[X]CHANGING PERSPECTIVES: ENRICHING MULTISTAKEHOLDER DELIBERATION WITH EMBODIMENT IN PARTICIPATORY SOCIETY presented at the CeDEM17 Conference in Krems, Austria

1. [ X ] C H A N G I N G P E R S P E C T I V E S :
E N R I C H I N G M U LT I - S TA K E H O L D E R D E L I B E R AT I O N W I T H E M B O D I M E N T I N
PA R T I C I PAT O RY S O C I E T Y.
[ X ] C P @ C E ’ D E M ’ 1 7 K R E M S , A U S T R I A | 1 7 - 0 5 - 2 0 1 7

2. I N T R O D U C T I O N
• Transformation Economy
• Multi-stakeholder collaborations
• Bottom-up movements
• Decentralisation
• Deliberative democracy
PA R T I C I PAT I O N
S O C I E T Y

3. F O C U S
C O N T R I B U T I O N
• Our aim is not to design direct
solutions to societal issues
• but instead we focus on designing
deliberation tools for multi-
stakeholders to tackle the societal
issues together
• based on participatory sensemaking.

4. • Systemic mechanisms are
‘colonising’ the Lifeworld
• ”…reaching understanding in the
sense of a cooperative process of
interpretation” [Habermas 1981, p.
40]
• Stakeholders should engage in
discussions that cross over the
System and Lifeworld dichotomy
and reach a common
understanding
• System-Lifeworld
(HABERMAS, 1981)
• Plurality
(ARENDT, 1945)
• Phenemenology of Perception
(MERLEAU-PONTY, 1985)
• Participatory Sensemaking
(DE JAEGHER & DI PAOLO, 2009)
• Deliberative Democracy
(FISHKIN & LUSKIN, 2005)
• Embodiment
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
F R A M E
T H E O RY

5. • System-Lifeworld
(HABERMAS, 1981)
• Plurality
(ARENDT, 1945)
• Phenemenology of Perception
(MERLEAU-PONTY, 1985)
• Participatory Sensemaking
(DE JAEGHER & DI PAOLO, 2009)
• Deliberative Democracy
(FISHKIN & LUSKIN, 2005)
• Embodiment
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
F R A M E
• Distinctness & otherness
• Handeln
• Through action, we can
discover and even affect
each other’s opinions
• Table as metaphor of the
public space
T H E O RY

6. • System-Lifeworld
(HABERMAS, 1981)
• Plurality
(ARENDT, 1945)
• Phenemenology of Perception
(MERLEAU-PONTY, 1985)
• Participatory Sensemaking
(DE JAEGHER & DI PAOLO, 2009)
• Deliberative Democracy
(FISHKIN & LUSKIN, 2005)
• Embodiment
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
F R A M E
T H E O RY
• We perceive and make sense of
the world by interacting with and
in it
• Designing for physical interaction
opportunities (movements) might
open up different ways to
perceive and thus different ways
to makes sense of the world
• Opens up ‘understanding’
beyond the limits of a verbal
discussion

7. • System-Lifeworld
(HABERMAS, 1981)
• Plurality
(ARENDT, 1945)
• Phenemenology of Perception
(MERLEAU-PONTY, 1985)
• Participatory Sensemaking
(DE JAEGHER & DI PAOLO, 2009)
• Deliberative Democracy
(FISHKIN & LUSKIN, 2005)
• Embodiment
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
F R A M E
• Cognition is embodied in
action
• Focus on the encounter itself
wherein interactions can
influence one another and
meaning is generated in the
‘in-between’ between
people, not in their separate
minds.
T H E O RY

8. • System-Lifeworld
(HABERMAS, 1981)
• Plurality
(ARENDT, 1945)
• Phenemenology of Perception
(MERLEAU-PONTY, 1985)
• Participatory Sensemaking
(DE JAEGHER & DI PAOLO, 2009)
• Deliberative Democracy
(FISHKIN & LUSKIN, 2005)
• Embodiment
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
F R A M E
• From the rationality of deliberation
towards the interaction of
deliberation
• We aim to enrich the concept of
deliberative democracy in two ways:
• firstly, taking the autonomy of the
interaction process into account, by
focusing on the dynamics of
participatory sensemaking,
• and secondly, by bringing the
notion of embodiment into play.
T H E O RY

