The Emerging Transition Design Approach

  • Terry Irwin
Palabras clave: Diseño para la transición; diseño sustentable; problemas perversos (wicked problems); relaciones con los interesados (stakeholders); transiciones socio-técnicas; visiones futuras; backcasting; diseño social; estudios de diseño


Este documento describe un enfoque emergente del Diseño para la Transición para abordar problemas “perversos o intrincados” (wicked problems: cambio climático, pérdida de biodiversidad, delincuencia, pobreza, contaminación, etc.) y catalizar transiciones sociales hacia futuros más sostenibles y deseables. Los problemas perversos son los “problemas de los sistemas” que requieren un nuevo enfoque de resolución de problemas. El marco del Diseño para la Transición, reúne un conjunto de prácticas en evolución que pueden utilizarse para (a) visualizar y “mapear” problemas complejos y sus interconexiones e interdependencias; (b) situarlos dentro de grandes contextos espacio-temporales; (c) identificar y crear puentes para los conflictos de las partes interesadas y sus líneas de apalancamiento; (d) facilitar a los interesados la creación conjunta de visiones de futuros deseables; y (e) identificar puntos de influencia para el cambio (localizaciones en donde situar las intervenciones de diseño) dentro del wicked problem y los sistemas socio-técnico-ecológicos que forman su contexto


Amatullo, M. (Ed.). (2016). LEAP dialogues: Career pathways in design for social innovation. Pasadena, CA: Designmatters at Art Center College of Design.

Amplifying Creative Communities (2010). Retrieved from Parsons DESIS Lab website:

Australian Public Service Commission. (2007). Tackling wicked problems: A public policy perspective. Commonwealth of Australia.

Bardwell, L. (1991). Problem-framing: A perspective on environmental problem-solving. Environmental Management, 15, 603-612.

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books.

Baur, V., Elteren, A., Nierse, C., & Abma, T. (2010). Dealing with distrust and power dynamics: Asymmetric relations among stakeholders in responsive evaluation. Evaluation, 16, 233-248.

Bloch, E. (1995). The principal of hope (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Block, P. (2008). Community: The structure of belonging. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Bohling, K. (2011). The multi-stakeholder approach in the United Nations: Unprecedented perhaps, but not unexpected. Presented at Transnational Private Regulation in the Areas of Health, Environment, Social and Labor Rights. Retrieved from Technische Universitat Munchen, Lehrstuhl fur Wald- und Umweltpolitik:

Bourdieu, P. (1997). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bramwell, B., & Sharman, A. (1991). Collaboration in local tourism policymaking. Annals of Tourism Research, 26, 392-415.

Brand, S. (1999). The clock of the long now: Time and responsibility. New York: Basic.

Buchanan, R. (1995). Wicked problems in design thinking. In V. Margolin & R. Buchanan (Eds.), The idea of design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Candy, S., & Dunagan, J. (2017). Designing an experiential scenario: The people who vanished. Futures, 86, 136-153. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2016.05.006

Capra, F. (1996). The web of life: A new scientific understanding of living systems. New York, NY: Anchor Books.

Capra, F., & Luisi, L. (2014). The systems view of life: A unifying vision. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Carlsson-Kanyama, A., Dreborg, K., Moll, H., & Padovan, D. (2008). Participative backcasting: A tool for involving stakeholders in local sustainability planning. Futures, 40, pp 34-46.

Chatterton, P., Fuller, D., Routledge, P. (2007). Relating action to activism: Theoretical and methodological reflections. In S. Kindon, R. Pain, & M. Kesby (Eds.), Participatory action research approaches and methods: Connecting people, participation and place. London: Routledge.

Clarke, M. (2002). In search of human nature. New York: Routledge.

Cornwall, A., & Jewkes, R. (1995). What is participatory research? Social Science & Medicine, 41, 1667-1676.

Coyne, R. (2005). Wicked problems revisited. Design Studies, 26, 5-17.

Debord, G. (2002). Perspectives for alterations in everyday life. In B. Highmore (Ed.), The everyday life reader. London: Routledge.

Dentoni, D., & Bitzer, V. (2015). The role of universities in dealing with global wicked problems through multi-stakeholder initiatives. Journal of Cleaner Production, 106, 68-78.

de Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

de Sousa Santos, B. (2006). The rise of the global left: The world social forum and beyond. London: Zed Books.

