Aalborg Universitet

Course Programme

Food Concept Design

Tvedebrink, Tenna Doktor Olsen

Publication date:2015

Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Link to publication from Aalborg University

Citation for published version (APA):Tvedebrink, T. D. O. (2015). Course Programme: Food Concept Design. Department of Civil Engineering,Aalborg University. DCE Lecture notes, No. 38

General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

? Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. ? You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain ? You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?

Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at vbn@aub.aau.dk providing details, and we will remove access tothe work immediately and investigate your claim.

Downloaded from vbn.aau.dk on: October 10, 2020

ISSN 1901-7286 DCE Lecture Notes No. 38

Course Programme“Food Concept Design”

Tenna Doktor Olsen Tvedebrink

DCE Lecture Notes No. 38

Course Programme “Food Concept Design”

by

Tenna Doktor Olsen Tvedebrink

July 2015

© Aalborg University

Aalborg University Department of Civil Engineering

Center for Food Science, Design and Experience

Scientific Publications at the Department of Civil Engineering Technical Reports are published for timely dissemination of research results andscientific work carried out at the Department of Civil Engineering (DCE) at AalborgUniversity. This medium allows publication of more detailed explanations and results thantypically allowed in scientific journals. Technical Memoranda are produced to enable the preliminary dissemination of scientificwork by the personnel of the DCE where such release is deemed to be appropriate.Documents of this kind may be incomplete or temporary versions of papers—or part ofcontinuing work. This should be kept in mind when references are given to publications ofthis kind. Contract Reports are produced to report scientific work carried out under contract.Publications of this kind contain confidential matter and are reserved for the sponsors andthe DCE. Therefore, Contract Reports are generally not available for public circulation. Lecture Notes contain material produced by the lecturers at the DCE for educationalpurposes. This may be scientific notes, lecture books, example problems or manuals forlaboratory work, or computer programs developed at the DCE. Theses are monograms or collections of papers published to report the scientific workcarried out at the DCE to obtain a degree as either PhD or Doctor of Technology. Thethesis is publicly available after the defence of the degree. Latest News is published to enable rapid communication of information about scientificwork carried out at the DCE. This includes the status of research projects, developmentsin the laboratories, information about collaborative work and recent research results.

Published 2015 by Aalborg University Department of Civil Engineering Sofiendalsvej 9-11 DK-9200 Aalborg SV, Denmark Printed in Aalborg at Aalborg University ISSN 1901-7286 DCE Lecture Notes No. 38

COURSEPROGRAMME

“FoodConceptDesign:MappingStrategicandService‐OrientedpossibilitieswithinFood

Businesses”

P32015

  

 2 

 

Figure1:TheUrbanFoodscape“Foodhasbeensoldonthestreeteversincepeoplehavelivedintownsettlements.Encouragingsocialexchangeand

interaction,thepublicconsumptionoffoodbringsvitalityandconvivialitytourbanlife.”

(Franck2005:2)(IllustrationbyTennaD.O.Tvedebrink2014)

  

 3 

 

DearstudentsWelcometoyourlastseriesofDESIGNlecturesandworkshopsgiveninthecourse:‘FoodConceptDesign:MappingStrategicandService‐OrientedpossibilitieswithinFoodBusinesses’.IhopeyouhaveenjoyedtheDESIGNcoursessofar,andthatyouarenowreadytoimplementtheso‐called“DesignThinking”perspectiveandintegratedknowledgetaughttoyouthroughouttheprevioussemestersintomoredetailedconsiderationsonhowtoinvestigate,analyze,evaluateandcreatedifferentfoodrelatedconcepts.Thiscourseprogrammewillguideyouthroughtheoverallpurposeandcontentofthecourse,aswellasthedemandsforthefinalassignmentandevaluationcriteriafortheindividualexamsheldinOctober.Assuch,thiscourseprogrammewillbeyourguidanceforthenextweeks,aswellasfortheindividualstudytimewhereyouneedtopreparethefinalassignmentfortheexamination.SopleasereaditcarefullyIhopeyouwillhavesomeinspiringweeksandthatyouwillenjoythecourse.Iknowthateachoftheteachersarelookingforwardtomeetandworkwithyou–andhopefullyIwillseeyouallagaininthespring!AllthebestTennaCourseresponsibleTennaDoktorOlsenTvedebrink,PostdocCenterforFoodScience,DesignandExperience,DepartmentofCivilEngineeringAalborgUniversityEmail:tdot@civil.aau.dkPhone:+4529447002

  

 4 

 

