Welcome

An Approach to Prospective Methodology based on Futures Design and its Relation to Human-Centered Experience Design

OFFicial logo

Abstract

OFFicial, as a Strategic Design Consultancy specializing in the intersection of Refugees and Technology, proposes an Ideation and Futures Study Session that will help Institutions such as the Red Cross, the United Nations, CEAR, Frontline Defenders and other Non-Governmental Organizations to visualize, design and move towards preferred futures instead of passively accepting what is and “will be”.

From the inquiry, description, and interpretation of a problem and need experienced several years ago and investigated during 2021, OFFicial, with a multidisciplinary team made up of designers, sociologists, lawyers, and NGO workers, provides from the perspective, critical, and strategic design a solution to the following challenge or problem:

What would the refugee experience be like when using and interacting with a virtual voice assistant powered by Artificial Intelligence within the Spanish socio-political context of 2030?

Introduction

Since this article was written for the subject “Academic Research Methodologies” of the Official Master’s Degree in User Experience for the Design of Digital Products and Services at ESNE, the topics covered here respond to that learning.

The main topic that circumscribes this project was the one referred to as Human Experience Design. From this, the following topics were spun off:

• UX Research
• Research Through Design
• Design or Study of Futures (Prospective and Critical Design)
• Transitional Design

It should be noted that the article is not merely theoretical from beginning to end, but also has a methodological and procedural basis, where such knowledge was applied to a portion of the research of the Master’s Thesis; specifically, to the design of both the scenario and the future artifact devised and conceptualized within an Ideation Session with the other group members of the Thesis.

Main problem

Improving the Asylum Application Process for refugees within the Spanish territory

Challenge (designed from the point of view of the person and not of the system we want to solve) of the Ideation Session

To generate a future artifact that could be operational within a maximum period of 10 years that would generate a simplification and broader understanding of the asylum application process

Hypothesis

Such an artifact will improve the accepted/rejected ratio by generating confidence and eliminating uncertainty

Final problem

We have observed that in the asylum application process, it is not being achieved to establish clear criteria at the time of approval/denial, nor give security to applicants as currently the vast majority of applications are rejected generating uncertainty and fear in applicants

OFFicial, as a Strategic Design Consultancy specializing in the intersection of Refugees and Technology, our Ideation Session and Futures Study seeks a way to help in present time Institutions related to migration and asylum such as the Red Cross, the United Nations, CEAR, Frontline Defenders and other Non-Governmental Organizations to visualize, design and move towards preferred futures instead of passively accepting what is and “will be”.

This Ideation Session proposes, from a problematic and concrete case visible in 2021, to put the focus on the question of all the people who request asylum and refuge in the Spanish territory (and why not European as well), to investigate, describe, and interpret what real needs they have and what problems they face daily.

Theoretical Framework

User Experience Design

To understand User Experience Design it is necessary to put into context what we mean by user experience. This concept is defined as a person’s perceptions and responses resulting from the use or anticipated use of a product, system, or service. For Obrist, Vaananen, Roto, Lai-Chong Law, Vermeeren, and Buie (2012) “it is understood as inherently dynamic, given a person’s constantly changing internal and emotional state and differences in circumstances during and after an interaction with a product.” It is thus that user experience includes all the emotions, beliefs, preferences, perceptions, physical and psychological responses, behaviors, and achievements of users that occur before, during, and after use. ISO 9241–210 (tool and provision used in organizations to ensure that the products and/or services offered by such organizations meet the customer’s quality requirements and intended objectives) also lists three factors that influence user experience:

1. The system
2. The user
3. The context of use

On the one hand, the actual user experience does not cover all relevant user experience concerns. This is because everyone may have an indirect experience before first use through expectations formed from previous experiences, knowledge of this or that brand, advertising, presentations, and/or the opinions of other users. Likewise, the indirect experience continues after its use.

On the other hand, it is worth mentioning the difference between user experience and usability. The latter refers to “effectiveness, efficiency, and satisfaction with specific users intended to achieve specified objectives in particular environments”, while the former refers to “all aspects of the user’s experience when interacting with the product, service, environment or facility”.

The objective, then, will be for the user to use the tool smoothly, intuitively, and with as little friction as possible. To this end, two issues are considered within the user experience design:

1. Heuristic evaluation with 10 general usability principles.
2. Usability test or user test, where the tasks to be performed by users are tested.

User Experience Design focuses on the design of digital products (although sometimes it also deals with the “phygital”, a mix between the physical and the digital). It is understood as those points of contact of the user with a service. This type of design also involves a process with different phases, which are:

• Understanding
• Ideation
• Refinement
• Prototyping

It can be said then, that the User Experience Design is considered as a type of design that serves to improve the user’s experience in every sense with a product or service.

UX Research

User Experience Research is the systematic study of target users and their requirements, to add realistic contexts and knowledge to the design process. To develop such research, it is necessary to use different methods to discover the needs that users have when faced with a given problem and thus, design opportunities that can solve it.

While there are different types of research-based objectives within user experience research (researching common definitions and understanding of user experience or developing methods and techniques to evaluate it; creating appropriate models to support design and development processes, etc.), there is no relevant debate where the theoretical point of view of user experience research is discussed.

Research Through Design

It should be mentioned that in the present design process, Research Through Design was followed, where the subject and object of the research is the design itself, i.e., we start from the design object to generate design knowledge. According to Keyson (2009), this type of research “focuses on the role of a product prototype as a research instrument”. It is believed that there is no tangible separation between the theory and practice of Design and, therefore, it is the most complete classification of the three.

That is why, according to Findeli (2008), Research Through Design is the integration of the Research For Design and Research About Design approaches. From the first, it takes an interest in improving the practice of design and, from the second, the methodological and scientific rigor that can be carried out from other disciplines such as Sociology, for example. Hence, multidisciplinary work is very important because it results in a severe and fruitful type of research.

Design or Futures Study

For Masini (1993), Bell (1996), Amara (1981), Sardar (1999), Inayatullah (2000), and Saul (2001), futures studies “consist of the systematic study of possible, probable, and preferred futures, including the worldviews and myths underlying each future. Over the past fifty years or so, futures studies have moved from predicting the future to determine alternative futures to shaping desired futures, both collectively and externally and individually and internally” (Masini 1993; Bell 1996; Amara 1981; Sardar 1999; Inayatullah 2000; Saul 2001).

In the words of Inayatullah (2002), “futures studies have moved from focusing on the external, objective world to adopting a layered approach in which our way of seeing the world shapes the future we see” (Inayatullah, 2002) That is, it is a study or design of futures based from a critical type of design. Determining or recognizing alternative futures is an activity in which both a structure (weight of history) and the individual’s action (ability to influence the world around him/her by creating desired futures) interact. Therefore, to understand the futures ahead, it is necessary to have a coherent theoretical framework.

Fundamental principles:

• Futurists cannot predict the future (no one can).
• A prediction is intended to be a true statement, an accurate statement about the future. We once lived in communities where prediction was possible — not now!
• But futurists can, and do, forecast alternative futures (and you, the reader, should too).
• A forecast is intended to be a logical statement, a useful statement about futures.
• Futures are plural, alternative, diverse, and possible: futuribles. They are not the future but they are alternative futures.
• Most importantly, futures studies help institutions and individuals visualize, design, and move toward preferred futures rather than passively accepting what “will be.”

