Agonistic Arrangements: Design for Dissensus in Environmental Governance

Akshita Sivakumar

In response to a desire for justice-based outcomes in environmental governance, there is a rise in various forms of collective governance. The dominant models include participatory and consensus-based, deliberative governance, where aspects of the environment are managed and debated between state agencies, the market, and civil society. However, these models have limitations in negotiating power between various social groups to result in transformative organization. In response, building on the political theory of agonism, design and Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) have recently acknowledged the role of difference and dissensus in public sector participatory processes. The methods and effectiveness of how design can assist social movement actors in spurring and maintaining these differences to ensure just outcomes when participating in state-led governance practices remain to be studied. This article draws on over three years of fieldwork with environmental justice activists participating in California’s decarbonization program. I argue design can help with dissensus by creating space for, articulating the content of, and giving form to ways to draw out tensions that are often suspended in participatory and deliberative processes. I propose a conceptual and methodological framework called Agonistic Arrangements to draw out these tensions. These findings have implications for those involved in participatory governance in the public section across domains.