Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education (Italy), S.r.l. Via Ripamonti, 89 – 20141 Milano Rights of translation, reproduction, electronic storage and total or partial adaptation by any mean whatsoever (including microilms and Photostat copies) are not allowed. Given the intrinsic features of the Internet, the Publisher is not responsible for any possible change in both the addresses and the contents of the mentioned Internet websites. Names and brands mentioned in the text are generally registered by the respective producers.Copertina: Rebecca Squires Programme and Portfolio Manager: Natalie Jacobs Programme Manager: Marta Colnago Programme Manager: Daniele Bonanno Produzione: Donatella Giuliani Prestampa e postproduzione digitale: digitaltypes.it ISBN: 9788838694059 Prooceedings of the Cumulus Conference, Milano 2015 TheVi r t uousCi r c l e Des i gnCul t ur e andExper i ment at i on 3-7 June 2015, Milano, Italy Editors Luisa Collina, Laura Galluzzo, Anna Meroni Publisher: McGraw-Hill Education Italy Politecnico di Milano Design Department School of Design Poli.Design Fondazione Politecnico For further information on Cumulus Association: Cumulus Secretariat Aalto University School of Arts, Design and Architecture PO Box 31000, FI-00076 Aalto Finland E: cumulus@taik.fi W: http://www.cumulusassociation.org ISBN 9788838694059 -v Conference Colophon President of Cumulus International Association of Universities and Colleges of Art, Design and Media. Conference Chair Luisa Collina / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Conference Manager Laura Galluzzo / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Scientiic Committee Chairs Ezio Manzini / DESIS Network Anna Meroni / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Tracks Chairs Nurturing Eleonora Lupo / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Sarah Teasley / Royal College of Art Paolo Volonté / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Envisioning Giulio Ceppi / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Stefano Marzano / THNK, School of Creative Leadership. Francesco Zurlo / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Experimenting/Prototyping Banny Banerjee / Stanford University Paola Bertola / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Stefano Maffei / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Incubating/Scaling Anna Meroni / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Cabirio Cautela / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Gjoko Muratovski / Auckland University of Technology. Assessing Lia Krucken / Universidade do Estado de Mina Gerais. Pier Paolo Peruccio / Politecnico di Torino. Paolo Tamborrini / Politecnico di Torino. Disseminating/Communicating Elena Caratti / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Paolo Ciuccarelli / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Mark Roxburgh / University of Newcastle. Training/Educating Luca Guerrini / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Pablo Jarauta / IED, Istituto Europeo di design. Lucia Rampino / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. International Affairs Anne Schoonbrodt / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Visual Communication Andrea Manciaracina, Umberto Tolino / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. Pictures Massimo Ferrari Translations and English Editing Rachel Anne Coad Graphic and Interior Design Tina Fazeli, Elisabetta Micucci Rebecca Squires / Design Department, Politecnico di Milano. International Review Board The conference adopted double blind peer review. Yoko Akama, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology Jose Allard, Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile Zoy Anastassakis, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Nik Baerten, Pantopicon Giovanni Baule, Politecnico di Milano Elisa Bertolotti, Politecnico di Milano Alessandro Biamonti, Politecnico di Milano Massimo Bianchini, Politecnico di Milano Luigi Bistagnino, Politecnico di Torino Sandy Black, University of the Arts London Spyros Bofylatos, University of the Aegean Gustavo Borba, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos Brigitte Borja de Mozota, Paris College of Art Clare Brass, Royal College of Art Caelli Brooker, University of Newcastle Graeme Brooker, Middlesex University London Sam Bucolo, University of Technology Sydney Daniela Calabi, Politecnico di Milano Barbara Camocini, Politecnico di Milano Angus Campbell, University of Johannesburg Daria Cantù, Politecnico di Milano Michele Capuani, Politecnico di Milano Michelle Catanzaro, University of Newcastle Manuela Celi, Politecnico