Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 192 references

Overview over the first decade of LIMITS

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-06-29 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Review of 160 LIMITS papers finds rising degrowth mentions and modest global expansion since 2015.

desk verdict A first map of LIMITS papers that flags real trends in degrowth talk and global reach but leaves the classification rules opaque. read the letter →

arxiv 2605.30543 v1 pith:BMHXBR6A submitted 2026-05-28 cs.CY

Maria Emine Nylund , Erik Johannes Husom , Ophelia Prillard This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.CY
keywords computingwithinlimitsdegrowthpost-growthsustainabilityworkshopenvironmentalimpactglobalperspectivesscarcity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper reviews publications from the LIMITS workshop to track how the field addresses computing within environmental limits. It combines automated analysis with manual review of 160 papers from 2015 to 2025. The analysis shows increased discussion of degrowth and post-growth especially in recent years, a growing but still limited set of contributions from outside the Global North, and a majority of positional or observational papers with solution-oriented output on the rise. This mapping helps the community see its current trajectory and plan work that better matches the field's core principles of questioning growth, preparing for scarcity, and cutting energy and material use.

What carries the argument

A combination of programmatic analysis and manual review applied to 160 LIMITS publications to track trends against the field's core principles of questioning growth, addressing scarcity, and reducing consumption globally and over time.

What would settle it

A re-analysis using a larger corpus of related papers outside the workshop or an alternative classification scheme that shows no rise in degrowth mentions after 2023 or no change in the share of work from beyond the Global North.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

By examining 160 papers from the first decade of the LIMITS workshop the authors establish that the community has paid increasing attention to degrowth and post-growth ideas, expanded its geographic reach modestly beyond the Global North, and produced mostly positional and observational work rather than new artifacts, although solution-focused contributions have risen in recent years.

Load-bearing premise

That the selection of 160 publications and the methods of programmatic analysis combined with manual review accurately reflect the developments in relation to the field's core concerns without significant bias in classification or coverage.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The community can use the mapped trends to set priorities for future research that better matches core concerns.
  • Continued growth in solution-oriented output could reduce the current scarcity of artifact-producing work.
  • Efforts to broaden representation beyond the Global North may increase the field's relevance on a global scale.
  • Rising references to degrowth and post-growth align the workshop more closely with wider ecological limits discussions.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The observed trends might be tested by applying the same review method to papers in related venues outside the workshop.
  • Greater focus on artifact production could lead to concrete computing tools designed for scarcity conditions.
  • Persistent concentration in the Global North could slow the spread of LIMITS ideas to regions facing acute resource limits.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes 160 publications from the LIMITS workshop (2015–2025) via combined programmatic analysis and manual review to map the field's international spread, contributions, and developments relative to its core concerns (questioning growth, scarcity models, reduced consumption, global scale, long time frames). Key findings are an increase in degrowth/post-growth mentions (especially 2024–2025), broadened but still limited representation beyond the Global North, predominance of positional/observational papers with scarce artifact-producing work, and recent growth in solution-oriented output. The work positions itself as a community mapping to guide future research.

Significance. If the classification and coverage are robust, the overview provides a useful baseline for the LIMITS community by documenting temporal shifts toward degrowth themes and solution-oriented work while highlighting persistent Global-North dominance and the scarcity of artifact-producing research. This can inform priorities for broadening participation and output types. The paper does not include machine-checked proofs or parameter-free derivations, but its descriptive mapping of a decade of workshop output is a concrete contribution to field self-assessment.

major comments (3)
  1. [Methods] Methods section: The description of the combined programmatic analysis and manual review provides no details on classification criteria, decision rules for borderline cases, inter-rater reliability metrics, or validation procedures for assigning papers to types (positional/observational vs. artifact-producing) and themes (degrowth mentions, Global North vs. beyond). These omissions are load-bearing for the central claims on majority paper types, temporal growth in solution-oriented output, and degrowth mentions.
  2. [Data selection] Data selection subsection: The criteria used to arrive at exactly 160 publications, whether this constitutes complete coverage of all workshop papers, and any inclusion/exclusion rules are not stated. This directly affects the representativeness of the reported distributions and trends.
  3. [Findings] Findings on temporal trends (e.g., degrowth mentions in 2024–2025 and solution-oriented growth): These rest on the unvalidated manual classifications; without disclosed coding schemes or sensitivity checks, alternative reasonable classifications could alter the reported shifts.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract/Introduction] The abstract and introduction could more explicitly define the five core principles (a–e) with citations to prior LIMITS literature for readers new to the field.
  2. [Results] Figure or table presenting the 160-paper breakdown by year, type, and theme would improve readability of the quantitative trends.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which identify key areas for improving transparency in our methods and data handling. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional details where feasible.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods section: The description of the combined programmatic analysis and manual review provides no details on classification criteria, decision rules for borderline cases, inter-rater reliability metrics, or validation procedures for assigning papers to types (positional/observational vs. artifact-producing) and themes (degrowth mentions, Global North vs. beyond). These omissions are load-bearing for the central claims on majority paper types, temporal growth in solution-oriented output, and degrowth mentions.

    Authors: We agree that greater detail on the classification process is needed. In the revised manuscript, we will expand the methods section to explicitly describe the criteria for assigning papers to types (positional/observational vs. artifact-producing) and themes (including degrowth mentions and geographic scope), along with decision rules for borderline cases. These were resolved through iterative discussion among the authors. As the review was performed by the core author team rather than independent raters, formal inter-rater reliability metrics were not computed; we will instead document the collaborative validation steps taken. This will directly support the robustness of the reported distributions and trends. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Data selection] Data selection subsection: The criteria used to arrive at exactly 160 publications, whether this constitutes complete coverage of all workshop papers, and any inclusion/exclusion rules are not stated. This directly affects the representativeness of the reported distributions and trends.

    Authors: The original manuscript indicates analysis of 160 publications from the 2015–2025 LIMITS workshops but does not detail the selection process. We will add a dedicated data selection subsection explaining the sources used to compile the list (workshop proceedings and archives), confirmation that this represents the complete set of available publications meeting the scope, and any inclusion/exclusion rules applied (e.g., focusing on peer-reviewed or presented papers). This addition will clarify representativeness. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Findings] Findings on temporal trends (e.g., degrowth mentions in 2024–2025 and solution-oriented growth): These rest on the unvalidated manual classifications; without disclosed coding schemes or sensitivity checks, alternative reasonable classifications could alter the reported shifts.

