Design Justice

1. Design justice challenges the matrix of domination in technology

Design justice is a framework for analysis of how design distributes benefits and burdens between various groups of people.

Rethinking design's impact. Design justice examines how the creation of technologies, interfaces, and systems can reproduce or challenge existing power structures. It focuses on how design choices distribute advantages and disadvantages across society, often unintentionally reinforcing racism, sexism, ableism and other forms of oppression.

Key principles:

• Center the voices of marginalized communities in the design process
• Prioritize design's impact on the community over designers' intentions
• Work towards sustainable, community-led outcomes
• Recognize and build on existing community assets and knowledge

By critically examining the values encoded into designs, we can create more equitable and liberatory technologies that benefit all of society rather than reinforcing existing inequalities.

2. Intersectionality is crucial for understanding design's impact

Intersectionality (following feminist legal scholar Kimberlé Crenshaw) refers to the ways that structural oppression is not based only on race or gender identity, but on the intersection of race, gender identity, sexual orientation, class, immigration status, disability, age, and other axes of identity.

Multidimensional analysis. An intersectional approach recognizes that people's lived experiences are shaped by multiple, overlapping systems of power and oppression. In design, this means considering how race, gender, class, disability and other factors interact to influence who benefits from or is harmed by design choices.

Examples of intersectional impacts:

• Facial recognition systems perform worst on darker-skinned women
• Ride-hailing apps may be inaccessible to low-income people without smartphones
• Voice assistants struggle with non-native English accents

Intersectional analysis reveals how designs that seem "neutral" often privilege dominant groups while creating barriers for marginalized communities. By understanding these complex dynamics, designers can create more inclusive solutions that work for diverse users.

3. Community-led design processes center marginalized voices

We center the voices of those who are directly impacted by the outcomes of the design process.

Shifting power dynamics. Traditional design processes often exclude the very communities that will be most affected by the resulting products or systems. Design justice advocates for meaningful participation and leadership from marginalized groups throughout the entire design lifecycle.

Key strategies:

• Partner with community organizations
• Compensate community members for their time and expertise
• Use participatory research and co-design methods
• Ensure community control over decision-making
• Build long-term, accountable relationships

By centering the knowledge, experiences, and priorities of marginalized communities, designers can create solutions that truly address community needs rather than reinforcing harmful assumptions or power imbalances.

4. Design narratives shape who gets credit for innovation

Attribution and attention are important benefits of design processes, and they should be more equitably distributed.

Challenging dominant stories. The stories we tell about how technologies are created often erase the contributions of marginalized people and grassroots movements. These narratives reinforce stereotypes about who can be an innovator and shape funding and career opportunities.

Examples of overlooked innovators:

• Black women mathematicians at NASA
• Immigrant rights activists who created early group texting tools
• Disability advocates who pioneered voice control interfaces

By surfacing alternative histories and giving proper credit, we can challenge the myth of the lone (usually white and male) genius inventor. This expanded view recognizes innovation as a collaborative, culturally-embedded process drawing on diverse forms of expertise.

5. Privileged design spaces often reproduce inequality

Privileged design sites are raced, classed, and gendered.

Exclusionary environments. Spaces like hackathons, makerspaces, and tech incubators are often dominated by white, male, middle-class participants. This homogeneity can reinforce biased assumptions and exclude valuable perspectives.

Barriers to participation:

• Lack of childcare or family-friendly scheduling
• Inaccessible locations or facilities
• Unwelcoming culture for marginalized groups
• High costs or required technical skills

Some organizations are working to create more inclusive spaces through targeted outreach, codes of conduct, and reimagining event formats. For example, the Detroit Digital Justice Coalition organizes "DiscoTechs" (Discovering Technology fairs) in community spaces to democratize access to tech skills and tools.

6. Design justice pedagogies are rooted in critical consciousness

Design justice is an approach that asks us to focus sustained attention on these questions, beginning with "how does the matrix of domination shape affordance perceptibility and availability?"

Transformative education. Teaching design justice involves more than just adding diversity to existing curricula. It requires developing students' critical consciousness about power and oppression while building practical skills to create more equitable designs.

Key pedagogical elements:

• Analyzing real-world case studies of discriminatory design
• Partnering with community organizations on projects
• Studying the history of social movements and technology
• Practicing participatory design methods
• Reflecting on one's own social position and biases

By integrating these approaches, educators can prepare a new generation of designers equipped to challenge systemic inequalities through their work.

7. The #TechWontBuildIt movement shows growing ethical awareness

Tech workers have recently been building power through active refusal to work on oppressive technology projects, often under the banner of the hashtag #TechWontBuildIt.

Collective action. Growing numbers of tech workers are organizing to challenge unethical practices in the industry. This includes opposing contracts with immigration enforcement, military AI projects, and biased surveillance systems.

Notable campaigns:

• Google employees successfully pressured the company to drop a Pentagon AI contract
• Microsoft workers protested the company's work with ICE
• Amazon employees pushed for stronger climate commitments

These efforts show the potential for workers to shape the ethical direction of tech companies. However, deeper changes are still needed to address root causes of injustice in the tech industry and beyond.

Last updated: November 15, 2024