di Milano Eunji Cho, Hunan University Jaz Choi, Queensland University of Technology Matteo Ciastellardi, Politecnico di Milano Carla Cipolla, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Luisa Collina, Politecnico di Milano Chiara Colombi, Politecnico di Milano Sara Colombo, Politecnico di Milano Marta Corubolo, Politecnico di Milano Vincenzo Cristallo, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy Robert Crocke, University of South Australia Heather Daam, Institute without Boundaries Toronto Chiara Del Gaudio, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos Alessandro Deserti, Politecnico di Milano Loredana Di Lucchio, Sapienza Università di Roma Jonathan Edelman, Stanford University Davide Fassi, Politecnico di Milano David Fern, Middlesex University London Silvia Ferraris, Politecnico di Milano Venere Ferraro, Politecnico di Milano Alain Findeli, University of Nimes Elena Formia, Università di Bologna Marcus Foth, Queensland University of Technology Silvia Franceschini, Politecnico di Milano Teresa Franqueira, Universidade de Aveiro Carlo Franzato, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos Karine Freire, Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos Marisa Galbiati, Politecnico di Milano Laura Galluzzo, Politecnico di Milano Giulia Gerosa, Politecnico di Milano Miaosen Gong, Jiangnan University Carma Gorman, University of Texas at Austin Francesco Guida, Politecnico di Milano Ashley Hall, Royal College of Art Michael Hann, University of Leeds Denny Ho,The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Stefan Holmlid, Linkoping University Lorenzo Imbesi, Sapienza Università di Roma Ayelet Karmon, Shenkar - Engineering. Design. Art Martin Kohler, HafenCity University Hamburg Cindy Kohtala, Aalto University Ilpo Koskinen,The Hong Kong Polytechnic University Peter Kroes,TU Delft Peter Gall Krogh, Aarhus University Carla Langella, Seconda Università degli Studi di Napoli Yanki Lee, Hong Kong Design Institute Elisa Lega, University of Brighton Wessie Ling, Northumbria University Cyntia Malagutti, Centro Universitário Senac Naude Malan, University of Johannesburg Ilaria Mariani, Politecnico di Milano Tuuli Mattelmaki, Aalto University Alvise Mattozzi, Università di Bolzano Mike McAuley, University of Newcastle Lisa McEwan, Auckland University of Technology Stuart Medley, Edith Cowan University Western Australia Massimo Menichinelli, Openp2pdesign Cynthia Mohr, University of North Texas Nicola Morelli, Aalborg University Afonso Morone, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II Francesca Murialdo, Politecnico di Milano Andreas Novy, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business Marina Parente, Politecnico di Milano Raffaella Perrone, ELISAVA Escola Superior de Disseny Margherita Pillan, Politecnico di Milano Francesca Piredda, Politecnico di Milano Marco Pironti, Università di Torino Paola Pisano, Università di Torino Giovanni Profeta, Scuola Universitaria Professionale, Svizzera Italiana Agnese Rebaglio, Politecnico di Milano Livia Rezende, Royal College of Art Dina Riccò, Politecnico di Milano Francesca Rizzo, Università di Bologna Rui Roda, University of Aveiro Liat Rogel, Nuova Accademia di Belle Arti Valentina Rognoli, Politecnico di Milano Margherita Russo, Università degli studi di Modena e Reggio Emilia Dario Russo, Università di Palermo Fatina Saikaly, Cocreando Giuseppe Salvia, Nottingham Univesity Daniela Sangiorgi, Lancaster University Daniela Selloni, Politecnico di Milano Anna Seravalli, Malmo University Giulia Simeone, Politecnico di Milano Michele Simoni, Università Parthenope Eduardo Staszowski, Parsons The New School for Design Cristiano Storni, University of Limerick Shehnaz Suterwalla, Royal College of Art Kate Sweetapple, University of Technology Sydney Virginia Tassinari, MAD Faculty Genk Carlos Teixeira, Parsons The New School for Design Adam Thorpe, Central Saint Martin Paola Trapani, Unitec Institute of Technology Auckland Raffaella Trocchianesi, Politecnico di Milano Federica Vacca, Politecnico di Milano Fabrizio Valpreda, Politecnico di Torino Francesca Valsecchi,Tongji University Beatrice Villari, Politecnico di Milano Katarina Wetter Edman, University of Gothenburg Robert Young, Northumbria University Salvatore Zingale, Politecnico di Milano 325 Substitutions Thomas Pausz, Adjunct Professor - Thomas.pausz@gmail.com Iceland Academy of The Arts, Iceland In this short speculative design paper I reflect on mouvements and ideas, which do not use usual conflictual tactics to change mentalities and values regarding food. Instead a new typology of design projects focus on elaborating seducing alternative systems through