    Authors: The expanded methods section (addressing the first comment) will include the full coding schemes and decision rules, enabling readers to evaluate the classifications independently. We did not conduct formal sensitivity analyses on alternative codings, as the classifications were developed iteratively with author consensus; however, the added transparency will allow assessment of potential shifts. We believe this sufficiently addresses the concern without requiring new empirical checks. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: purely descriptive literature mapping with no derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The paper performs a descriptive overview of 160 LIMITS workshop publications via programmatic analysis plus manual review. It reports observed trends (degrowth mentions, Global North vs. beyond representation, positional/observational vs. artifact-producing papers) without any mathematical derivations, parameter fitting, predictions, or uniqueness theorems. No load-bearing steps reduce to self-definition, self-citation chains, or renaming of inputs as outputs. The analysis is self-contained against external benchmarks as a standard literature survey; classification choices affect validity but do not create circularity by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

As a literature review paper, there are no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities underlying a central claim; the work relies on analysis of published papers.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Overview over the first decade of LIMITS." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BMHXBR6A

@misc{pith2026260530543,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Overview over the first decade of LIMITS},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BMHXBR6A}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2605.30543}
}
read the original abstract

Computing within limits is a promising field, that follows principles of a) questioning endless growth narrative, b) considering and preparing for models of scarcity and c) reducing energy and material consumption, while considering d) a global spatial scale and e) long time frames. With computing's environmental impact growing and ecological limits becoming increasingly pressing, the LIMITS workshop has served as a central venue for this community since its inception in 2015, but an overview of the research published there has yet to be described. This paper addresses this gap by analyzing 160 publications from the LIMITS workshop in the period 2015 to 2025 to identify its international spread, contributions and developments in relation to field's core concerns, combining programmatic analysis with a manual review. Our findings indicate that the field has increasingly mentioned degrowth and post-growth, especially in 2024-2025. It has broadened its global perspective, with a growing, but still limited, representation of work beyond the Global North. The majority of papers are positional or observational, while artifact-producing research remains relatively scarce, though solution-oriented output has grown in recent years. This paper contributes to the LIMITS community by mapping its first decade and current trends to support future research and enhance its global impact.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.30543 by the authors.

Figure 3
Figure 3. Type of artifacts developed in the research papers [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Percentage of articles per year mentioning words [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Number of papers that 1) developed an artifact [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: It shows that it started US focused and spread to European [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_6.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Percentage of articles per year that mention effi [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Countries from which papers originate (based on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

192 extracted references · 105 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2008–2025. GROBID. https://github.com/kermitt2/grobid. swh:1:dir:dab86b296e3c3216e2241968f0d63b68e8209d3c

    2008

  2. [2]

    Anaëlle Beignon, Thomas Thibault, and Nolwenn Maudet. 2025. Imposing AI: Deceptive design patterns against sustainability. InProceedings of the Eleventh Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2409.07471

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2409.07471 2025

  3. [3]

    Christian Bogmans, Ganchimeg Ganpurev, Patricia Gomez-Gonzalez, Giovanni Melina, Andrea Pescatori, and Sneha Thube. 2026. Power hungry: How ai will drive energy demand.Energy Economics(2026), 109278

    2026

  4. [5]

    2020.Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need

    Sasha Costanza-Chock. 2020.Design justice: Community-led practices to build the worlds we need. MIT press

    2020

  5. [8]

    David Franquesa and Leandro Navarro. 2018. Devices as a Commons: limits to premature recycling. InProceedings of the Fourth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10.1145/nnnnnnn.nnnnnnn

    work page doi:10.1145/nnnnnnn.nnnnnnn 2018

  6. [9]

    Margarita Grinko, Tanja Ertl, Konstantin Aal, and Volker Wulf. 2021. Transitions by methodology in human-wildlife conflict-reflections on tech-based reorganiza- tion of social practices.Proceedings of the LIMITS21 (2021)

    2021

  7. [10]

    mores", counter the

    Xinning Gui and Bonnie Nardi. 2015. Foster the" mores", counter the" limits". First Monday(2015)

    2015

  8. [12]

    David G Hendry. 2021. Transition Discourse, Food, and Computing within Limits. InSeventh Workshop on Computing within Limits 2021. LIMITS

    2021

Show all 192 references
  1. [13]

    Heine, and Ara Norenzayan

    Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine, and Ara Norenzayan. 2010. The Weirdest People in the World?Behavioral and Brain Sciences33, 2-3 (June 2010), 61–83. doi:10.1017/S0140525X0999152X

    2010 doi

  2. [14]

    Lara Houston and Cassie Thornton. 2022. The Richness of Designing for Eco- Social Change Creative Practice, Transformative Futures and Living within Limits. InProceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10. 5210/fm.v21i5.6637

    2022

  3. [15]

    Nidhal Jegham, Marwan Abdelatti, Chan Young Koh, Lassad Elmoubarki, and Abdeltawab Hendawi. 2025. How hungry is AI? Benchmarking energy, water, and carbon footprint of LLM inference.arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.09598(2025). Overview over the first decade of LIMITS LIMITS ’26, Jun...

    2025

  4. [17]

    Petra Jääskeläinen. 2022. On the environmental sustainability of Ai art(s). In Proceedings of the Eighth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10. 1007/BF01405730

    2022

  5. [19]

    Alexandra Sasha Luccioni, Emma Strubell, and Kate Crawford. 2025. From efficiency gains to rebound effects: The problem of jevons’ paradox in AI’s polarized environmental debate. InProceedings of the 2025 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency. 76–88

    2025

  6. [20]

    Stephen Makonin, Laura U Marks, Radek Przedpełski, Alejandro Rodriguez-Silva, and Ramy ElMallah. 2022. Calculating the carbon footprint of streaming media: Beyond the myth of efficiency. InEighth workshop on computing within limits

    2022

  7. [22]

    Jahaziel Osei Mensah and Aimee Van Wynsberghe. 2025. Where are the missing values: an exploration of the need to incorporate Ubuntu values into African AI policy.AI and Ethics5, 4 (2025), 4365–4375

    2025

  8. [23]

    Bonnie Nardi, Bill Tomlinson, Donald J Patterson, Jay Chen, Daniel Pargman, Barath Raghavan, and Birgit Penzenstadler. 2018. Computing within limits. Commun. ACM61, 10 (2018), 86–93

    2018

  9. [24]

    Greg Nelson. 2024. Towards symbiotic university-adjacent edge spaces for sustainability transitions and computing: a design imaginary with some material and financial feasibility. InProceedings of the Tenth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10.1007/s13412-012-0086-8

    2024 doi

  10. [25]

    Elisabet Nilsson, Rikke Jensen, Anne-Marie Hansen, Tilde Bekker, Daisy Yoo, Eva Eriksson, and Hagensby Jensen. 2024. What do we Teach when Teaching More- than-human Perspectives in Computing and Technology Design Education? -An Emerging Pedagogical Framework. InProceedings of ...

