Publications & activities

In review.
Co-authors: Jaap Daalhuizen and Jotte de Koning.

Abstract: Societal transitions involve fundamental systemic shifts toward more just, sustainable, and resilient production and consumption patterns. Most research to date has emphasized innovation as the primary resource driving these transitions. However, effective change also necessitates the deliberate breakdown of existing practices, structures, and cultures – an underexplored area of research and practice in design. Our interdisciplinary study bridges transition studies and design research, proposing actionable approach to foster systemic breakdown by design. We draw upon literature from both fields, as well as 15 in-depth interviews with breakdown experts from academia and practice, spanning the domains of food and agriculture, fishery, energy, healthcare, education, fashion, and public service. Literature and a thematic analysis of the interviews supported the identification of eight characteristic patterns that foster systemic breakdown in transitions. The patterns are integrated in the Design for Decline (DfD) approach, which is visualized and complemented by a mobilizing manifesto for practitioners. This study enriches transition studies with its actionable outcomes to support decline in transitions, and design research with its focus on destruction instead of creation. Moreover, it provides interdisciplinary researchers, change professionals, design educators and students with a foundational reference on creative action for systemic breakdown.

In Proceedings of Relating Systems Thinking and Design, RSD14: Arcs of Impact RSD Symposium. October 3, Toronto, Canada.
Co-authors: Hannah Goss, Geert Brinkman, Sine Celik, Jotte de Koning, JC Diehl, Tekla Komlóssy, Emile Mazerant, P. Merkus, A. Özçelik, Deger Ozkaramanli, Rebecca Price, Froukje Sleeswijk-Visser, Elisabeth Tschavgova, Thomas van Arkel, S. van Dam, Anita van Essen, M. Weber, Elke Wennekers, and S. Westerhof.

Abstract: This paper presents the systemic design approach of the Delft Systemic Design Lab (D-SDL) at TU Delft’s Faculty of Industrial Design Engineering through four interrelated practices that inform its research, education, and design activities: 1) framing complexity, 2) meaningful formgiving, 3) building relations, and 4) nurturing reflexivity. Rather than offering prescriptive methodologies, these practices constitute evolving orientations for engaging with systemic complexity, developed through iterative reflection and grounded in the experience of D-SDL researchers. We demonstrate how these practices unfold in design work through the analysis of two master’s thesis projects that address complex societal challenges-one focused on financial crime prevention, the other on public health intervention. Each project is examined through the lens of the four practices, showing how they shape design processes and outcomes in context. Through this analysis and reflection, we identify specific research questions to deepen the understanding of each practice and their dynamic interactions. Additionally, we highlight cross-cutting themes, particularly around positionality and methodology, that signal areas for further theoretical and methodological development. Together, these insights form a research agenda for the D-SDL and contribute to the broader scholarly discourse on the evolution of systemic design methodologies and their epistemological foundations. 2 PROCEEDINGS OF RELATING SYSTEMS THINKING AND DESIGN, RSD14

In Contexts: the Systemic Design Journal.
Co-authors: Nynke Tromp and Paul Hekkert. https://systemic-design.org/contexts/anna-louisa-peeters/v3001/

Abstract: Sustainability transitions are inherently comprised of wicked problems, requiring new systemic problem-solving approaches that transcend disciplinary boundaries. Design framing is a practice that lies at the core of problem-solving, as it connects a specific problem to a promising solution space. We contribute to transition design research by conceptualising a transformative design frame. Anchored in the fields of design, sustainable behavioural science, and transition studies, our transdisciplinary model is intended to support transition designers in their reasoning and to inspire the development of novel frames to help accelerate sustainability transitions. The model visually organises several building blocks of a design frame: Transition Case, Transition Strategy, Systemic Levers, Behaviour Change, and
Worldview. To evaluate our model in various transition design contexts, we held review sessions with three Dutch design agencies, followed by a framework analysis of their responses. The results informed a revision of the model and demonstrated that the model supports designers in building a stronger design rationale, which the designers expected to benefit stakeholder alignment and mobilisation in transition contexts. After engaging with the model, participants intended to adopt a more comprehensive and systematic framing
approach in future projects. To bring the model to a higher level of maturity, opportunities for further research involve applying it in practice. As such, we can examine more thoroughly how the model might support reframing and explore which combinations of its components could be most transformative.

In Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions.
Co-authors: Nynke Tromp, Brit Bulah, Monique van der Meer, Lieke van den Boom and Paul Hekkert. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221042242400039X

Abstract: Excessive animal protein consumption has led to calls for a plant-based protein transition. Plant-based diets can be fostered by design interventions, yet their effect on dietary choices depends on the framing that is chosen. The aim of this study was to understand which transition design frames (TD frames) are prevalent in existing consumer interventions in the Netherlands, to help
transcend the dominant substitution pathway with alternative strategies for intervention. We explore framing through the lens of design, examining human-made interventions in a transition context, to complement the discursive lens that is common in transitions literature. Based on 62 existing consumer interventions and eight expert interviews, we identified eight TD frames. We find that market regulation and cultural interventions are strategic avenues to pursue. Reframing
opportunities involve inclusivity, system breakdown and integrating multiple frames into single interventions. We observed that a design lens helped elucidate frame types that have not previ­ously been identified in transitions literature.

In Proceedings from EFOOD24 conference, at ELISAVA, Barcelona, Spain (in press).

Abstract: Pressing societal challenges such as climate change, biodiversity loss, increased concerns for animal welfare, and public health, have been linked to the amount of animal proteins in our diets. These complex issues have led to the call for a ‘plant-based protein transition’, implying a shift away from animal proteins towards plant-based proteins. This paper expands and diversifies opportunities for design to foster the protein transition, building on two preceding studies – one involving four scenarios for the Dutch protein transition for the year 2035, and one presenting eight design frames which each foster the transition in a distinct way. A design frame is understood as a strategy for intervention, which proposes a solution direction for a societal issue. For instance, a design frame could involve the mimicking of meat and dairy products (solution direction) to help consumers eat more sustainably without having to change their eating practices (societal issue). Designers embody their chosen framing in concrete products, services and other (behavioral) interventions. We summarize the two studies in this paper and continue by mapping the frames onto the scenarios. The mapping revealed that the scenarios provide directionality for the frames. We also find that designers can play a crucial role in fostering scenarios beyond ecomodernism. In every scenario, the design frames can be tailored to actors other than consumers as well. Two opportunities for new design frames emerged, one supporting people in letting go in transitions, and one helping people embrace new types of food and eating experiences. We warmly invite researchers and practitioners to experiment with the findings from this paper.

In Journal of Cleaner and Responsible Consumption.
Co-authors: Nynke Tromp and Ellen van der Werff. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666784322000213

Many of our daily behaviours, e.g., our choice for transportation and our consumption behaviours, need to change in the light of the pressing sustainability issues we are facing. Yet, while many people value the envi­
ronment, they do not always engage in the behaviours that are in line with these values, representing the so-called ‘value-action gap’. This paper argues that the value-action gap can to a large extent be explained by a choice architecture which promotes unsustainable behaviours. Therefore, we present a redesign of choice ar­
chitecture in the context of meat consumption, to stimulate people to act in line with their values. Our experi­mental study shows that such a redesign leads to a significant increase in sustainable behaviour, without conflicting with people’s values. This opens the discussion on how we design the architecture for such choices and adds granularity to the moral debate about nudging.