material transformations, myth making and narrative design. We propose to use here the concept of Substitutions or substitutive thinking to describe this multitude of design activities aiming at changing the way we produce and consume in a progressive way. Design substitutions, like magic tricks leave the public with a sense of enchantement. To describe this multitude of design activities aiming at changing the way we produce and consume in a progressive way. Design substitutions, like magic tricks leave the public with a sense of enchantement. I will take examples from material sciences as well as food research. Our presentation follows three main paths: circular systems thinking, experiments with substitutive materials, and a reflection on medias to communicate these experiments. Through case studies illustrating these topics we reflect on the impact of designers, producers and consumers involved in substitutive activities.The ideas were mainly informed by working with product design students & LHI design department colleagues on two courses: 1_ Spiritualism, Crafts & Waste (summer 2014) 2_ Food Systems and Technology (autumn 2014) SUBSTITUTIVE THINKING IN THE FOOD INDUSTRY SUPERFICIAL SUBSTITUTION: SURFACE / TEXTURE / TASTE The creation of substitutes for meat is already an established industry in the vegetarian and vegan niche markets. It will now boom and reach the mainstream in the next years as we have reached the limits of production for meat. Major tech corporations such as Google and Microsoft are currently investing in what is described as ‘FOOD.02’: a huge effort to transform the entire food system by creating sophisticated substitutes. In a recent article in the French Magazine Le Nouvel Observateur1, the author interviews founders from several companies involved in these experiments: Beyond Meat, for example is a company producing ‘hacked meat’ or ‘chicken breasts’ using exclusively proteins extracted from yellow beans. Nothing new in the process, as lupina as been a well known source of protein for a very long time.The real revolution is in their marketing strategy 1 Boulet-gercourt, P. (2014) Que Mangerons Nous Demain? Le Nouvel Observateur, Octobre 2014 – N.2604 326 - The Virtuous Circle - Cumulus conference June 3-7, 2015, Milan ‘We do not say that we produce vegetarian food. We say we do produce meat. However the source of this meat is different and does not require mass breeding and animal torture.We are redefining meat itself.’ Says the CEO of the company Varun Singla. In this apparently simple statement: ‘we are producing meat’ appears the radical novelty of the upcoming food industry. The point is not to change the consumer’s habits by convincing them of accepting a new philosophy based on ethics or a rational discourse. Quite the opposite, the idea is to comfort the consumer by recreating the perfect substitutes, so we can carry on eating ‘burgers’ and ‘chicken’ without having to suffer from a change of taste or texture in the substitution. Recreating perfect food textures is the current horizon for food researchers, as the secrets of taste have already been discovered thanks to chemical analysis of aromas. Another component of our food, the ‘phantom aromas’, are a type of kinesthetic component that are also being explored. The power of these apparently superficial substitutions is that they do not have to be presented as a massive change to operate. Interestingly, the term substitution is also often used in cooking recipes – ‘if you don’t have this, substitute for that’, but essentially the recipe/system remains the same. These collaborations between food industry and science are altering the food system already. Their power is that they address the consumer’s senses (taste, smell, touch, sight and smell) rather than their moral or rational thinking. But will these strategies actually improve the system and promote variety? Or reinforce the current trend of food standardization and globalization of taste? The image of the classic bank robbery trick comes to mind: the static photo of the existing room stuck in front of the security camera… This ‘technical’ or ‘engineered’ system of substitution in fact works on the level of individual taste and aims at changing individual behaviour through seduction. We could question whether a more ‘conscious’ approach is needed, where the substitutions developed are clearly aimed at impacting the production system is publicly debated. In her provocative article Beyond the ABC, Climate change policies and theories of Social Change, Elizabeth Shove offers a critic of the paradigm in which issues relating to the environment and social change are presented