Reconsidering Design Justice in Architecture and Urban Design in the Post-pandemic Era

A special issue of Architecture (ISSN 2673-8945).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (31 May 2024) | Viewed by 2917

Special Issue Editor


E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
College of Architecture and Design, Lawrence Technological University, Southfield, MI, USA
Interests: global challenge of urban growth and shrinkage; sustainable communities; alternative urbanisms; urban communication; community identity; urban design review, and community development capacity building systems

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Design justice is a concept and practice that aims to ensure that the designs of environments, services, systems, and products promote social, economic, and environmental justice (White et al., 2020). It is a response to the recognition that many design decisions have social and political consequences. Designers have a responsibility to achieve greater equity and inclusion in their work. The central concern of design justice is to identify and dismantle the power dynamics that shape design decisions, working to shift that power into the hands of those who have historically been neglected or marginalized.

A variety of historical factors have contributed to the design justice movement (Lee, 2019). Some of the most notable events in the United States include, but are not limited to, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s, the Disability Rights Movement of the 1960s and 70s, the Feminist Movement of the 1960s and 70s, and the Environmental Justice Movement of the 1970s and 80s. These forces played a role in advancing the contemporary design justice movement and its approach to design in a way that seeks to address systemic inequalities and injustices in society.

The roots of the contemporary design justice movement are rich and diverse and can be traced back to a series of discussions and events that took place in the early 2000s and brought together designers, community organizers, and social justice advocates (Costanza-Chock, 2020). Some of the most notable events have included various gatherings, including the Design as Protest symposium, which was first held in 2002 at the University of California, Berkeley, and has been held multiple times since then. These events and other related activities helped to lay the foundation for a more critical and socially engaging approach to design and led to the development of new design methodologies and approaches that prioritize equity, justice, and inclusion, such as participatory design, co-design, and community-based design. More recently, the Black Lives Matter movement, which began in 2013, has highlighted the systemic racism and injustice faced by Black communities in the United States; this too has led to a greater emphasis on designing products and environments that are inclusive and accessible to people of all races and backgrounds. Design justice advocates continue to push for a more socially responsible and responsive approach to design in order to work towards creating more just and equitable futures and cities for all.

In recent years, the design justice movement has encountered numerous historic moments of reflection following the COVID-19 pandemic and George Floyd’s death. In addition, it faces a series of questions that deserve attention: How have the pandemic, the extrajudicial killing of George Floyd, and increasing social tension around the world impacted the design justice movement? Do these recent events require practitioners and educators to redefine design justice and its role? How might Artificial Intelligence (AI) foster (or undermine) design justice practices? How could design justice respond to the rise of intersectionality in the United States? These are just some of the inquiries that might help people to reconsider design justice in light of the recent changes, conflicts, and divisions in the world.

Ideally, papers should address at least one or more of the following areas to reconsider design justice:

  1. Critical assessment of the past, present, and future of the design justice movement;
  2. Design justice response to the (post-) COVID-19 pandemic, George Floyd’s death, intersectionality, and the anti-abortion movement;
  3. Education on design justice in architecture and urban design;
  4. Governments’ support for design justice;
  5. Response to racialized places and practices (e.g., discriminatory zoning policies);
  6. Role of community development organizations in design justice;
  7. Impact of AI and other technological advances on design justice practices;
  8. Pedagogical approaches to design justice;
  9. Practice models of design justice;
  10. Impact of DIY movement on design justice;
  11. Research methods to investigate design justice;

We welcome papers that address some of these questions, research areas and other relevant topics; reflect on the design justice movement; examine current issues or trends in design justice; investigate the examples of best; or propose new approaches to educate or practice design justice in the face of emerging changes in society.

Prof. Dr. Joongsub Kim
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Architecture is an international peer-reviewed open access quarterly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1000 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • design justice
  • social justice
  • environmental justice
  • participatory design
  • community-based design
  • equity

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

  • Ease of navigation: Grouping papers by topic helps scholars navigate broad scope journals more efficiently.
  • Greater discoverability: Special Issues support the reach and impact of scientific research. Articles in Special Issues are more discoverable and cited more frequently.
  • Expansion of research network: Special Issues facilitate connections among authors, fostering scientific collaborations.
  • External promotion: Articles in Special Issues are often promoted through the journal's social media, increasing their visibility.
  • e-Book format: Special Issues with more than 10 articles can be published as dedicated e-books, ensuring wide and rapid dissemination.

