Probing bus stop for insights on transit co-design

Social computing provides a new way for citizens to engage with their public service. Our research investigates how social computing might support citizens co-design their transit service. We conducted a field study with public transit riders, exploring the issues and controversies that reveal conflicting communities. Our analyses revealed three insights. First, encourage citizens to share what they see as the rationale for current service offerings. Second, encourage citizens to share the consequences of current services and of proposed changes and new designs. Third, focus on producing a shared citizen and service provider understanding of what the goals and mission of the public service should be.

[1]  Daren C. Brabham.  Crowdsourcing the Public Participation Process for Planning Projects , 2009 .

[2]  John Zimmerman,et al.  Research through design as a method for interaction design research in HCI , 2007, CHI.

[3]  B. Edvardsson,et al.  Service portraits in service research: a critical review , 2005 .

[4]  Edward A. Hirsch.  Contestational design : innovation for political activism , 2008 .

[5]  Andrea Botero Cabrera,et al.  Setting up a public participation project using the urban mediator tool: a case of collaboration between designers and city planners , 2008, NordiCHI.

[6]  G. L. Shostack,et al.  How to Design a Service , 1982 .

[7]  C. DiSalvo,et al.  Design and the Construction of Publics , 2009, Design Issues.

[8]  Tomasz Janowski,et al.  Rapid development of electronic public services: a case study in electronic licensing service , 2007, DG.O.

[9]  Ricardo Matheus,et al.  Public online consultation of federal ministries and federal regulatory agencies in Brazil , 2009, ICEGOV '09.

[10]  L. Winner.  The Whale and the Reactor , 2020 .

[11]  Soon Ae Chun,et al.  Towards transparent policy decision making process: a case study for Seoul metropolitan government , 2011, dg.o '11.

[12]  Haiyan Qian.  Global perspectives on e-governance: from government-driven to citizen-centric public service delivery , 2010, ICEGOV '10.

[13]  Klaus Petrik,et al.  Participation and e-democracy how to utilize web 2.0 for policy decision-making , 2009, D.GO.

[14]  William W. Gaver,et al.  Design: Cultural probes , 1999, INTR.

[15]  Reinhard Riedl,et al.  Top-level decisions through public deliberation on the internet: evidence from the evolution of Java governance , 2009, D.GO.

[16]  Alan J. Tomkins,et al.  Public input for municipal policymaking: engagement methods and their impact on trust and confidence , 2010, DG.O.

[17]  Roger S. Maull,et al.  Embedding the New Discipline of Service Science , 2011, The Science of Service Systems.

[18]  John Zimmerman,et al.  Understanding the space for co-design in riders' interactions with a transit service , 2010, CHI.

[19]  Andrea Botero,et al.  A long-term strategy for designing (in) the wild: lessons from the urban mediator and traffic planning in Helsinki , 2012, DIS '12.

[20]  Paul Brown,et al.  Fix my street or else: using the internet to voice local public service concerns , 2007, ICEGOV '07.

[21]  Muriel Zimmerman,et al.  Design Research Through Practice: From the Lab, Field, and Showroom , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[22]  Mawaki Chango,et al.  Challenges to e-government in Africa south of Sahara: a critical view, and provisional notes for a research agenda , 2007, ICEGOV '07.

[23]  Yngve Sundblad,et al.  Co-operative Design — perspectives on 20 years with 'the Scandinavian IT Design Model' , 2000 .

[24]  Stefan Holmlid,et al.  Participative, co-operative, emancipatory : From participatory design to service design , 2012 .

[25]  Robert Johnston,et al.  The service concept: the missing link in service design research? , 2002 .

[26]  Background Document on Public Consultation , 2006 .

[27]  John Zimmerman,et al.  Swarthmore College , 2012 .