as individual/behavioural issues. For Shove, this framework considering that ‘Attitude, Behaviour, and (individual) Choice’ are the keys to social change takes the responsibilities off the governments: ‘it is clear that the ABC is a political and not only a theoretical position in that it obscures the extent to which governments sustain unsustainable economies and ways of life, and the extend to which they have a hand in structuring options and possibilities.’2 2 Shove, E. (2010). Beyond The ABC: Climate Change policy and theories of social change, in Environment and Planning A2010, volume 42, pages 1273 – 1285. Doi:10.1068/a42282. Envisioning - 327 This critic that Shove convincingly develops around climate change policies can extend to our area of food production: who is ‘structuring the options and possibilities’ in the future of food? If only private hands are involved in the new substitutive sciences, we could head towards situations of monopoly and inequality of access. It is therefore time for governments to stop sustaining obsolete models of food production. DEEP SUBSTITUTION A radically different approach to changing food behaviours is presented by chef and writer Dan Barber in his 2014 book The Third Plate, Field Noted on the Future of Food3. The book starts with a self-critical look at current practice of organic cuisine: substituting all ingredients on menus for organic, local ingredients is obviously a good thing. But Barber argues that it is not enough, and not sustainable. His point is that in the long term this attitude will create similar imbalances than the current monocultures, by pushing organic farms to supply the most popular ingredients, rather than producing what the natural ecosystem is meant to produce locally. The trend in organic vegetables and fruits for example, which represent only 10% of food production, is occulting the huge problem of grain cultivation (wheat, spelt, corn). Instead Barber proposes that chefs and local cuisines adapt to what is best for the farms and ecosystems, and that we rethink the entire culture of what should go on our plates:‘The cuisine should serve the landscape.’ Some radical conclusions of this ideas: i. Restaurants should not offer a menu at all, but rather a variable list of ingredients, which the guests mix themselves in relation to natural ratios: specific local variety of grains, using all parts of the animals and not only prime cuts. So the plate reflects the season, the locality, and the history of the surroundings. ii. The grains varieties are the main ingredient of the plate, with possibly some meat flavouring and small side dishes of seasonal vegetables, and not the other way around with the grain as a marginal component. iii. Reading this book as a designer, one cannot help but transfer this type of thinking to the world of the production of object and processes, which is undergoing a transformation similar to the food system.What would it means to have ‘no menu’? could we imagine a place, where one could have access to seasonal and local materials and designers make objects from these materials rather than sourcing the materials to fulfill a predetermined design? In such a scenario material scientists, designers and craftsmen would work together to create locally in response to available resources and real needs, instead of feeding from huge anonymous material supplies and consume global brands. 3 Barber, D. (2014). The Third Plate: Field Notes on the future of Food, Little, Brown. 328 - The Virtuous Circle - Cumulus conference June 3-7, 2015, Milan SUBSTITUTIONS BEYOND THE FOOD INDUSTRY Switching to a more local resource is the first reason to substitute a material, for obvious reason of transport costs and ecological footprint. One recurring example in history is the search for local resources to create alternative rubber (normally made from latex collected from Rubber Trees.) During the Cold War there was huge effort to produce alternative rubbers both in the US and in the USSR, as both wanted to reduce their dependence on imported natural latex.The local Dandelion Flower appeared as the star substitute, and for a while millions were invested in its study and growth. In his chronicle Growing American Rubber, Strategic Plants and the Politics of National Security (2009), Mark Finlay makes the history of this quest involving ‘Thomas Edison, Henri Ford, known botanists, Hawaiian peasants, and ordinary citizens, all of whom contributed to this search for economic independence(…)’ Although synthetic rubber has been widely used since the mid XXth century, the automobile industry is currently reviving the Dandelion research, because the demand