Theories for foresight:

• Predictive: based on empirical social sciences.
• Interpretive: based not on forecasting the future, but on understanding mutually contradictory images of the future.
• Critical: derived from post-structural thinking and focused on finding out who benefits from understanding certain futures and what methodologies privilege certain types of futures studies.
• Participatory learning or action research: a democratic approach focused on interest groups who develop their futures, based on their assumptions of the future (whether it is linear or cyclical) and the aspects that are critical to them.

Once the theories for foresight had been categorized into four, a fifth type of approach, the “Six Pillars” approach explained by Inayatullah (2008), was taken:

1. Futures planning: it uses the futures triangle as its main method (Inayatullah 2002; 2007).
2. Anticipation of the future: its central methodology consists of the analysis of emerging problems (Molitor, 2003).
3. Temporization of the future: based on micro, meso, and macrohistory (Galtung and Inayatullah, 1997).
4. Deepening the future: based on stratified causal analysis (Inayatullah, 2004).
5. Creation of alternatives: employs scenario planning as the most important methodology (Boulding, 1995).
6. Transformation of the future: the most important methodologies are vision of the future and hindsight (Boulding 1995).

OFFicial is based on a critical theory supported mainly by the creation of alternatives (planning future scenarios and artifacts) and a transformation of the 10-year future (with a corresponding retrospective). It aims to “disrupt current power relations by problematizing our categories and evoking other types of future scenarios’’ (Inayatullah, 2013).

According to Ricardo Mejía (2021), both the individual and society are facing significant changes that have occurred over the years. In order not to get lost in them and to give them a sense of direction, it will be necessary to elaborate a “road map”, which allows the anticipation of futures from thinking about what is possible and talking about what is ethically preferable. It is thanks to fiction and criticism (taken as narrative exercises and scenarios) that conversations will be generated that help us to think about the future. That is, it is through fiction and critical design that we relate to the future. The author calls this “exploring the possible, speaking the preferable” as “Backcasting”: going back to the present to link it to the future through a narrative (a history that gives it meaning), profoundly understanding medium and long-term contexts.

Quoting an excerpt from the “Book of Futures” (2018) by Bespoke Strategic Design and Foresight Studio, “In these times of uncertainty and high-speed change in all domains of life, prediction as such is no longer sufficient for the restless creative soul” we want to imply that we at OFFicial cultivate this new sense of awareness by sharing a phrase from that study:

“We are all futures designers”

Let’s look at the future as something we all affect all the time, and commit to getting it right.

Planning futures

Futures studies are always long-term (between five and fifty years), conceiving alternative futures that convert initial assumptions into existing problems; this type of design is participatory in that it seeks to include the various stakeholders, rather than just the power groups.

Another interesting issue in planning futures studies is creativity. That is, consciously resorting to different forms of knowledge, from theatrical representations to postcards or front pages of newspapers of the future; “it is both an academic field and a participatory social movement” (Inayatullah, 2013).

DIY Futures

Another of the branches studied and applied to this process is the “do it yourself futures design” where the creation of a speculative future based on both emerging and transformative technology is sought; innovative humanitarian phygital technological solutions through a sustainable project. From processes available today with technological connection (simple, useful, and non-intrusive). All this is translated and designed in a future artifact (fictitious prototype).

Voros Cone

This type of tool used within the Futures Design is based on the idea that there is no single future or destination already pre-established to which it can be directed; the future is no longer thought of as singular but rather as a plurality due to its multiple ramifications.

1. The first type of future is probable: they have a statistical or social probability of occurring, including the fact that the knowledge and resources to make them more or less feasible already exist.
2. The second type of future is the plausible future: for reasons of present social, political, and economic trends, they are not as likely to occur as the first, but where the knowledge and resources to make them feasible already exist, and that in the event of an unforeseen historical event or simply a change of forces, the probability factors could be altered, and they would then become a probable future.
3. The third type is the possible future: they include the probable and plausible ones, but also other non-probable and non-plausible scenarios. They are all those futures about which it would not be strange for us to think about it, or in which the knowledge for it to happen does not yet exist, but could be reached in a faster time frame than expected.
4. The fourth type of future is the desirable (or preferable): transversal to the previous ones, it consists of those that, whether probable, plausible, or implausible, are desired by society, or by a specific group.

Transitional Design

For Terry Irwin (2015) this type of emerging discipline “is based on a longer-term vision and the recognition of the need for solutions rooted in new and more sustainable socioeconomic and political paradigms” (Irwin, 2015). It is based on a social transition supported by the design of more sustainable futures and the reinvention of lifestyles; based on the understanding of the interconnection and interdependence of social, economic, political, and natural systems. Thus, it also possesses as a characteristic a ‘cosmopolitan localism’ which in the words of Irwin (2015) defines as:

“A place-based lifestyle in which solutions to global problems are designed to be appropriate to local social and environmental conditions.” (Terry Irwin, 2015)

If we consider its design framework, it is described through four key areas:

1. Vision
2. Theories of change
3. Mindset or stance
4. New ways of designing

All four are mutually reinforcing through knowledge, action, and self-reflection of the individual and/or society. Therefore, Transition Design stimulates new thinking in designers accompanying changes in their mindset.

Methodology

The Master’s Thesis is a qualitative and flexible research project, where the “Double Diamond” approach was followed, from a Design Thinking perspective.

Based on four phases, we started with the Problem Discovery; research to discover the state of the art and context of refugees, know a little about them, and their experiences at local and international levels related to issues such as immigration, bureaucracy, labor, media, technology, organizations, and Spanish legislation; we also investigated from a perspective of the SDGs (Social Development Goals), the relationship of networks between actuators and a benchmarking was raised looking for similar projects. All this information was collected through local newspapers and the internet, scientific studies, and reports from global organizations to better understand the situation.

Then, in the second phase of the model or approach, we moved on to the Problem Definition with the Problem Statement, Insights, defined challenge, and finally the “How might We…” or “How could we…”.

Since the article is theoretically and methodologically based on the Ideation Session produced with the group members of the Master’s Thesis, the type of methodology used within the Prospective Design is explained below.

Designing future scenarios

Prospective Design uses methodologies drawn from the Social Sciences. This type of study is not limited only to narrative but also deals with the study of the social environment or context to generate knowledge and be able to manage uncertainty by generating hypotheses.

This type of design has a methodology that seeks as a result the generation and postulation of different future scenarios depending on the type of challenge posed to analyze and investigate; in the proposed case, the formulation of the final challenge of the Ideation Session was proposed following a series of steps within the research process of the project, based on the User Experience Design.

The succession of steps is as follows:

From the interviews, done during the primary research, the answers of different stakeholders are clustered (clustering divides a database into different groups, the main goal of performing the clustering process is to find groups that are different from each other, and that their members are similar to each other), resulting in the problem statement. As a result of the Problem Statement, the “5 Whys” activity is proposed, which is a type of tool used to analyze the main cause of a given problem and consists of asking why a problem exists as many times as necessary until the origin is known, that is until the real reason that produced a situation is known. The basic idea of this technique is that not all problems have only one cause, but that there may be several reasons for the problem to occur.

From the choice of a problem observed from the clustering of the interviews with the refugees, we began to ask these questions.

Thus, Strategic Foresight links Futures Design to the planning and management of design groups, focusing on long-term aspects such as, Social Innovation. Therefore, it is important to work adequately on these skills and thus, observe complex futures; considering the total of possibilities that are presented to us.

