here is the entry ‘unhome’ by dominic muren and andrew dahlgren (usa). jury member cameron sinclair mentioned it in his comment .this entry does not correspond to the ‘shelter in a cart’criteria and therefore could not be among the top selections,but it perfectly explores the defects of current social structures.homeless people cannot vote without a residence address.also governmental aid is sometimes available for homeless people, but many may not know where to find it or how to apply. since they don’t have a mailing address, governmental agencies may not be able to reach them.–thank you cameron for your in depth comments toillustrate the jury’s thoughts and I would like to explain the organizer’s point of view.

it all started when designboom received a request from our readers – a canadian community that helped homeless people to build carts – to organize a design competition. since then we have spent a significant amount of time contacting homeless organizations worldwide to understand the different reasons for homelessness, the basic needs of homeless people and the realistic ways to help (housing, food and clothing, medical assistance, human relationships …). we were encouraged by those charity institutions, social workers, and homeless individuals, nevertheless it took us half a year to decide. when we started out with this ‘shelter in a cart’ initiative, we were of course aware of the fact that whatever approach we take to this difficult issue and the intrinsic contradictory character of this design competition, there would be a large element of risk of inadequateness.

the theme the designboom team agreed on the initial ‘cart’ theme, which to us seemed to be very practical in nature, very hands on, the thing that homeless people deal with on a daily basis. a perfect ‘icon’ to use in our communication to raise awareness. we asked our readers to personally identify with the homeless – to make the problem their own!

the criteria whichever end you approach it from, the appearance of paradoxes is inevitable. low-cost, safe shelter and secure storage have been the main criteria of selection…and the ability to combine all three.we did not expect to find the ‘optimal cart solution’ -the participants of this competition had the task of accomplishing an impossible goal.

what motivates our competitions? one answer might be humility – offering a platform to people and good ideas, the second reason has to do with equal and free knowledge distribution worldwide, and the third one is that design competitions are also a method of looking at the world itself.

I would like to invite the critic crowd to see ‘how all is good’, by seeing ‘how all that is not good is not so bad after all’. there are, and there continue to be, some specific frustrations relating to the designers’ competence and credibility when operating in the social sphere. basic needs and design proposals are two fields that collide more often than not. the problem seems rooted in the nature that we have to deal with an assortment of complex constraints and to be fully aware of the present, which is an extraordinarily difficult task.

designboom and the jury did not expect the ‘perfect solution’. we are interested in the dialectical approach to understanding and treatment of human problems, in the problems of change and interaction. some of the differences among the various voices (of the entries in this competition) are fundamentally philosophical differences. it likewise begins with the gap between word and thing, or in this case between design-project and reality. in design projects there is the problem of perspective – all knowing is a kind of interpretation, all of our knowing arises from our location, our point of view, and our cultural context. none of us has a god’s eye view, a ‘view from nowhere’ – attention to detail, to particularity, and to the concreteness of reality leads us to value different voices and perspectives on the object (and this no doubt leads to contrasting, even conflicting, points of view about the object).

do not accept the homeless’ situation … make it a great subject for discourses and discussions. many thanks to those who have participated (we love your designs) and to those who help us spreading the word. it is right that you are in conflict with all the particular cart solutions that emerged. go ahead and be in conflict, but put your frustration aside on at least one level so you can continue to operate.

a communication project within the 10 days of the publication of the results of ‘shelter in a cart’ designboom has already received invitations to important international congresses and exhibitions. the US recycling specialist of the government department of conservation has written to us. they are developing a model buy-back/redemption center and wish to use some details of the projects for the benefit of the homeless. and there is much to come, that’s why we see the competition as a great success. by organizing design competitions, designboom will continue to offer you a fruitful dialogue and exchange, because important insights can be gained from contrasting perspectives.