Further information on MDPI's Special Issue policies can be found here.

Published Papers (2 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

27 pages, 6682 KiB  
Article
Reflecting on City Governmental Responses to COVID-19: Focus on Design Justice
by Joongsub Kim and Stephen Vogel
Architecture 2024, 4(4), 1071-1097; https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture4040056 - 27 Nov 2024
Viewed by 894
Abstract
In the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resultant stay-at-home mandates, local governments in some cities in the United States implemented programs in response to the pandemic. This article focuses on Slow Streets, which were several programs implemented in eleven cities [...] Read more.
In the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and the resultant stay-at-home mandates, local governments in some cities in the United States implemented programs in response to the pandemic. This article focuses on Slow Streets, which were several programs implemented in eleven cities (Los Angeles, Oakland, San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, Denver, Chicago, Minneapolis, Detroit, Boston, and New York) in the United States. The programs were intended to keep people healthy by providing temporary public spaces on residential roads where residents were allowed to exercise and socialize. Some practitioners characterized the programs as tactical urbanism or tactical placemaking and as agile responses to the public health crisis. The programs deserve a critical reflection, considering their potential impact on community health and the limited amount of the literature on the program in terms of design justice, which is an approach to design that prioritizes marginalized communities and challenges their structural inequality. This reflective study attempts to fill that gap in the literature of architecture and urban design. This article aims to examine whether the Slow Streets programs promoted design justice. To address that aim, we propose a social justice framework to evaluate the program, because social justice is essential to design justice. Data from publicly available information online about the eleven cities’ Slow Streets programs, interviews, surveys, focus groups, and the interdisciplinary literature support the qualitative research. The study outcomes suggest that the Slow Streets program had limited success because their attention to the priorities of underserved populations was ineffective. We argue that while the programs provided a timely response to the pandemic, the programs did not adequately address the vulnerability of low-income communities of color due to the limited consideration of design justice. Building on the lessons from social justice and human geography, the article concludes with recommendations for future practices including place-cultivating and human geography-informed design to better serve vulnerable communities of color. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

12 pages, 4475 KiB  
Article
Youth Engagement in Water Quality Monitoring: Uncovering Ecosystem Benefits and Challenges
by Sangyong Cho, Leah Hollstein, Luis Aguilar, Johnny Dwyer and Christopher Auffrey
Architecture 2024, 4(4), 1008-1019; https://doi.org/10.3390/architecture4040053 - 12 Nov 2024
Viewed by 1184
Abstract
A youth-centric participatory mapping approach was employed to monitor the lower Mill Creek, an urban waterway located in Cincinnati, Ohio, by collecting geospatial data points on surface water quality and ecological assets. Utilizing the ArcGIS Field Maps application, a digital survey-based tool was [...] Read more.
A youth-centric participatory mapping approach was employed to monitor the lower Mill Creek, an urban waterway located in Cincinnati, Ohio, by collecting geospatial data points on surface water quality and ecological assets. Utilizing the ArcGIS Field Maps application, a digital survey-based tool was developed to identify key areas related to ecological assets and urban water management challenges. The purpose of this citizen science approach was to allow researchers to capture and understand community perspectives and insights while engaging in scientific research that focuses on identifying geographic vulnerability areas and ecological assets. The primary objective was to empower local community groups and residents in an environmental justice neighborhood to understand the current opportunities and constraints of the adjacent waterbody, enabling informed decision-making for future planning initiatives that benefit both conservation and remediation efforts aligned with local values and needs. A youth-centric participatory mapping approach was employed to monitor the lower Mill Creek, an urban waterway in Cincinnati, Ohio, through the collection of geospatial data on surface water quality and ecological assets. The findings, based on hotspot analysis, revealed significant spatial clustering of heavy debris near the barrier dam and the lower portion of Mill Creek, where it converges with the Ohio River. This accumulation is attributed to the structural features of the barrier dam’s inner flood catchment area, which traps debris during rainfall events. Although no areas showed spatial significance for perceived ecological services, students identified specific areas with esthetic and biodiversity value, particularly at Mill Creek’s confluence with the Ohio River and along the northern stretch of the stream corridor. These findings provide valuable insights for guiding future conservation and remediation efforts that reflect both community values and environmental priorities. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop