=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-2448/SSS19_Paper_Upload_220
|storemode=property
|title=Concept of Future Prototyping Methodology to Enhance Value Creation within Future Contexts
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2448/SSS19_Paper_Upload_220.pdf
|volume=Vol-2448
|authors=Miwa Nishinaka,Yusuke Kishita,Hisashi Masuda,Kunio Shirahada
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/aaaiss/NishinakaKMS19
}}
==Concept of Future Prototyping Methodology to Enhance Value Creation within Future Contexts==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2448/SSS19_Paper_Upload_220.pdf
Concept of Future Prototyping Methodology to Enhance Value Creation
within Future Contexts
Miwa Nishinaka1, Yusuke Kishita2, Hisashi Masuda3, Kunio Shirahada4
1The Graduate University for Advanced Studies, Shonan Village, Hayama, Kanagawa 240-0193 Japan,
2The University of Tokyo, 7-3-1 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo 113-8654, Japan,
3Kyoto University, Yoshida Honmachi, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto-shi, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan,
4Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, 1-1 Asahidai, Nomi, Ishikawa 923-1292 Japan
Nishinaka_miwa@soken.ac.jp
Abstract Our methodology uses a story as one of the characteristics,
This is a position paper to show our research “Future Proto- which may cause the transformation of thinking.
typing Methodology” to help to create knowledge in a fu- Although there are many definitions of well-being, the
ture context. This methodology provides a platform to simu- scope of well-being in this paper covers a broad area, in-
late discussions on future situations by utilizing a fiction
cluding social well-being for future generations and per-
story. Using this methodology, we create a model to exter-
nalize the process of people’s thinking including implicit sonal happiness for the present generation. Note that, in
thought for the future. In well-being AI as an emerging re- this paper, well-being and happiness are used interchange-
search field, the proposed model would be useful to clarify ably, including physical, mental, social happiness. The
requirements for further advancing well-being AI and show final goal of Future Prototyping Methodology is to create a
the future by analyzing people’s needs for the future.
new model by incorporating a time factor of future con-
texts into knowledge creation processes, through which we
Introduction attempt to clarify the process of how participants change
their thought when they discuss well-being in a future con-
This position paper presents the concept of “Future Proto- text.
typing Methodology,” which aims to support knowledge In the AI (artificial intelligence) community, well-being
creation in a future context. Assuming to hold a citizen AI is becoming an emerging research field to understand
workshop, the methodology provides a platform to simu- how AI-related technologies will affect our well-being and
late participants’ discussion on future situations. Using this quality of life (Kido & Takadama 2018). Well-being AI
methodology, we create a model to explain the process of refers to an AI research paradigm for promoting psycho-
people’s thinking. On proposing the methodology and the logical well-being and maximizing human potential (Kido
model, we focus on well-being as an inevitable factor for & Takadama 2018). At present, there are restriction rules
the discussion because it is an essential aspect of happiness on AI, such as Three Laws of Robotics. In order to encour-
for human beings. “Well-being” means “being well and age discussions on how AI research can contribute to well-
doing well” or “living well itself is good (living a meaning- being, it is necessary to understand people’s well-being
ful life),” which consists of hedonia and eudaimonia (Ryan, from multiple perspectives (e.g., social well-being and per-
Huta & Deci 2008). According to Aristotle, the highest sonal well-being, future well-being and current well-being,
good is happiness (eudaimonia), which mentioned that etc.) based on human nature, which is sometimes paradoxi-
being well is the same meaning as happiness (Nicomachian cal, complex and transformative. In the field of well-being
Ethics). We assume that “being well” means to consider AI, the proposed model is positioned as a tool to show the
social well-being for the succeeding generations as well as future to achieve well-being based on people’s needs for
to seek current personal happiness. At some point, a person the future.
might change their thinking expanding to future and socie- The characteristic of the methodology is to utilize a fic-
ty. However, the process of how people’s thinking on hap- tion story in order to help the workshop participants to
piness or well-being changes has not been studied enough. describe their future. The fiction story externalizes the par-
ticipants’ implicit thought to generate ideas of desirable
future situations based on their values and mental models, MRQ (Major Research Question): Why people change
using such as metaphors (Halpern, Eschrich, & Sadowski their thinking for social well-being in the future?