    2024 doi

  11. [26]

    Juliet Norton, Birgit Penzenstadler, Samantha McDonald, Emily Kang, Nora Koirala, Rieko Konishi, Gabriela Pena Carmona, Jainee Shah, Sebastian Troncoso, and Bill Tomlinson. 2019. The SAGE community coordinator: A demonstration. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing ...

    2019

  12. [27]

    Sofie Nyström, Cecilia Katzeff, Miriam Börjesson, Rivera Arjun, Rajendran Menon, Miriam Rivera, Arjun Menon, and Björn Hedin. 2021. Challenging the image of the altruistic and flexible household in the smart grid using design fiction. In Proceedings of the Seventh Workshop on ...

    2021

  13. [28]

    Barath Raghavan. 2015. Abstraction, Indirection, and Sevareid’s Law: Towards Benign Computing. InProceedings of the First Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM

    2015

  14. [29]

    Barath Raghavan and Daniel Pargman. 2016. Refactoring Society: Systems Com- plexity in an Age of Limits. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926677

    2016 doi

  15. [30]

    Clara Rigaud. 2025. Zombitron: towards a toolbox for repurposing obsolete smartphones into new interactive systems.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.06354(2025)

    2025

  16. [31]

    William J Ripple, Christopher Wolf, Michael E Mann, Johan Rockström, Jillian W Gregg, Chi Xu, Nico Wunderling, Sarah E Perkins-Kirkpatrick, Roberto Schaeffer, Wendy J Broadgate, et al. 2025. The 2025 state of the climate report: a planet on the brink

    2025

  17. [32]

    Dmitry Scherbakov, Nina Hubig, Vinita Jansari, Alexander Bakumenko, and Leslie A Lenert. 2025. The Emergence of Large Language Models as Tools in Literature Reviews: A Large Language Model-Assisted Systematic Review. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association32, 6...

    2025

  18. [33]

    doi:10.1093/jamia/ocaf063

    doi

  19. [34]

    Paul Schmitt and Elizabeth Belding. 2017. Low On Air: Inherent Wireless Channel Capacity Limitations. InProceedings of the Third Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080558

    2017 doi

  20. [35]

    Roy Schwartz, Jesse Dodge, Noah A Smith, and Oren Etzioni. 2020. Green ai. Commun. ACM63, 12 (2020), 54–63

    2020

  21. [37]

    M Six Silberman. 2023. Information systems practice for the age of consequences. (2023)

    2023

  22. [38]

    Brian Sutherland. 2022. Strategies for degrowth computing. InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits, Vol. 6. LIMITS

    2022

  23. [40]

    Roberto Verdecchia, June Sallou, and Luís Cruz. 2023. A systematic review of Green AI.WIREs Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery13, 4 (2023), e1507. arXiv:https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/widm.1507 doi:10. 1002/widm.1507

    2023 doi

  24. [41]

    Huaxin Wei, Jeffrey CF Ho, Kenny KN Chow, Shunying An Blevis, and Eli Blevis

  25. [42]

    InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing Within Limits

    Should do, can do, can know: Sustainability and other reflections on one hundred and one interaction design projects. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing Within Limits. 1–18

  26. [43]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2017. ACM LIMITS 2017: Third Work- shop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2017/. Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 22–24 June 2017. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2017

  27. [44]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2018. LIMITS 2018: Fourth Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2018/. Toronto, Canada, 13–14 May 2018. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2018

  28. [45]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2019. LIMITS 2019: Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2019/. Lappeen- ranta, Finland, 10–11 June 2019. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2019

  29. [46]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2020. LIMITS 2020: Sixth Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2020/. Virtual workshop, 21–22 June 2020. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2020

  30. [47]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2021. LIMITS 2021: Seventh Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2021/. Virtual, distributed workshop, 14–15 June 2021. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2021

  31. [48]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2022. LIMITS 2022: Eighth Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2022/. Virtual, distributed workshop, 21–22 June 2022. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2022

  32. [49]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2023. LIMITS 2023: Ninth Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2023/. Online workshop, 14–15 June 2023. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2023

  33. [50]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2024. LIMITS 2024: 10th Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2024/. Online workshop, 18–19 June 2024. Accessed: 2026-05-19

    2024

  34. [51]

    Workshop on Computing within Limits. 2025. LIMITS 2025: 11th Workshop on Computing within Limits. https://computingwithinlimits.org/2025/. Online workshop, 26–27 June 2025. Accessed: 2026-05-19. Papers included in the review Note: Out of 162 papers published in the LIMITS work...

    2025

  35. [53]

    Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed, Nova Ahmed, Faheem Hussain, and Neha Kumar

  36. [54]

    InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits

    Computing beyond Gender-Imposed Limits. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–7. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926681

    doi

  37. [55]

    Lorenzo Angeli, Özge Okur, Carlo Corradini, Marcel Stolin, Yilin Huang, Frances Brazier, and Maurizio Marchese. 2022. Conceptualising Resources-aware Higher Education DigitalInfrastructure through Self-hosting: A Multi-disciplinary View. InEighth Workshop on Computing within L...

    2022

  38. [56]

    Oliver Bates and Adrian Friday. 2018. Intangible Commodities with Free De- livery: Finding the Limit in Digitally Mediated e-Commerce and Workforce Injustice.. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–8. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232622

    2018 doi

  39. [57]

    Oliver Bates and Ben Kirman. [n. d.]. Sustainable Pla-orm Coopera3vism. ([n. d.])