IntroductiontocourseAsyouarepresumablyquiteawareofbynow,theeducation‘IntegratedFoodStudies’isbasedonanintegrationoftheknowledge,skillsandcompetenciescapturedwiththethreeoverallresearchperspectivesof:PublicHealthNutrition(PHN),FoodNetworks&Innovation(FINe),andFood+Design(DESIGN).In short, PHN can broadly be defined as the research perspective of healthy meals, foodserviceandthepublichealthnutritionaspectsoffood.FINeisaresearchperspectivebroadlyapproaching the socio‐technical understanding of food‐environments, governance and thepolicy‐processesrelatedcontextofthefoodsystems.Whereas,DESIGNisrelatedtoabroadresearchperspectiveontheaestheticunderstandingandcreativeworkwithfoodexperiencesand food contexts. Throughout the entire IFS‐education these three overall researchperspectives and their inherit theories, methods and approaches supplement, support andcounterweighteachother,therebyaimingatprovidingyouwithanintegratedunderstandingandintegratedresearchapproachtothecomplexconceptoffoodstudies.Thisspecificcourse:‘FoodConceptDesign:MappingStrategicandService‐OrientedpossibilitieswithinFoodBusinesses’aims,incontinuationofthetwopreviousDESIGNcoursesheldatthefirstandsecondsemesters,atprovidingyouwithabasicdesignframe‐of‐referenceforthetheoretical,methodological,andpracticalworkwithanalyzinganddesigningfoodconcepts.ThiscourseassuchrepresentsthedynamicandholisticperspectiveoftheDESIGNapproachandfocusesontheintegratedunderstandingof‘FoodDesign’.However, as a new experimental educational perspective and improved learning goal, thissemestertheDESIGNcourseisalignedandco‐coordinatedwiththecourseon‘Result‐OrientedFoodscapes Projects Management and Planning’ (F‐PMP). This means F‐PMP courseresponsible Bent Egberg Mikkelsen and I have made an effort out of providing you withinterdisciplinaryperspectivesand ideas forhowyoucanworkmore integrated.Theoverallideaisthatthetwocoursessharethesameoverallcourseframeworkasapointofdeparture,thereby allowing you toworkwith the same themes and subjects in both courses for yourcourseexercisesandforyourhand‐ins/preparationsfortheexam.Butmoreaboutthatlater!FirstyouneedtoknowmoreabouttheDESIGNcourseingeneral.CoursecontentAsIhaveemphasizedthroughoutmypreviouslecturesinthelasttwosemesters–andasyoucanreadfromtheeditors’notewrittenbyZampollo(2013),theterm‘FoodDesign’containsanenormousrichnesswellbeyondthespecificdesignoffoodobjectscreatedforeating.Forinstance,accordingtotheInternationalFoodDesignSociety(IFDS),‘FoodDesign’canbesplitintothefollowingsub‐categories:(1)‘DesignwithFood’,(2)‘FoodProductDesign’,(3)‘DesignforFood’,(4)‘DesignAboutFood’,(5)‘FoodSpaceDesign’orwhatisalsocalled‘InteriorDesignfor Food’, (6) ‘EatingDesign’ (see alsowww.ifooddesign.com). These six sub‐categories arediverseintheirdesignapproach(theoryandmethods)anddesignscale(typeof“product”).Some fooddesignersworkwith foodasa rawmaterial– just like thechef ‐ transforming itintoanewedibleobject,eitherasuniqueartifactorasanobjectformass‐production.Otherfooddesignersworkwiththeobjectsandspacesrelatingtofood–theproductsusedtogrow,

  

 5 

 