2018). Due to its narrative and explanatory nature, the fic-
tion story is effective to notice themselves what they really To answer this question, we address the following sub-
think in their mind (Johnson 2011; Kohno & Johnson sidiary questions:
2011). Implicit thought means descriptive tacit knowledge
in a person’s mind, such as mental models among two What are critical factors to change participants’ mind-
kinds of tacit knowledge. Tacit knowledge includes two set to think about the future?
meanings; one is undescriptive knowledge such as physical What are critical factors to change participants’ mind-
knowledge (e.g., how to ride a bike), and the other is im- set to think about social well-being?
plicit knowledge that can be describe, but not be external- What causes the participants create a good future?
ized or unnoticed (Nonaka & Takeuchi, 1995).
The outputs of the workshop are a story describing a Detail Flow of the Methodology
future and a future image, which realize metaknowledge of
participants’ thought. The outputs include the viewpoint of Figure 1 shows our research overview “Future Prototyping
thinking about the future and the knowledge creation Methodology.” The figure shows how to build the method-
framework - a framework of thinking process - that indi- ology and a new model. By repeating this cycle with trial
vidual will acquire when a person is located in a possible & error, the methodology will have been brushed up and
future. This metaknowledge is expressed by a future image completed. As a result of the analysis during the methodol-
illustrated, and a completed story. ogy building, a new model of knowledge creation which
From a practical viewpoint, our methodology would incorporated a time factor of future context is proposed.
promote public engagement in the decision-making process The detail steps are described below: (The numbers cor-
to create a future of their community. respond to those in Figure 1.)
(1) As an input, three categories of data are prepared:
Overview of our Research 1. High level outline of a story,
2. Digital cards of future factors, such as future technol-
Firstly, we present our research question, and then explain ogy, economy, nature, social factors, etc., and time and
the detailed process of the methodology. avatars of future generations to simulate backcast-
ing/forecasting thinking, which those are to create fu-
Research Question ture contexts. Digital cards have real data and image
The participants prototype a future using the methodology data those will be parts of OUTPUT.
in the workshop. There is a question as to whether personal 3. Actual data provided by government, such as white
well-being and social well-being are not always identical. paper and RESAS (Regional Economy Society Ana-
However, there is also a question that the identicalness lyzing System in Japan)
might be happened when people think the future context. It (2) As a process, experimental workshop is implemented.
depends the situation whether the participants are egoistic 1. Participants discuss their future using prototyping im-
or altruistic. We think, at some point, the participants age and story to complete, which are offered as input.
change to be altruistic to think about the future by expand- 2. During the workshop, data is collected for analysis to
ing their ranges of individual to the context they belong to build a methodology and a model. The data are speech
– future. It does not mean altruistic, but the identical per- text, output text of the story, gaze and other biological
spective of self and context. When the situation occurs, the data to understand participants’ implicit thinking.
participants start to think social well-being for the future. (3) Three outputs are created.
For example, in the case of community planning, residenc- 1. Digital image of future context
es initially think about the convenience only of themselves, 2. Completed future story
but as parents want to remain the town's tradition and scen- 3. Graph generated by actual data as quantitative evi-
ery for children, a future perspective will arise. However, dences.
there might be conflicts between convenience and conser- (4) Analyze the data and evaluate the workshop. By doing
vation, so discussion arises to find their way. We will ex- this, clarify processes when people create knowledge with-
amine the process of thinking how they change their in future contexts.
thoughts and why, and create a methodology of discussion 1. Examine correlation between input and output
platform. To examine the processes, we define the follow- 2. Examine participation level of participants
ing research question: 3. Examine subjective thinking of participants
(5) The process of the cycle and a prototyping tool is com- 2017, Shirahada and Ho (2018) have categorizes TSR re-
pleted. lated studies into four segments by using two axes – 1)
(6) Using the newly created tool, the cycle is repeated with lack/shortage of resources / development of resources and
trial and error, and the tools are brushed up. 2) micro / meso and macro. In service research, a service is
(7) Finally, the methodology is completed. The model is defined as the application of operant resources (knowledge
also proposed which clarifies the processes of creating and skills) for the benefit of another actor (Lusch and Var-
knowledge in future context. go 2014), so it is important to think about the negative and
positive impacts on such resources and the resource itself
to find and solve well-being related service issues. The
concept that this paper argues is about designing future by
adding time scale and planning appropriate services to
achieving human well-being.