  40. [59]

    Oliver Bates, Christian Remy, and Kieran Cutting. 2024. Exploring Post- Neoliberal Futures for Managing Commercial Heating and Cooling through Speculative Praxis. (2024)

    2024

  41. [61]

    Anaëlle Beignon, Thomas Thibault, and Nolwenn Maudet. 2025. Imposing AI: Deceptive Design Patterns against Sustainability. (2025)

    2025

  42. [63]

    Eshta Bhardwaj, Han Qiao, and Christoph Becker. 2024. Limits at a Distance: De- sign Directions to Address Psychological Distance in Policy Decisions Affecting Planetary Boundaries. (2024)

    2024

  43. [64]

    Shunying An Blevi, Maryam Heidaripour, Shaowen Bardzell, and Eli Blevis

  44. [65]

    Advancing Non-Linear Design Thinking.LIMITS(2023)

    2023

  45. [66]

    Eli Blevis, Chris Preist, Daniel Schien, and Priscilla Ho. 2017. Further Connecting Sustainable Interaction Design with Sustainable Digital Infrastructure Design. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 71–83. doi:10.11...

    2017 doi

  46. [67]

    Inès Moreno Boluda, Elizabeth Patitsas, and Peter McMahan. 2021. What Do Computer Scientists Know About Conflict Minerals?LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.64063bd7

    2021 doi

  47. [68]

    Nils Bonfils. 2025. An Empirical Inquiry into Surveillance Capitalism: Web Tracking. (2025)

    2025

  48. [69]

    Alan Borning, Batya Friedman, and Deric Gruen. 2018. What Pushes Back from Considering Materiality in IT?. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–6. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232627

    2018 doi

  49. [71]

    Tega Brain, Alex Nathanson, and Benedetta Piantella. 2022. Solar protocol: Exploring energy-centered design. InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS

    2022

  50. [72]

    Christina Bremer, Christian Remy, and Adrian Friday. 2024. Fake Data Leads to Fake Insights: The Challenges of Prototyping Energy Dashboards. (2024)

    2024

  51. [73]

    Patterson

    John Brock and Donald J. Patterson. 2015. Cacophony: Building a Resilient Internet of Things.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6130

    2015 doi

  52. [74]

    Aurélie Bugeau and Anne-Laure Ligozat. 2024. How Digital Will the Future Be? Analysis of Prospective Scenarios. (2024)

    2024

  53. [75]

    Edward Burnell. 2018. Design for Survivability: A Participatory Design Fiction Approach to Sustainability. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–4. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232628

    2018 doi

  54. [76]

    Simon Castellan, Jos Käfer, and Eric Tannier. 2023. Back to the Trees: Identifying Plants with Human Intelligence. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.265c52ce

    2023 doi

  55. [77]

    Teresa Cerratto Pargman and Somya Joshi. 2015. Understanding Limits from a Social Ecological Perspective.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8. 6125

    2015 doi

  56. [78]

    Jay Chen. 2015. Computing within Limits and ICTD.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6124

    2015 doi

  57. [79]

    Jay Chen. 2016. A Strategy for Limits-Aware Computing. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–6. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926692

    2016 doi

  58. [81]

    Rob Comber and Elina Eriksson. 2023. Computing as Ecocide. InNinth Comput- ing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.9fcdd0c0

    2023 doi

  59. [82]

    Sarah Cooney. 2023. Imagining LIMITS: Can ChatGPT Radically Re-Imagine a New World?. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10. 21428/bf6fb269.dc071e80

    2023

  60. [83]

    Sarah Cooney, Vishal Sharma, Joshua Palmer, Neha Kumar, and Barath Raghavan

  61. [84]

    InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022

    Alternative Pathways to Caring for Limits:The Case of Ecospirituality. InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS. doi:10.21428/ bf6fb269.8bd78035

    2022

  62. [86]

    Marloes De Valk. 2021. A Pluriverse of Local Worlds: A Review of Comput- ing within Limits Related Terminology and Practices.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.1e37d8be

    2021 doi

  63. [87]

    Martin Deron. [n. d.]. Sprouting Technology Otherwise, Hospicing Negative Commons. ([n. d.])

  64. [89]

    Richard P Donovan. [n. d.]. What to Do with All These Bits? ([n. d.])

  65. [90]

    Callum Egan, Andrew O’Dowd, and Neil Fyffe. 2020. Hasten Slowly: Devel- oping an Interactive Sustainability Storytelling Chair. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 321–329. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401817

    2020 doi

  66. [91]

    Callum Egan, Richard Thompson, and Andrew O’Dowd. 2019. The Lions’ Gate: Towards a Permaculture-inspired Blended Space. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Lappeenranta Finland, 1–8. doi:10.1145/3338103.3338110

    2019 doi

  67. [92]

    Elina Eriksson and Daniel Pargman. 2018. Meeting the Future in the Past - Using Counterfactual History to Imagine Computing Futures. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–8. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232621

    2018 doi

  68. [93]

    Elina Eriksson and Daniel Pargman. 2023. Exploring Inner Transition: Expand- ing Computing forSustainability. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.22dea4ad

    2023 doi

  69. [94]

    Ylva Fernaeus and Andreas Lindegren. 2023. Celebration of Finitude as a Post- Industrial Aesthetics of Interaction. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.cf43f46a

    2023 doi

  70. [95]

    David Franquesa and Leandro Navarro. 2018. Devices as a Commons: Limits to Premature Recycling. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–10. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232624

    2018 doi

  71. [96]

    David Franquesa, Leandro Navarro, and Xavier Bustamante. 2016. A Circular Commons for Digital Devices: Tools and Services in Ereuse.Org. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–9. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926684

    2016 doi

  72. [97]

    Valentin Girard and Antoine Martin. 2025. A Protocol to Address Ecological Redirection for Digital Practices in Organizations. (2025)

    2025

  73. [98]

    Valentin Girard, Maud Rio, and Romain Couillet. 2024. Computing, Complexity and Degrowth : Systemic Considerations for Digital De-escalation. (2024)

    2024

  74. [99]

    Lou Grimal, Inès Di Loreto, Nicolas Burger, and Nadège Troussier. 2021. Design of an Interdisciplinary Evaluation Method for Multi-Scaled Sustainability of Computer-Based Projects. A Workbased on the Sustainable Computing Evalua- tion Framework (SCEF).LIMITS Workshop on Comput...

