Co-production of actions and activities at airport security screening

In this paper we will examine passenger actions and activities at the security screening points of Australian domestic and international airports. Our findings and analysis provide a more complete understanding of the current airport passenger security screening experience. Data in this paper is comprised of field studies conducted at two Australian airports, one domestic and one international. Video data was collected by cameras situated either side of the security screening point. A total of one hundred and ninety-six passengers were observed. Two methods of analysis are used. First, the activities of passengers are coded and analysed to reveal the common activities at domestic and international security regimes and between quiet and busy periods. Second, observation of passenger activities is used to reveal uncommon aspects. The results show that passengers do more at security screening that being passively scanned. Passengers queue, unpack the required items from their bags and from their pockets, walk through the metal-detector, re-pack and occasionally return to be re-screened. For each of these activities, passengers must understand the procedures at the security screening point and must co-ordinate various actions and objects in time and space. Through this coordination passengers are active participants in making the security checkpoint function – they are co-producers of the security screening process.

The Effective and The Evocative : A Spectrum of Creative Practice Research

In the expanding literature on creative practice research, art and design are often described as a unified field. They are bracketed together (art-and-design), referred to as interchangeable terms (art/design), and nested together, as if the practices of one domain encompass the other. However it is possible to establish substantial differences in research approaches. In this chapter we argue that core distinctions arise out of the goals of the research, intentions invested in the resulting “artefacts” (creative works, products, events), and the knowledge claims made for the research outcomes. Moreover, these fundamental differences give rise to a number of contingent attributes of the research such as the forming contexts, methodological approaches, and ways of evidencing and reporting new knowledge. We do not strictly ascribe these differences to disciplinary contexts. Rather, we use the terms effective practice research and evocative practice research to describe the spirit of the two distinctive research paradigms we identify. In short, effective practice research (often pursued in design fields) seeks a solution (or resolution) to a problem identified with a particular community, and it produces an artefact that addresses this problem by effecting change (making a situation, product or process more efficient or effective in some way). On the other hand, evocative practice research (often pursued by creative arts fields) is driven by individual pre-occupations, cultural concerns or human experience more broadly. It produces artefacts that evoke affect and resonance, and are poetically irreducible in meaning. We cite recent examples of creative research projects that illustrate the distinctions we identify. We then go on to describe projects that integrate these modes of research. In this way, we map out a creative research spectrum, with distinct poles as well as multiple hybrid possibilities. The hybrid projects we reference are not presented as evidence an undifferentiated field. Instead, we argue that they integrate research modes in deliberate, purposeful and distinctive ways: employing effective practice research methods in the production of evocative artefacts or harnessing evocative (as well as effective) research paradigms to effect change.

Developing sustainable ‘liveable’ buildings, cities and communities for a sub-tropical context : residents’ perspectives

A key challenge for the 21st Century is to make our cities more liveable and foster economically sustainable, environmentally responsible, and socially inclusive communities. Design thinking, particularly a human-centred approach, offers a way to tackle this challenge. Findings from two recent Australian research projects highlight how facilitating sustainable, liveable communities in a humid sub-tropical environment requires an in-depth understanding of people’s perspectives, experiences and practices. Project 1 (‘Research House’) documents the reflections of a family who lived in a ‘test’ sustainable house for two years, outlining their experience and evaluations of universal design and sustainable technologies. The study family was very impressed with the natural lighting, natural ventilation, spaciousness and ease of access, which contributed significantly to their comfort and the liveability of their home. Project 2 (‘Inner-Urban High Density Living’) explored Brisbane residents’ opinions about high-density living, through a survey (n=636), interviews (n=24), site observations (over 300 hours) and environmental monitoring, assessing opinions on the liveability of their individual dwelling, the multi-unit host building and the surrounding neighbourhood. Nine areas, categorised into three general domains, were identified as essential for enhancing high density liveability. In terms of the dwelling, thermal comfort/ventilation, natural light, noise mitigation were important; shared space, good neighbour protocols, and support for environmentally sustainable behaviour were desired in the building/complex; and accessible/sustainable transport, amenities and services, sense of community were considered important in the surrounding neighbourhood. Combined, these findings emphasise the importance and complexity associated with designing liveable building, cities and communities, illustrating how adopting a design thinking, human-centred approach will help create sustainable communities that will meet the needs of current and future generations.

Building distributed leadership for effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees : final report 2014