Backcasting
With a drastic change in mind, backcasting is to first clari-
fy desirable/undesirable future endpoints or visions, fol-
lowed by describing transition paths to connect those end-
points and the present (Robinson 1990). The concept of
backcasting is differentiated from forecasting in terms of
the starting point; i.e., backcasting starts from a vision
whereas forecasting assumes possible futures from the pre-
sent. There are many practices in backcasting focusing on,
Figure 1. Overview of Future Prototyping Methodology e.g., transportation system, energy system, and land use
(Kishita et al. 2016).
However, from a methodological perspective, less support
Prior Research has been provided to conduct backcasting. In particular, it
is not an easy task to come up with discontinuous changes
So far, Nishinaka and Shirahada have studied co-creative
from the present situation and context.
communication in a workshop in these couple of years
which incorporates schemes promoting future oriented and
innovative thinking. (Nishinaka, et al. 2017). The results of
Future Design
our research showed the mechanism to generate innovative First proposed by Saijo (2015), the concept of future de-
idea in a team, however, detailed processes of perception sign aims to transform society and people’s attitudes for
encoding of considering future context nor the process of sustainability. The key idea is to create imaginary future
creating a mental image from the perception was not generations to extract the voices of future generations be-
enough. Kishita have conducted empirical research on sus- cause, in many cases, sustainability issues inherently en-
tainable service systems in local governments by backcast- compass conflicts between future and present generations.
ing. In addition, Masuda’s research is included to discuss One typical example is energy system design, where dif-
future context. Finally, we adopted TSR theory to cover ferent generations will receive benefits and negative im-
the research and the methodology to create knowledge in pacts caused by the usage of nuclear power. Assuming that
future contexts. The previous research is described below workshop is held to discuss sustainable communities by
to clarify insufficient area and uniqueness of our research: involving stakeholders (e.g., policy-makers in a local gov-
ernment and citizens), researchers attempt to understand
Well-being and Transformative Service Research the difference between the two generations. So far, a few
case studies have been carried out for Japanese communi-
Transformative Service Research (TSR) centers on creat-
ties (Hara et al. 2015). Future design is complementary to
ing uplifting changes and improvements in the well-being
backcasting because it enables to reflect the interest of fu-
of individuals, communities, and ecosystems (Anderson et
ture generations in the process of describing desirable vi-
al. 2013). It has been recognized as a research priority of
sions. However, the question about how to facilitate the
service research and received attention from the service
intergenerational dialog in future design workshops still
research community. The concept of well-being includes
remains unanswered. This is partly because, in this sort of
health status, hedonic values (such as a sense of happiness),
workshop, there are implicit interactions among partici-
and eudemonic values (capability development and utiliza-
pants involved that needed to be examined further.
tion). On the basis of a survey on TSR literature up till
Context References
The proposed methodology requires participants to discuss Anderson, L., et al.., 2013. Transformative service research: An
issues based on future and social context, In terms of Ser- agenda for the future, Journal of Business Research, 66(8), 1203-
vice-dominant(S-D) logic (Lusch and Vargo 2014), ``value 1210.
arises through the use of offering in a particular context, in Dey, A.K. 2001, Understanding and Using Context, Personal
conjunction with resources provided by other service pro- Ubiquitous Computing, 5 (1), pp.4-7, DOI:
viders and this value unfolding extends over time with a 10.1007/s007790170019.
consequence of continuing social and economic exchange, Halpern, M., Eschrich, J., & Sadowski, J. 2018. The Rightful
Place of Science: Frankenstein, Consortium for Science, Policy
implicit contracts, and relational norms.'' Although the con-
& Outcomes, Tempe, AZ and Washington, DC.