on rubber worldwide will soon exceed the current production.The company Ford for example has whole R&D department of scientists and designers studying alternative rubbers today. FIGURE 1 - Dandelion Rubber Extraction Courtesy of Sarah Tribble and James Owens. Envisioning - 329 FIGURE 2 - Georges Washington Carver Courtesy of Wikipedia. THE CHEMURGICAL COUNCIL: A HISTORICAL PRECEDENT While researching creative use of materials in the farming sector, we encountered the singular figure of Georges Washington Carver. A farm worker by trade, Carver made experiments with planting new crops and using waste from traditional crops to create new processes and products. He pioneered the Chemurgical Council, which delivered bulletins to inform farmers on these experiments long time before the idea of Open Source design existed. His life goal was to improve the income and social condition of small scale farmers by: i. Promoting full-use of crops (Carver famously published a manual on 100 different products to create from peanuts only!). ii. Creating new systems to use resources generally considered waste in the food industry, and thus started experimentations on alternative fuels still relevant today. iii. Fight against monoculture and single use crops The Chemurgical Council operated between 1950 and1977. Chemurgical Council members designed many alternative processes and products as substitutes for synthetic products, which are still in use today, Castor Oil being the most versatile and Peanut Butter the most popular.A lack of organisation and of good communication of this research meant that these experiments remained marginal. 330 - The Virtuous Circle - Cumulus conference June 3-7, 2015, Milan The personality of Carver itself and his scientific capacities are still being debated today. Moreover towards the end of the 1950’s the arising petro-chemical industry started to impose its hegemony on material research and farming policies. Chemurgy and its small scale production and social ethos fell out of interest. Governments and big company lobbies aimed for large scale production, maximum productivity and profits, with consequences that we know today: loss of variety of crops, quasi destruction of soil’s natural nutrients creating needs for artificial boosting of crops, and struggle for the small farm culture. However short lived, Chemurgy did inspire a longer term philosophy and several other mouvements. The New Use Council was a direct offshoot, and is still active today as a small lobby rather than a recognised tool of the industry. We can also find a more recent echo of Chemurgy in mouvements like the FarmHacking Network, an online resource where small producers can find open source technology to adapt and transform tools made for gigantic monocultures to their smaller scale production. FIGURE 3 - A hacked agricultural machine for hand weeding a sensitive ield. From the website http://www.farmhack.org/ WASTE & CIRCULAR DESIGN THINKING The three aims of Chemurgy were: i. Waste as resource ii. Full-use iii. Variable use of soil/respect of ecosystems through multiculture. Envisioning - 331 These goals define a growing territory of contemporary design promoting the integration of natural & man made production processes into the same cycle, or ‘circular design thinking’. The idea of making a creative use of waste has a long history and transgresses the various historical production models, from the local/traditional production through the synthetic/intensive model and natural/ecological models. In her essay Synthetic Worlds, Esther Leslie reminds us that the strength of the chemical industry is precisely this potential to utilize waste, in order to maximize productivity: ‘(…) Waste can be made to give up a second batch of value. In volume Three of The Capital, Marx discusses the how the capitalist mode of production extends the utilization of the excretions of production and consumption: ‘The most striking example of utilizing waste is furnished by the chemical industry. It utilizes not only its own waste, for which it finds new uses, but also that of many other industries. For example, it converts the formerly almost useless gas-tar into aniline dyes, aliyarin, and more recently even into drugs…’ Waste of industrial production has been the domain of the chemical industry because it provided a good complement to synthetic processes.Recently designers question the need to use chemical processes at all in the transformation of waste. Bio-design projects are engaged in developping substitute binders and resins to turn industry waste into toolable materials. The German company Tecnaro for example has pioneered a material entirely