The Ethics and Politics of Design for the Common Good: A Lesson from Alibaug

• Abbott, J. K., & Haynie, A. C. (2012). What are we protecting? Fisher behavior and the unintended consequences of spatial closures as a fishery management tool. Ecological Applications, 22(3), 762–777.

  Google Scholar 

• Abdelnour Nocera, J. et al. (2021). Geopolitical issues in human computer interaction. In IFIP conference on human-computer interaction (pp. 536–541). Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Abdelnour Nocera, J. et al. (2017). Socio-technical HCI for ethical value exchange: A case of service design and innovation “at the Margins” in resource constrained environments. In The 16th IFIP TC13 international conference on human–computer interaction (pp. 254–262). Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Abdelnour Nocera, J. et al. (2019). Socio-technical HCI for ethical value exchange: Lessons from India. In International conference on social implications of computers in developing countries (pp. 229–240). Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Abdelnour Nocera, J., Dunckley, L., & Sharp, H. (2007). An approach to the evaluation of usefulness as a social construct using technological frames. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 22(1–2), 153–172.

  Google Scholar 

• Akrich, M. (1995). User representations: Practices, methods and sociology. In Managing technology in society: The approach of constructive technology assessment (pp. 167–184). Pinter Publishers.

  Google Scholar 

• Annett, J., & Duncan, K. D. (1967). Task analysis and training design. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 41, 211–221.

  Google Scholar 

• Archibugi, D., Koenig-, M., & Marchetti, R. (2011). Introduction: Mapping global democracy. In D. Archibugi, M. Koenig-, & R. Marchetti (Eds.), Global democracy: Normative and empirical Perspectives (pp. 1–21). Cambridge University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Azad, B., & Faraj, S. (2013). Using signature matrix to analyze conflicting frames during the IS implementation process. Methodologies in AIS Research, 14(2), 120–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.accinf.2011.06.003

• Bannon, L. (1991). From human factors to human actors. In J. Greenbaum & M. Kyng (Eds.), Design at work: Cooperative design of computer systems (pp. 25–44). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  Google Scholar 

• Bannon, L. & Bodker, S. (1991). Beyond the interface: Encountering artifacts. In Designing interaction: Psychology at the human-computer interface (pp. 227–253). Cambridge University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Bijker, W. E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs : Toward a theory of sociotechnical change (p. 380). MIT Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Bjørn, N., & Clemmensen, T. (2017). The shaping of the Scandinavian socio-technical IS research tradition. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 29(1), 79–118.

  Google Scholar 

• Bødker, S. et al. (2000). Co-operative design—Perspectives on 20 years with “the Scandinavian IT Design Model”. In Proceedings of NordiCHI (Vol. 2000, pp. 22–24).

  Google Scholar 

• Bratteteig, T. & Wagner, I. (2014). Disentangling participation: Power and decision-making in participatory design. Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Brynjarsdóttir, H. & Sengers, P. (2009). Ubicomp from the edge of the North Atlantic: Lessons from fishing villages in Iceland and Newfoundland. In Ubicomp 09 workshop. Citeseer.

  Google Scholar 

• Button, G., & Sharrock, W. (2009). Studies of work and the workplace in HCI: Concepts and techniques. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics, 2(1), 1–96.

  Google Scholar 

• Cabrero, A.-N. J., Daniel, G., Winschiers-Theophilus, H. (2016). Re-conceptualising personas across cultures: Stereotypes, archetypes and collective personas in pastoral Namibia. In 10th culture, technology, communication international conference (CaTaC’16). United Kingdom.

  Google Scholar 

• Celestino, J. E. M., et al. (2012). Ergonomics and environmental sustainability: A case study of raft fisherman activity at Ponta Negra Beach. Natal-RN. Work, 41(Suppl. 1), 648–655.

  Google Scholar 

• Chavan, A. L. et al. (2009). How mobile money can drive financial inclusion for women at the bottom of the pyramid (BOP) in Indian urban centers. In International conference on internationalization, design and global development (pp. 475–484). Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Cherns, A. B. (1976). The principles of socio-technical design. Human Relations, 29, 783–792.

  Google Scholar 

• Clemmensen, T. (2011). A human work interaction design (HWID) case study in e-government and public information systems. International Journal of Public Information Systems, 2011(3), 105–113.

  Google Scholar 

• Clemmensen, T., Orngreen, R., & Pejtersen, A. M. (2005). Describing users in contexts: Perspectives on human-work interaction design. In Workshop proceedings of interact. Citeseer.

  Google Scholar 

• Cooper, A., Reimann, R., & Cronin, D. (2007). About face 3: The essentials of interaction design. John Wiley & Sons.

  Google Scholar 

• Dearden, A. & Rizvi, H. (2008). Participatory IT design and participatory development: A comparative review. In Proceedings of the tenth anniversary conference on participatory design 2008 (pp. 81–91). Indiana University (PDC ’08). http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1795234.1795246.

• Dillon, A. (2000). Group dynamics meet cognition: Applying socio-technical concepts in the design of information systems. In The new sociotech: Graffiti on the long wall (pp. 119–125). Springer Verlag.

  Google Scholar 

• Fox, S. (2000). Communities of practice, foucault and actor-network theory. Journal of Management Studies, 37(6), 853–868.

  Google Scholar 

• Fulton, E. A., et al. (2011). Human behaviour: The key source of uncertainty in fisheries management. Fish and Fisheries, 12(1), 2–17.

