4. Experience Ethics

Part of the series on the field of Experience Design

Choice Architecture

Ethical implications of design are wide and varied. Who decides what is considered ethical and unethical? In the case of governments using nudge theory to change the behaviour of it’s citizens, who in the government is distinguishing ethical and unethical policy. Thaler and Sunstein, (2009) writers of Nudge argue that “choice architecture, both good and bad, is pervasive and unavoidable, and it greatly affects our decisions” The argument being, that policy created by government is designed for social benefit. Experience and service designers are moving into roles within governments to input human centered design methods to create policy, but Gruneyanoff and Hansson (2009) question “what about the minority who does not want the government to interfere with their preference formation?”

Such is the case with organ donation as a default choice, with an option to be removed from the donation list. Thaler and Sunstein, (2009) argue that although Austria’s 99% organ donation rate on their default donation is higher compared to Germany’s 12% optional donation consent, the choice alone can not solve problems. The infrastructure has to be able to support the entire donation infrastructure. Designers need to keep the entire service lifecycle in mind when designing for behavioural changes.

Moral Grounds

Design can do good in the world but it has the potential to do harm to others. The increase use of ‘hostile architecture’ in urban cities to decrease homeless presence falls far from designing for human needs.

This form of design solves the needs of urban planners and property owners who want to reduce the visibility of homelessness. Disregarding those whose needs of warmth and rest are on the most important scale based on Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs.

This is an unethical stance on the use of design to dismiss true human needs for those with wealth and power. When aesthetics become a central concern in the construction of urban and public space the “experience” for the urban communities might be better, but at what cost?

Next: 5. Experience Future