As a first step, it is essential to understand and organize the current signals in what is called “Horizon Scanning” where all kinds of signals (sufficiently significant and powerful sources of change that can have an impact on the strategic challenge proposed here) are detected and scanned. They are usually around for a while helping us to discover trends, patterns, and/or emerging themes; even being able to look into the past to detect when they emerged. These signals to be analyzed are dumped into a grid or chart, analyzing threats, scalability, impact, opportunities, and uniqueness; answering questions such as “Who does it hurt?”, “Can it grow virally?”, “What trend would it break?”, “Who does it benefit?” and “What distinguishes it from the rest?”.

“AEIOU” table to analyze signals according to threats, scalability, impact, opportunities, and uniqueness. Source: “Explorando Futuros: Metodología Teoría y Práctica. Enfrentar los desafíos del presente y construir tu futuro”

Once the analysis of the signals has been obtained, the next step will be the selection of three signals for the construction or creation of a “new possibility” where the three elements, signals, or trends are imagined as future experiences that interact with each other giving rise to emerging futures.

The “New Possibility” triangle is created from three current signals or trends. Source: “Explorando Futuros: Metodología Teoría y Práctica. Enfrentar los desafíos del presente y construir tu futuro”

When defining future scenarios, collaborative creation is fundamental in Prospective Design, being able to use a tool such as the “Futures Wheel” where both designers and stakeholders participate, in the case of the article, the three colleagues of the Master’s Thesis group, in a Brainstorming on the development of future scenarios, locating the new possibility or “event” as a starting point for thinking and analyzing these implications.

“Futures Wheel” is shaped from the starting point and the direct and indirect consequences. Source: “Explorando Futuros: Metodología Teoría y Práctica. Enfrentar los desafíos del presente y construir tu futuro”

As the challenge posed was based on both User Experience Design and Service Design focused on a Critical — Strategic Design, to design or develop a good strategy, it was essential to be able to think about the future in a methodological way, and from there, the use of the prospective technique.

Finally, once the future events have been constructed and counted, they are ordered or classified in the “Impact — Probability of Occurrence Matrix”, depending on whether they are low — medium or high impact and low — medium or high occurrence:

• Essential and important (high occurrence — high impact): these are the ones that give credibility and robustness to the scenario. What almost everyone expects to happen and is likely to happen.
• Disruptive (low occurrence — high impact): Wildcards; these are events that, if they happen, few people expect. They make the scenario provocative.
• Ignore (low occurrence — medium/low impact): They should be discarded as they do not add any particular characteristic to the scenario.
• Satellite: Facts used to achieve a complete description of the possible future.

“Impact — Occurrence Matrix” consisting of an XY axis; X: Impact, Y: Probability of occurrence. Source: “Explorando Futuros: Metodología Teoría y Práctica. Enfrentar los desafíos del presente y construir tu futuro”

Based on two different canvases from those mentioned above, a second design of the future scenario is carried out, using a similar methodology.

The canvases used are:

Scenario Readiness Canvas. Source: How To Future

Scenario Sketch Worksheet. Source: How To Future

In addition to the creation and design of the future scenario, the other relevant point of the prospective design process is the creation of a future artifact, which serves to explain the user experience within this type of scenario. Here is the process with some guidelines and general ideas to keep in mind:

Canvas customized by OFFicial for the creation and design of the future artifact

To devise and design the artifact it is necessary to start from a brainstorming, where ideas are thought about the scenario and the artifact itself; once this is achieved, the final vote is taken, giving as the winner the idea most valued by the whole team.

From there, we moved on to the “Lotus Flower” ideation technique, which focuses on the free association of words and concepts to generate ideas. We start from the winning idea previously placed in the center, generating eight other ideas around it. Finally, from each of the eight ideas, placed in the center of their boxes, eight new ideas or concepts are generated. The objective of this is to have a more finished and complete conceptualization or ideation of the future artifact; its characteristics, its functionalities, the context, who will use it, etc.

Lotus Blossom: ideation technique created by Matsumura

Finally, a canvas based on the Transitional Design was used, where the present context is placed in the first place and in the last place where we want to get to, the desirable future. Then, linking the two in the transition path from medium-term visions which provide tangible goals and objectives, a long-term review will be given to ensure that the vision remains vital and relevant. Therefore, it is necessary to move back from the long-term vision to the present, creating a transition path, where projects become “steps” in a transition to the desirable future.

Transition Design Canvas designed by OFFicial

Since there is no methodological tool applicable to Transitional Design, the OFFicial team decided to develop its own. Following the definition previously mentioned, the years from 2021 to 2030 were placed in the form of a column on the right side of the image, which is formed by a timeline with a gray scenario at the bottom and a green scenario at the top; in the middle of both, there are different scenarios in white. The gray scenario corresponds to the current scenario during 2021 and the green scenario corresponds to the future scenario during 2030; the middle ones correspond to each passing year until the last one.

At the time of the activity, 10 post-its were placed, the first one in the year 2021, already with an inscription referring to the asylum application and reception process, and the last one in the year 2030, with another inscription referring to “Welcome” (the solution that OFFicial brings to the future scenario). In the other years, the post-its are left blank.

The use of all these types of methodological tools based on the Futures Design (Prospective, Critical, and Transitional), serves to obtain a greater amount of information and data to contextualize and validate in a more finished and final way the design process or Ideation Session, translated into the scenarios and artifacts of futures, exposed in the Master’s Thesis.

Officially Welcoming: An Analysis of the Futures Scenarios and Artifacts

Signals

Secondary Research

Regarding the analysis of the trends investigated by the OFFicial team, it is first necessary to focus on the Secondary Research.

Regarding Immigration, the main countries of origin of people seeking refuge in Spain and some statistical data (1% of the world’s population is displaced. 80% of the world’s displaced people are in countries or territories affected by acute food insecurity and malnutrition) were observed.

Regarding the local territory (Spain), the cities of Madrid and Barcelona were taken as referents of large metropolises. Immigration in Madrid is closely related to several factors on which the integration of the different groups depends, some of them being social image, labor development, training, and origin; observing that Spain, as a whole, only offers protection to one out of every twenty asylum seekers, in addition to there being an oversaturation in the Asylum System. Another report taken into account was the one on migration in the Canary Islands, which explains the migratory situation in the Canary Islands within the national and European context (during 2020 there was a significant decrease in migratory pressure; being a European transit point to the mainland, chosen by half of the people in an irregular situation).

Referring to the international territory (Europe) and according to the analysis of the last UNICEF report on the intervention in Europe with MENAS (Unaccompanied Minors) who remain outside the protection system, there was an increase of these in the existing and alternative migratory routes; lack of governmental programs of child protection; observing that in Italy there is a campaign called “Never again alone” that tries to help in the way towards the autonomy of the young people in order not to fall into marginalization.

On the bureaucratic issue, we found the analysis of the report “Rompe el Trecho” by Red Acoge, on proposals for modification of the regulations on foreigners where the modification of the Regulation on Foreigners was sought to adapt the requirements for access to residence and work permits as there is a growing lack of protection suffered by thousands of foreigners in the current context of the socioeconomic crisis, seeking to promote a structural and sustainable reform in the medium and long term; global compact for migration and agenda 2030 (social inclusion of migrants should be carried out regardless of their migratory status). Finally, within the National Reception System, the aim is to optimize resources to provide solutions to the most vulnerable cases (there are a total of 4,000 asylum seekers waiting to be assisted under the Reception System, in violation of Article 24 of the Spanish Constitution — the right to effective judicial protection and defense — by denying them reception in the protection system for asylum seekers), since after 18 months all social benefits for immigrants come to an end.

