# Re-framing HCI through Local and Indigenous Perspectives

José Abdelnour-Nocera, Masaaki Kurosu, Torkil Clemmensen, Nic Bidwell, Ravi Vatrapu, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus, Vanessa Evers, Rüdiger Heimgärtner, Alvin Yeo

► To cite this version:

José Abdelnour-Nocera, Masaaki Kurosu, Torkil Clemmensen, Nic Bidwell, Ravi Vatrapu, et al. Re-framing HCI through Local and Indigenous Perspectives. 13th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction (INTERACT), Sep 2011, Lisbon, Portugal. pp.738-739, 10.1007/978-3-642-23768-3_141. hal-01596946

HAL Id: hal-01596946

https://inria.hal.science/hal-01596946

Submitted on 28 Sep 2017

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
# Re-framing HCI through local and indigenous perspectives

Jose Abdelnour-Nocera¹, Masaaki Kurosu², Torkil Clemmensen³, Nic Bidwell⁴,
Ravi Vatrapu³, Heike Winschiers-Theophilus⁵, Vanessa Evers⁶, Rüdiger Heimgärtner⁷,
Alvin Yeo⁸

¹University of West London, ²The Open University of Japan, ³Copenhagen Business School, ⁴CSIR-Meraka & Nelson Mandella Metropoliton University, ⁵Polytechnic of Namibia, ⁶University of Amsterdam, ⁷Intercultural User Interface Consulting Germany,

⁸Universiti Malaysia Sarawak

Jose.Abdelnour-Nocera@uwl.ac.uk, masaakikurosu@spa.nifty.com, tc.inf@cbs.dk, nic bidwell@gmail.com, rv.caict@cbs.dk, heikew@polytechnic.edu.na, evers@uva.nl,

ruediger.heimgaertner@iuic.de, awyeo@acm.org

**Abstract.** This one-day workshop aims to present different local and indigenous perspectives from all over the world in order to lead into an international dialogue on re-framing concepts and models in HCI/Interaction Design. The target audience is HCI researchers and practitioners who have experience with working with culture and HCI. The expected outcome of the workshop is a) network building among the participants, b) a shortlist of papers that can be basis for a proposal for a special issue of the UAIS journal, and c) identify opportunities to develop a funded network or research proposal.

**Keywords:** Indigenous HCI, HCI theory and methodology, localization, globalization, cultural usability.

## 1 Objective and theme

One of the current challenges for HCI as a discipline is addressing the tensions created between local cultures and the assumptions, priorities and values embedded in the HCI as a discipline. The objective of this workshop is to further our understanding of these issues and lead to practical recommendations for people researching and implementing HCI from an explicit indigenous perspective. Translating local knowledge into valid and useful HCI tools is not a simple problem, but one that requires re-defining and re-negotiating disciplinary boundaries (and connections) and the subject and object of the interaction design. Focusing on local or indigenous awareness and practices in design pushes the envelope in a very exciting way. For instance, the democratic values of equal participation driving user-centred design are not necessarily shared by local communities which prioritize respecting the views of their leaders. Addressing these gaps requires a fresh look at how diverse disciplines and professions explore and conceptualize the relation between users, designers and other stakeholders. While the global HCI community has well-defined conceptual and methodological frameworks, there is little research about how local HCI professionals
experience, adapt and implement this knowledge, nor how to locate HCI so that it is
locally accountable [1]. To progress this research we must start by better
understanding relationships between HCI concepts and methods and their meanings to
local and indigenous groups. Universal perspectives on HCI like ethnology and
ethnography, e.g., technomethodology [2], and national culture models [3] and
activity theory [4] have all had an impact in the design of interactive systems for
culturally different users, but the potential contribution of explicitly local or
indigenous perspectives, approaches and experiences with HCI, see e.g., [5], have not
become so clear and uniform. Furthermore, the idea of what constitutes a useful and
usable system in different cultural contexts remains partially explored at the very
least. In addition, a simple localization, i.e. the adaptation of products and systems
developed in advanced countries to developing countries, may take the form of
cultural invasion or sometimes a technological colonization. Thus, we need to support
those who are interested in improving the Quality of Life (QOL) of people in
developing countries by co-operating the user research and designing something new
that will contribute to the QOL of people living there, as well as conducting the
conventional localization.

## 2. Workshop organization and duration, target audience, and expected outcomes

This one-day workshop will address the goals above through three activities: (a) workshop participants will together compile a list of examples of indigenous HCI problems, (b) participants will present short papers on their own current research; (c) group discussion will address specific issues. The target audience is HCI researchers and practitioners who have experience with working with culture and HCI, e.g., participants in IWIPS, ICIC, IFIP TC 13 SIG on Interaction Design and International Development, and more. The expected outcome of the workshop is a) network building among the participants, b) a shortlist of papers that can be basis for a proposal for a special issue of the UAIS journal, and c) identify opportunities to develop a funded network or research proposal.

## References

1. Suchman, L. (2002). Located accountabilities in technology production. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 14(2), 7.

2. Button, G., & Dourish, P. (1996). Technomethodology: paradoxes and possibilities CHI1996 (pp. 19-26): ACM.

3. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's Consequences: Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, and Organizations Across Nations: Sage Publications.

4. Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design: MIT Press Cambridge, MA.

5. Kurosu, M., Kobayashi, T., Yoshitake, R., Takahashi, H., Urokohara, H., & Sato, D. (2004). Trend in Usability Research and Activities in Japan. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 17(1), 103-124.