produce, process, prepare, cook, distribute and communicate food and eating. Finally thereare the sub‐categories working conceptually with spaces, objects, interactions, services,strategies, mind‐sets, communication and experiences inspired by or relating to food, butwhich does not necessarily include food as a specific material. Together these six sub‐categoriessuggestabroaddefinitionof the term ‘FoodDesign’,aswell asavastamountoffood conceptswhich have a magic and poetic ability to seduce us, trigger our memories,dreams or imagination and thereby foster not only desires for new types of food, butpotentiallyalsoaffectourgeneralhealthandwell‐being.Thislaterperspective,thepotentialeffectonourgeneralhealthandwell‐being,boarderswithanew tendency in contemporary researchandpractice focusingmoreandmoreon the so‐calledPublicWelfareSpaces.Forinstance,inarecentstudyperformedbytheDanisharchitectand urban planner Jan Gehl (see also Gehl 1987, 2010), he found that the Australian citySydney has wasted the extraordinary natural advantages provided by its stunning harborarea. Instead of encouraging a vibrant,welcoming and people‐friendly city, city developershaveallowed thearea toevolve intoa “soulless”urbanenvironmentwithdense trafficandlittleornopasswaystothewaterbecauseofmajorfreewaysandrailways.Basedonaseriesof observations, Gehl argues that the city center of Sydney is not a healthy, life‐enhancingecosystem,but insteadamonumentonhowcitydevelopmentsoccuron the costofhumanvaluesandrelationships.Inthebook:‘LifeBetweenBuildings:UsingPublicSpace’,Gehl(1987)asserts that an importantpart of theurban environment is theopenpublic spaces and theopportunitiesthesespacescontainforfacilitatingvarioustypesofhumaninteraction.Assuchheamongothers argues forencouragingmore social interactionsandpersonalmeetings inpublicspace,andinrelationheretoadvocatesthattoachievethisinurbandesignpracticeweneed a more human‐centered approach in our research and investigations. Thereby the“designerlywayofthinking”rangeacrossbothprivateandpublicdomains,aswellascloselyboarderswiththetheoreticalandmethodologicalperspectivesofthePHNresearchtraditionandthecontentoftheF‐PMPcourse.In the previous PHN‐related courses you have previously learned about the concepts of‘Nudging’ and ‘Choice Architecture’. These theoretical concepts relate to how the builtenvironmentbothinaphysical‐sensoryandpsychological‐perceptionalwayinfluencehumanbehavior, and thereby also how the design of various settings possibly affect human foodchoice, eatingbehaviorandmeal satisfaction.Traditionally, thePHNresearchperspective–andasparthereoftheconceptsof‘choicearchitecture’and‘nudging’‐arebasedonaresearchfoundation relating to the Natural Sciences where investigations are centered around aquantitative approach testing the generalizability of theory through the method ofinterventionsandsurveys. In theF‐PMPcourseprovidedduring this semester, youwill getthe knowledge, skills and competencies needed to create innovation and change in thedifferentfoodenvironmentsthatsurroundusinourdailylife(seefurthercoursedescriptionintheF‐PMPmoodlespace).FromaDESIGNperspective,exactlybecauseoftheabove‐mentionedmagicandpoeticabilityof built environments to both indirectly and directly influence and affect our health andwellbeing, the theoretical andmethodological approaches rooted in the discipline of ‘FoodDesign’ slightly differs from other food research disciplines. First of all, ‘Food Design’ isdefinedbyacreativeprocess,moving fromanalyzing “things as theyare”, to imagininganddreaming about “things as they could be”. In that way, in addition to the quantitative and

  

 6 

 

qualitative research methods, the more Humanistic Sciences with the hermeneutic‐interpretativemethodandwhatdesigners refer toas ‘mapping’becomecrucial forhowwedescribe, analyze and explain the various food contexts. But also for how we move fromdescribing,analyzingandexplainingtointentionally“predicting”thefutureandthuscreatinganddesigningtheseinnovativechanges.Traditionallytodoamapis“totakethemeasureofaworld,andmorethanmerelytakeit,tofigurethemeasuresotakeninsuchawaythatitmaybycommunicatedbetweenpeople,placesor times” (Cosgrove 1999:2). However, the act of ‘mapping’ is not restricted to themathematical;itmay–asarguedforbyCosgrove(1999)‐alsoberelatedtothespiritual,thepolitical, moral and so on. Thereby, the act of mapping is a method of visualizing,conceptualizing, recording, representing and creating spaces graphically, which especiallyarchitects, urban planners and designers use in their research activities to gain a deeperunderstandingofagivencontextandthelifeand/oremotionsoftheusers/inhabitantsofthatcontext.Relativehereto, the specificmapping‐methodcalled ‘UrbanSonglines’ is, as arguedfor by Marling (2012), a kind of storytelling‐research tactic developed to present urbanqualitiesexperiencedbyordinarypeople.The Urban Songline‐method is inspired from the Australian continent, where aboriginesaccording to legend created a personal understanding of the world through their songs.Duringtheirwanderings(orwalkabouts),theysupposedlysangthenameofeverythingthatcrossedtheirpaths;birds,rocks,cliffs,animals,plantsandsoon.Thespecificlocationorplaceoftheseobjects,elementsandsitesbecamesacredtothewalkerandhisdescendants.‐Andsothese places and the invisible lines connecting them are what is referred to as ‘songlines’(Marling 2012). The point, from a research perspective, is that this method supportsresearchers in removing themselves from the role of the “all‐knowing” expert and insteadtriesto“see”aspecificareaordomainwithinthecityandvariouslocalcommunitiesthroughthe eyes of the ordinary people living there, and thereby hopefully also better understandhowtheplacesshapethesocio‐culturalpracticesoftheireverydaylife.Themethodisthusbasedonadualmeaning;ononehanditreferstotheso‐called‘linies’thatthe individual inhabitant follows in his/hers everyday life in the city. As emphasized byMarling(2012),inthatsensetheurbansonglineisakindofgps‐trackeachofusmovealongin the city, fromoneplace to thenext –whether it is the route fromourprivatehomes towork/school,thelocalsupermarket,foodoutletsetc.Ontheotherhand,theurbansonglineisalsoamentaltrackconstitutingplacesofpersonalimportance(bothinanegativeandpositivesense)tous.Thiscanbehistoricalorculturalsites,placeswemeetwithfriendsorfamily,orsimply placeswhichhave an impact on our social behavior andmentalmemories (Marling2012).ThemethodofUrbanSonglinesisassuchaspecifictooltomapandvisuallyrepresentthe architectural and socio‐cultural experiences of a city of ordinary people. And it can bedone by use of interviews combined with a gps‐registration of movements, serial visions,walk‐alongs,photosafarisandsoonfocusingondefiningthevariousplacesofmeaninginthelocalcommunitytotheinhabitants–theso‐calledpersonalterritory(Marling2012).In continuation of themethod of mapping with tactics like ‘Urban Songlines’, the tactic of‘Storytelling’servestogroundyourideasforhowtochangeandcreateinnovationinagivenfoodenvironmentinarealcontext,aswellaskeepthepeopleinvolvedatthecenterofyourwork(Quessenbery&Brooks2009).Nomatterwhatprojectideasyoudevelop,intheendit

