I participated in the third G-Mark screening session since privatization, and for the first, I was in charge of screening Group 2 of the Family-use Products Category, the category of furniture and interiors. I had been looking over the entries in the screening area for a long time, but I began to feel that something was out of sorts when I saw that the items submitted, with few exceptions, were of lower quality and lagged farther behind current trends than the products generally handled by the Japanese interior decorating industry these days. The main role of the G-Mark is to raise the quality of everything that supports the foundations of daily life and to create a fuller and more satisfying environment for living that incorporates the pursuit of comfort as well as new regulations and suggestions. An attempt we made last year involved issuing invitations to regions that had not attracted much interest up till now, including local furniture industries. We succeeded in unearthing some local industries, and we held preliminary screening of products that we had collected in Hokkaido, especially in the area around Asahikawa. This project led us to some excellent items, and it just so happened that one of these entries was selected for a Gold Prize.
This year, based on these past experiences, we set up a system in which Judges make recommendations. In order to make the activities in the Category more lively, we formed a sort of "caravan" and went around to the relevant show rooms in Tokyo with the aim of actively seeking out items that Judges deemed worthy of the G-Mark. In the area of furniture, most imported items were overwhelmingly superior, and although we tried to recommend items that Japanese manufacturers had planned or manufactured, whether they were designed in Japan or overseas, not many items caught our attention. The items we selected yielded more than ten entries in the end. Yet another method was considered. In order to bring the G-Mark to a new level, we attempted to solicit entries by aiming the spotlight at young designers in particular, and selecting the furniture and accessories that they had worked on most recently, but whether due to lack of interest or other reasons, this approach yielded no entries.
In recent years, consumers have become more interested in interior decoration. If the G-Mark is going to serve as a public relations tool for making consumers even more interested in design, this genre will have to become more substantial.
We will need to publicize this concept appropriately and take the innovative approach of looking at a broad range of subcultures and the counterculture to select high-quality everyday products.

 
DETAILS OF SCREENING

With this G-Mark Project adopting electronic technology and the Internet, we held the preliminary rounds of screening for this fiscal year on the World Wide Web. We saw 79 entries from 38 companies, but as in most years, the entries were unexciting. Moreover, the image data in the first round by CD-ROM and the Web had low information content, and most items were advanced to the second round of screening, giving a selection rate of 91%, since examination of the actual object was indispensable. This method was introduced in anticipation of increased use of information technology, but evidently, it will take a bit of time before this technology can be put to use in any serious way. The amount of items in the second round of screening was about the same, given items withdrawn from the competition, as well as items that Judges had found in shops around the city, as described previously, and items picked up out of materials on hand and recommended for entry. In the end there were 79 entries, and their level was somewhat higher. 38 items received the G-Mark, a success rate of 44%.
A noticeable problem that we discussed during the screening process was that most of this year's entries showed traces of slow but sure improvements and modifications in the direction of maturity, possibly because of the requirements of the era. Yet, on the other hand, we couldn't help noticing mediocre materials and technology employed for cost cutting. We felt that comfortable, low-cost items for daily life ought to have their own unique manifestations and ways of solving the problem of cost versus quality. In addition, we found few items that evoked new lifestyles.
Every year, a lot of beds are entered in the competition, and although there were some differences in performance in line with their prices, they were all able to fulfill their functions to an appropriate level. More important were accessories that let customers produce a coordinated, pleasant bedroom space with mattress pads and covers, and we were unable to find an appropriate answer to the question of what today's beds should be. We saw too many items that followed generalized, superficial styles. On the other hand, despite their high prices, some of the beds entered by South Korean manufacturers drew our attention.
This year's Gold Prize winners, the Composer Alumina storage furniture submitted by Arflex Japan, was also discovered through the system of recommendation by Judges. It is a box-type storage cabinet that this maker has developed and matured with great consistency. It has a simple expression and structure and exhibits quality down to the last detail. It is a flexible piece of furniture that fits easily into every facet of the user's life, and as a leading product in the field, it has influenced storage design all over the world.
There were many candidates for Small and Medium Enterprises Prize, a category drawing entries mostly from small and medium companies, but the Table & Desk System from Toska Co., Ltd was selected as the winner. Its systematized components are made of extruded aluminum, and allow an abundance of possible variations in form that the user can customize.

 
FUTURE CHALLENGES

It has been a long time since the introduction of design into the industry caused a move away from the mere pursuit of economic factors to the creation of social and cultural values. The variety of notions of what constitutes value in this category is especially noteworthy, and this leads to difficulty in screening the items based on a narrowly-defined range of evaluation criteria. As a movement that provides guidelines for lifestyles in our confused country, the G-Mark can provide some grace and style to our lives, and design can bring this about. In order to make this happen, we will need to grow beyond the idea of attracting only a small range of entries and gain the help of a large number of supporters to gather entries from a wider range. To this end, we will take an active role in commercialization of G-Mark products, one of the objectives of this project, and in activation of a design infrastructure. In order to create a richer, more fulfilling living environment, we need to foster the growth of this project that is attractive in many senses of the word and provides something that transcends design education. We especially need to consider new tactics for Group 2.