2022年11月15日、産学連携ハイブリッド・イノベーションプログラム第3回セッションを開催しました。今回は東工大特任教授であるネイサン・コーエン博士が、演習とディスカッションをリード。コーエン博士はロンドン芸術大学セントラル・セント・マーチンズ校のMA Art/Scienceの元コースリーダーであり、アーティスト兼研究・教育者です。共著にThe Art of Scienceがあり、この本で、時代を超えて我々の文化を形成してきたアーティストと科学者の作品群を紹介しています。またスタッフチームとして、HIディレクターの野原佳代子教授、HIクリアイティブディレクターのジョルジョ・サラニ助教、アシスタントディレクターの鹿又亘平氏が入りました。
The third session of our Hybrid Innovation programme for Japanese industry was held at Nohara Lab on 15th November 2022. Tokyo Tech’s Visiting Professor Dr. Nathan Cohen led the activities and the discussion, alongside HI Director Prof. Kayoko Nohara and HI Assistant Director, Kohei Kanomata. Dr. Cohen is an artist, educator and researcher, and the former Course Leader of the MA Art/Science at Central Saint Martins college, University of the Arts London. He is a co-author of “The Art of Science”, an illustrated selection of works by artist-scientists that shaped our cultures over the ages.
Participants attended in person whilst Dr. Cohen joined us from the UK on zoom, assisted by a simultaneous translation service provided by NHK. This was a very practical session with no central lecture but 3 exercises designed to facilitate a discussion about differences and overlaps between artistic and scientific approaches to creativity and innovation. After some warm-up questions about the perception of art vs. science among the participants, a series of captivating images were shown and discussed. These included less familiar works of art from the distant and recent past, from mysterious ethnic and prehistoric art to more contemporary works, and Dr. Cohen’s own artwork. Questions were raised about the artists’ intentions and methods of making, with educated guesses shared by the participants. Without prior knowledge some images looked alien and hard to decipher, but even more well-known artworks were often made with techniques and materials unfamiliar to the session’s participants. This stimulated an initial exchange about the goals of art and its role in societies across the globe. What is the purpose for which the art was created? What is its social role?
After a short break, the participants were split in groups and assigned a practical task. Each group had one hour to build a bridge of 1.2m span, to be constructed between 2 tables using only bamboo sticks, elastic bands and coloured ribbon. The results would be judged both in terms of technical features such as strength and aesthetics. Early on, all groups engaged in discussions aided by sketches of bridge designs on paper, and gradually moved on to checking the materials and testing solutions. Multiple ways of joining sticks were possible and this gave options and variety to the project. The exercise was engaging and all groups focused closely on their tasks, splitting labour among them and progressing fast. The all managed to finish on time and the results were assessed by Dr. Cohen and everyone in the room, collectively. Books were used to test the strengths of the structures and everyone voted for their preferred solution. The groups also introduced the motivation behind the different designed and these were sometimes insightful and not immediately obvious. The conclusion we all drew from the activity and the discussion was that the technical features and aesthetics of the bridges could be thought of separately but in reality they were largely intertwined and the winning bridge was judge by most to be both the stronger and the best looking.
At the end of the session, we reflected again on what it means to be artistic, in the light of what it means to be scientific. In particular, when we say that ‘science is rational’, what does that mean? How does it differ from ‘rationalisation’ in business? What is the rationality to be found in art? Where are the standards of aesthetics to be found? … and so the discussion goes on. We are thus on the path to exploring the fusion of science and art.
Session 4 of the HI programme will be held on 29th November and will focus on various techniques to facilitate the divergence in creativity, at the start of the ideation phase. Group work to start in Session 4 will be undertaken by the participants across various sessions to exemplify an innovation cycle based on HI theory and practice. The results will be amply discussed in the final sessions and presented to the public in the HI Symposium to be held in April 2023 (exact date TBC).
Activity period: October 2022 to April 2023PROGRAMME CONTENT: Seminars, workshops, manufacturing, experiments, creative community activities, etc. that flexibly use face-to-face and online. A final symposium – open to participating companies and the public – is scheduled for April 2023.