About organizations related to migration and refugees, several of them were found:

• CEAR (Spanish Commission for Refugee Aid): they work for refugees, stateless persons, and migrants in vulnerable situations so that their rights are recognized and respected; in their reception centers they offer accommodation, psychological and legal attention to refugees and support their social and labor integration; they carry out reports, campaigns making both society and the Institutions aware of the situation of refugees. In addition to denouncing in court when their rights are violated.
• Refugees Welcome: refugees share apartments with local people.
• Sick of Waiting: who demand full compliance in time with the relocation and resettlement commitments made by the European Council in 2015; that full refugee status and permanent residence permit be extended to relocated and resettled refugees in all EU countries.
• Frontline Defenders: aim to protect Human Rights defenders at risk, people who work, non-violently, for any or all of the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
• Ongi Etorri Errefuxiatuak (Welcoming Commission): One of the cornerstones of OEE is welcoming, in which more and more people who pay special attention to the needs of migrants have become involved. We have several active working groups and many forms of participation. People from OEE, other associations, and other activists participate in all the groups.

About technology, a wide range of approaches or models were investigated, for example:

• Non-intrusive technologies: they aim to use technology in a non-invasive but proactive way, to act earlier without modifying users’ habits by increasing their autonomy and security without infringing on the individual’s integrity. The risks of invasion of individual privacy must be balanced with the independence provided by the services.
• Dystopia made reality: there is a risk that technology will allow the State to carry out total surveillance and that such a measure, supposedly temporary, will become permanent; once it starts tracking people for health reasons, what prevents it from being done for political reasons or religious convictions?
• Technological transformation: such transformation will affect commerce, industry, and the way we live. The boundaries between designer, manufacturer, and consumer are becoming increasingly blurred.
• Technological connection: investigating Invisible Flock’s (Yorkshire-based interactive art studio Sculpture Park) “Remote Contact” (co-designed with individuals and their families living with dementia, it features a series of interactive artworks that explore how sensory and generative technologies can enhance connections between families and their relatives in care portfolio, it was noted how creative uses of technology can enhance feelings of connection and address isolation.
• Internet of (Good) Things: the UN Office of Innovation created a program called IoGT which aims to bridge the digital divide and generate knowledge in societies. In other words, transforms lives and provides opportunities, making knowledge universally accessible. Internet of Things: Open IoT Studio is an open-source repository based on the value of a healthy Internet, where people make meaningful connected things. They promote responsible open IoT through professional practices and a network of IoT practitioners doing research, prototyping, and building meaningful collaborations.
• Open Source Software: eServices Techniques is an open-source software application that accelerates the issuance of public space occupation permits for informal vendors and small businesses in Côte d’Ivoire.
• Artificial Intelligence (AI): two projects were taken from Superflux (Studio for Design, Art, Research, and Futures; They aim to create worlds, stories, and tools that provoke and inspire us to engage with the precariousness of our rapidly changing world); Better Care: based on a Critical Design thought what would a future where we apply technology to support the UK’s ailing social care system look like? where a more realistic and “frictional” near future was portrayed where technology itself doesn’t quite work, needing human support; and Our Friends Electric: a short film exploring alternative forms and interactions for voice AI exploring our developing relationship with voice-activated AI assistants and the future potential of these relationships through three fictional devices.
• Technology Ethics: through combating behavioral or non-substance addictions; the easy transition from pervasive use of new technologies to abuse of new technologies. Digital Wellbeing: OFFicial is based on and believes that technology should enhance life, not distract from it.

As methodological tools, futures scenarios and artifacts are theoretically based on Prospective and Speculative Design, as well as a type of Design Fiction (http://design-friction.com/contents/en/#/projects/myths-tech/disrupted-futures, https://www.postfuturear.com/escenarios-futuro/, https://medium.com/digital-experience-design/design-fiction-32094e035cd7, https://www.postfuturear.com/diseno-especulativo/). Hence, these types of designs were investigated. One of the articles related to both the topic of future scenarios and artifacts, as well as refugees, taken as a kind of guide by the team was written by Scott Smith (2017) for Medium, called “Speculative Humanitarian Futures”.

Finally, the last two secondary research searches achieved were about “The Refugee Rights Project” (in the founder’s words: “One-woman mission educating people and advocating for refugee rights”) in two senses:

1. “How to solve the crisis facing refugees. A beginner’s guide” (also for the politicians and governments who have the power to enact these solutions but haven’t bothered to yet): a guide to solving the crisis facing refugees in eight specific points.
2. “Phone as a lifeline”: where it is explained that for refugees, phones or mobiles are a lifeline and not a luxury since they are used for communication, navigation, translation, and information daily.

PESTEL Analysis

This type of analysis is based on a methodological tool designed to highlight current political, economic, social, technological, ecological, and legal facts, news, or trends to project these facts, news, or trends into the medium and long-term future. It can be used for the strategic planning of a project being definitive to analyze, reimagine, redesign, and redefine in a satisfactory way the changes that occurred in the general context where the future scenario will unfold.

Thanks to this analysis it was possible to put into context the facts, news, or trends related to people in asylum situations from the present (2021) projecting into a medium-term future (between 2 to 5 years) and long-term (between 5 to 10 years) offering a small glimpse of what could happen.

Clustering of interviews

As a third and final point, the clustering of the results and/or responses from the interviews with the different stakeholders (Asylum-seekers <refugees>, paralegals, and NGO workers) also helped in the creation of the subsequent activity. Main themes:

• Biography and life history of people in asylum situations
• Needs
• Migration process
• Reception process
• Bureaucracy
• Interviews
• Information
• Clear Communication
• Language
• Translator
• Networks and/or links
• Support Network
• International Policy
• Technology
• Applications
• Present
• Future
• Others (or general information)

Ideation Session

Challenge

To generate a forward-looking artifact that could be operational within a maximum of 10 years that would generate a simplification and broader understanding of the asylum application process.

Hypothesis

Such an artifact will improve the accepted/rejected ratio by generating confidence and eliminating uncertainty.

“5 Whys?”

The “5 Whys?” activity is a type of tool used to perform root cause analysis of a given problem and, consists of asking the why of a problem as many times as necessary, until you get to the origin, i.e., until you know the real reason that produced a situation. The basic idea of this technique is that not all problems have only one cause, but that there may be several reasons for the problem to occur.

Based on the choice of a problem observed from the clustering of the interviews with the refugees and the challenge proposed in the ideation session, these questions began to be posed.

Problem:

Dealing with unwanted loneliness:

Because it affects them psychologically and because they do not have access to basic daily information about the country — how to live.

These people can develop mental health problems because in the organizations they are not explained beyond the bureaucratic process.

Because there is a saturation of the staff managing the reception process, saturation of the bureaucratic system itself, and a lack of training of the civil servants assisting in this process.

Because there has been an exponential growth in the number of people requesting refuge.

Because there are no standardized criteria or guidelines on acceptance criteria.

Because there is no service-area space that is dedicated exclusively to this group and unites or links all the necessary steps that are currently scattered.

