VIVA - Heritage and Participatory Dynamics: Valuing, Imagining, Aiming, Learning and Innovating for a Living Heritage
"Heritage is not what is preserved, but what is transmitted and transformed.” (Bernard Stiegler, 2010)
VIVA - Valuing, Imagining, Aiming, Learning and Innovating approaches heritage as a living legacy, understood not as a fixed set of objects to be preserved, but as a social, cultural and pedagogical process in constant reconfiguration (Smith, 2006; UNESCO, 2003). Grounded in participatory dynamics, this perspective recognizes the central role of communities, uses and contemporary practices in the production and transmission of heritage values (Bastian & Flinn, 2020).
However, if heritage can indeed be “transmitted and transformed,” it is first because it has been preserved; and one can preserve only what material or memorial traces manage to endure. Transmission cannot be conceived without first attending to the conditions of existence, persistence and reactivation of these traces (Nora, 1989). In the face of recurring destruction affecting artefacts, sites, archives and embodied practices, the VIVA call seeks to articulate more explicitly the links between valorisation, transmission and conservation, questioning the concrete modalities through which traces can be safeguarded, documented and re-inscribed in the present.
The call also opens the reflection to the notion of “matrimoine”—designating the heritage of female lineages, practices and cultural productions. Because many of these expressions rely on inherently fragile supports-textiles, domestic arts, care practices, private archives, everyday objects, they have historically been marginalized or rendered invisible within dominant heritage narratives (Huyssen, 2003). Recognizing and documenting this matrimoine means making perceptible forms of heritage that are sensitive, situated and precarious, yet essential to understanding cultures and lived worlds. Contributions addressing the (re)valorisation, documentation or transmission of matrimoine are therefore strongly encouraged.
Within this framework, design education occupies a strategic position (Cross, 2006; Schön, 1983). As a project-driven disciplinary field, design articulates critical imagination, situated methods and transformative intentionality, enabling the valorisation of local knowledges, the projection of possible futures and the pursuit of responsible transitions (Manzini, 2015). These approaches resonate with educational paradigms centered on experience, participation and the co-construction of knowledge. Far from being a merely illustrative mediation tool, design becomes an epistemic device, capable of revealing narratives, gestures and memories that are often marginalized, while opening spaces for pedagogical experimentation.
Emerging technologies, and in particular artificial intelligence, reinforce this dynamic when mobilized critically and in a human‑centered manner. AI, data visualization and immersive environments can support the exploration of heritage corpora, collaborative documentation and scenario-building, provided they remain embedded within explicit ethical and pedagogical frameworks (Floridi, 2019; Shneiderman, 2022). Innovation thus exceeds tools: it entails a renewal of design pedagogies, their learning methods, assessment dispositifs and social responsibilities (Norman, 2013).
The VIVA call therefore invites contributors to explore how valuing, imagining, aiming, learning and innovating can form a shared grammar for approaching heritage through design education. By intersecting pedagogical practices, participation and technologies, the call positions heritage as a critical experimental field, where renewed forms of transmission, value creation and cultural governance can emerge through dialogue with territories, institutions and living actors.
Axis 1 — Valuing & Imagining: Activating Heritage through Design, Narratives and Possible Futures
Bringing together Valuing and Imagining means acknowledging that heritage (material/immaterial, vernacular/institutional) gains relevance when activated through the projective power of design and storytelling (Dunne & Raby, 2013). Pedagogies of the imaginary, design fiction, sensory mapping, narrative or immersive dispositifs make heritage values intelligible and re-expressible. Generative AI, data visualization, augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) enable reconstructions, simulations of past/future uses and the opening of speculative scenarios, transforming heritage into a dynamic pedagogical material. Design-driven dispositifs, exhibitions, prototypes, films, installations, platforms can act as public mediations, revealing local crafts, gestures and memories that are often obscured or under-recognized.
Axis 2 — Aiming & Learning: Situated Methods, Co‑Design and the Design of Transitions and Transmission
Linking Aiming and Learning situates the objectives of design education within a trajectory of situated transformation, attentive to social, cultural and environmental challenges. This involves defining explicit aims in terms of transmission, transition and impact, and equipping learning processes to achieve them with—and through—communities in specific territorial and cultural contexts.
Co‑design methods and field‑based inquiry establish forms of in situ learning grounded in experience, engagement and participation (communities of practice, practice-based research). In this context, transmission becomes not a simple transfer of knowledge but a process of transition, in which heritages are reconfigured through uses, societal change and ecological pressures.
Documentation via collaborative databases, open standards or AI-assisted indexing becomes a central pedagogical practice, functioning as a tool for safeguarding, mediation and updating knowledge. This attention to documentation necessarily entails a renewed focus on conservation: transmission and transition are impossible without the persistence of material or memorial traces. Recurring destruction of artefacts, archives and embodied practices makes it essential to address the concrete conditions of safeguarding particularly for the fragile, often overlooked expressions of matrimoine such as textiles, domestic arts and care‑related objects.
