I'm glad you're treating the report as "open source," but could you be a bit more detailed as to what that means? I understand that use & personal modification are fine, trying to pass it off as my own is not, but to what degree would people outside of the Design Council be allowed to take big chunks of the document for their own work (with attribution, of course)?

In short, what are the "some rights reserved" by the creative commons license for the report?

That an open source approach is used is hugely welcome.
Although section 5 (Tools and Methods to help) includes:
"User-centred design: This is a bottom up emergent process which starts with the needs of users/consumers as the basis for the co-creation of goods and services. This participatory design process can also be used to challenge perceptions and values, using sustainable consumption and lifestyles as a starting point for the design process. It is characterised by a systems wide view of design problems in which relationships and context are primary. It has been pioneered by Christopher Day in architecture and the Red Program at the Design Council in the design of public services and infrastructure."
...this does not appear to have been followed through as much as possible in section 6 (Ways forward), although 6.3.1 sugests some individual projects.
If the "systems wide view of design problems in which relationships and context are primary" can be followed through, perhaps there is a way of seeing contributions to the Sustainable Community Action wiki as having something to offer.

Does the search for sustainable products include the study of reliability and the prediction of the cash flows generated by the product over its life cycle?
Do you recall the D.O.I.'s attempts to generate an understanding of Terotechnology?

Jamais, this is document is released under our Creative commons licence - that means that you can:
.copy, distribute, display, and perform the work
.make derivative works
.make commercial use of the work

All as long as you credit the authors and continue to distribute the new work under the same licence. Specifically you can take as much or little of it as you want.

But by making this open source what we really want is your comments the draft to help improve it.

My two papers (below) sought to address a need for design students (initally the Chemical Engineering Design Course Students), but applicable in principle to any designers not working totally for their own self-gratification. If "The final and most powerful point of intervention is at the level of values and 'mind-sets'." (Richardson:Julie; Terry Irwin, Chris Sherwin 2005 Design & Sustainability: A Scoping Report for the Sustainable Design Forum. Design Council p16) my work addresses how the students may be able to achieve that. It would need adapting, but the necessary concepts are there. I am open to contributing to such an adaptation.

Innovation in education: a cybernetics contribution to problem solving and design. 1990 ISBN 0 9508033 7 5 G Hibbs trading as ASR Resources

"Have you negotiated this yet? ... This ... is NOT quantified." A self-learning package originally for the staff of the Design Course of the Imperial College, First Year, Chemical Engineering Course. 1986 First published 1991 ISBN 1 873015 03 8 G Hibbs trading as ASR Resources

Both publications are available from me gmhibbs@blueyonder.co.uk.

Great report and workshop BTW!

Some thoughts...
1.
This website is hard to find and not designed to maximise the potentials of open source. Are there any funds available to improve this? Who is responsible for collating the info from this process - & are they adequately supported and resourced? What would the selection criteria be for deciding what's in or out? What's the timescale for all this? Is the report going to be rewritten before submission in ...September?
I ask these questions because if feedback is really valued it can be sought - the problem would then be the volume of comments and questions coming back...

2.
In order to maximise the impact of the Forum I would vote for addressing design at its source - i.e. design as a way of responding creatively and positively to contemporary challenges - rather than just 'How can we use design to sell more stuff albeit in a less unsustainable way?' In this regard I would suggest (& I have started some work on this) a detailed review of best parctice design methodology in relation to sustainable/eco-design principles. This kind of information could then be injected, via the Forum, into design environments wherever they may be. Tricky, seeing as design is universal (and not just products, graphics, buildings, systems etc -'design is crossing the road', 'design is David Beckham's haircut') but therein also lies the potential of exceptionally high leverage.