1. Background:
With environmental issues becoming increasingly prevalent, the conditions in which humanity lives are under a certain degree of threat. Growing attention is being focused on keywords such as ‘sustainability’ and ‘environmental protection’, which have gradually become key areas of social concern whilst also providing new opportunities for certain forms of innovative development. However, such opportunities are accompanied by uncertainties; many so-called sustainable innovations have failed to adequately weigh up the relationships within existing social structures, or have become entangled in the dilemma of balancing relationships and interests. This is why the majority of sustainable innovations, which are driven by exploration and problem-solving, face a series of obstacles and constraints.
It is therefore more important and rational to identify and refine the implementation of accountability by analysing the interrelationships within existing environmental and industrial structures, and to seek more concrete and actionable solutions.
2. Multi-Perspectives Thinking:
Based on the current general understanding of sustainability, we will analyse its multi-dimensional definitions from a human perspective, whilst also examining the underlying causes and opportunities.
Diverse priorities arising from individual structural differences
Individuals in society have differing definitions of sustainability, whether due to factors such as perception, implementation or varying interpretations across different fields. Without taking into account the prioritisation of interests, this diversity of understanding has already posed significant challenges to the widespread, standardised application or management of sustainability.
From a macro perspective, it must be acknowledged that all actions or initiatives aimed at environmental protection are inevitably driven by considerations of self-interest and personal value; even non-profit environmental organisations, whilst operating for public good, ultimately seek — from a human-centred perspective — to determine how best humanity can coexist within this objective ecosystem. We must therefore ask: what are the core elements of so-called sustainability or environmental protection? And, once again, what is humanity’s highest priority in this regard? Now, let us narrow our focus to observe each individual within their daily lives: what does environmental protection mean to each person? Is it passion or interest? Or is it a fear of a bleak future, a belief in survival, or simply a sense of responsibility and mission towards human society?
Some might argue that all it takes is for each individual to make small behavioural changes in their daily lives — such as driving less and walking more, or foregoing a plastic bag when shopping — to contribute significantly to the process of sustainability from various perspectives.
However, the same prioritisation applies to every individual’s life; from a results-oriented perspective, environmental protection and sustainability rank almost at the very bottom of each person’s list of priorities. This may partly stem from the fact that these actions do not yield immediate or short-term benefits for the individual. To explain this using some fairly straightforward examples: on a Sunday, you might want to cycle through the park to reach your destination, because, in a sense, you’re in no hurry to get anywhere and it allows you to reduce your personal carbon footprint. However, this only applies in situations where there is no comparison of priorities. Consider a busy working day on a Monday: because I am tired and want to sleep for a few more minutes, yet do not want to be late for work due to my commute, I have no choice but to take a taxi to the office to ensure my attendance record remains intact.
In this scenario, ‘environmental protection’ and ‘sustainability’ — as key terms — are automatically relegated to the bottom of the list of daily priorities (much like the alphabetical order from A to Z in a dictionary, where the responsibilities that sustainability entails for the individual in daily life can automatically be assigned to the ‘Z’ position), because all factors directly related to personal interests and relationships determine the relative priority of these issues.
Now that we have a clear understanding of the concept of prioritisation, why not take a moment to reflect once more on the significance of sustainability and environmental protection from the perspective of the individual? What does this mean for you personally? And what does it mean for humanity as a entirety?
3. Critical Thinking:
“Manufacturing is Repairing.”
When analysed within the same social structure, individuals are, in fact, extremely passive as consumers, and the rational and appropriate changes they can bring about are likewise limited. Some conceptual case studies stem from reflections on the manufacturing process; to a certain extent, enterprises or groups capable of utilising and processing more resources possess relatively greater manoeuvrability and capacity for implementation, as both the manufacturing and supply chain processes involve varying degrees of consumption and accumulation.
As a series of environmental factors impact humanity, the regulation and optimisation of restrictions implemented by macro-level organisations or institutions are, to a certain extent, influencing the degree of importance that companies and enterprises attach to sustainable emissions reduction.
Many enterprises have already implemented corresponding optimisations in their manufacturing or assembly line operations based on the core principles of sustainable development, whether driven by a sense of corporate social responsibility in a macro sense, the enhancement of corporate culture and influence, or simply the motivation of stakeholder interests.
(References cited in: Towards a Zero Future — Creating Closed-loop Systems)
Similarly, inspiration was drawn from an exhibition. A group of people, guided by a long-term vision of a more rational, closed-loop sustainable economy, have been experimenting with a series of structural innovations. As illustrated in the exploratory case study shown in the diagram, they analyse existing product life cycles through the lens of current material and manufacturing processes to explore feasible solutions based on these closed loops. The existing production and supply relationships, together with the product usage cycle, collectively form a semi-closed-loop product life cycle.