Curricula and assessment frameworks clarify pedagogical aims (service learning, cultural mediation, social design) while integrating questions of accessibility, inclusion and responsibility. The challenge lies in articulating methods, criteria and values to ensure accountability and to accompany ongoing transitions in the ways heritage is transmitted, learned and engaged through design.
Axis 3 — Innovating: AI, Emerging Technologies and Participatory Dynamics for a Living Heritage
Innovation extends beyond tools; it requires rethinking pedagogies through the critical articulation of technologies (AI, AR/VR, digital fabrication, open platforms) and participation. AI acts both as a design assistant (corpus analysis, generative systems, linguistic accessibility) and as a critical object (bias, explainability, sustainability). Open innovation ecosystems (living labs, collaborations with cultural institutions and local authorities) enable the testing of reproducible and evaluable dispositifs (Bekele et al., 2018). Pedagogical and social impact assessment (learning traceability, indicators of heritage vitality, governance of digital commons) and sustainability considerations (frugality, data sovereignty, archival longevity) structure innovation over time.
Submission Guidelines — VIVA — DEED‑3
The VIVA call is designed to be inclusive and federative. Any contribution, method, pedagogical dispositif, research project or institutional initiative engaging explicitly or implicitly with valuing, imagining, aiming, learning and innovating or with related conceptual or methodological combinations may be submitted. What matters most is the ability of proposals to embed themselves within integrative, participatory dynamics, viewing heritage as a living, continuously transforming process, co‑produced by actors, uses, territories and pedagogical dispositifs.
We invite critical, theoretical, experimental or project‑based contributions, completed or in progress. Submissions may take the form of scholarly articles, case studies, project narratives, interviews, methodological approaches, design dispositifs or any other relevant format.
This call is addressed to researchers, scholar‑practitioners, designers, heritage professionals, cultural managers, archivists, artists, engineers, as well as PhD candidates and advanced students. Contributions from product, spatial, Spatial construction, graphic, service, textile or digital design, architecture, digital humanities, heritage studies, and all fields exploring relationships between design, pedagogy, heritage/matrimoine and participatory dynamics are welcome.
Submissions must demonstrate originality, conceptual rigor and scientific quality, whether through strong theoretical grounding, explicit methodological framing or robust empirical work. Particular attention will be paid to the clarity of argumentation, to the articulation of pedagogical and cultural issues, and to the mobilization of the five dynamics that structure VIVA.
We particularly welcome contributions exploring the interactions between design, transmission, conservation, transition, emerging technologies and participation, including inquiries into the safeguarding of traces, the (re)valorisation of matrimoine, and the role of design education in fostering a living heritage. Contributions should enrich critical dialogues and advance the debates supported by the DEED journal.
Online Submission Instructions
- For this call for contributions, the required length of the final text is 2,500 to 8,000 words.
Please take into consideration the DEED Style Sheet: DEED Style Sheet. - Online submission of articles will open on January 28, 2025.
- The complete document must be in Word format and submitted online before April 28, 2026.
- You may submit your articles via the following link:
https://design-in-deed.com/index.php/journal/about/submissions File name: “Article Title_VIVA_DEED_3.docx”
The DEED journal operates a continuous submission system for full articles, with a six‑month publication cycle for each issue, each centered on a specific theme. All submissions undergo a double‑blind peer‑review process, ensuring objectivity and rigor.
It is essential that articles comply with The author guidelines and respect all deadlines, as submissions received and accepted after the cutoff date will be postponed to a later publication cycle.
Références
- Bastian, J. A., & Flinn, A. (2020). Community archives, community spaces. Facet Publishing.
- Bekele, M. K., Pierdicca, R., Frontoni, E., Malinverni, E. S., & Gain, J. (2018). A survey of augmented, virtual, and mixed reality for cultural heritage. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage, 11(2), 1–36.
- Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. Springer.
- Dunne, A., & Raby, F. (2013). Speculative everything. MIT Press.
- Floridi, L. (2023). Ethics, governance, and policies in artificial intelligence.
- Huyssen, A. (2003). Present Pasts: Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford University Press.
- Stiegler, B. (2010). Ce qui fait que la vie vaut la peine d’être vécue : De la pharmacologie.
- Manzini, E. (2015). Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. MIT Press.
- Nora, P. (1989). Les lieux de mémoire.
- Norman, D. A. (2013). The design of everyday things (Revised and expanded ed.). Basic Books.
- Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. Basic Books.
- Shneiderman, B. (2022). Human-centered AI. Oxford University Press.
- Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage.
- (2003). Convention pour la sauvegarde du patrimoine culturel immatériel. UNESCO.