  Google Scholar 

• Gardien, P. et al. (2014). Changing your hammer: The implications of paradigmatic innovation for design practice. International Journal of Design, 8(2).

  Google Scholar 

• Hall, S. (1999). Encoding, decoding. In The cultural studies reader (pp. 507–517). Routledge.

  Google Scholar 

• Hertzum, M., et al. (2018). A mobile app for supporting sustainable fishing practices in Alibaug. Interactions, 25(3), 40–45.

  Google Scholar 

• Hinman, R., & Matovu, J. (2010). Opportunities and challenges for mobile-based financial services in rural Uganda. In CHI’10 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 3925–3930). ACM.

  Google Scholar 

• Hirschheim, R., & Klein, H. K. (1989). Four paradigms of information systems development. Communications of the ACM, 32(10), 1199–1216.

  Google Scholar 

• Khoo, M. (2001). Community design of DLESE’s collections review policy: A technological frames analysis. In Proceedings of the 1st ACM/IEEE-CS joint conference on digital libraries (pp. 157–164). ACM Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Lin, A., & Silva, L. (2005). The social and political construction of technological frames. European Journal of Information Systems, 14(1), 49–59.

  Google Scholar 

• Mackay, H., et al. (2000). Reconfiguring the user: Using rapid application development. Social Studies of Science, 30(5), 737–757.

  Google Scholar 

• Mumford, E. (1996). Systems design: Ethical tools for ethical change. Macmillan.

  Google Scholar 

• Mumford, E. & Weir, M. (1979). Computer systems in work design: The ETHICS method. John Wiley [Preprint].

  Google Scholar 

• Nelimarkka, M. (2019). A review of research on participation in democratic decision-making presented at SIGCHI conferences. Toward an improved trading zone between political science and HCI. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 3(CSCW) (pp. 1–29).

  Google Scholar 

• Oh, Y., Do, E.Y.-L., & Gross, M. D. (2004). Intelligent critiquing of design sketches. In D. J. L. Randall, T. Stahovich, R. Miller, & E. Saund (Eds.), Making pen-based interaction intelligent and natural (pp. 127–133). AAAI Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Orlikowski, W., & Gash, D. C. (1994). Technological frames: Making sense of information technology in Organisations. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 174–207.

  Google Scholar 

• Pellegrino, G. (2005). Thickening the frame: Cross-theoretical accounts of contexts inside and around technology. Bulletin of Science Technology Society, 25(1), 63–72.

  Google Scholar 

• Puri, S. K. et al. (2004). Contextuality of participation in IS design: A developing country perspective. In Proceedings of the eighth conference on Participatory design. ACM Press (pp. 42–52). https://doi.org/10.1145/1011870.1011876.

• Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A. M., & Goodstein, L. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. Wiley.

  Google Scholar 

• Rogers, Y., Sharp, H., & Preece, J. (2011). Interaction design: Beyond human-computer interaction (3rd ed.).Wiley.

  Google Scholar 

• Saldanha, M. C. W., et al. (2012). The construction of ergonomic demands: Application on artisan fishing using Jangada fishing rafts in the beach of Ponta Negra. Work, 41(Suppl. 1), 628–635.

  Google Scholar 

• Salmon, P. et al. (2010). Hierarchical task analysis vs. cognitive work analysis: comparison of theory, methodology and contribution to system design. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 11(6), 504–531.

  Google Scholar 

• Sarkkinen, J. (2004). Examining a planning discourse: How a manager represents issues within a planning frame and how the other could do the same. ACM.

  Google Scholar 

• Singh, D. et al. (2016). Visual design for blue ocean services: mKRISHI® fisheries. In Proceedings of the 8th Indian Conference on Human Computer Interaction (pp. 96–101). ACM.

  Google Scholar 

• Sorenson, K. H., Aune, M., & Hatling, M. (2000). Against linearity: On the cultural appropriation of science and technology (p. 165). The Public, Science and Technology.

  Google Scholar 

• Subrahmanyan, S., & Tomas Gomez-Arias, J. (2008). Integrated approach to understanding consumer behavior at bottom of pyramid. Journal of Consumer Marketing, 25(7), 402–412.

  Google Scholar 

• Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions. Cambridge University Press.

  Google Scholar 

• Torkilsheyggi, A. M., & Hertzum, M. (2017). Incomplete by design: A study of a design-in-use approach to systems implementation. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 29(2), 35–60.

  Google Scholar 

• Valtolina, S. et al. (2017). Socio-technical design of an app for migrants rescue operations. In IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (pp. 140–147). Springer.

  Google Scholar 

• Van der Velden, M., & Mörtberg, C. (2012). Between need and desire: Exploring strategies for gendering design. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 37(6), 663–683.

  Google Scholar 

• Winograd, T., & Flores, F. (1986). Understanding computers and cognition. Ablex Publishing.

  Google Scholar 

• Winschiers-Theophilus, H. et al. (2010). Being participated: A community approach. In Proceedings of the 11th Biennial Participatory Design Conference (PDC ’10) (pp. 1–10). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/1900441.1900443.

• Wolf, C. T. (2017). Narrative assembly: Technological framing, storytelling, and the situating of “data analytics” in organizational life. PhD Thesis. UC Irvine.

  Google Scholar 

• Woolgar, S. (1991). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. In A sociology of monsters: Essays on power, technology and domination (pp. 58–100). Routledge.

  Google Scholar 

Download references