Future scenario

Signal analysis

With the secondary research, the PESTEL Analysis, and the clustering of the data from the stakeholder interviews, all kinds of signals offered there were observed, analyzed, and selected. Their results:

1. Cuts within the reception process: it harms every person seeking asylum in Spanish territory and NGO workers assisting in the process, being able to eliminate asylum or become very restrictive. The trend that would be broken is the consideration that refugees are people in need of humanitarian aid. This signal benefits those who derive political gain from criminalizing refugees. This signal is the least desirable option as it contradicts the trend of considering refugees as actors in the society of the future.
2. Technology becoming more and more important in the lives of refugees (mobile as a lifeline and technological empowerment): it hurts non-technologically literate refugees, every day there are more and more apps focused on helping refugees. It would break the trend of disinformation and isolation transforming into one of autonomy and collectivity (greater use of mobile concerning communication, navigation, translation, and information). This signal benefits the whole society (refugees, NGO workers, and state officials). In turn, the signal distinguishes itself from the rest by providing such autonomy to the refugees.
3. Toughening of migration policies (“hot returns” and “export to another country’’): harms both refugees and the population that is in solidarity with them. The scalability of this signal is high due to the rise of far-right policies in Parliament and the growth of social alarm based on racism. The trend that would be broken is that of a society that is more aware of and in solidarity with people in need of humanitarian aid. The signal will benefit migratory mafias, political parties with racist or identitarian discourses, and radical right-wing groups. It distinguishes itself from the rest of the signals by eliminating the possibility of intervention for the civilian population (not belonging to NGOs or the State).
4. Dissemination of bureaucratic procedures for refugees: it is detrimental to refugees and government officials. Scalability is decreasing, there is a tendency to reverse this signal. It breaks with the trend of clear, organized, and digitized communication. It benefits those who know about the bureaucratic system and do not want to update it; this signal is different from the rest because it is the first piece that leads to the “bureaucratic labyrinth”.
5. Increase of armed conflicts and natural disasters (reason for forced mobilization): it harms the entire civilian population; the population of those places and the host ones. May increase or grow virally. The trend that would be broken is that each generation will have a higher quality of life. The signal will benefit migratory mafias, arms manufacturers, political profiteers, and large companies that need low environmental regulations for their business model. The uniqueness of this signal is that it requires a global solution.
6. Excess of technological solutionism: It threatens the technologically illiterate or those without access to technology and vulnerable people who can generate dependency, which can grow in scalability (which is happening more and more). The trend that it would break is the dissemination of bureaucratic procedures, benefiting people who are fluent in the technological world. Uniqueness has a positive effect if planned in an orderly fashion.
7. More than 80 million people seek refuge in the world, increasing every year (data obtained through CEAR): The signal threatens refugees, family members, Industry, and the population of the affected countries, among others, could escalate significantly and would break the trend of understanding that your place of birth determines your country of residence or sense of belonging. It benefits NGOs and those people whose objective is to help such people.
8. Increase of hate crimes in Spain on grounds of racism and xenophobia: It harms refugees, foreigners, and the LGTBQ+ community with a significant and constantly increasing scalability. The observable impact is the displacement of refugees, for fear of violence in the country of arrival benefiting the same actors of other signals; migratory mafias, political parties with racist or identitarian discourses, and radical right-wing groups.
9. The COVID-19 pandemic has put in a situation of extreme vulnerability people who had already left everything behind because they were persecuted, threatened, tortured, or had lost everything in a war: it harms everyone but the persecuted, threatened, tortured, escaped because of war and refugees, observing an increase in its scalability. The trend that would be broken is the consideration of asylum as a human right, benefiting (once again) the migration mafias, political parties with racist or identitarian discourses, and radical right-wing groups.

New possibilities

Based on the analysis of the signals developed in the previous section, each OFFicial member created his or her new possibility (or future scenario) with three current signals or trends.

The first new possibility was as follows:

Current signal or trend 1:

Technology becoming increasingly important in the lives of refugees (mobile as a lifeline and technological empowerment)

Current signal or trend 2:

Cuts within the reception process

Current signal or trend 3:

Dissemination of bureaucratic efforts toward refugees

New Possibility:

“Due to the remembered cutback of the reception process that took place in 2021, bureaucratic steps were scattered in different governmental bodies independent from each other.

As a result of this, the ‘Refugee Office’ was created, which has a unified system based on the easy use of technology, allowing better management of asylum applications and reception processes of people seeking asylum in the country.

Offering greater participation of this group in their migratory process, where few steps, phases and/or documentation are needed to comply with the said process and at the same time providing them with information to be able to live and develop fully”.

The second new possibility was given as follows:

Current signal or trend 1:

Technology is increasingly important in the lives of refugees (mobile as a lifeline and technological empowerment)

Current signal or trend 2:

Dissemination of bureaucratic dealings with refugees

Current signal or trend 3:

Increase in armed conflicts and natural disasters (reasons for forced mobilization)

New Possibility:

“An international unified (technology-supported) and user-friendly system to manage asylum applications with little (human-economic) cost for the local administration, which facilitates and shortens the process of obtaining asylum.”

The third new possibility was given as follows:

Signal or trend in force 1:

An increase in hate crimes in Spain on the grounds of racism and xenophobia.

Current signal or trend 2:

Dissemination of bureaucratic dealings with refugees.

Current signal or trend 3:

Increasingly important technology in the lives of refugees (mobile as a lifeline and technological empowerment)

New Possibility:

“Total control of people through technology, increase in cybercrime, illegal mobiles to avoid tracking, an illegal market of local people helping to manage paperwork without leaving a footprint in the cloud.”

Futures Roundtable

In order not to lose relevant information and issues, instead of selecting only one new possibility out of the three, it was decided to take the most complete one and add details or characteristics of the other two. In this way, we ended up designing a scenario as detailed as possible.

Future scenario:

The asylum application process is digitized and unified through technology under the control of the host State in the ‘Refugee Offices’.

In turn, the scenario was characterized by dividing it according to the social, political, economic, cultural, technological, and environmental context.

Regarding the social context, this is mainly characterized by the existence of a polarization of society around refugees (more integrating people but also more “virulent” opposition) resulting in:

• Riots in different refugee neighborhoods.
• Appearance of community reception groups.
• Ease of integration for refugees because there are more people in that situation (therefore more empathy) and the digitalization of the process eliminates misunderstandings about other customs and processes.

If we take the political context, it is mainly characterized by greater state control and increased cybercrime, resulting in:

• Emergence of a digital underground in which resources that are only accessible to admitted applicants are sold to those who are not, and those who are in the process.
• New political parties formed largely by refugees, which put the focus on this group (e.g. refugee mayors, refugee government candidates, etc.).

Referring to the economic context, this is characterized by a lowering of bureaucracy costs due to the digitalization of the process, resulting in:

• Emergence of forms of social responsibility linking refugees with digital platforms (e.g. tax incentives for hosting refugees in your Airbnb or giving them employment in Uber).
• Permission to locate public spending in other state areas.

The cultural context is characterized by there being a greater richness, acceptance, and information about the different cultures coming from the refugees’ countries of origin bilaterally, resulting in:

• New figures (new professions and new organizations) that represent the refugee collective, and which are trained more specifically on the subject; both professions and organizations are advised by refugees.
• Emergence of a current of solidarity with refugees (such as #MeToo or #BLM).
• The proliferation of strategic design services and consultancies specialized in the intersection of refugees and technology (e.g. OFFicial).

About the technological context, it can be said that it is characterized by the existence of a platform or device that brings together all the procedures and formalities in the lives of refugees (or in the asylum process), resulting in:

• Greater autonomy for refugees; in addition to being able to communicate, navigate and inform themselves more simply and correctly.
• The existence of clandestine forums and a need to create the minimum possible digital footprint for people not admitted as refugees.

Finally, regarding the environmental context, from the digitalization of bureaucratic processes, there is a greater number of server farms, thus, a greater use of electricity consumption and non-renewable materials; resulting in:

• Environmental collectives demand that these servers have zero carbon footprint, even positive.