  

 7 

 

will impact on and be used by people. So, storytelling is as argued for by Quessenbery &Brooks(2009)awayofconnectingwhatyou(asaresearcher)knowabout thosepeople tothedesignprocessandphasesofideadevelopment.Thekeyofthistypeofresearchtacticisthat therearemanywaysof tellingastory.Astorycanbewrittenorspoken, itcanbe toldthroughpictures,astoryboard,movingimagesorwords,toldliveorthroughrecordedaudioorvideo.Whatiscommonaboutitallisthatitrepresentsawayofcommunicatingpersonalexperiencesandemotionsinagivencontext,situationandproblem–andtherebyhelpus(asresearchers)understandtheirworldbetter(Quessenbery&Brooks2009).As you have hopefully realized by now, themethod of mapping and the specific tactics ofurbansonglines,storytellingandstoryboardscloselyrelateandareintertwined.Theyfirstofall drawn on traditional research tactics like ‘interviews’ and ‘observation’, but they alsosupport each other in a much more visual and user‐centered approach to doing andcommunicatingempiricalresearchthanthetraditionalresearchmethods.Inthefirstsemesteryouwereintroducedtotheanalysisanddesignofthespaces,experiencesandobjectsrelatingtofoodasamealandpubliceatingsettings.Inthesecondsemesterthiswaselaboratedwithanintroductiontotheanalysisanddesignoffoodasaproduct,materialandstructure.Incontinuationhereof,thepurposeofthislastcourseintheDESIGNseriesistounfoldandexplorehowweanalysedifferentpublicfoodcontexts,andthenhowwecanusethis analysis to create new food concepts profiting public health andwellbeing, as well asvarioustypesoffoodbusinesses.Therebytheaimofthiscourseistogiveyoutheoreticalandmethodologicalknowledge,practical skills, andcreativecompetenciesonhow tounfold theservice‐oriented and strategic dimensions of Food Design. This is done with a basicintroduction to central theories, methods and creative tools for describing, evaluating andpredictingthedesignoffoodconcepts.OverallcourseframeworkTo help you get started with the work of analyzing and creating food concepts, we haveestablished an overall “framework” for you to analyze, but also for you to practice and getfamiliarwith the course literature and how to use the analyticalmodels and creative toolspresentedinthecourse.This “framework” takes its point of departure in the case of the localCopenhagen‐basedcommunity‘KongensEnghave’(togetherwiththeF‐PMPcourse)andtheoverallconceptof:PublicWelfare Space, and relative hereto the sub‐category of Urban Farming. Both theterms ‘welfare space’ and ‘urban farming’ has in recent years gained increasing attentionamong various academic disciplines, as well as within the general public and a series ofdesign‐relatedpractices.Thiscan,amongothers,beseenbythegrowingamountofpopularmediapresentingstorieson‘gorillagardening’andcommunitygardensoccurringnotonlyonillustrations of outdoor kitchens, cafés and restaurants, but also on design proposals forharbour developments, schools, workplaces, hospitals and general city developments. Assuch,awiderangeofDanishandinternationalexamplesexists,today,illustratinghowurbandevelopmentsbecomeso‐called‘foodscapes’linkedwithaspectsofinfrastructure,climateandlandscapethroughperspectivesoffoodproduction,agriculture,locallyfocusedretailing,foodpolicy, food security, welfare and place‐based social strategies (see e.g. Miazzo & Minkjan

  

 8 

 

2013,Fox2011,Andraos2010,Despommier2010,Feireiss&Feireiss2009,Krasny2012orOsman2013).