    2021 doi

  75. [100]

    Margarita Grinko, Tanja Ertl, Konstantin Aal, and Volker Wulf. 2021. Transi- tions by Methodology in Human-Wildlife Conflict - Reflections on Tech-based Reorganization of Social Practices. (2021)

    2021

  76. [101]

    Mores", Counter the

    Xinning Gui and Bonnie Nardi. 2015. Foster the "Mores", Counter the "Limits". First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6121

    2015 doi

  77. [102]

    Iness Ben Guirat and Jan Tobias Mühlberg. 2025. Resistance Technologies: Moving Beyond Alternative Designs. (2025)

    2025

  78. [103]

    Nara Guliyeva, Eshta Bhardwaj, and Christoph Becker. 2025. Exploring the Viability of the Updated World3 Model for Examining the Impact of Computing on Planetary Boundaries. (2025)

    2025

  79. [104]

    Dave Guruge, Samuel Mann, Ruth Myers, and Oliver Bates. 2025. Surviving the Narrative Collapse: Sustainability and Justice in Computing Within Limits. (2025)

    2025

  80. [105]

    Andrea Hamm. 2020. Particles Matter: A Case Study on How Civic IoT Can Contribute to Sustainable Communities. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 305–313. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401815

    2020 doi

  81. [106]

    Anne-Marie S. Hansen. 2020. The App Is Not Where the Action Is: Discussing Features of an Internal Communication System for a Permaculture Village. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 275–284. doi:10.1145/3...

    2020 doi

  82. [107]

    Mike Hazas, Janine Morley, Oliver Bates, and Adrian Friday. 2016. Are There Limits to Growth in Data Traffic?: On Time Use, Data Generation and Speed. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–5. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926690

    2016 doi

  83. [108]

    Björn Hedin. 2022. Omnifood – Exploring the Possibilities of a Consumer System WithUbiquitous Access to Data About the Food We Eat. InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.1e8b10af

    2022 doi

  84. [109]

    David G. Hendry. 2021. Transition Discourse, Food, and Computing within Limits.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/ bf6fb269.244d268b

    2021

  85. [110]

    Joshua Hill, Kelly Widdicks, and Mike Hazas. 2020. Mapping the Scope of Soft- ware Interventions for Moderate Internet Use on Mobile Devices. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 204–212. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401361

    2020 doi

  86. [111]

    Lorenz M Hilty. [n. d.]. Computing Efficiency, Sufficiency, and Self-sufficiency: A Model for Sustainability? ([n. d.])

  87. [112]

    Lara Houston, Ann Light, and Cassie Thornton. 2022. The Richness of Designing for Eco-Social Change: Creative Practice, Transformative Futures and Living within Limits. InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.eb087907

    2022 doi

  88. [113]

    Petra Jääskeläinen, Daniel Pargman, and André Holzapfel. 2022. On the Envi- ronmental Sustainability of Ai Art(s). InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.c46375fa

    2022 doi

  89. [114]

    Pierre Jacquet and Adrien Luxey-Bitri. 2025. The Case for Time-Shared Com- puting Resources. (2025)

    2025

  90. [115]

    Esther Jang, Matthew Johnson, Edward Burnell, and Kurtis Heimerl. 2017. Un- planned Obsolescence: Hardware and Software After Collapse. InProceedings of Overview over the first decade of LIMITS LIMITS ’26, June 23–25, 2026, Online the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ...

    2017 doi

  91. [116]

    Fieke Jansen, Merve Gulmez, Becky Kazansky, Narmine Abou Bakari, Claire Fernandez, Harriet Kingaby, and Jan Tobias Mühlberg. 2023. The Climate Crisis Is a Digital Rights Crisis: Exploring the Civil-Society Framing of Two Intersecting Disasters. InNinth Computing within Limits ...

    2023 doi

  92. [117]

    Somya Joshi, Teresa C-Pargman, Andreas Gazis, and Daniel Pargman. 2016. Whose Future Is It Anyway?: Limits within Policy Modeling. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–6. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926682

    2016 doi

  93. [118]

    Michelle Kaczmarek. 2021. Who Are We Listening to? The Inclusion of Other- than-human Participants in Design Rodrigo dos Santos. InProceedings of the Seventh Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM. doi:10.1145/3385010. 3385016

    2021 doi

  94. [119]

    Meyers, and Lisa P

    Michelle Kaczmarek, Saguna Shankar, Rodrigo Dos Santos, Eric M. Meyers, and Lisa P. Nathan. 2020. Pushing LIMITS: Envisioning beyond the Artifact. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 255–266. doi:10.1145/34...

    2020 doi

  95. [120]

    Bran Knowles and Elina Eriksson. 2015. Deviant and Guilt-Ridden: Computing within Psychological Limits.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6127

    2015 doi

  96. [121]

    Martin Lafréchoux. 2025. Practical Retrofitting for Obsolete Devices. (2025)

    2025

  97. [122]

    Marvin Landwehr, Alan Borning, and Volker Wulf. 2019. The High Cost of Free Services: Problems with Surveillance Capitalism and Possible Alternatives for IT Infrastructure. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Lappeenranta Finland, 1–10. doi:10....

    2019 doi

  98. [123]

    Marvin Landwehr and Volker Wulf. 2020. Toward Emancipatory Currencies: A Critique of Facebook’s Libra Cryptocurrency and Ideas for Alternatives. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 236–246. doi:10.1145/3401...

    2020 doi

  99. [124]

    Débora De Castro Leal, Max Krüger, Michael Ahmadi, Jason Appiah, Ricardo A. Baquero Gómez, Daniel Courtney, Ata Daee, María Belén Giménez Ciciolli, Lena Hieber, Md Shakhawat Hossain, Jeongmin Lee, Ramona Plogmann, Lil- iana Savage Pinto, Sasmitha Sinnathurai, Darinka Yepez, an...

    2021 doi

  100. [125]

    Josh Lepawsky. 2020. Towards a World of Fixers Examining Barriers and Enablers of Widely Deployed Third-Party Repair for Computing within Limits. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 314–320. doi:10.1145/3401...

    2020 doi

  101. [126]

    Henry Lieberman and Christopher Fry. [n. d.]. Understanding the Limits of Competitive Processes. ([n. d.])