However, until a series of technical barriers preventing the complete conversion of products into raw materials at the end-of-life stage are overcome, the disposal of vast quantities of products and composite materials necessitates consideration of reprocessing and reusing what is currently defined as waste. This may be achieved through reprocessing in factories, the equitable distribution of macro-resources, or the creation of value through reuse. Consequently, we must envision and reflect upon the resources available within the ecological system in which future humanity will exist.
With the relentless advance of human-centred industrialisation and commodification — which are already approaching saturation — it may become extremely difficult for humanity to find so-called ‘raw materials’, as the majority of usable resources have already been incorporated into products or are currently undergoing processing. It is therefore not difficult to imagine that future material use will begin with discarded ‘processed materials’, and that all humanity can do is to create and explore new applications for these materials in order to meet the needs of future generations.
To begin with, when the word ‘repair’ is mentioned, I wonder what images spring to mind subconsciously for everyone? I’d like to start by explaining my own understanding of the term ‘restoration’. To me, ‘restoration’ is, to a certain extent, about re-use or ‘re-purposing’.
Viewed from a materialist perspective, a product is undoubtedly a functional structure composed of various elements and materials. Over time, this structure ceases to fulfil a specific original function; consequently, humans process or supplement this semi-abandoned or discarded object so that it can once again fulfil that specific function, or so that it can be repurposed to provide a solution for a new need. If we analyse the life cycle of any product or commodity from a more microscopic perspective, we find that whether recyclable or non-recyclable, these materials continue to exist in physical form within this ecosystem and play a role in some corner of the world; or they may have gradually slipped from human view, making it impossible to observe their subsequent fate; or perhaps humanity has accelerated their natural process, breaking them down and then reassembling them into new commodities to meet human needs or create new value.
What remains constant, however, is the relatively stable and closed-loop relationship between resources. Let us narrow our focus further: from the perspective of molecules or elements, if one were to trace a single molecular unit indefinitely, it would inevitably be driven by external forces — including both human and non-human actions — and, in the process, would have been synthesised or decomposed countless times to satisfy innumerable human and non-human needs or influences. Therefore, if we were to narrow this broad temporal dimension down to a local scale, might it be said, in a sense, that all production and manufacturing in today’s society — from a material perspective — is already, in essence, a process of restoration? Yet do most people remain unaware of this cycle?
4. Reflection and Imagination:
Practical Opportunity Analysis: responsibility design after the end of the commodity cycle
When considering the responsibilities of designers from a designer’s perspective, and with regard to a specific role, we need to focus more on the value and benefits that the product itself can bring to the company and the organisation, by balancing the functional fulfilment of market demands or problem-solving with cost considerations and the use of materials. In companies or industries where overall interests are central to decision-making, and in light of the influence of environmental issues such as sustainability and social constraints, businesses are increasingly establishing long-term visions to achieve emissions reductions in current production, manufacturing or processing processes, thereby fostering the development of a sustainable supply chain.
From the perspective of balancing interests, it is both more reasonable and effective for companies to optimise their existing supply chains to achieve sustainability and enhance efficiency.
Shifting once again to the perspective of the individual consumer, as mentioned above, consumers are extremely passive when their priorities permit; the majority of their behaviour within their normal daily routines is driven by the fulfilment of needs and constrained by the objective conditions of the product lifecycle.
To a certain extent, even in scenarios where environmental protection is a priority, consumers — as recipients of manufactured goods — have few options for participating in the overall process of sustainability optimisation. What consumers can achieve still depends on the touchpoints in their immediate environment and the usability of the goods themselves. So, when it comes to repairing products after use, do they truly possess sufficient information and options to carry out such repairs?
(Original repairing responsibility diagram 01)
Hypothetical content: Repair Designer / Commodity Reuse Scheme / Product Lifecycle Designer / Commodity Closed-loop Thinking, etc.
In the short term, the focus is on whether designers in the manufacturing and production sectors can incorporate post-use scenarios into their product designs as part of near-term development. This encompasses not only the recycling and reuse of the product, but also the additional possibilities that designers imbue in the product itself; such possibilities represent a responsibility whilst also providing individual consumers with a wider range of options.
To give some concrete examples: could feasible repair and repurposing solutions be provided at the end of a product’s lifecycle, tailored to the specific usage scenarios of the target customer base? Alternatively, could the product be integrated with any relevant touchpoints in that context to realise its value once more, or even generate new value?
When this entire closed-loop process is considered and designed with greater care and comprehensiveness, it may well lead to significant improvements.
*The ownership of the project and the information belongs to the individual only for communication and sharing. Do not copy or use it for commercial purposes.