“Impact — Occurrence” Matrix

Once the possible future scenario was described, each direct and indirect consequence was placed in the Impact — Occurrence matrix; this activity allowed us to give a final finish to the design of the scenario by observing which consequence has a greater or lesser impact and occurrence in this new possibility.

The essential facts that give credibility and robustness to the scenario were:

Essentials

• From the digitalization of bureaucratic processes, there is a greater number of server farms, therefore, a greater use of electricity consumption and non-renewable materials.
• Ease of integration for refugees because there are more people in that situation (therefore more empathy) and the digitization of the process eliminates misunderstandings about other customs and processes.
• Appearance of community host groups.

Important

• Appearance of a current of solidarity with refugees (such as #MeToo or #BLM).
• Thanks to the platform or device there is greater autonomy for refugees; in addition to being able to communicate, navigate, and inform themselves more simply and correctly.
• A greater richness, acceptance, and information about the different cultures coming from the refugees’ countries of origin, in a bilateral way.
• Platform or device that brings together all the procedures and formalities in the lives of refugees (or in the asylum process).
• Increased state control and increase in cybercrime.
• Polarization of society around refugees (more people integrating but also more “virulent” opposition).
• Lower costs of bureaucracy due to digitalization.

The satellite facts, which give a more complete description of the scenario were:

• Clandestine forums and the need to create the smallest possible digital footprint for people not admitted as refugees.
• The proliferation of strategic design services and consultancies specialized in the intersection of refugees and technology.
• Environmental groups demand that these servers have a zero, even positive, carbon footprint.
• Riots in various refugee neighborhoods.
• Appearance of forms of social responsibility that link refugees with digital platforms (Tax incentives for hosting refugees in your Airbnb or giving them jobs in Uber).
• A digital underground appears in which resources that are only accessible to admitted applicants are sold to those who are not, and those who are in the process.
• New figures (new professions, new organizations…) that represent the refugee collective, and which are trained more specifically on the subject; both professions and organizations are advised by refugees.
• Public spending in other state areas is due to the cheapening of digitalization.

The “Wildcard” fact of the future scenario was:

• Political parties formed largely by refugees, which put the focus on this collective (e.g. refugee mayors, refugee government candidates, etc.).

It is considered a disruptive event because no one expects it, generating provocation in people.

Scenario Readiness Canvas

The scenario readiness canvas was used to see where the different actors involved in this new possibility are at the moment or situation in the 10-year horizon. That is, where refugees, NGOs, and the State stand today, what they have, what they need or lack, and the impact on reaching that future depending on the people, their knowledge, tools, regulations, and ecosystem/partnerships.

Refugee Readiness Canvas:

People:

• Refugees today are an open-minded type of people, self-educated regarding technology and quite close to it (considered techies).
• They will need in the future a network of trusted contacts (i.e. a kind of “cricket cricket” companion for advice and companionship).
• The impact of the future scenario on refugees will be the result of less uncertainty in the processes and more confidence in requesting information of interest, combatting unwanted loneliness, and a more “human” welcome.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 3 and a half out of 5.

Knowledge:

• Refugees today possess data on bureaucratic processes, mobile technology, and access to information of vital interest.
• They will need future knowledge about the functioning of the country’s system in general and access to all information of vital interest in an intuitive and connected way.
• The impact of the future scenario on refugees in this area will be both greater security and freedom of decision and foresight.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 4 out of 5.

Tools:

• Refugees today are aware of the existence of refugee application databases used by the state and different types of virtual assistants.
• They will need in the future a single three-way application database; refugees, officials, and NGOs.
• The impact of the future scenario on refugees will be clear communication, streamlined processes, and less or no uncertainty.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 4 out of 5.

Regulations:

• Refugees today are aware of the stringency they face within the process and the infinite number of submissions of all requested documentation.
• They will need more verification and official documents in the future to proceed with their process.
• The impact of the future scenario on refugees will be the need for NGOs to be taken as the trusted entities to endorse such processes.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 2 and a half out of 5.

Ecosystem/partnerships:

• Refugees today possess contact with both family members and other refugees in the country they are going to, as well as NGOs, as well as people in authority and the government.
• They will need in the future to be able to decrease randomness in information gathering and facilitate meaningful connections up front as most refugees have contacted “by chance”.
• The impact of the future scenario on refugees will result in greater security and satisfaction with the experience.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 4 out of 5.

NGO Readiness Canvas:

People:

• NGO workers and volunteers possess the knowledge of digital technologies, interpersonal and empathy.
• However, they will need in the future a continuous work of empathy by putting themselves in the place of the asylum seeker and refugee.
• The impact of the future scenario on them will be the creation of a stronger work and interpersonal culture between workers/volunteers and refugees.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 3 out of 5.

Knowledge:

• NGO workers and volunteers have expertise in migration and socio-political issues (refugees, asylum and reception; HR, laws).
• They will need in the future to be able to connect such information with the person’s day-to-day experience.
• The impact of the future scenario on them will be the acquisition of a holistic type of profile.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 2 out of 5.

Tools:

• NGO workers and volunteers today are aware of the digitization of the hosting process with mobiles and computers as a tool to use.
• They will need in the future a greater possession of such digital tools, continuous knowledge/learning of novelties from year to year, mainly of AI applied to migration.
• The impact of the future scenario on them will be that by being informed, knowing, and learning the use and possession of new technologies, NGOs will be able to position themselves at the forefront of society.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 3 out of 5.

Regulations:

• NGO workers and volunteers today possess and are aware of the bureaucratic, legal, and social knowledge and application of the subject.
• They will need in the future a greater continuous adaptation in procedural and bureaucratic issues; “to be with the latest information”.
• The impact of the future scenario on them will be the existence of NGOs more committed to regulatory issues and continuous assistance to the refugees.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 3 out of 5.

Ecosystem/partnerships:

• NGO workers and volunteers today have partnerships between themselves and refugees; between themselves and the Ministry of Interior (“Refugee Office” in the future) and between themselves and the community.
• They will need in the future to be able to strengthen partnerships in general; with the community (anti-refugee groups), with the State (political parties and officials against), and with the refugees (trust, certainty, and recognition of their rights).
• The impact of future scenarios they will have difficulty in establishing relationships with the State, but not with the Refugee Office; on the other hand, a positive impact on the community in general and on the refugees.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 3 out of 5.

State Readiness Canvas:

People:

• The State today is made up of census officials, computer crime police, social workers, computer security experts, jurists/lawyers, and translators.
• It will need user experience designers, psychologists, conversational designers, etc. in the future.
• The impact of the future scenario on them will result in a decrease in the workload of the committee overseeing the applications and being able to dispense with the police in the application process.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 2 out of 5.

Knowledge:

• The State today uses knowledge applied to a methodology of tracing applicants by asking them for documents of their previous lives, information from multiple sources of the social situation in the country, and a piece of advice from independent organizations.
• In the future, it will need an international policy database updated with immediacy.
• The impact of the future scenario in this regard will be that the State could keep an up-to-the-minute census of asylum applications, having detailed information on each case and application.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 2 out of 5.

Tools:

• The State today has the possibility of using Artificial Intelligence that determine whether or not you are accepted as an asylum seeker by examining news, documentation, and data concerning your case in addition to the person’s statements.
• It will need a well-designed AI in the future. Machine Learning based on adaptability with a strong emphasis on empathy. That is, the Welcome device itself and watertight databases (one-way info) to store what is collected by the artifact or device.
• The impact of the future scenario in this sense will be that the State will need to update structures (Ministries) with qualified personnel and the existence of structures dedicated to secure data storage.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 1 out of 5.

