trends and future of sustainable development - TransEco

4. ConclusionsSocial concerns are issues for sustainable designers (Shedroff 2009, 15), as well as ecological concernsfor sustainable architects. But these concerns should intertwine even more. A transdisciplinaryframework for collaboration should not aim into forcing one single approach to all the participants.Instead, it should be based on the co-creation of the value systems and design aims. This processrequires a good facilitator that is able to balance the shared and professional processes – and also theprofessional differences – into a negotiated, shared outcome.Rather than believing that we could design "universally applicable blueprints" (Wahl & Baxter 2008,73) or "perfect solutions" for "more sustainable offerings" (Shedroff 2009, 20), the aim should be put inreshaping the collaborative framework and process. It may prove to be more useful to seek thesesustainable outcomes as "an emergent property of the complex dynamic system in which we allparticipate" (Wahl & Baxter 2008, 73). A framework that promotes the use of disciplinary competencesand is at the same time based on an iterative dialogue would create a proper platform fortransdisciplinary collaboration, in which the participants would be able to analyze, translate and scaletheir professional knowledge and experience, as well as others.The managers, however, should bear in mind that not only the participating disciplines, but also thedesign focus is dictating the outcomes. Also the educators can orientate the transdisciplinary designprocess by selecting the necessary professional and psychological approaches, choice of tools, team setupsand certain exercises, to be able to foster the necessary level to aim with the particular professionalexpertise. In the integration of knowledge the focus should not in the end be "on types of people" butinstead on "types in people” (Wilber 2001: 6). In multi-professional collaboration it's not that muchabout the participating professions and not about the people themselves, but about the properframework for collaboration and the application of the work so that it supports integrative approach.ReferencesBeck, D. – Cowan, C. C. (1996) Spiral Dynamics: Mastering Values, Leadership, and Change.Cambridge, UK: Blackwell.Bruun, H. – Hukkinen, J. – Huutoniemi, K. – Klein, J. T. (2005) Promoting Interdisciplinary Research:The Case of the Academy of Finland. Helsinki, FI: Edita.Després, C., N. Brais and S. Avellan (2004) Collaborative planning for retrofitting suburbs:transdisciplinarity and intersubjectivity in action. Futures, 36, 471–486.European Commission (2003) The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge. Brussels, BE:European Commission.Gibbons, M. – Limoges, C. – Nowotny, H. – Schwartzman, S. – Scott, P. – Trow, M. (1994) The NewProduction of Knowledge: The Dynamics of Science and Research in Contemporary Societies.London, UK: Sage.Giddings, B. – Hopwood, B. – O'Brien, G. (2002) Environment, economy and society: fitting themtogether into sustainable development. Sustainable Development, 10, 187–196.Hukkinen, J. (2008) Sustainable Networks: Cognitive tools for expert collaboration in social-ecologicalsystems. London, New York: Routledge.Marttila, T. – Kohtala, C. (2010) Towards Transdisciplinarity: Understanding CurrentMultidisciplinarity in Designing Sustainable Urban Solutions. In Ceschin, F. – Vezzoli, C. – Zhang,271