Building distributed leadership for effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees is an Office for Learning and Teaching (OLT) funded project, conducted in partnership between Queensland University of Technology, The University of Melbourne, Auckland University of Technology, University of New South Wales and University of Western Sydney. The project was initiated to develop a cooperative approach to establishing an understanding of the contextual frameworks of the emergent field of creative practice higher degrees by research (HDRs); capturing early insights of administrators and supervisors; gathering exemplars of good practices; and establishing an in-common understanding of effective approaches to supervision. To this end, the project has produced: • A literature review, to provide a research foundation for creative practice higher research degree supervision (Chapter 3). • A contextual review of disciplinary frameworks for HDR programs, produced through surveys of postgraduate research administrators (Section 4.1), and an analysis of institutional materials and academic development programs for supervisors (Section 4.2). • A National Symposium, Effective Supervision of Creative Arts Research Degrees (ESCARD), at QUT in Brisbane in February 2013, with 62 delegates from 20 Australasian Universities, at which project findings were disseminated, and delegates presented case studies and position papers, and participated in discussions on key issues for supervisors (Appendix 1). • Resources, including a booklet for supervisors: 12 Principles for the Effective Supervision of Creative Practice Higher Research Degrees, which encapsulates attitudes, insights and good practices of experienced and new supervisors. It was produced through a content analysis of interviews with twenty-five supervisors in creative disciplines (visual and performing arts, music, new media, creative writing and design) (Printed booklet, PDF, Appendix 3). • A project website to disseminate project outcomes , which holds project findings, relevant references, and a repository of case studies and position papers by supervisors and program administrators. • A call for papers for a special issue ‘Supervising Practice: Perspectives on the Supervision of Creative Practice Research Higher Degrees’ of ACCESS Journal: Critical Perspectives on Communication, Cultural & Policy Studies (ERA ranked A quality) in 2014 (Appendix 2). • A community of supervisory practice initiated through project partnerships, a national symposium where supervisors from across Australasia met in dialogue for the first time, resource sharing, and joint publishing opportunities. • A set of recommendations for supervision capacity building and academic development, produced through the triangulation of literature and contextual reviews, analysis of institutional frameworks, interviews with supervisors and national dialogues. It is anticipated that the project’s outcomes will support experienced and new supervisors in this emergent field, and so benefit HDR students, and will enable creative disciplines to build supervision capacity, and so to accommodate growth in postgraduate enrolments. Funded as a pilot project, the project set out to establish a robust research base to provide a foundation for future work involving sharing good practices, resource building, and designing effective approaches to academic development for supervisors. Recommendations that were produced out of this project include the need to extend beyond generic, formal training for supervisors to academic development that harnesses and extends distributed leadership; focuses on local, disciplinary contexts; has a strong emphasis on case studies; provides diverse resources; and facilitates dialogue between supervisors. Recommendations also include developing frameworks for mentoring new supervisors and building a national network to facilitate cross-institutional discourse, disseminate good practices, and share insights into the management of risk factors, ethical issues, and preparing candidates for examination. As a pilot investigation, the outcomes of this project lay the ground for this future work.

12 principles for the effective supervision of creative practice higher research degrees, dispatches from the field

In late 2012 and early 2013 we interviewed 25 experienced and early career supervisors of creative practice higher research degrees. This journey spanned five universities and a broad range of disciplines including visual art, music, performing art, new media, creative writing, fashion, graphic design, interaction design and interior design. Some of the supervisors we interviewed were amongst the first to complete and supervise practice-led and practice-based PhDs; some have advocated for and defined this emergent field; and some belong to the next generation of supervisors who have confidently embarked on this exciting and challenging path. Their reflections have brought to light many insights gained over the past decade. Here we have drawn together common themes into a collection of principles and best practice examples. We present them as advice rather than rules, as one thing that the supervisors were unanimous about is the need to avoid proscriptive models and frameworks, and to foster creativity and innovation in what is still an emergent field of postgraduate supervision. It is with thanks to all of the supervisors who contributed to these conversations, and their generosity in sharing their practices, that we present their advice, exemplars and case studies.

Product ecosystems : an emerging methodological approach to study the implementation of disruptive innovations : the case of the CityCar

The car has arguably had more influence on our lifestyle and urban environment than any other consumer product; allowing unprecedented freedom for living, working and recreation where and when we choose. However, problems of pollution, congestion, road trauma, inefficient land use and social inequality are associated with car use. Despite 100 years of design and technology refinements, the aforementioned problems are significant and persistent: many argue that resolving these problems requires a fundamental redesign of the car. Redesigned vehicles have been proposed such as the MIT CityCar and others such as the Renault Twizy, commercialized. None however have successfully brought about significant change and the study of disruptive innovation offers an explanation for this. Disruptive innovation, by definition, disrupts a market. It also disrupts the product ecosystem. The existing product ecosystem has co-evolved to support the conventional car and is not optimized for the new design: which will require a redesigned ecosystem to support it. A literature review identifies a lack of methodology for identifying the components of product ecosystems and the changes required for disruptive innovation implementation. This paper proposes such a methodology based on Design Thinking, Actor Network Theory, Disruptive Innovation and the CityCar scenarios.

Artefact and iteration : circular entanglements

In this workshop proposal I discuss a case study physical computing environment named Talk2Me. This work was exhibited in February 2006 at The Block, Brisbane as an interactive installation in the early stages of its development. The major artefact in this work is a 10 metre wide X 3 metre high light-permeable white dome. There are other technologies and artefacts contained within the dome that make up this interactive environment. The dome artefact has impacted heavily on the design process, including shaping the types of interactions involved, the kinds of technologies employed, and the choice of other artefacts. In this workshop paper, I chart some of the various iterations Talk2Me has undergone in the design process.

Factor Five : Transforming the Global Economy through 80% Improvements in Resource Productivity

The 21st century will see monumental change. Either the human race will use its knowledge and skills and change the way it interacts with the environment, or the environment will change the way it interacts with its inhabitants. In the first case, the focus of this book, we would see our sophisticated understanding in areas such as physics, chemistry, engineering, biology, planning, commerce, business and governance accumulated over the last 1,000 years brought to bear on the challenge of dramatically reducing our pressure on the environment. The second case however is the opposite scenario, involving the decline of the planet’s ecosystems until they reach thresholds where recovery is not possible, and following which we have no idea what happens. For instance, if we fail to respond to Sir Nicolas Stern’s call to meet appropriate stabilisation trajectories for greenhouse gas emissions, and we allow the average temperature of our planets surface to increase by 4-6 degrees Celsius, we will see staggering changes to our environment, including rapidly rising sea level, withering crops, diminishing water reserves, drought, cyclones, floods… allowing this to happen will be the failure of our species, and those that survive will have a deadly legacy. In this update to the 1997 International Best Seller, Factor Four, Ernst von Weizsäcker again leads a team to present a compelling case for sector wide advances that can deliver significant resource productivity improvements over the coming century. The purpose of this book is to inspire hope and to then inform meaningful action in the coming decades to respond to the greatest challenge our species has ever faced – that of living in harmony with our planet and its other inhabitants.