Dreborg, K. (1996). Essence of backcasting. Futures, 28, 813-828.

Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative everything: Design fiction and social dreaming. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.

Forrester, J., Swartling, A., & Lonsdale, K. (2008). Stakeholder engagement and the work of SEI: An empirical study. Stockholm, Sweden: Stockholm Environment Institute.

FSG. (2017). Guide to actor mapping. Retrieved from:

Gaziulusoy, I., & Brezet, H. (2015). Design for system innovations and transitions: A conceptual framework integrating insights from sustainability science and theories of system innovations and transitions. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 558-568.

Geels, F. (2006). Major system change through stepwise reconfiguration: A multi-level analysis of the transformation of American factory production. Technology in Society, 28, 445-476.

Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.

Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict (GPPAC). (2015). Multi-stakeholder processes for conflict prevention & peacebuilding: A manual.

Grimble, R., & Wellard, K. (1997). Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: A review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agricultural Systems, 55, 173-193.

Grin, J., Rotmans, J., & Schot, J. (2010). Conceptual framework for analzying transitions. In Transition to sustainable development: New directions in the study of long term transformative change. New York: Routledge.

Helmerich, N., & Malets, O. (2011). The multi-stakeholder approach in the United Nations: Unprecedented perhaps, but not unexpected. Presented at Transnational Private Regulation in the Areas of Health, Environment, Social and Labor Rights conference. Retrieved from the Technische Universitat Munchen website:

Hemmati, M. (2002). Multi-stakeholder processes for governance and sustainability: Beyond deadlock and conflict. Earthscan Publications, London.

Hughes, L., & Steffen, W. (2013). The critical decade: Climate change science, risks and responses. Climate Commission Secretariat, Australia.

Irwin, T. (2011a). Design for a sustainable future. In J. Hershauer, G. Basile, & S. McNall (Eds.), The business of sustainability: Trends, policies, practices and stories of success, (pp. 41-60). Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Irwin, T. (2011b). Wicked problems and the relationship triad. In S. Harding (Ed.), Grow small, think beautiful. Edinburgh: Floris Books.

Irwin, T. (2015). Transition Design: A proposal for a new area of design practice, study and research. Design and Culture Journal, 7, 229-246.

Irwin, T., Tonkinwise, C., & Kossoff, G. (2015). Transition Design: An educational framework for advancing the study and design of sustainable transitions. Presented at the STRN Conference, University of Sussex. Available on

Irwin, T. (2017). Mapping Ojai’s water shortage: A workshop. Unpublished report, retrieved from website:

Jana, R. (2010, March). IDEO’s Tim Brown on using design to change behavior. The Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from

Jensen, L. (Ed.). (2017). The sustainable development goals report 2017. New York, NY: United Nations.

Kearney, M. (1984). Worldview. Novator: Chandler & Sharp.

Klein, J. (1993). Blurring, cracking, and crossing: Permeation and the fraction of discipline. In

E. Messer-Davidow, D. Shumway, & D. Sylvan (Eds.), Knowledges: Historical and critical studies in disciplinarity. Charlottesville, NC: University Press of Virginia.

Kossoff, G. (2011). Holism and the reconstruction of everyday life: A framework for transition to a sustainable society. In S. Harding (Ed.), Grow small, think beautiful. Edinburgh: Floris Books.

Kossoff, G., Tonkinwise, C., & Irwin, T. (2015). The importance of everyday life and lifestyles as a leverage point for sustainability transitions. Presented at the STRN Conference, University of Sussex. Available on

Kravcik, M., & Lambert, J. (2015). Introductory summary: United States action plan for the restoration of natural water cycles and climate. Unpublished paper. New Water Paradigm Management, LLC.

Kravcik, M., & Lambert, J. (2016). A global action plan for the restoration of natural water cycles and climate. Unpublished paper. New Water Paradigm Management, LLC. Retrieved from the Bio4Climate website:

Kravcik, M., Pokorny, J., Kohutiar, J., Kovac, E., & Toth, E. (2016). Water for the recovery of the climate - A new water paradigm. Retrieved from New Water Paradigm website:

Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kuijer, L., & de Jong, A. (2011). Practice theory and human-centered design: A sustainable bathing example. In Proceedings Nordic Design Research Conference (NORDES). Helsinki: Aalto University.

Lakoff, G. (2004). Don’t think of an elephant! Know your values and frame the debate. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.