Regulations:

• The State today possesses, in matters of regulation and laws, an insufficient and ambiguous law enforcement manual.
• In the future, it is necessary to establish clear criteria in the Asylum Law and update the legislation to allow data collection by Welcome.
• The impact of the future scenario in this regard will be the emergence of judicial and bureaucratic officials with specific training in technology, data collection, and analysis, as well as data management.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 1 out of 5.

Ecosystem/partnerships:

• The State today has relationships or alliances with Interpol, Frontex, Cyber Security, and international Coop.
• In the future, it will need to establish new relationships with psychologists aligned with experts in international legislation and service (and conversational) designers.
• The impact of the future scenario in this regard will be the emergence of new forms of relationship between NGOs and the State, in addition to a possible recruitment of NGOs within the Ministry and a reformulation of the border police and immigration laws.

The readiness rating corresponds to a level 3 out of 5.

Scenario Sketch Worksheet

The description of the impact of the future scenario for each type of stakeholder involved in this research work is very important because it will give us a more complete and real image of what has been previously analyzed.

That is, by defining certain events or trends, it is possible to observe what pain points and opportunities the actors will have about their context. Once that is done, a narrative of the scenario will be created, which can be just text, a story, a description of the world, or an image.

NGO Sketch:

Events and/or trends:

• Ongoing “tug-of-war” with the Spanish State when it comes to cementing relations.
• The State leaves the decision to accept or deny asylum in the hands of IA.
• Polarization of society around refugees (more integrative people but also more “virulent” opposition).
• Increase in cybercrime both to the state and NGO systems.
• Riots in refugee neighborhoods due to certain groups against the existence of “ghettos”.

Pain points:

• Possibility of being attacked, by both refugees and NGO workers/volunteers, by opposing political groups and national police when defending neighborhoods.
• Xenophobia and racism.
• Continuing to have little say in governmental/bureaucratic matters.
• Security gaps in NGOs’ internal systems.

Opportunities:

• Support from civil society.
• To have more relevance within public opinion.
• Use such unrest to expose the State’s agenda.
• Challenge whether an AI has the capacity to be the one to accept/deny people.

Sketch:

About the NGO sketch, a fictitious front page of the newspaper “El País” during the year 2030 was created placing as main news that referred to NGOs:

“Would you leave it up to your toaster to decide who enters your house or not?”

“New Government policies, more cuts of state officials related to the socio-political field (foster care system).

It’s Law: The Refugee Office began pilot tests for an AI to decide which refugees enter Spain and others to be deported instantly, better known as ‘hot deportations’.

New riots in District 9 (Barrio Zimbabwe) between far-right groups and refugees; national police intervene resulting in 10 injured and 2 dead.”

Accompanied by an image of a future artifact based on a conversational assistant designed today; plus other critical and speculative type news to give the right tone to the sketch.

State Sketch:

Events and/or trends:

• Environmental crisis spiking refugee numbers.
• Cuts in asylum system staffing and assistance.
• Reform of privacy and data collection legislation for refugees.

Pain points:

• Possibility of impersonation/data trafficking.
• Security gaps.
• Opposition from civil society.

Opportunities:

• Closer scrutiny.
• Shortening of deadlines.
• Cutting costs.
• Independence of NGOs.

Sketch:

The sketch was intended as a narrative of the situation of the Spanish State in 2030, its context, and characteristics:

“Year 2030 — Situation of the Spanish State:

As a direct consequence of the bureaucratic digitalization initiated during the confinement by the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, the vast majority of bureaucratic steps can be done online.

Therefore the state has made a great effort in: 1.- Redesigning its digital platforms based on user experience criteria, resulting in much more intuitive and user-friendly portals. 2.- Digital literacy of the civil service, being the main support for citizens during the first steps of this transition process.

The growth of pro-independence movements and political parties has resulted in a reconfiguration of the organization of the state, becoming grouped under a confederation of peoples like Switzerland or the Netherlands. Much more autonomy is granted in the management of competencies, although some of them are still decided by consensus in a central assembly, as is the case of the one that concerns us: the management of asylum applications for refugees. Despite the new territorial organization, most communities are governed by right-leaning parties that imply restrictive policies on social issues for minorities, again affecting the refugee crisis.

Significant increase in asylum applications, therefore the need to manage the asylum application decision process in a new, automated, and clear way. The state invites leading prospective design studios to a public competition to provide solutions in conjunction with the Ministry of Immigration, psychologists, lawyers, and social workers”.

Refugee sketch:

Events and/or trends:

• Increase in people applying for asylum status.
• Empowerment of refugees and newcomers with technology (technological solutionism).
• Lack of a network of trusted people in the country of refuge.
• Unwanted loneliness.
• Increased xenophobia and racism.

Pain points:

• Inability to supply on a human level all the needs of people arriving seeking asylum status.
• Need for the state and/or organizations and companies to invest in refugee projects to cover costs.
• Increased control of refugees’ movements (less privacy, self-interested biases…).
• An overexposure of refugees in today’s society.

Opportunities:

• Provision of 24/7 virtual assistance through technology.
• New avenues of accompaniment (thanks to technology, unwanted loneliness is combated).
• Improved quality of the refugee’s daily life due to direct access to the network with information of interest.
• Less physical/mental wear and tear on the people who collaborate in helping this group.
• Greater knowledge and awareness in society about refugees.

Sketch:

The sketch was thought of as a narrative of the situation of the asylum seekers in the Spanish territory during 2030, its context, and characteristics:

1. The person requesting asylum status is directed to a “particular” house of reception, of a local person (perhaps a refugee who has acquired full autonomy) who has previously been endorsed by processes of acceptance of the state and NGOs involved in the cause. This person lives in that house for 15 days (the state provides aid for these people who receive refugees in their homes) and this allows him to know the lifestyle of the country, to have a person of trust and a more human welcome, like a host family; on the other hand, the person who assists him is dedicated exclusively to it during the 15 days, to become his shadow during the tours and processes that he has to carry out.
2. Air bed & breakfast = Airbnb; Technology + Company + bed & breakfast = Technopany. The person who applies for asylum status is directed to a “smart” host house, specially designed to create a Community of refugees (these houses could be connected around the world), and that becomes your assistant during a time of adaptation in the country (the house itself). It has only what is necessary at a material level and at the same time, with the latest technology of personal assistance with machine learning.
3. They are given a device (audio and/or visual) that simulates (virtual reality or voice assistant) a best friend who accompanies them on their journeys and points out points of interest, the usefulness of each building institution, and specific functions. All this is accompanied by an image of an elderly man using virtual reality glasses as an example.

Futures artifact

Brainstorming

Going back a few steps, once the sixth “why” of the “5 Whys” activity was thought of and posed, it was decided to end there, taking this as the origin of the problem and starting point for the Brainstorming of the future artifact. The ranking of the most voted results was:

First place:

• Interview IA (winning idea, voted and valued by the whole team as the possible future artifact. Then, it was iterated arriving at a voice-driven Virtual Assistant powered by Artificial Intelligence as the final idea).

Second place:

• Info Points for refugees located throughout the city (signage and advertising about these in key locations in the city).
• Videos/augmented reality to guide asylum seekers by showing them what the service they will face looks like.