  102. [127]

    Boy, Frederico De Musso, Cristina Grasseni, Coco Lisa Kanters, Sabine Luning, Tim Van De Meerendonk, Tessa Minter, Rodrigo Ochigame, and Marja Spierenburg

    Andrew Littlejohn, John D. Boy, Frederico De Musso, Cristina Grasseni, Coco Lisa Kanters, Sabine Luning, Tim Van De Meerendonk, Tessa Minter, Rodrigo Ochigame, and Marja Spierenburg. 2022. Remodeling Environments: Anthropological Perspectives on the Limits of Computational Mod...

    2022

  103. [128]

    Jen Liu. 2023. Unpacking IntermittencyLiving with Infrastructures in Southeast Louisiana. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/ bf6fb269.80fa33f5

    2023

  104. [129]

    Szu-Yu (Cyn) Liu, Shaowen Bardzell, and Jeffrey Bardzell. 2018. Out of Control: Reframing Sustainable HCI Using Permaculture. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–8. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232625

    2018 doi

  105. [130]

    Anton Lundström and Daniel Pargman. 2017. Developing a Framework for Evaluating the Sustainability of Computing Projects. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 111–117. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080562

    2017 doi

  106. [131]

    Stephen Makonin, Laura U Marks, Radek Przedpełski, Alejandro Rodriguez- Silva, and Ramy ElMallah. 2022. Calculating the Carbon Footprint of Streaming Media: Beyond the Myth of Efficiency. (2022)

    2022

  107. [133]

    Aymeric Mansoux, Brendan Howell, Dušan Barok, and Ville-Matias Heikkilä

  108. [134]

    InNinth Computing within Limits 2023

    Permacomputing Aesthetics: Potential and Limits of Constraints in Com- putational Art, Design and Culture. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.6690fc2e

    2023 doi

  109. [135]

    Matthew Marsden, Mike Hazas, and Matthew Broadbent. 2020. From One Edge to the Other: Exploring Gaming’s Rising Presence on the Network. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 247–254. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401366

    2020 doi

  110. [136]

    Mayhew and Elizabeth Patitsas

    Eric J. Mayhew and Elizabeth Patitsas. 2021. Materiality Matters in Computing Education: A Duoethnography of Two Digital Logic Educators.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.19c98f37

    2021 doi

  111. [137]

    Samantha McDonald. 2016. 3D Printing: A Future Collapse-Compliant Means of Production. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–6. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926680

    2016 doi

  112. [138]

    Samantha McDonald, Bonnie Nardi, and Bill Tomlinson. 2017. Political Re- alities of Digital Communication: The Limits of Value from Digital Mes- sages to Members of the US Congress. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California US...

    2017 doi

  113. [139]

    Rob McGuinness and George Porter. 2021. Stipulated Smartphones for Students: The Requirements of Modern Technology for Academia.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.69788078

    2021 doi

  114. [140]

    Emmanuel Azuh Mensah, Richard Anderson, Sudheesh Singanamalla, and Kurtis Heimerl. 2021. When Borders Blur - Overcoming Political Limits with Com- puting in Truly Global Societies.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits (June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.ee99522f

    2021 doi

  115. [141]

    Nick Merrill. 2017. Better Not to Know?: The SHA1 Collision & the Limits of Polemic Computation. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 37–42. doi:10.1145/3080556.3084082

    2017 doi

  116. [142]

    Olivier Michel and Émilie Frenkiel. 2025. ICT Within Limits Is Bound To Be Old-Fashioned By Design. (2025)

    2025

  117. [143]

    Jan Tobias Mühlberg. 2022. Sustaining Security and Safety in ICT: A Quest for Terminology, Objectives, and Limits. InEighth Workshop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.58c3a89d

    2022 doi

  118. [144]

    Meena Devii Muralikumar and Bonnie Nardi. 2018. Addressing Limits through Tracking Food. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–9. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232620

    2018 doi

  119. [145]

    Bonnie Nardi. 2015. Inequality and Limits.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10. 5210/fm.v20i8.6126

    2015

  120. [146]

    Michael Nekrasov, Lisa Parks, and Elizabeth Belding. 2017. Limits to Internet Freedoms: Being Heard in an Increasingly Authoritarian World. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 119–128. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080564

    2017 doi

  121. [147]

    Greg L Nelson. [n. d.]. Towards Symbiotic University-Adjacent Edge Spaces for Sustainability Transitions and Computing: A Design Imaginary with Some Material and Financial Feasibility. ([n. d.])

  122. [148]

    Elisabet M Nilsson, Rikke Hagensby Jensen, and Anne-Marie Hansen. 2024. What Do We Teach When Teaching More-than-human Perspectives in Comput- ing and Technology Design Education? – An Emerging Pedagogical Framework. (2024)

    2024

  123. [149]

    Juliet Norton, Birgit Penzenstadler, Samantha McDonald, Emily Kang, Nora Koirala, Rieko Konishi, Gabriela Pena Carmona, Jainee Shah, Sebastian Troncoso, and Bill Tomlinson. 2019. The SAGE Community Coordinator: A Demonstra- tion. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computin...

    2019 doi

  124. [150]

    Sofie Nyström, Miriam Börjesson Rivera, Björn Hedin, Cecilia Katzeff, and Arjun Rajendran Menon. 2021. Challenging the Image of the Altruistic and Flexible Household in the Smart Grid Using Design Fiction.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6f...

    2021 doi

  125. [151]

    Thomas Ollson, Olli Pyyhtinen, Anna Rantasila, Salla-Maaria Laaksonen, Minna Vigren, Johanna Ylipulli, and Nitin Sawhney. 2023. A User-Centered Lens into Digital Excess: Exploring the Superfluity and Environmental Burden of the Digital World. InNinth Computing within Limits 20...

    2023 doi

  126. [153]

    Daniel Pargman. 2015. On the limits of limits.First Monday(2015)

    2015

  127. [154]

    Daniel Pargman, Aksel Biørn-Hansen, Elina Eriksson, Jarmo Laaksolahti, and Markus Robèrt. 2020. From Moore’s Law to the Carbon Law. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 285–293. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401825

    2020 doi

  128. [155]

    Daniel Pargman, Elina Eriksson, and Adrian Friday. 2016. Limits to the Sharing Economy. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–7. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926683

    2016 doi

  129. [156]

    Daniel Pargman and Björn Wallsten. 2017. Resource Scarcity and Socially Just Internet Access over Time and Space. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 29–36. doi:10. 1145/3080556.3084083

    2017

  130. [157]

    Teresa Cerratto Pargman, Somya Joshi, and Uta Wehn. 2019. Experimenting with Novel Forms of Computing: The Case of the Swedish Citizen Observatory for Water Quality Conservation. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Lappeenranta Finland, 1–10. d...