Lent, J. (2017, May). A house on shaky ground: Eight structural flaws of the Western worldview. Retrieved from Tikkun website:

Lefebvre, H. (1991). Critique of everyday life: Foundations for a sociology of the everyday (Vol. 1). London: Verso.

Loew, P. (2014). Seventh generation Earth ethics. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Historical Society Press.

Lockton, D., Harrison, D., Cain, R., Stanton, N., & Jennings, P. (2013). Exploring problemframing through behavioral heuristics. International Journal of Design, 7, 37-53.

Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Mason, S., & Rychard, S. (2005). Conflict analysis tools. Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, SDC. Retrieved from the SDC website:

Max-Neef, M. (1991). Human scale development: Conception, application and further reflections. New York, NY: Apex. Retrieved from

Meadows, D. (1999). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Hartland, VT: The Sustainability Institute.

Nanus, B. (1992). Visionary leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Norman, D., & Stappers, P. (2016). DesignX: Complex sociotechnical systems. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics and Innovation, 1, 83-106. doi:10.1016/j.sheji.2016.01.002

Orr, D. (2002). The nature of design: Ecology, culture and human intention. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Penin, L. (2010). Amplifying creative communities in New York City. Cumulus Proceedings, Cumulus Shanghai Conference. Retrieved from:

Polak, F. (1973). The image of the future. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Porritt, J. (2013). The world we made: Alex McKay’s story from 2050. New York: Phaidon.

Quist, J., & Vergragt, P. (2006). Past and future of backcasting: The shift to stakeholder participation and a proposal for a methodological framework. Futures, 38, 1027-1045.

Rawolle, M., Schultheiss, O., Strasser, A., & Kehr, H. (2016). The motivating power of visionary images: Effects on motivation, affect and behavior. Journal of Personality, 85, 769-781.

Reed, M., Graves, A., Dandy, N.,…Stringer, C. (2009). Who’s in and why? A typology of stakeholder analysis methods for natural resource management. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 1933-1949.

Rittel, H., & Webber, M. (1973). Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155-169.

Ritzer, G. (2004). The McDonaldization of society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

obinson, J. (1982). Energy backcasting: A proposed method of policy analysis. Energy Policy, 10, 337-344.

Rotmans, J., & Kemp, R. (2003). Managing societal transitions: Dilemmas and Uncertainties: The Dutch energy case study. Report from an OECD Workshop on the Benefits of Climate Policy: Improving Information for Policy Makers. Retrieved from

Sanders, E., & Stappers, P. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-Design, 4, 5-18. doi:10.1080/15710880701875068.

Scott, K., Bakker, C., & Quist, J. (2011). Designing change by living change. Design Studies Journal, 33, 279-297.

Schatzki, T. (2010). Timespace and human activity: On performance, society, and history as indeterminate teleological events. Latham, MD: Lexington Books.

Sharpe, B. (2013). Three horizons: The patterning of hope. Axminster, UK: Triarchy Press.

Shove, E., & Walker, G. (2010). Governing transitions in the sustainability of everyday life. Research Policy, 39, 471-476.

Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The dynamics of social practice: Everyday life and how it changes. London, UK: Sage Publications.

Simon M., & Rychard, S. (2005). Conflict analysis tools. Retrieved from the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation (SDC) website

SPREAD. (2012a). Sustainable lifestyles: Today’s facts & tomorrow’s trends. Report funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme. Retrieved from

SPREAD. (2012b). EU sustainable lifestyles roadmap and action plan 2050. Report funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme. Retrieved from

SPREAD. (2012c). Scenarios for sustainable lifestyles 2050: From global champions to local loops. Report funded by the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme. Retrieved from

Trist, E., & Murray, H. (Eds.) (1993). The social engagement of social science (Vol. 2). The Socio-Technical Perspective. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Wageningen University. (2017). Needs-fears mapping. Retrieved from Wageningen University website:

Wheatley, M., & Kellner-Rogers, M. (1996). A simpler way. San Francisco, CA: BerrettKoehler Publishers.

Winterhouse Institute. (2017). Social design pathways. Retrieved from

Woodhouse, M. (1996). Paradigm wars: Worldviews for a new age. Berkeley: Frog.

Cómo citar
Irwin, T. (2019). The Emerging Transition Design Approach. Cuadernos Del Centro De Estudios De Diseño Y Comunicación, (73), 149 a 181.

Artículos más leídos del mismo autor/a

1 2 > >>