Thisangleofwelfarespaceandurbanfarmingisinmyopinionparticularlyinteresting,fromafood design theoretical and practical perspective, because environmentalist organizationshave pronounced theworld is facing a crisis affecting not only our future food supply andglobalenvironment,butalsothelivingstandards,generalhealthandwellbeingoftheentirepopulation(seee.g.Latour2011).Therefore,morethanever,ifthecomfortsofeverydaylifeasweknow it, today, are to sustain, it is perhapsnecessary to re‐evaluate ourpracticesofhandling food and preserving our environment, as well as rethink howwe as food designthinkers,andyouasfutureemployeesworkingintegratedwithfoodinfluencethesematters?

My claim is that contemporary tendencies governingwelfare space and urban farming aregenerally based on two overall opposing movements; one is the “bottom‐up” approachoriginatedfromtheprivateinitiativesof localcommunitiesand/orgrass‐rootorganizations.These initiatives are often based on a public level of interest characterized by the citizen’sinvolvement and ownership. Contrary, the other “top‐down” approach, which is generallybased on a more political level and initiatives of public institutions like the differentmunicipalities or architectural competitions held by urban developers. Nevertheless, whatboth these above tendencies imply, is that elements of welfare spaces and urban farmingeffects our everyday food environments – howwe eat,whatwe eat and not least howwecreateandshapethedifferentpublicsettingsorurbanenvironmentsthatframeoureverydayactionsofproducing,selling,consuminganddisposingfood.

Learninggoals

In this coursewewill focus on the relationship between food, people and place. This is toprovideyouwithabasicunderstandingofwhatinfluencesourinterpretationsandintentionswhendevelopingfooddesignconceptstoday.TheconceptWelfareSpaceandasparthereofUrbanFarming,seenfromaDESIGNperspectiveexploreshowfoodcanbeusedinthe‘urbanfabric’or‘urbandomain’torespondtosocietalchallengesonhealthandwellbeingnotonlyofindividuals but also of communities occurring with the rising urbanization. How theaccessibility of food through “designerly thinking” can also be about involvement work asactive and participatory social entities, producers of new knowledge aswell as creators ofawarenesstowardssustainableandecologicalurbandevelopments.OverallthiscourseandinparticulartheworkshopaimstomakeyoustartreflectingonwhatyourroleasanIFSstudentandpotential"foodconceptdesigner"willbeinthefuture.

  

 9 

 

Figure2:TheDesign‐wayofThinkingThedesignthinkerisnotagifteddesigner,butmustinsteadhaveatalentforbalancingtechnical,commercial,societalandhumanconsiderations.“Whatweneedisanapproachtoinnovationthat…canbeintegratedintoallaspectsofbusinessandsociety,andthatindividualsandteamscanusetogeneratebreakthroughideasthatare

implementedandthatthereforehaveanimpact.”

(Brown2009:3)(IllustrationbyTennaD.O.Tvedebrink2014)

  

 10 

 

