Before the design spaces can be analysed, first the present parties, opinions and knowledge (assorted baggage) must be defined. This assorted baggage is known as a presence. Unlike the most commonly known meaning of the word, their presence is not restricted by their physical location. It has gotten a much wider meaning, in the new and upcoming world of virtual realities, long distance connections, and other technology. Looking back in time to humankind in earlier years, the presence can be described as the traces humanity has left behind. This means maps and buildings and carvings, but also more incorporeal aspects such as language and culture (Nevejan & Brazier, 2015).
This means that while presence is how we communicate with others in the here and now, it also consists of the remains or conclusions of the assorted sum of knowledge we leave behind for people for there and later (Nevejan & Brazier, 2015).
New technologies are emerging, and with them new ways of communicating, and new networks. Over the past few decades there was a giant wave of innovation, almost completely changing the way we communicate with others. Offline and online systems are merging, creating new scenarios. Many of these new technologies however, are still in development, or not widely used yet. This lack of real life knowledge about them often leads to people not trusting in these technologies, or at least believing they cannot keep living at the same standards of living as they do now.
Actual presence can help combat this, and also help facilitate social interaction and agency. This means a large part of designing new systems is designing them for trust, as there is a lack of this with the users (Venhoeven, Bolderdijk & Steg, 2013).
Presence design is about sharing knowledge with the world This is necessary in part because humanity is stuck in worldwide complex systems, on which they are dependent for their water, food, and other goods (Nevejan & Brazier, 2015).
Inhabitants want more control over their own systems. Because of their newly easy access to information, they can decide they don’t agree with the morals and methods of the existing complex system. As they are such a small part of this system, they won’t be able to influence it. Instead they sometimes create their own networks, such as neighbourhood energy communities. Here, they manage to get a much better grip on the system. However, moving to a new system is always unpredictable. While some systems have a framework which they believe users won’t stray outside of, humanity always manages to find a way to think out of the box (Nevejan & Brazier, 2015).
This means that in order to move on to a new, more locally based system, we need presence (of stakeholders), communication, trust, interdisciplinarity and multilingual capacity. To what extend we need each of these on Texel is as of yet unknown. In order to get a clearer vision, the YUPTA is a way to analyse which of these aspects are the greatest threat to the success of this goal, and which contain the best opportunities (Nevejan & Brazier, 2015).
Nevejan, C., & Brazier, F. (2015). Design for the Value of Presence. In J. van den Hoven et al. (Ed.), Handbook of Ethics, Values and Technological design. Dordrecht: Springer.
Venhoeven, L. A., Bolderdijk, J.W., & Steg, L. (2013). Explaining the paradox: How pro-environmental behaviour can both thwart and foster well-being.
Sustainability, 5(4), 1372-1386.