Policies frozen in silicon: using WPR to expose the politics of problem-solution configurations in technical artifacts

TL;DR

This paper critiques the dominant problem-solving view in design, advocating for a problem-framing perspective using WPR to uncover ideological assumptions embedded in technological artifacts, thereby challenging techno-solutionism.

Contribution

It introduces the application of the WPR approach from policy studies to design, enabling systematic analysis of ideological and political assumptions in technological artifacts.

Findings

WPR reveals hidden ideological assumptions in artifacts

Applying WPR fosters reflexive and critical design practices

Empirical analysis challenges techno-solutionism in technology design

Abstract

Design is often characterized as an act of problem-solving. This is a perspective that, while pervasive, risks reducing complex socio-technical conditions to easily fixable issues. This paper critiques the ideology of "design as problem-solving", highlighting its culmination in technological solutionism, where societal and human challenges are reframed as technical problems awaiting technical answers. Drawing on critiques and the recognition of "wicked problems", we argue that design must also be understood as a process of problem-framing, emphasizing the interpretive work involved in defining what counts as a problem and why. To advance this analytical perspective, we propose applying the What's the Problem Represented to be? (WPR) approach from critical policy studies to design and technology. By treating artifacts as materialized problem representations, WPR allows for the systematic unpacking of the ideological, cultural, and political assumptions encoded in technological forms. This analytical lens can reveal hidden problematisations within artifacts, foster reflexive design practice, and empirically challenge techno-solutionism. Ultimately, integrating WPR into design research enriches both design theory and philosophy of technology by offering a method to interrogate how technologies shape, and are shaped by, the questions they claim to answer.