ThefinalassignmentEnghaveFoodscapeDevelopmentInthefinalassignmentofthiscourse,weproposetoutilizetheincreasingpublicattentionandpoliticalawarenessontheelementsofWelfareSpaceandUrbanFarmingtodevelopaseriesof new food concepts for the local community foodscape in the AAU‐CPH neighbourhood:KongensEnghave,whichisanimportantdevelopingurbanareainCopenhagen.As such,Enghave isyouroverall context fordoing researchand collectingempirical “data”.ButwithinthedefinedareaofEnghave,therearemanylocalcontexts–orwecouldalsosayfoods,peopleandplaces ‐youcanchoose todevelop foryourspecific foodconceptdesign.Obviouslyyourspecificchoiceoflocalcontext,targetgroup/userandemployer/foodbusinesslens determine the specific development of a food concept. But perhaps the food conceptcould be used to create attention to the contemporary challenges on health, welfare andenvironment in a more profound and informative way? Furthermore, your food conceptwould have to respect and adapt to the existing context, user groups and employer/foodbusinessprofile.IntheF‐PMPcourseyouwillbeintroducedtotheassessmentoffoodscapesandtheplanningfor actionspart of foodscapeprojects. TheF‐PMP coursewill further introduce theLC‐FATtool (Local Community Foodscapes Assessment Tool) that can be used for assessing theagency aswell as the structure of the foodscapes inwhich change is planned to occur. Inotherwords,theLC‐FATisanattempttoassessthe“affordances”and“actionpossibilities”ofthefoodscapesinwhichchange,innovationandinterventionsisgoingtotakeplace.IntheF‐PMPcourseyouwillalsoworkwiththedifferenttimelinestepsthataprojectlifeisorganizedin.‐Fromtheideageneration,overthesketchingofthebudget,findingthefunds,writingtheproject proposal, getting the green light, kicking off the project, analysing stakeholderrelations, anticipating risk and contingencies until finally evaluating and completing theprojectwithin the timeandbudget.Relativehereto, theDESIGNcoursewill focusongivingyoudesign‐basedtheory,design‐basedresearchmethodsandcreativetoolstoinvestigateanddevelop the idea for an innovative change project or intervention project in a localcommunity.In relation hereto, the final assignment of the DESIGN coursewewill be focusing on yourabilitytocommunicateandargueinavisualwayforthefollowing5aspects:1)WHERE,doyouplantointervene/makeachangeproject?Whatistheplaceofyourfoodconcept?2)WHY,isthisintervention/changeprojectimportant?Whatisthecurrentproblemyouaimatsolvingwithyourfoodconcept?3)WHO,isinterestedinyoumakingthisintervention/changeproject?Whoareyourstakeholders–e.g.“employer”and“user”involvedinthefoodconcept?4)WHAT,isyourfoodconcept?Whatdoyouproposeasasolutiontowhatcanbedonetochangeorintervenewiththecurrentproblemidentified?5)HOW,isitgoingtobedone?Descripewhatandwhoyouwillhavetoincludetofulfillyourgoals.

  

 11 

 

As part hereof, it is important that you, on the background of yourmappings and contextanalysis can argue for your different choices between the local context, user groups, andemployerlens.Thatyoucanargueforthechoiceyoumakerelativetotheinterventionsandchangesofrelationshipsbetweenfood,peopleandplaces.ThePortfolioEachgroup(max2‐3students)makesaportfoliowritteninEnglishofminimum6A3‐pages.Theportfolioshouldillustrateapictorial/grapicalunderstandingofhowtoanalyze,evaluateandcreateafooddesignconcept.ForinstancethroughthecreativetoolsthoughtduringtheDESIGN courses: mappings, storytelling, mindmap and storyboard, as well as photos,drawings/sketches, diagrams, key‐words and short statements. Furthermore, see the‘assignmentspecifications’belowanddescriptioninthesummarylectureswewilluploadonMOODLEbytheendoftheworkshops.During the entire course, each student either individually or in groups, has researched,registeredandanalyzedKongensEnghave,aspecificplace,ausergroupandaspecific foodrelatedbusinessprofile.Basedonthisyouhavebeenaskedtodevelopastoryboardclarifyingwhere, why, who, what and how you will do to create change and innovation in the localcommunity?Nowitistimetofinishthiswork.Theportfolioassuchtakesitspointofdepartureintheexercisesassignedtoyouduringtheworkshops.Basedontheseexercisestheportfoliomustpresent your ideas andoverall proposal for a food concept for futureEnghaveUrbanFoodDevelopments(seeassignmentspecifications).For you to be able to make decisions and establish arguments that support the creativedevelopment of your ideas and food concept, we expect that you show how you use andreflect on the theoretical andmethodological knowledge and creative tools gathered fromlectures and exercises in the course. We expect that you show you have gained basicknowledge aboutWelfare Spaces, Urban Farming andmost importantly about the design‐based research methods: Mapping, Storytelling and the use of Storyboards. Together theknowledge on mapping, storytelling and storyboards constitute the basis of your futureanalyticalandcreativetoolsandmethodsforhowtoevaluateandcreatefoodconcepts.AssignmentspecificationsTheportfolioshouldatleastpresentthefollowing:

WHY&WHO:Employer,ProblemandTargetgroup(1A3page)

Duringtheworkshopsyouwillbetoldtochooseaspecificcompanyprofile/food‐relatedbusiness–or“employer”toperformresearchon.Nowyoushouldusethebusinessprofiletobrieflyoutlinekey‐termsdescribingthecharacteristics/lens,targetgroupandinterestsinfoodproducts/servicesofthechosenbusiness.This“employer”shouldbeyourkey‐inspirationforthecontextmapping,mindmappingandstorytelling,foridentifyingyourtargetgroupandproblem,aswellastocreateyour

  

 12 

 

foodconceptforthefutureEnghaveUrbanFoodDevelopments.Useempiricalknowledgecollectedintheareathroughobservationorinterviews,togetherwithotherstate‐of‐the‐artresearchtoargueforyourspecificidentificationandchoicesofa“problem”and“targetgroup”.