    2019 doi

  131. [158]

    Patterson

    Donald J. Patterson. 2015. Haitian Resiliency: A Case Study in Intermittent Infrastructure.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6129

    2015 doi

  132. [159]

    Shreyasha Paudel, Sabine Loos, and Robert Soden. 2023. Towards the Develop- ment of an Anti-Colonial Critique of Climate and Disaster Risk Models. (2023). LIMITS ’26, June 23–25, 2026, Online Nylund et al

    2023

  133. [160]

    Sanjana Paul. [n. d.]. Principles for Environmental Justice in Technology: Toward a Regenerative Future for Computing. 1, 1 ([n. d.])

  134. [161]

    Birgit Penzenstadler. 2020. Leverage Points for Focus Flow and Communitas. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 267–274. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401826

    2020 doi

  135. [162]

    Birgit Penzenstadler. 2021. The Pursuit of Essence: Realizing Expansion and Oneness by Limitation.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.390c5acb

    2021 doi

  136. [163]

    Birgit Penzenstadler, Jason Plojo, Marinela Sanchez, Ruben Marin, Lam Tran, and Jayden Khakurel. 2018. The Afordable DIY Resilient Smart Garden Kit. In Proceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–10. doi:10.1145/3232617.3232619

    2018 doi

  137. [164]

    Birgit Penzenstadler, Ankita Raturi, Debra J Richardson, M Six Silberman, and Bill Tomlinson. [n. d.]. Collapse (& Other Futures) Software Engineering. ([n. d.])

  138. [165]

    Thibault Pirson, Louis Golard, and David Bol. 2023. Evaluating the (Ir)Relevance of IoT Solutions with Respect to Environmental Limits Based on LCA and Backcasting Studies. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.6af396ff

    2023 doi

  139. [166]

    Critical Questions Are Missing

    Hasan Mahmud Prottoy, Lydia Stamato, and Foad Hamidi. 2023. “Critical Questions Are Missing”: Perspectives of Environmental Justice Activists of Bangladesh on Justice and Technology. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.d81e72c1

    2023 doi

  140. [168]

    Barath Raghavan. 2015. Abstraction, Indirection, and Sevareid’s Law: Towards Benign Computing.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6120

    2015 doi

  141. [169]

    Barath Raghavan and Shaddi Hasan. 2016. Macroscopically Sustainable Network- ing: On Internet Quines. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–6. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926685

    2016 doi

  142. [170]

    Barath Raghavan and Daniel Pargman. 2016. Refactoring Society: Systems Complexity in an Age of Limits. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–7. doi:10.1145/2926676. 2926677

    2016 doi

  143. [171]

    Aina Rasoldier, Jacques Combaz, Alain Girault, Kevin Marquet, and Sophie Quinton. 2022. How Realistic Are Claims about the Benefits of Using Digital Technologies for GHG Emissions Mitigation? (2022)

    2022

  144. [172]

    Christian Remy, Oliver Bates, Vanessa Thomas, and Elaine M. Huang. 2017. The Limits of Evaluating Sustainability. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 103–110. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080567

    2017 doi

  145. [173]

    Christian Remy and Elaine M Huang. [n. d.]. Sustainable Interaction Design: Obsolescence in a Future of Collapse and Resource Scarcity. ([n. d.])

  146. [174]

    Clara Rigaud. 2025. Zombitron: Towards a Toolbox for Repurposing Obsolete Smartphones into New Interactive Systems. (2025)

    2025

  147. [175]

    Tina Ringenson, Elina Eriksson, Miriam Börjesson Rivera, and Josefin Wangel

  148. [176]

    InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits

    The Limits of the Smart Sustainable City. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 3–9. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080559

    2017 doi

  149. [177]

    Miriam Börjesson Rivera, Elina Eriksson, and Rob Comber. 2020. Diminishing Space - Peer-to-Peer Sharing as a Transition Practice. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 220–226. doi:10.1145/3401335.3401672

    2020 doi

  150. [179]

    Dina Sabie, Samar Sabie, Cansu Ekmekcioglu, Yasaman Rohanifar, Fatma Hashim, Steve Easterbrook, and Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed. 2019. Exile Within Borders: Understanding the Limits of the Internally Displaced People (IDPs) in Iraq. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing wi...

    2019 doi

  151. [180]

    Samar Sabie, Jay Chen, Azza Abouzied, Fatma Hashim, Harleen Kahlon, and Steve Easterbrook. 2017. Shelter Dynamics in Refugee and IDP Camps: Cus- tomization, Permanency, and Opportunities. InProceedings of the 2017 Work- shop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara Calif...

    2017 doi

  152. [181]

    Samar Sabie, Maha Salman, and Steve Easterbrook. 2016. Situating Shelter De- sign and Provision in ICT Discourse for Scarce-Resource Contexts. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–9. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926686

    2016 doi

  153. [182]

    Paul Schmitt and Elizabeth Belding. 2016. Navigating Connectivity in Reduced Infrastructure Environments. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Comput- ing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–7. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926691

    2016 doi

  154. [184]

    Douglas Schuler. 2016. Empowering Limitations. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–6. doi:10.1145/ 2926676.2926688

    2016

  155. [185]

    Wicked Problems

    Douglas Schuler. 2021. On Beyond Wicked: Exploring the Uses of "Wicked Problems".LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits(June 2021). doi:10. 21428/bf6fb269.26fb2aec

    2021

  156. [186]

    Douglas Schuler. 2023. Welcome to the Cybercene?. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.81c380f5

    2023 doi

  157. [187]

    Douglas Schuler, Aldo De Moor, and Greg Bryant. 2020. New Community Research and Action Networks Addressing Wicked Problems Using Patterns and Pattern Languages. InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on ICT for Sustainability. ACM, Bristol United Kingdom, 330–337. ...