Third place:

• Government Agency specifically for asylum seekers and refugees.
• People or civil servants of such a Government Agency should work on a day-to-day basis with a virtual assistant.
• Replace refugee camps with neighborhoods of prefabricated modular houses with heating. Weather-proof jacket with an associated personal ID/ID that can be worn comfortably wherever you go.
• Ability to self-generate a temporary ID/ID.
• Portable solar battery with wifi, hotspot, and data plan.

Lotus Blossom

The Lotus Blossom activity was carried out based on the winning idea of the Brainstorming explained above, where the concept “AI-powered virtual voice assistant” was placed in the center of the canvas, based on a post-it, and around eight other concepts related to it:

1. AI adapts its level of communication depending on whether or not the asylum seeker understands certain concepts.
2. Refs Office workers have an AI on hand for consultation.
3. Third-party integration assistance device: while capturing information that allows resolving whether it is a valid asylum application.
4. Machine Learning that collects information from sources outside the State to update admission criteria.
5. The AI is connected to news databases (social situation of the country), statistics, and bureaucratic information (health system, labor, etc.).
6. Virtual worker’s guide to establish clear criteria that cannot be manipulated.
7. Advice on arrival in the country (airport) to know the next steps of the process that I face.
8. Virtual test to know before arriving in the country, what probabilities (%) you have of being accepted.

Generating from these eight concepts, other concepts or characteristics of the first ones:

IA adapts its level of communication depending on whether or not certain concepts are understood by the asylum seeker:

• “Make it visual”: as social and physical environments become increasingly complex, they may lack readability. Making it visual succeeds when words do not represent complexities or do not capture the attention of an audience. Visualization reveals hegemonic processes and can highlight unexpected hidden interactions.
• Super Simplification: being able to reduce information inputs to colors and/or sounds.
• That you know whether you are talking to a refugee, a Refugee Office worker, a legal advisor, an NGO worker, or another type of person.
• Present documentation based on drag & drop.
• Possibility to scan and convert into valid (certified) digital documentation through the camera.

Refugee Office workers can have an AI at hand for consultation:

• Courses regarding AI in this area of work.
• AI has the option to adapt to a version of workers at the touch of a button or by telling them.
• As they interact, the AI learns from them.
• Images taken from series and movies.

Alien device to aid integration; as it captures info that allows it to resolve whether it is a valid asylum application:

• Biometrics to avoid cheating.
• An AR (through the camera) that allows you to discriminate options within interfaces helping you to find what you want (or simultaneous translator).
• Must include identification and verification software for image consultation, biometric fusion programs for searches when biometric indicators alone are inconclusive, database tools, and service provision for proper operation of the system and hardware necessary for its operation.
• Due to the scarcity of technological resources: “Infopoints” by the city to return defective devices (reuse of components) or upgrade previous versions.
• A kind of earpiece in the ear with which they can inform themselves and communicate 24/7.
• “I have seen that you travel to Fuenlabrada every day, you spend more than 40 hours a week in Renfe so I have found these available housing for refugees closer to Fuenlabrada…”.

Machine learning that collects info from sources outside the state to update admission criteria:

• The device that collects your interview data cannot upload the data anywhere and needs physical collection (from the device).
• Cultural norms: consider social and cultural norms and promote inclusion and equity. Collegiate organized from NGO workers, sociologists, anthropologists, migration lawyers, social workers, designers…. [1/2].
• Re-elections of the collegiate every 1 or 2 years to give it more plurality and voice [2/2].
• “I have seen that you travel to Fuenlabrada every day, you spend more than 40 hours a week in Renfe so I have found these available housing for refugees closer to Fuenlabrada…” (this idea or concept is related to both lotus leaves because it has parts of both Machine Learning and integration support).

The AI is connected to news databases (social situation of the country), statistics, and bureaucratic information (health system, labor, etc.):

• Updating of data and information every 24 or 48 hours.
• Calendar function with reminders of deadlines for submitting documentation.
• The AI has the autonomy to propose actions to improve the asylum seeker’s quality of life (e.g. it analyzes who owns the real estate agencies and, if it has links with racist episodes, it filters the offers when looking for housing).
• It should be able to differentiate between official or real data and those that are not.
• An internal AI evaluation of these databases should be done from time to time.

Virtual worker guidance to establish clear criteria that cannot be manipulated:

• AI can act as a simultaneous translator, in addition to language, of cultural concepts that make understanding difficult.
• Video seminars on migration/cultural/social/social issues for workers together with the annexes of the virtual guide.
• Cultural interpretation to base such criteria as appropriate.
• Protected against cyber-attacks; learn about previous attacks and defend yourself better and better.
• Images taken from series and movies.

Advice on arrival in the country (airport) to learn about the next steps of the process I face:

• Intimate questions and active listening to get to know the user better.
• Signage and advertising in key locations for knowledge and location of vending machines.
• Refugee Office workers next to the machines for any questions or inconveniences. Access to a “virtuado” (virtual lawyer).
• Assignment of a host “Family”, which can be a local individual volunteer or a refugee with full autonomy, to advise you and provide you with “affection” and “security” in the process.
• A filter on the camera discriminates (visually distorts) choices in processes such as an ATM or applying for a document online.
• Artifact vending machines.
• Explanatory holoprojectors.

Virtual test to know before arriving in the country, what are your chances (%) of being accepted:

• Turn it into a game: set achievements, and earn points and badges. A gamified solution can encourage motivation and participation, as well as constrain citizens’ behavior by telling them what to do and what is considered a success.
• Easy, simple, and fast onboarding: “Two questions are enough for this first setup: it is important to start providing value to the user as soon as possible and there will be plenty of time to learn their preferences in the following days”.
• Simple questions, limited response options.
• Visual accompaniment with illustrations, if necessary, the illustrations could be a small animated click that develops the concept being asked.

Conclusion

It can be said that since OFFicial the fundamental principles promulgated by Jim Dator about Prospective Design have been followed.

On the one hand, the future has not been predicted, but rather devised and conceptualized; and promptly, designed.

On the other hand, a possible future was predicted for all persons seeking asylum and/or a reception status in the Spanish territory during the year 2030. This alternative prognosis was consolidated through a theory and methodology based on the Design or Study of Futures and a type of Critical Design, by which, it was intended to provide the reader of this article (and future Master’s Final Project as a whole) with a logical and useful statement about the context or new future possibility of refugees in 10 years.

OFFicial, as a Strategic Design Consultant specializing in the intersection of Refugees and Technology, our Ideation and Futures Study Session will help Institutions such as the Red Cross, the United Nations, CEAR, Caminando Fronteras, and other Non-Governmental Organizations in the present time to visualize, design and move towards preferred futures rather than passively accepting what is and “will be”.

As has been explained, this Futures Study is a type of critical study, focused on finding out who benefits from the understanding of certain futures and who does not, seeking at the same time, a solution to that need or problem; translated into the futures artifact.

In addition to generating provocation in the readers to draw their conclusions and ask themselves new questions that have not yet been asked. It was also a qualitative research focused on people seeking refuge and asylum in foreign countries. In other words, it was research produced with and for them.

From the methodological point of view, the use of all these types of tools based on the Futures Design (Prospective, Critical, and Transitional), serves to obtain a greater amount of information and data to contextualize and validate in a more finished and final way the design process or Ideation Session exposed in the Master’s Thesis.

Ultimately, both the scenario and the future artifact presented here are a tool in the process and not an end in themselves. They will serve to draw conclusions, further questions, or new paths.

In the volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous world we live in, my work as a sociologist and futurist lies at the intersection of research, futures design, and strategy creating earth-centered services, artifacts, and scenarios from the near future. Contact me: Nicolás Bronzina.