WHERE:MappingKongensEnghave_1–SiteandContext(1A3page)During theworkshops youwill analyze theEnghave foodscape area.Here youwill beaskedtochooseonespecificplace/siteofinterest–itcanbeaninstitutionoranurbanspaceetc.Brieflyoutlinelocation,scaleandfunctions,aswellaskey‐termsandconceptsdescribingthespecificlocalcontextyouchoseusingknowledgegainedfromthelectures.This mapping is part of your key‐inspiration for the storytelling, mind map andstoryboardyouneedtocreateforcommunicatingyourfoodconceptforEnghaveUrbanFoodDevelopment.

WHERE:MappingKongensEnghave_2‐UrbanSongline(s)(1A3page)DuringtheworkshopsyouwillalsobeaskedtoanalyzedtheEnghavefoodscapeareaonthe background of your “employer” profile and/or the target groups personalunderstandings. Briefly describe essential aspects about the chosen location,event/situation of intervention and target group (their food related actions andbehaviors)byuseofthemethod‘UrbanSonglines’introducedtoyouinthecourse.

WHAT:FoodConcept–Ideadevelopmentwithstorytelling(1A3page)Throughout thedifferent lecturesand exercises in theworkshops youwillbeprovidedwith theoretical and methodological knowledge and creative tools to analyze andevaluateurban food contexts,aswellas create food concepts.Use thisknowledgeandtoolstogetherwiththeabove3bullets(WHY,WHOandWHERE)tobegindevelopyourown proposal for a food concept addressing the challenge of creating change andinnovation in the local community. Use the knowledge gained from the exercise onstorytelling tooutline initiate ideas/possibilities fordoingan interventionormakingachangeproject.Andfocusondescribingkey‐aspectsforinstancebyuseofimages,aswellaskey‐words.

WHAT&HOW:FoodConceptinStoryboard(min.1A3page)Onthebackgroundoftheaboveideadevelopment,selectoneoftheideas/possibilitiesfordoingan interventionormakingachangeprojectanddescribebyuseofa storyboardwhatyour foodconcept is,andhowyouplantodothe intervention/change.Pleaseusethe followingprogress (moreor less)ofa storyboard, startingwithpresenting:1) theproblemand/orchallengetoday,2)characters–employerandtargetgroup,3)contextandplace,4) suggestion for solution,5)how the solution is tobe implemented,and6)imaginedeffectofthesolution(theideal).

REFLECTIONS:knowledge,skillsandcompetencies(1A3page,written)Brieflyreflectonyourlearningprocessandyourimplementationoftheory,methodsandcreativetools.Yourreflectionsshouldbebasedonthefollowing4questions:

1) Whatisthemostimportantthingyouhavelearnedinthiscourse–andwhy?(Approximately150words)

  

 13 

 

2) Whatisstorytelling‐andhowcanitbeused?(Approximately100words)

3) Whatismapping/urbansonglines‐andhowcanitbeusedcomparedtostorytelling?

(Approximately100words)

4) Whatisastoryboard‐andhowcanitbeused?(Approximately100words)

ExamandevaluationAccording to the: “Curriculum for Master’s Program in Integrated Food Studies ‐ 2015”,publishedbytheFacultyofEngineeringandScience,theStudyboardforPlanning,thecourse:“FoodConceptDesign:MappingStrategicandService‐OrientedpossibilitieswithinFoodBusinesses”iscompletedwithaninternalexam,individuallyevaluated.Thismeanseachstudentwillhavetodoanindividualoralpresentation,heldinEnglish.Youwillusetheportfolio(developedingroupsduringtheworkshops)asaguidelinefortheoralpresentation.Theexaminationofeachstudentislimitedto20minutes.Attheexamweexpectthatalldemandsfortheportfoliohavebeenfulfilled.Soremembertobring1printedversionofyourportfoliototheexam.Thiswillbethemediaforyourpresentation,aswellaspartofourevaluationofyourperformanceinthecourse.Basedonyourperformance,youwillreceiveagradefromthe7‐stepscale.Furtherdetailsaboutthespecificdate,timeandlocationwillbeprovidedlaterinMoodle.AlsofurtherevaluationcriteriaarestatedintheFrameworkProvisions,publishedbytheFacultyofEngineeringandScienceandTheFacultyofMedicine,AalborgUniversity.

