Understanding Ecodesign from Practitioners' Perspectives: A Study with Designers and Managers in India
This study of Indian design and management practitioners reveals a significant gap between corporate sustainability commitments and actual design practice, where professionals feel their personal alignment with environmental goals is constrained by limited influence and complex, standardized development processes.
Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer
Every product we use, from the refrigerator in our kitchen to the car we drive, begins its life as an idea in a designer's mind. This early stage of creation is a critical moment for the planet. Decisions made here determine how much energy a product will consume, what materials it will use, and how easily it can be recycled or disposed of when it is no longer needed. This approach, known as ecodesign, is the practice of building environmental care directly into the creation of goods. For decades, experts have developed tools and frameworks to help companies make these greener choices. Yet, despite the availability of these methods, the widespread adoption of ecodesign in the real world has been slow. The question is no longer whether we have the right tools, but why they are not being used effectively. To understand this gap, researchers in India looked not at the tools themselves, but at the people who are supposed to use them: the designers and managers who shape the products we buy every day.
The researchers focused their study on the Indian market, a place where environmental regulations are tightening and companies are under increasing pressure to act sustainably. They wanted to know what the people actually doing the design work think about these environmental goals. Do they feel empowered to make greener choices, or do they feel stuck? To find out, the team conducted in-depth conversations with fourteen professionals. These individuals held roles such as product designers, design engineers, and managers, and they worked for seven major companies that lead the market in home appliances, consumer electronics, and heavy machinery. The researchers asked these professionals to share their experiences, their beliefs, and their feelings about the role of sustainability in their daily work. They also compared what these people said with the official sustainability promises published on their companies' websites.
The conversations revealed a striking disconnect. While the companies' websites were filled with bold commitments to reduce carbon emissions, manage waste, and protect biodiversity, the designers and managers on the ground felt a profound sense of powerlessness. A large majority of the participants, nearly eighty percent, expressed a feeling of "role limitation." They described their jobs as being confined to specific tasks, such as creating the outer look of a product or selecting a handle, while the big decisions about materials, manufacturing processes, and cost were made by others higher up in the organization. They felt that environmental sustainability was not part of their direct responsibility. Even when they wanted to make a product more sustainable, they believed they lacked the authority to do so. One designer noted that they were just creating the visuals, while another explained that decisions about materials were driven by cost and market demands, not by environmental concerns.
Despite this feeling of powerlessness, the professionals did not lack care for the environment. In fact, their personal values aligned closely with the green goals their companies publicly claimed to support. They spoke highly of the importance of minimizing waste, choosing materials wisely, and recycling. They believed that raising awareness among both designers and consumers was crucial. However, they viewed the integration of these values into their work as secondary to other priorities. They saw the product development process as a rigid, standardized machine that had been running for decades, driven by regulations and the need to keep costs low. In their view, sustainability was a complex challenge that often got pushed aside in favor of functionality and price. They felt that the only thing that truly forced them to consider the environment was external pressure from government rules, rather than an internal drive from their own companies.
This creates a puzzling situation. The companies have the policies, the public commitments, and the employees who care about the environment. Yet, the actual practice of designing products remains largely unchanged. The researchers found that the problem is not a lack of knowledge or a lack of good intentions. The designers know what needs to be done and they want to do it, but the structure of their work does not allow it. The bridge between the high-level corporate promises and the daily tasks of the designer is missing. The study suggests that simply having a sustainability policy on a website is not enough. For ecodesign to truly take root, companies need to change how they organize their work. They must give designers clear responsibilities and the authority to make green choices, rather than leaving environmental decisions to a separate layer of management or treating them as an afterthought.
The findings point to a need for a shift in how sustainability is implemented. It is not enough to provide new tools or set new targets. The way companies define roles, set performance goals, and make decisions must change to include environmental considerations as a core part of the design process. Until the people who draw the blueprints and choose the materials feel that they have a real say in the matter, the gap between what companies say they will do and what they actually do will remain wide. This study highlights that the future of sustainable design depends less on new technology and more on understanding the human and organizational dynamics that either enable or block progress. By listening to the people who do the work, we can see that the path forward requires building a structure where environmental care is not just a slogan, but a daily practice.
Drowning in papers in your field?
Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.