text in this proposed methodology is mainly based on S-D
Hara, K., Yoshioka, T., Kuroda, M., Kurimoto, S., Saijo, T. 2015.
logic, other concepts are also required. In terms of Anthro- Participatory deliberation for future design by creating imaginary
pology, Hall (1976) explains context as a function of future generations - Evidence from an experimental workshop in
communication to transmit meaning. The meaning is made Yahaba Town, Iwate, Japan, Proceedings of EcoDesign 2015
of information and context. The low context communica- International Symposium, 72-74.
tion has the higher percentage of information than the high Hall, E.T. 1976, Beyond culture, Anchor Press.
context one, and vice versa. Besides, from a perspective in Johnson, B.D. 2011. Science Fiction Prototyping: Designing the
Context Aware Computing, Dey (2001) explains that con- Future with Science Fiction, Morgan and Claypool,
text is any information that can be used to characterize the https://doi.org/10.2200/S00336ED1V01Y201102CSL003.
situation of an entity. An entity is a person, place, or object Kido, T., Takadama, K. 2018. The Challenges for Understanding
Cognitive Bias and Humanity for Well-Being AI – Beyond Ma-
that is considered relevant to the interaction between a user
chine Intelligence, The 2018 AAAI Spring Symposium Series,
and an application. 237-238.
Kishita, Y., Hara, K., Uwasu, M., Umeda, Y. 2016. Research
Science Fiction Prototyping (SF Prototyping) Needs and Challenges Faced in Supporting Scenario Design in
SF Prototyping is a tool using fiction as a way to imagine Sustainability Science: A Literature Review, Sustainability Sci-
ence, 11(2). 331-347.
the future(https://csi.asu.edu/). (Johnson 2011). The meth-
Kohno, T. and Johnson, B. D., 2011. Science Fiction Prototyping
odology of this paper presents an overview story to the
and Security Education: Cultivating Contextual and Societal
participants; however, our method focuses theoretical pro- Thinking in Computer Security Education and Beyond, SIGCSE
cesses of participants thinking change to create a future by '11 Proceedings of the 42nd ACM technical symposium on Com-
using a story, not focusing the SF story making itself. puter science education, 9-14. DOI: 10.1145/1953163.1953173.
Lusch, R. F. and Vargo, S. L. 2014. Service-Dominant Logic:
Premises, Perspectives, Possibilities: Cambridge.
Summary Nishinaka, M., Shirahada, K., and Kohda, Y. 2017. Visualization
of the influence by conceptual leadership promoting high quality
This position paper introduced the concept of “Future Pro- output, Proceedings of 2017 International Conference on Indus-
totyping Methodology” and a model, which supports to trial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEE
create knowledge in a future context and promotes the par- IEEM2017), DOI: 10.1109/IEEM.2017.8289866.
ticipants’ thinking of considering social well-being as well Nonaka, I. and Takeuchi, H. 1995, The Knowledge-Creating
as personal well-being by explaining academic background, Company: How Japanese Companies Create the Dynamics of
characteristics and research method. We also proposed a Innovation, New York: Oxford University Press.
model to clarify thinking process for the future when peo- Ryan, R.M., Huta, V., and Deci, E. L. 2008. Living well: A self-
ple seeking well-being, which will also be a requirement determination theory perspective on Eudaimonia, Journal of
Happiness Studies, 9(1), 139-170.
for well-being AI should aim.
Robinson, J. 1990, Futures Under Glass: A Recipe Who Hate to
Predict, Futures, 22, 820-842,
Saijo, T. 2015. Future Design: Concept for a Ministry of the Fu-
Acknowledgments ture, Kochi University of Technology, Social Design Engineering
Series, 2015-14.
This research was supported by “Challenging Exploratory
Research Projects for the Future” grant from ROIS (Re-
search Organization of Information and Systems), the open
collaborative research program at National Institute of In-
formatics (NII) Japan (FY2018) and JSPS KAKENHI
Grant Number JP16K03859.