  

 14 

 

References:Literatureuploadedforlectures:Brooks,K.&Quesenbery,W.(2009).“StorytellingforUserExperienceDesign.USA:RosenfeldMedia,pp.1‐29(29pages)Cosgrove(1999),“Introduction:MappingMeaning”.In:Mappings,London:ReaktionBooks,pp.1‐23(23pages)Corner(1999),“TheAgencyofMapping:speculation,critiqueandInvention”.In:Mappings,London:ReaktionBooks,pp.213‐252(39pages)Fisker,A.M.&Olsen,T.D.(2008).Food,ArchitectureandExperienceDesign.NordicJournalofArchitecturalResearch,1(1),pp.63‐75(12pages)Franck,K.(2005).Food+theCity.ArchitecturalDesign,75(3),Wiley‐Academy,pp.4‐10(6pages)Kolko,J.(2010).AbductiveThinkingandSensemaking,thedriversofdesignsynthesis.MITDesignIssue,26(1),onlinedocument(12pages)Marling,G.(2012).UrbanSonglines–thecityexperiencedbyordinarypeople.In:Andrade,V.,Lanng,D.B.andSmith,S.,Musings:anurbandesignanthology,(red),Aalborg:AalborgUniversitetsforlag,pp.142‐153(11pages)Mattelmäki,T.,Brandt,E.,Vaajakallio,K.(2011).Ondesigningopen‐endedinterpretationsforcollaborativedesignexploration.CoDesign,7:2,June2011,pp.79–93(16pages)Steel(2008),“HungryCity–howfoodshapesourlives”.London:Chatto&Windus,ch.1“theland”,pp.3‐52(49pages)Tvedebrink,T.D.O.(2015),CourseProgramme–FoodConceptDesign.LectureNotes,fromDepartmentofCivilEngineering,(15pages)Wasson,Christina(2002).Collaborativework:integratingtherolesofEthnographersandDesigners.In:CreatingbreakthroughideasbySusanSquiresandBryanByrne,pp.71‐90(19pages)Wasson,C.(2000).EthnographyintheFieldofDesign.HumanOrganisation,59:4,pp.377‐387(10pages)Zampollo,F.(2013).FoodandDesign:Space,PlaceandExperience,Editorial,JournalofHospitalityandSociety,3(3),pp.181‐187(7pages)Additionalliterature:Andraos,A.&Wood,D.(ed.)(2010).“Abovethepavement–thefarm:architectureandagricultureatpublicfarm1”,NewYork:PrincetonArchitecturalPress.Despommier,D.(2010),“TheVerticalFarm;FeedingtheWorldinthe21stCentury”,NewYork,USA:Picador.

  

 15 

 

Feireiss,L.&Feireiss,K.,(2009),“ArchitectureofChange2:SustainabilityandHumanityintheBuiltEnvironment”,Gestalten.Fox,T.J.(2011).“UrbanFarming:Sustainablecitylivinginyourbackyard,inyourcommunity,andintheworld”.Franck,K.(2005).Food+theCity.ArchitecturalDesign,75(3),Wiley‐Academy.Gehl,J.(2010),CitiesforPeople,Washington‐Covelo‐London:IslandPress.Gehl,J.(1987),LifeBetweenBuildings:UsingPublicSpace,NewYork:VanNostrandReinholdGroat,L.&Wang,D.,(2013).ArchitecturalResearchMethods.USA.Wiley&Sons.Hall(2002),“TheCityintheGarden”.In:CitiesofTomorrow.Oxford:BlackwellPublishing,pp.87‐141(54pages)Koskinen,I.,Zimmerman,J.,Binder,T.,Redström,J.&Wensveen,S.(2011).DesignResearch,throughPractice,fromthelab,field,andshowroom.USA:Elsevier.Krasny,E.,(2012),“Hands‐OnUrbanism1850‐2012:TheRighttoGreen”.Latour,B.,(2011),“WaitingforGaia.Composingthecommonworldthroughartsandpolitics”,SciencePo.Marling,G.(2003).UrbanSonglines,hverdagslivetsdrømmespor.Aalborg:AalborgUniversitetsforlag.Miazzo,F.&MInkjan,M.(ed.)(2013).“FarmingtheCity:foodasaToolforToday’sUrbanisation”,Netherlands:Cities.Moggridge(2007),“DesigningInteractions”Osman,H.,(2013),“UrbanAgriculture:BacktoBasics”,Web:http://www.wupr.org/2013/05/25/urban‐agriculture‐back‐to‐basics/Steel(2008),“HungryCity–howfoodshapesourlives”.London:Chatto&Windus,ch.2“supplyingthecity”,pp.55‐102(47pages),ch.7“Sitopia”,pp.285‐324(39pages)Tafoya(2007),“DiplomacyoftheDish:CulturalUnderstandingThroughtaste”.InFood&Philosophy,pp.264‐275(11pages)www.ifooddesign.com

ISSN 1901-7286 DCE Lecture Notes No. 38