    2020 doi

  158. [188]

    Douglas Schuler, Marloes de Valk, Shreya Urvashi, and Scott Rose. 2022. A Pattern Language for the LIMITS Community. (2022)

    2022

  159. [189]

    Prashant Sharma. 2025. Civil Servants as Builders: Rethinking Digital Transfor- mation Beyond Vendors and Centralized Agencies. (2025)

    2025

  160. [190]

    Six Silberman

    M. Six Silberman. 2015. Information Systems for the Age of Consequences.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6128

    2015 doi

  161. [192]

    Eric Snodgrass, Helen Pritchard, Miranda Moss, Daniel Gustafsson, and Jorge Luis Zapico. 2024. Designing Grid-Liberated Servers for Regenerative Energy Communities.LIMITS ’(2024)

    2024

  162. [193]

    Robert Soden, Matt Ratto, G Arno Verhoeven, and Bart Simon. 2022. Photovoltaic Imagination: Solar Strategies for Community Integrated Research and Graduate Training. (2022)

    2022

  163. [194]

    Martin Stojanov, Daniel Pargman, Mike Hazas, Rob Comber, and Jorge Luis Zapico. 2023. How Do We Arrive at Constraints? Articulating Limits for Com- puting. InNinth Computing within Limits 2023. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/ bf6fb269.a317d18f

    2023

  164. [195]

    Adam Streed, Michael Kantar, Bill Tomlinson, and Barath Raghavan. 2021. How Sustainable Is the Smart Farm?LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits (June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.f2d0adaf

    2021 doi

  165. [196]

    Supreeth Subramanya, Zain Mustafa, David Irwin, and Prashant Shenoy. [n. d.]. Energy-Agility: A New Grid-centric Metric for Evaluating System Performance. ([n. d.])

  166. [197]

    Brian Sutherland. 2021. Design Aspirations for Energy Autarkic Information Systems in a Future with Limits.LIMITS Workshop on Computing within Limits (June 2021). doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.8b56b095

    2021 doi

  167. [199]

    Brian Sutherland. 2024. Energy Experience Design.LIMITS ’(2024)

    2024

  168. [200]

    Nicolas Szilas. [n. d.]. Digital Sobriety: From Tips to Values. ([n. d.])

  169. [201]

    Theresa Jean Tanenbaum, Marcel Pufal, and Karen Tanenbaum. 2016. The Limits of Our Imagination: Design Fiction as a Strategy for Engaging with Dystopian Futures. InProceedings of the Second Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Irvine California, 1–9. doi:10.1145/2926676.2926687

    2016 doi

  170. [202]

    Thomas Thibault, Léa Mosesso, Camille Adam, Aurélien Tabard, Anaëlle Beignon, and Nolwenn Maudet. 2025. Environmental (in)Considerations Inthe Design of Smartphone Settings. (2025)

    2025

  171. [203]

    Vanessa Thomas. 2018. Disableism and Constrained Computing: Checking Privilege and Power in a Future of Limits. InProceedings of the 2018 Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Toronto Ontario Canada, 1–9. doi:10.1145/ 3232617.3232623

    2018

  172. [204]

    Vanessa Thomas, Christian Remy, and Oliver Bates. 2017. The Limits of HCD: Reimagining the Anthropocentricity of ISO 9241-210. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 85–92. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080561

    2017 doi

  173. [205]

    Neil Thompson, Kristjan Greenewald, Keeheon Lee, and Gabriel F. Manso. 2023. The Computational Limits of Deep Learning. InNinth Computing within Limits

    2023

  174. [206]

    doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.1f033948

    LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269.1f033948

    doi

  175. [207]

    Klervie Toczé, Maël Madon, Muriel Garcia, and Patricia Lago. 2022. The Dark Side of Cloud and Edge Computing: An Exploratory Study. InEighth Work- shop on Computing within Limits 2022. LIMITS, Virtual. doi:10.21428/bf6fb269. 9422c084

    2022 doi

  176. [208]

    Bill Tomlinson. 2015. Toward a Computational Immigration Assistant.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6119

    2015 doi

  177. [209]

    Bill Tomlinson and Benoit A. Aubert. 2017. Information Systems in a Future of Decreased and Redistributed Global Growth. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 21–28. doi:10. 1145/3080556.3080569

    2017

  178. [210]

    Patterson, and Bonnie Nardi

    Bill Tomlinson, Donald J. Patterson, and Bonnie Nardi. 2016. A Report from an Online Course on Global Disruption and Information Technology. InProceedings Overview over the first decade of LIMITS LIMITS ’26, June 23–25, 2026, Online of the Second Workshop on Computing within L...

    2016 doi

  179. [211]

    Six Silberman, Andrew W

    Bill Tomlinson, M. Six Silberman, Andrew W. Torrance, and Kurt Squire. 2019. Participatory simulation of institutions could help address global limits. In Proceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits (LIMITS). https: //computingwithinlimits.org/2019/papers/limi...

    2019

  180. [212]

    Kentaro Toyama. 2015. Preliminary Thoughts on a Taxonomy of Value for Sustainable Computing.First Monday(July 2015). doi:10.5210/fm.v20i8.6132

    2015 doi

  181. [213]

    Huaxin Wei, Jeffrey C. F. Ho, Kenny K. N. Chow, Shunying An Blevis, and Eli Blevis. 2019. Should Do, Can Do, Can Know: Sustainability and Other Reflections on One Hundred and One Interaction Design Projects. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, ...

    2019 doi

  182. [215]

    Maruf Hasan Zaber, Bonnie Nardi, and Jay Chen. 2017. A Study of Hashtag Activism for Raising Awareness about Riverbank Erosion in Bangladesh. In Proceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California USA, 51–58. doi:10.1145/3080556.3080557

    2017 doi

  183. [216]

    Mariya Zheleva, Petko Bogdanov, Daphney-Stravoula Zois, Wei Xiong, Ranveer Chandra, and Mark Kimball. 2017. Smallholder Agriculture in the Information Age: Limits and Opportunities. InProceedings of the 2017 Workshop on Computing Within Limits. ACM, Santa Barbara California US...

    2017 doi

  184. [217]

    Matt Ziegler. 2019. Who Breathes the Smoke: Technologies for Community- Based Natural Resource Management. InProceedings of the Fifth Workshop on Computing within Limits. ACM, Lappeenranta Finland, 1–10. doi:10.1145/ 3338103.3338107 Received 3 April 2026

    2019

Pith tools

Reviewed June 29, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.