This article was co-written by Nohara Lab staff and students. For a first introduction to Nohara Lab’s collaboration with CooperVision Japan please read this post.
Planning research on contact lens use in Japan
The Nohara Lab at the Tokyo Institute of Technology are collaborating with CooperVision Japan on the environmental impact of single-use contact lenses (CLs). The projects comprises an initial research phase to inform a design contest to be undertaken by the students in the 2022-23 autumn and winter terms. This blog reports on the completion of the first phase and covers the final development of appropriate research methods, a description of the event held at the university in October 2022 and plans for the next phase of collaborative work.
A review of literature focused on three key areas: general recycling policy in Japan, CLs consumer behaviour, and specific issues concerning the design of CLs blister packaging (i.e. polypropylene), hydrogels and carton. The review highlighted inconsistency across data from national and international sources, obtained through various methods and of varying quality. The team quickly agreed on the need to produce a baseline report on CLs usage in Japan that could reliably inform design proposals to be presented in Phase 2. Quantitative data from a custom-designed questionnaire survey could easily incorporate a range of questions to address most of the points raised by the students and form the basis for subsequent qualitative R&D.
Questionnaire results
A screening survey with four questions followed by a main survey which consists of 15 questions was conducted via Fastsk, an internet survey service provided by JustSystems. All questions were designed around the three key areas raised by the literature review.
We have collected 2141 responses from the screening survey, among which 2035 were effective. The following figure which demonstrates the age and gender of the effective respondents show we have well-balanced research panels.
The figures above indicate that about half of the effective respondents have used contact lenses and only 20% stopped using contact lenses mainly due to their age, while about 60% continue to wear contact lenses at a high frequency of three or more days a week.
Estimating from these results, it is safe to say that approximately 30% of the population use contact lenses on a daily basis, so attempts to communicate information to this group of people or to change their behavior would have a significant impact on society and the environment.
We have distributed the main survey to 819 people who (1) have used contact lenses and (2) are currently using contact lenses and collected 450 responses, among which 447 were effective.
Key findings addressing our initial interests are outlined below.
Use of Contact Lenses and Consumer Behavior
CLs are more frequently used by those who use them for a longer period of time. This seems to be a natural result, however, it is an empirical indication that contact lenses are a stable necessity that has taken root in people’s lives.
A more detailed look at contact lens usage reveals there are groups of users with different habits for each type of disposable CL. The one-day disposable lens user group consists of a diverse group of people ranging from those who only wear CL (but not eyeglasses) and use them at high frequency to those who use both and use CL occasionally. On the other hand, the user group of two-week or longer disposable CL is relatively monolithic, consisting mainly of those who only wear them at high frequency. The difference between users who use two-week disposable and one-month disposable cannot be determined from the survey and we expect the input of domain knowledge from CooperVision professionals.
Another phenomenon that attracted our attention was that when asked about the important factors that will affect their purchase of CLs, younger respondents (students in specific) tend to focus on “company’s contribution to environmental and social issues” and “appearance and design of the product” than other respondents.
Environmental Awareness and Recycling Behavior
Concerning the above, when analysing the answers to the questions about respondents’ environmental awareness and recycling behavior, we found that most of the respondents are environmentally conscious and take action to protect the environment in their lives.
However, when it comes to the recycling of plastic waste related to CLs, the ways of disposal are not ideal, as nearly 70% of people dispose of them as burnable garbage, and about 50% of people also dispose of blisters (plastic cases) as burnable garbage. Since policies and regulations by companies and governments do not cover the particular area, this implies a lack of ways to contribute from the customer’s side.
Surely setting recycling boxes in public places, clinics, or pharmacies will help, but additional encouragement might be needed to fully motivate the users to participate in the recycling of CL waste.
Based on the exploratory insights we gained from the survey, three groups of students conducted further analysis from the point of view of their initial research questions.
Presentation to CooperVision Japan and third parties
An event was held on 14th October at Nohara Lab to present the results of the questionnaire survey as analysed by Prof. Xinru Zhu to the CooperVision Japan team, Mr. Mitsuaki Watanabe (CEO of PROTOTYPE Inc.), Mr. Toshiaki Sakamono (Product Designer of Nava Products), and Mr. Satoru Sota (Industrial Promotion Division, Ota City). Mr. Watanabe and Mr. Sakamoto will assist the students in the second phase.
