This paper is a contribution to the discussion on the ethical and political limitations of institutionalised, dominant design practices and on the need to rethink the ways in which they operate. It points out that institutionalised design processes act as a dispositive of power that not only capture and colonise forms of life, but that also shape territories, bodies and languages through normative models that are exogenous to them. This discussion is crucial when thinking about the role that design has played in nurturing current crises. This paper is an inquiry into the possibility of design practice that is not institutionalised either by sovereign designing designers or by subordinated designed users, but that constitutes itself according to dynamics where design emerges as a common project-process of creative possibilities of being and becoming. Crucial aspects for a non-institutionalised design practice are identified through the analysis of a design experience with communities in Rio de Janeiro favelas. This paper shows how this design experience is based on a design approach that, through discursive structures, dynamically supports and is informed by dissent and consensus, and by the interplay between resistance and counter-resistance.

For some years now I have been reflecting on design processes, especially in project contexts that seek to provoke social innovations. Researching and getting to know several initiatives, both governmental and private, and from civil society, coming from several countries, I became aware that the design processes frequently used bring intrinsic limitations. These are related to certain principles imbued in practice and to ontological understandings widely spread in the field of design, which often contribute to the creation of projects that are not in the best interest of the communities for which they are intended.Understanding the necessity to explore this field, we started in 2013 netweaving to experiment alternative forms of collective creation in communities, consciously using some principles, perspectives and intentionalities referred to in this text as lenses. This approach was called Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Open Design and comprises several network-based initiatives that are distributed, open, with horizontal co-creations, made and incorporated by common people (formal designers or not).Peer-to-Peer Open Design initiatives do not have features often present in a design project, such as stages, managers, specialized team, schedules. Due to the absence of these characteristics, we differentiate "project" from "netweav-

Há alguns anos venho refletindo sobre processos de design, sobretudo em contextos de projetos que buscam provocar inovações sociais. Pesquisando e conhecendo diversas iniciativas tanto governamentais quanto privadas e da sociedade civil, oriundas de diversos países, fui tomando consciência de que os processos de design recorrentemente utilizados trazem limitações intrínsecas. Estas estão relacionadas a determinados princípios imbuídos na prática e a entendimentos ontológicos largamente disseminados no campo do design, que muitas vezes contribuem para a criação de projetos que não estão no melhor interesse das comunidades às quais se destinam.Compreendendo a necessidade de explorar esse campo, iniciamos em 2013 animações em rede (netweaving) para experimentar formas alternativas de criação coletiva em comunidades, utilizando conscientemente alguns princípios, perspectivas e intencionalidades referidos aqui neste texto como "lentes". Essa abordagem foi chamada de Design Aberto P2P (peer-to-peer), e compreende diversas iniciativas em rede, distribuídas, abertas, com cocriações horizontais, feitas e apropriadas por pessoas comuns (designers formais 1 ou não).1 Me referirei neste texto a "designers formais" como designers que possuem estudo e treinamento formal na área; e "designers informais", ou "não designers" a pessoas que projetam intuitivamente, sem treinamento ou estudo formal para tal, mas não menos designers.