from waste wood (including the resin), which can be injection moulded to make precision parts. On a more local level LHI product design students have been working with waste from the food industry to create paper, plant nutriens, and other new biodegradable materials. The beauty of these processes is that they seem to get more and more essential and use less and less additives. With more experiments and some investment from the industry these materials are potential substitutes for existing nonbiodegradable materials. This applied science is parallel to a mouvement of ‘new crafts’. As the tools developed to create the materials also allow to think of new ways of shaping them, and new ways of designing. The essential question is now a question of scale: is the next step in the substitutive trend to create wider platforms where these new materials and processes would be made accessible and shared by a community? Otherwise the substitutes will remain the domain of small craft editions where the unicity of the material adds value to the product, but risks disappearing with the designer and with the trend. How about the waste of consumption? The waste products of consumption are of two kinds: obsolete objects and human excreta. Unlike the waste from industry, these were largely ignored by the chemical industry, and at large by the capitalist economy. We can speculate two reasons: 332 - The Virtuous Circle - Cumulus conference June 3-7, 2015, Milan i. obsolescence of objects is a pre-condition of the market economy ii. modern concepts of hygiene promoted by the pharmaceutical industry classify excreta as part of the unhygienic matters, therefore to be hidden and buried or thrown at sea. Obsolete objects are starting to be perceived as a major material resource, thanks to rapidly developing recycling and upcycling systems. But we should remember that these systems were not always accepted: left over ‘obsolete’ objects of consumptions were first harnessed by ecological mouvements & activits critical of capitalist production systems. Designers followed with small crafted editions, making recycled matter desirable. Finally industry policies are following, mostly for image reason, as demonstrated in Hijacking Sustainability by Adrian Paar. These days designers are getting involved with the most reliable waste resource resulting from consumption: human excreta. Still marginal until recently, projects using urines as fuel or varnishes, or a source for drinkable water are now taking centre stage in future scenarios. The very end of the consuming cycle is on the way to be reintegrated in our everyday culture. CONCLUSION: MAKING A NEW MYTHOLOGY In Mythologies4, French writer Roland Barthes dismantled the myth of consumerism in France in the 50’s with the techniques of semiotics. In the chapter ‘Soap & Detergents’ for example Barthes shows how the emerging advertising industry created the myths necessary for the public to accept the substitution of traditionnal soaps by chemical stain removers.The fascination for the perfect whiteness, the myth of the ‘whiter than white’ for example were one of these founding myths. We accept the substitutions of our material and food cultures when we start believing in the founding myths around them. The responsibiity of communicating the potential of today’s substitutive materials lies with designers and design critics.The processes, tools and systems required to produce and distribute these new substitutive materials are still in the making. The need for founding myths and stories around them is urgent to create the soil for their growth. Creating and circulating a new mythology requires the use of all available medias such as videos, exhibitions, writing, web-based documentation or even performance based design work. This is perhaps one of most interesting consequences of circular design thinking: beyond its positive environmental impact, it also redefines the role of designers as strorytellers as much as engineers or makers. 4 Barthes, R. (1972) Mythologies, Hill & Wang. Envisioning - 333 REFERENCES Boulet-Gercourt, P. Que Mangerons Nous Demain? Le Nouvel Observateur, Octobre 2014 – N.2604 Leslie, E. (2005) Synthetic Worlds (2005), London, UK, Reaktion Books. Lopez, B. (1986), Arctic Dreams, (1986), New York, Scribner. Shove, E. (2010). Beyond The ABC: Climate Change policy and theories of social change, in Environment and Planning A2010, volume 42, pages 1273 – 1285. Doi:10.1068/a42282. Barber, D. (2014)The Third Plate, Field Notes on the future of Food, Little, Brown. Parr, A. (2012) Hijacking Sustainability,The MIT Press. http://farmhack.net/home/ http://www.spiritualismcraftwaste.com/