Smart home technologies (SHTs) are prominently featured in energy transition plans due to their potential to mitigate climate change effects. The representation of SHTs and their associated imaginaires significantly shapes perceptions and technology development. However, mass adoption of these technologies risks deepening social inequalities, enabling pervasive surveillance, and worsening environmental impacts. Previous studies involving users to foresee undesirable technology impacts fail to challenge industry solutionism effectively. This thesis reports on a co-design process organised to trouble dominant unfair sociotechnical systems behind SHTs, aiming to foster a more responsible and just imaginaire for the technology.
Working with 22 co-designers grouped as professionals, early adopters, and late adopters of SHTs, the study included five exploratory and speculative design workshops, an online focus group, and 14 evaluative interviews, analysed through qualitative coding and visual analysis. The co-design process uncovered three key insights: (i) prevalent techno-positivism exists in the imaginaires across different adopter groups and expert circles; (ii) issues with SHTs are systemic, impacting devices and usability, production and consumption, and the broader relationship between people and technology; (iii) when enacted through a democratic participation infrastructure focusing on mutual learning, co-design can disrupt unequal power dynamics, leading to more responsible and equitable outcomes associated with SHTs.
Co-design can enhance distinct social groups' abilities to critically represent alternative imaginaires. Viewing participants as partners rather than research subjects fosters a different relationship between industry and users, challenging dominant sociotechnical systems. This thesis presents three contributions: (a) conceptual framing SHT through its troubles instead of promised solutions; (b) maintaining engagement with SHT troubles via a non-solutionist co-design methodology; and (c) evidencing participants’ journeys of critical consciousness in co-designed speculative artefacts. Without challenging broader systemic and power dynamics, participatory practices like co-design risk perpetuating the same injustices produced by mainstream design.