Seeing systemic design through policy eyes: A frame-work to navigate complexities of policy contexts
Abstract
This paper examines why design practitioners experience tensions when ap-plying systemic design approaches within policy contexts. Drawing on Bekkers’ four analytical perspectives (rational, political, cultural, and institutional), we reinterpret the systemic design activities to reveal how each perspective places distinct, and at times conflicting, demands on design processes. By comparing the lenses across the dimensions of principles, framing, validity, appropriateness, and embedding, we develop a theoretical framework to shed light on how these tensions emerge. The framework also shows that each perspective puts different demands on a design process in the policy context. The framework helps both designers and policy professionals under-stand their own normative positioning, recognize competing logics, and iden-tify pathways to navigate complexity when collaborating on transformative so-cietal challenges.
Keywords
design and policy, design for policy, public sector design, policy design, tensions
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.1350
Citation
Wennekers, E., Brinkman, G., de Koning, J.I., and van Buuren, A. (2026) Seeing systemic design through policy eyes: A frame-work to navigate complexities of policy contexts, in Simeone, L., Gray, C. M., Verhoeven, A., de Götzen, A., Bakırlıoğlu, Y., Zohar, H., Stead, M., and Buwert, P. (eds.), DRS2026: Edinburgh, 8–12 June, Edinburgh, United Kingdom. https://doi.org/10.21606/drs.2026.1350
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Included in
Seeing systemic design through policy eyes: A frame-work to navigate complexities of policy contexts
This paper examines why design practitioners experience tensions when ap-plying systemic design approaches within policy contexts. Drawing on Bekkers’ four analytical perspectives (rational, political, cultural, and institutional), we reinterpret the systemic design activities to reveal how each perspective places distinct, and at times conflicting, demands on design processes. By comparing the lenses across the dimensions of principles, framing, validity, appropriateness, and embedding, we develop a theoretical framework to shed light on how these tensions emerge. The framework also shows that each perspective puts different demands on a design process in the policy context. The framework helps both designers and policy professionals under-stand their own normative positioning, recognize competing logics, and iden-tify pathways to navigate complexity when collaborating on transformative so-cietal challenges.