China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Disciplina: A Missing Link for Cross Disciplinary Integration
Published in Bo T. Christensen, Linden J. Ball, Kim Halskov, Analysing Design Thinking: Studies of Cross-Cultural Co-Creation, 2017
Lastly, we return to the first research question, how integration of design content and deliverable package occurred. From a design sciences perspective, Dunne and Martin (2006) define integrative thinking as ‘creative resolution of the tension’ between competing points of view. According to Lawson and Dorst (2009), design involves balancing and integrating stakeholder needs; based on both perspectives we expect the designers to arrive at an integrated whole that takes into account the end user needs as well as the intermediate users’ capabilities. Alavi and Tiwana (1992[1884]) suggest that such a synthesis is not only a re-arrangement of parts, but also the creation of new meaning. Based on this we examined the DTRS11 dataset to see if creative resolution of these competing views has occurred and the content and package became one integrated whole with new meaning.
Integrative technology hubs for urban food-energy-water nexuses and cost-benefit-risk tradeoffs (II): Design strategies for urban sustainability
Published in Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, 2021
Ni-Bin Chang, Uzzal Hossain, Andrea Valencia, Jiangxiao Qiu, Qipeng P. Zheng, Lixing Gu, Mengnan Chen, Jia-Wei Lu, Ana Pires, Chelsea Kaandorp, Edo Abraham, Marie-Claire ten Veldhuis, Nick van de Giesen, Bruno Molle, Severine Tomas, Nassim Ait-Mouheb, Deborah Dotta, Rémi Declercq, Martin Perrin, Léon Conradi, Geoffrey Molle
Overall, although great progress has been made by individual studies, the practical implementation of integrated urban FEW nexuses is still limited across the globe. Issues of alternatives prioritization, indicators selection, scenario planning, and tradeoffs are yet to be fully assessed over the three sectors. The water-energy nexus is still a priority focus without critically considering its relationship with the food sector. Interdependence and interconnection among the FEW sectors were rarely confirmed and analyzed in the case studies of the reviewed literature. Cases of integrated assessment for predicted performance integrating both present, past, and future policy actions based on both bottom-up and top-down approaches are still lacking. There is an acute need for integrative thinking and transdisciplinary approaches to address these large-scale and complex FEW systems. Although several tools for FEW nexus assessments are available, the improvements in data collection and sharing, model calibration and validation, as well as uncertainty analysis, are also desperately needed to fully realize the complexity embedded in multiscales, multiagents, multisectors, and multiimpacts. Future studies should advance the understanding of FEW systems from the perspective of system of systems engineering in terms of different paired sectors or extended sector structure with respect to differing indicators, evaluation criteria, tools, methodologies, etc., and innovate the analytical strategies via top-down or bottom-up approaches with cascade effects across scales to sort out the nature of different interconnected and interdependent complex FEW systems scientifically.