2 DISCIPLINES, 2 APPROACHES TO SUSTAINABLE DESIGN?

This paper will compare and analyse two approaches to designing and producing objects - and two subsequently different responses to the current (and perhaps urgent) need for environmentally sustainable products. The discussion will be presented through images of objects produced on the periphery of 'contemporary studio jewellery design', and experimental 'product design'.

‘Contemporary studio jewellery design’ can be understood as a discipline within the collective field of ‘applied art’ or ‘craft’.  Within this discipline, the process of making is usually central to idea development and practitioners often have an intimate knowledge of material and material value.  Objects produced under the umbrella of 'contemporary jewellery' often traverse the apparent boundaries of the definition, and embody personal responses to domestic objects and the domestic environment.

Taking the discipline of contemporary jewellery design as its focus, the presentation will examine and contextualise preconceived notions of design in this field by relating and comparing them to commonly understood values within the field of product design.  It will examine current approaches to sustainability and question whether these ideas are transferable between disciplines.  For example, in his book 'Emotionally Durable Design' Jonathan Chapman argues that through the objects we create we (designers) should be encouraging consumers to remain emotionally engaged with their possessions.  Can this theoretical model, developed within product design, be applied to objects produced within the field of contemporary jewellery?  This in turn raises the question of whether practices in contemporary jewellery design can inform or critique this model.

Two recent events form the starting point for the investigation: ‘Carry the Can’, a conference organised by the Association for Contemporary Jewellery, and ‘Design for Durability’, a seminar with a product design focus held by the Centre for Sustainable Consumption at Sheffield Hallam University.  These subject-specific responses to current ethical and environmental issues appear, on the surface, to be proposing the same debate; conference literature from both events uses a common language.  However, beyond this initial discourse, there are clear differences in the way these issues are understood and approached by each discipline.  This paper proposes that a comparison between the responses and approaches of both fields can present new perspectives for each, and could therefore suggest new directions to the design of sustainable and emotionally durable objects.