable World.” Design Issues 14, no. 2: 83-92.
National Geographic Society. “Anthropocene.” National Geographic (Resource Library). Accessed January 3, 2023. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/anthropocene.
Ornish, Dean. 2014. “Love, Not Fear, Will Help Us Fix Climate Change.” Time. September 30. https://time.com/3450002/love-not-fear-will-help-us-fix-climate-change/.
Papanek, Victor. 1971. Design for the Real World, Human Ecology and Social Change. New York and Toronto, Canada: Pantheon Books
Radford, Tim. 2011. “Silent Sprint by Rachel Carson—review.” The Guardian. September 30. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/sep/30/silent-spring-rachel-carson-review.
Sharrock, Gail. 2018. “Custom vs native fonts in apps.” Accessed January 16, 2023. https://medium.com/trade-me/custom-vs-native-fonts-in-apps-9cd7d872491c.
Stefanski, Jasio, 2018. “Imagining a Solar-Powered Internet: Kris De Decker, Low<-Tech Magazine.” The Gradient. Accessed January 10, 2023. https://walkerart.org/magazine/low-tech-magazine-kris-de-decker.
Van Der Ryn, Sim and Stuart Cowan. 1996. Ecological Design. Washington, Covelo, London: Island Press.
Zung, Thomas K (ed.). 2002. Buckminster Fuller: Anthology for the New Millennium. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
The timeline here includes pivotal points within the environmental movement from the 60s to today's International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports. Fuller, Maldonado, and Papanek warned designers decades ago to design responsibly and sustainably.
The Design Workflow Diagram above shows how a designer can think and work with a sustainable mindset.