Group 1
Group 1 focused on consumer behavior, most about their recycling awareness and how they dispose of used lenses and blisters. The change in how they use CLs before and after the covid19 is also one aspect of the research. The survey results show that most consumers dispose of the lenses and blisters as either burnable or plastic garbage. Few will bring the used lenses and blisters to the collection boxes due to unknown issues. On the other hand, student users prefer to choose the brand of CLs that pay more attention to environmental problems.
These findings made Group 1 members consider the reasons for the lower usage of collection boxes when customers have environmental expectations from the product. Is it too troublesome to go to the place of collection boxes? Is it that they do not know about recycling used lenses and blisters? According to these speculations, Group 1’s next step is to consider a way of helping the users collect the used lenses and blister easily. One initial idea is to proposes a kind of package design called “P2C” to transform the package box into a collectible container with beauty and fun by folding (“Origami”) that they hope could let customers enjoy the process of collecting.
Group 2
The topics of interest to Group 2 include the recycling policy in Japan and the products subject to regulation. They came up with two research questions. One is the impact of introducing a sign on blister packaging just as the Containers and Packaging Recycling Law. Containers or packages made of certain materials are required to have a sign of that material to promote recycling. If the sign of the blister package is designed and put on products, how will our recycling actions be influenced? The second question is about speculating on a ‘no contact lenses future’ in which users could benefit the company. Companies nowadays are required to show their environmental initiatives. Speculating about the future creates the basis for discussion on the sustainability of the blister package.
The students could address some questions based on the results of the questionnaire survey. Firstly, participants generally dispose of plastic packages as burnable garbage, even though its plastic composition is clearly stated on the sign. From this finding, the sign of the blister package will have no impact on recycling behavior. We can shift focus to the garbage stations. Secondly, younger participants and students tend to be highly aware of environmental issues, showing a willingness to use the garbage station for blister packages. They can choose the company speculating on the ‘no contact lenses future.’ For the next steps, we will consider how to visualize the data around the amount of waste produced by the industry.
Group 3
Group 3’s topics of interest were issues related to CLs in Japan. From the literature review, Group 3 paid attention to two points. One is the easier it has got to access CLs, the lower it has become to use CLs properly. The other is a lack of recognition or interest in post-use treatment. From these survey results, Group 3 became curious about how it is possible to improve consumers’ mindset/behavior from package design or company action approaches. Thus Group 3 set up the following two research questions:
1. How does CL consumer behavior change when packaging is designed to communicate concerns?
2. How can communicating weaknesses benefit the company?
From the survey result, which showed that the company’s commitment to expressing “consideration for environmental and social issues” may influence consumers’ choice of makers and brands, Group 3 came up with the second phase’s approach. That would address the question: how can communicating social and environmental issues caused by CLs (e.g., eye damage, plastic issues, etc.) be effective in consumer behavior?
Informing the next phase of work
At the event in October, all parties agreed to undertake R&D guided by new, detailed research questions and initial ideas for proposals. In November the students will be guided by the team at PROTOTYPE Inc. and inducted into design methods to develop their initial sketches. The wider team will sit together again in December for two progress meetings, and prototypes will be developed over the winter initially at Tokyo Tech and then at PROTOTYPE Inc.. The final proposals will be completed in February and reviewed by March 2023. At the beginning of March, a public event will be held at Shibuya QWS in central Tokyo. This will include an exhibition of the students’ proposals and a public award ceremony for the best designs led by CooperVision Japan.
