co-design callouts 4
In co-design, particularly within human services like child protection, a crucial question arises: Where does the responsibility lie? This method, when executed well and against the grain of less collaborative practices, extends expectations from community members to professionals and the funders / sponsors of the work. Community members may be excited at the prospect of real involvement, anxious to deliver. Meanwhile, sponsors and professionals might find themselves navigating their own anxieties, frustration or just learning different ways to take the necessary steps to realise the project.
This shift in responsibilities can be both exciting and tension-filled. Community accountability is essential, especially when a project is well-resourced. Costanza-Chock advocates for developing "specific, concrete mechanisms" for community accountability, highlighting the importance of shared responsibility and the potential for systemic change (Costanza-Chock, 2020). This represents a significant shift toward community designing, challenging the traditional notion of the responsible citizen and instead emphasising a collective effort where every participant, from the vocal member to the sponsor, commits to their role.
In terms of group dynamics, the co-design process benefits from establishing group agreements. Old-style ground rules can sometimes feel didactic or patronising. adrienne maree brown offers refreshing and flexible guiding ideas that foster inclusion and collaboration, such as "Listen from the Inside Out," "Engage Tension, Don't Indulge Drama," and "Make Space, Take Space," encouraging a balance between participation and listening (Brown, 2017).
Commons The concept of the commons, as discussed by Moten and Esteva, resonates deeply with the spirit of co-design. It's about forming alliances, recognizing shared goals, and mobilising around them, while acknowledging that current institutional practices can be harmful. This notion extends to the idea of commoning, seeing it as an act against historical enclosures and modern neoliberal imperatives, which often restrict co-design efforts. Moten, in conversation with Stefano, highlights a resistance to the management of the commons, suggesting instead that joining and experimenting with already existing informal networks can be more effective (Harney & Moten, 2013). Esteva reminds us of the historical role of commons and the importance of viewing the emerging post-capitalist world as a diverse collection of commoning practices. Through this exploration, we see that co-design's potential lies in collective action, where responsibility is shared, and the commons are embraced as a fertile ground for innovation and change.
References:
Costanza-Chock, S. (2020). Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. MIT Press.
Davis, R. (2016). Responsibility and Public Services. Cambridge University Press.
Brown, A. M. (2017). Emergent Strategy: Shaping Change, Changing Worlds. AK Press.
Harney, S., & Moten, F. (2013). The Undercommons: Fugitive Planning & Black Study. Minor Compositions.
Westoby, P., Palmer, D., & Lathouras, A. (2020). 40 Critical Thinkers in Community Development. Practical Action Publishing.
Sarkissian, W., Bunjamin-Mau, W., Cook, A., Walsh, K., & Vajda, S. (2010). SpeakOut: The step-by-step guide to SpeakOuts and community workshops. The Australian Centre for Social Innovation.