9. • System-Lifeworld
(HABERMAS, 1981)
• Plurality
(ARENDT, 1945)
• Phenemenology of Perception
(MERLEAU-PONTY, 1985)
• Participatory Sensemaking
(DE JAEGHER & DI PAOLO, 2009)
• Deliberative Democracy
(FISHKIN & LUSKIN, 2005)
• Embodiment
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
F R A M E
• Scaffolds: inviting physical objects
or spaces, props, that allow for
creative thought and bind
conversations or meaning and also
gain meaning through interaction
with them.
• Traces: positions, selections or
compositions of scaffolds that refer
to the interactions in the meaning-
making process; they form a
tangible or visible history and they
can become scaffolds themselves.
T H E O RY

10. D E S I G N : [ X ] C H A N G I N G P E R S P E C T I V E S
C O N T R I B U T I O N
• PRODUCT
(2) 15 tracking tables each with 15 tokens
with icons and 1 real-time visualisation of
token movements
• SERVICE
(1) Expectation management, Invitation,
(3) Analysis, report, video-impression,
(4) Collective evaluation session.
• SYSTEM
Token movements are tracked and
visualised in a real-time visualisation.

11. 3 C A S E S
C A S E S T U D I E S
• What do citizen initiatives need to
flourish?
• How can housing corporation and
tenants work together on enjoyable
living in the city?
• How can housing corporation and
tenants work together on enjoyable
living in the village?

12. vimeo.com/philemonne/aop080915

13. S E S S I O N : A C T I V E AT T E N T I O N
O B S E R VAT I O N S & F I N D I N G S

14. O B S E R VAT I O N S & F I N D I N G S
S E S S I O N : T R I G G E R S F O R P S

15. S E S S I O N : D I S P O S I T I O N O F P O W E R
O B S E R VAT I O N S & F I N D I N G S

16. B E F O R E & A F T E R T H E S E S S I O N
O B S E R VAT I O N S & F I N D I N G S

17. B A C K T O T H E F O C U S
• “…our aim is to contribute to
deliberative democracy, by designing
and evaluating embodied deliberation
tools that enable multi-stakeholders to
collaborate on societal issues using
participatory sensemaking.”
I M P L I C AT I O N S F O R D E L I B E R AT I O N

18. • Introducing physical and visual
elements to enrich deliberation
• Scaffolds: icons, tokens
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
• Traces: visual representation
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
I M P L I C AT I O N S
• Questioning each other
• Elucidating viewpoints
• Listening
• Building onto each
other’s contributions
• Hierarchy
I M P L E M E N TAT I O N

19. • Introducing physical and visual
elements to enrich deliberation
• Scaffolds: icons, tokens
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
• Traces: visual representation
(HUMMELS & VAN DIJK, 2015)
I M P L I C AT I O N S
• Reflection
• Sense of scale
• Other or unknown
perspectives
I M P L E M E N TAT I O N

20. • Introducing design tools in
deliberation processes
I M P L I C AT I O N S
• Expectation
management
• Design tool not limited to
one event
• Close collaboration
partners
• Open process
• Sharing research insights
I M P L E M E N TAT I O N

21. F U T U R E W O R K
D E S I G N D E V E L O P M E N T

22. [ X ] C H A N G I N G P E R S P E C T I V E S :
E N R I C H I N G M U LT I - S TA K E H O L D E R D E L I B E R AT I O N W I T H E M B O D I M E N T I N
PA R T I C I PAT O RY S O C I E T Y.
[ X ] C P @ C E ’ D E M ’ 1 7 K R E M S , A U S T R I A | 1 7 - 0 5 - 2 0 1 7
P H I L É M O N N E J A A S M A
P. G . J A A S M A @ T U E . N L