For more information on Project Vision 2022 please see our previous posts (in Japanese and English):
11月1日(火)、産学協働プログラム「ハイブリッド・イノベーション」第2回目を実施しました。今回は「科学技術最前線」として、STADHI-Science and Technology x Art and Design Hybrid Innovation ーのメンバーでもある東工大物質理工学院の須佐匡裕教授が登場、金属工学のスペシャリストです。鉄鋼の製造工程と歴史、そしてカーボンニュートラルな未来を目指す上でのグローバルな課題について講義をいただきました。今日のゴールは、革新的な製品やサービスを生み出す、あるいは改善するソリューションの「オルタナティブ」としての「プロセス・イノベーション」に目を向けること、そしてあらためて「科学的であること」の特徴を見直し、そこから何を学ぶことができるか、いろいろな方法を議論することでした。「サイエンスと工学」にちなんで参加者全員が白衣を着用し、その思考と文化、モード(形式、スタイル)をシミュレートしてみました。いつもと違う風景に、自分の中の何かがとぎすまされた、という感想も飛び出しました。
The second session of our Hybrid Innovation programme for industry was held on 1st November at Nohara Lab. This in-person event saw the contribution of Prof. Masahiro Susa from the School of Materials and Chemical Technology, who introduced the participants to the process and challenges of manufacturing steel. He gave a lecture on the manufacturing process and history of steel, and global challenges in moving towards a carbon-neutral future. The session aimed to inspire a discussion on “process innovation” as an alternative source of innovative solutions for generating or improving products and services, and reflect on a “scientific” approach to innovation. To embrace the S&T theme of the day, all participants were asked to wear white lab coats for the entire afternoon.
The process of making materials for steel includes the sintering process, in which powdered ore, lime and coke are mixed and baked to harden them; the process of making crude iron (or “pig iron”), the material for steel, in a blast furnace; and the process of pig iron entering a converter furnace to become steel… Unlike the vague image people have of ‘iron’, the composition and shape of iron changes depending on the process at each stage, and is transformed with different properties. The main theme of the conference was a zero-carbon society and the search for a pathway to steelmaking that realises this, with the major ‘question’ being how the steel manufacturing process can be changed towards decarbonisation, and the trial-and-error approach to cutting-edge innovation was discussed. Questions were actively raised, one after another, from companies in industries that use steel in their daily operations, as well as from those that do not.
Professor Kayoko Nohara then used post-its to check what each participant had grasped from the lecture they had just heard, and what messages they had received from this science communication. What the participants grasped varied from scientific events and information, to unconscious evaluations of them, to the sublimation of them into something more personal and of interest to them. Furthermore, what are scientific and technological methods and thinking, what is their potential for creativity… and their potential for application to more universal process innovation were examined.
Next, using techniques of Art Foundation studies, the participants were asked to discuss the topic of ‘steel towers’ in groups while blindfolded. With no reliance on sight, the participants shared their knowledge and senses. Creative translation extended from the types and functions of steel towers, such as Tokyo Tower, base stations, electricity and carrying radio waves, to associations such as “the tower looks good at sunset” and “towers owned by major companies usually have Yuru-kyara characters…”.
The final activity involved working in groups of three and making artefact using coloured clay. Individuals were first given 5 minutes to create a miniature frying pan using one tub of clay, in whichever method they preferred. In the second round, one participant per group had to explain and show how to make the same object his or her way. The other two participants should follow visual and oral instructions and replicate both shape and actions. An additional rule was introduced, forcing all groups to standardise their output. The next two rounds saw the same dynamic in the groups, with alternate participants instructing others while also observing newly introduced rules. Finally, all members had to individually create the frying pan by choosing their own methods, as they did at the start. The exercise provided a context in which the relationship between skill, knowledge, process and design were all made evident. The experience inspired a rich discussion on the difference of various techniques and the results highlighted the crucial role manufacturing processes can play in realising designs. After discussing impressions from the direct experience with clay, the conversation moved to more abstract associations with manufacturing, internal policies and communication within companies, and the ability to innovate processes (and/or designs) to accommodate ever-changing conditions.
The third session of the HI programme will be held on 15th November and will explore the theme of art/science with a guest lecturer from the UK (simultaneous translation will be provided).
Activity period: October 2022 to April 2023
PROGRAMME CONTENT: Seminars, workshops, manufacturing, experiments, creative community activities, etc. that flexibly use face-to-face and online. A final symposium – open to participating companies and the public – is scheduled for April 2023. Read our previous post on Session 1 here. For info please contact: tokyotechxcsm@tse.ens.titech.ac.jp