I’m throwing this provocative question out to our global audience on CPH127, whether establishing a national design council, creating a national design policy, or in general, bringing government support to the design industry has any benefit?
My reason for doing so is not out of any particular opinion on my part, instead, two recent issues in the news impelled this question out of curiousity. Especially since I know that our esteemed founders are closely connected to the Danish Design Council :).
The first article, from The Hindu, announces India’s imminent ratification of a National Design Policy, creation of an Indian Design Council, and most interesting, their intention to create a "mark" to qualify good design. This article states,
"The National Design Policy will be announced in January. Merely
coming out with a policy statement will not suffice, as it will have to
be followed up with implementation. Among other things, the `Designed
in India’ label will have to be linked with a certain quality
specification," Mr N.N. Prasad, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Commerce
and Industry, said.The attempt would be to position `Designed in India’ as a
label that assures quality and utility. This could be in conjunction
with other labels - `Made in India’ and `Served from India’.A mechanism will be worked out for creating a brand image for
Indian designs through the award of an `India Design Mark’ that satisfy
certain criteria such as appeal, centricity, ergonomic features, safety
and environment findings.
The EETimes, on the other hand, has an article titled "The politicization of Innovation" and covers the recently proposed bill submitted to the United States Congress, the "National Innovation Policy 2005" [.doc link] While I will not enter into the "is design equal to innovation" debate, an overly battered dead horse, methinks, I do however wonder if a national design policy or design council, along the lines of those established in Europe, (notably the UK, the DDC of course :), ANZAC and Asia (Japan, Taiwan, Korea - all leaders in consumer electronics) would benefit American industry. Indeed, this Innovation Policy, and it’s intention to create a President’s Council on Innovation, could possibly be the equivalent of a design council/policy, as per the other nations, I doubt though, that it is. These are it’s three key initiatives,
increasing investment in basic research;
improving science and technology talent;
and developing a robust innovation infrastructure.
and their terminology implies a) that innovation is inherently technology led and that b) design is not innovation. On the other hand, for argument’s sake, if this were a design policy and the intention was to create a national design council, do you think that it would be of greater benefit? If so, how and why? While on this topic, I’d like to throw out a few more questions on design policies in general, are they useful to nations? Actually, what I’m asking is, Hans, do you do anything over at that Design Council? 
[just kidding] Here’s a link to Ars Technica, which has a pessimistic view of this initiative by the US to give balance, and perhaps add fuel to this discussion.
7 comments so far
In a democracy, specially in a resource-starved nation like India, governance is influenced by lobbies. The brief for a “Design Council”, then, is primarily to give visibility and weight to the professional community, and partially, to the discipline itself. So far, so good.
However, in a complicated society like India, to envision “design” in a uni-dimensional mode is fraught with not just semantic and academic problems, but more importantly, ethical problems that actually can have an impact on human lives. Hence, any design policy must insist on a rigorous and critical discussion before formulating any draft or declaration.
Nett-nett, my view is that national design policies and councils certainly benefit some individuals and some organisations, but we must watch out that they do not end up adversely affecting others.
Arvind,
While I understand what you are saying, moreso in the context of India, her politics, and various interested parties w.r.t. the design industry, the other side of the coin is just how far the design industry has progressed in the past 15 years. When I was marketing for Whisper in Delhi before the markets opened for MNC’s, design and product design weren’t taken with any level of seriousness by either business or govt. While numerous problems remain to be solved or somehow answered, such as IP, the fact that design is more than NIFT work and Rohit Bal, NID not NIIT etc:) I’m still optimistic that this is a move in the right direction. If for nothing else but to create visibility of India’s creative potential in the eyes of the world?
Hi Niti & Arvind
Interesting topic and discussion, indeed
Back in August Jacob had a post about the “Design Ladder” that was conducted as part of a designprocess and analysis at the Danish Design Council, DDC back in 2003
Please take a look at:
http://www.cph127.com/cph127/2005/08/does_the_design.html
The discussion is interesting from several perspectives, but before going any further I think it will be polite to stretch out our universe, or maybe narrow it in?
If we imply that our understanding of design is more a way of doing things, rather than just shape and function, I think the question is more about an attitude to strategy formulation processes in it self – not only in the field of Design, but in general.
If so, I think there is a necessity – in Denmark too – to look at how we formulate proper strategies in several fields – also Design.
How do we act when ideas is distributed with the speed of light? Take a look at - http://www.jimcarroll.com/flash/idealoop.htm
How do we formulate strategy when we cant foresee what will happen tomorrow? I think those kind of questions are relevant and will set the agenda for future planning processes.
I think the answer is we can’t – it doesn’t make any sense. Strategy becomes tactical plans or even “right-on-operation”. Strategy in that sense is more about the ability to react on rapid change.
So, what does that mean when creating a National Design Strategy?
If I would be the one defining the path ahead I would make some suggestion in several directions – one of them would definitely be the one of education, where you Niti – and Ian - already have raised important discussions over at http://www.cph127.com/runway/
Another one would be in the area of business consulting. Companies need to understand that their survival depends on the ability to absorb and react on change – rapidly. And I think the design-area has several things to offer in that respect.
If that should be the role of a national design council at all I doubt, but in the bigger picture nations can use those kind of institutions as branding projects. External marketing rather than hands on delivery between them and companies……
Strategy for nations is maybe more about taking several perspectives into account rather only think “one-string” for several areas. Isn’t it what design has to offer?
I have to state that the above is my personal opinion
…..looking forward to the follow the discussion
All the best
Hans Henrik
Hans,
I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with your observation that for nations seeking to compete, the national design council/policy allows a means of global [external] positioning and branding for the local design and manufacturing industry, helping to grow brands by adding “marks of good design” and demonstrating their national support in the eyes of the world.
niti
Very interesting discussion - the notion of design as a national strategic asset is certainly seen around the globe. The question of whether design is becoming politicised asnswers itself. Two interesting pieces on this can be found here:
http://www.core77.com/reactor/03.06_winhall.asp
and
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4143/is_200410/ai_n9468896#continue
Is design as a part of national economic strategy good or bad? It depends on its pourpose is the obvious answer. Design for national purposes has been abused - design as a “weapon” was prominent in the heyday of fascism in the middle of the last century. The aggressive posturing of certain leaders was captured in architecture, design, the military, art, etc.
The issue for the designer working as a part of a national design strategy is their comfort level with knowing that their creative talent is being put to the use of the state, which in and of itself can cause a headache for many.
At the risk of sounding defensive or worse, dogmatic, I must point out the absurdity of every nation in the world joining the race to position itself as *the* design resource for the global economy. That, in itself, reveals the lemming-like wave that “design policy” actually is.
Every country needs to first look inwards as to how design can empower and enrich its own peoples and cultures, and address its internal imbalances. This is the only way it can “authenticate” design, and enable it to become truly unique and valuable - to itself and next, the world.
Consider the consequences of every country proclaiming its design strength on the basis of a largely generic but cosmetically distinctive basis (I’m reminded of the array of ‘propreitary’ branding processes available in the marketplace that are minor variations of each other). Consider the flattening of cultures, aesthetics and ethics into trendy package designs meant for consumption by the world’s affluent.