Content uploaded by Kristi Kuusk
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kristi Kuusk on Mar 23, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
6Textile Journal
Crafting Smart Textiles
– a meaningful way towards
societal sustainability in the
fashion field?
Kirsti Kuusk, Oscar Tomico, Geert Langereis
Department of Industrial Design, Eindhoven University of Technology
k.kuusk@tue.nl, o.tomico@tue.nl, g.r.langereis@tue.nl
Stephan Wensveen
Mads Clausen Institute, University of Southern Denmark
s.a.g.wensveen@mci.sdu.dk
Abstract
Smart textiles with its vast range of possibilities provide a considerable opportunity
for societal sustainability for the waste-oriented fashion industry. May the new textiles
react to the environment, wearer, have a mind of its own or simply provoke and inspire
people – it is a great tool for the transition from the product-oriented industry to the
service-minded economy. Fashion field needs to mature and adapt to the new rules
set by the user within today’s environment. While developing the new field of smart
textiles, this paper stresses the importance of learning from traditional crafts and the
value of craftsmanship.
We start by introducing the importance of crafting and connecting it to the industrial-
ized way of producing. Then, we ask whether we could merge valuable insights from
both in order to develop the smart textiles area. Later, you will find an example project
merging Quick Response (QR) codes with traditional embroidery that inspired a set of
TechCrafts explorations in a form of student projects. In case of the embroidered QR
codes, the link to technology is an add-on feature to textiles. In the other examples,
craftsmanship technologies are used to create the textile substrate itself. These
explorations are the input for a discussion about the role of craftsmanship and skills in
developing materials with interactive properties that is held with relation to the possibili-
ties for societal sustainability.
Keywords: craft, crafting smart textiles, digital technology, societal sustainability,
culture of connectedness
Introduction
Textiles and traditions, and rituals and crafts related to them have existed for millen-
niums. Natural fibers spun, weaved or knitted together have been close to the human
body, environment and conscious for basic survival purposes, social distinctions,
expressing different power relations and even interacting with the spiritual realms.
7
The Nordic Textile Journal
Kristi Kuusk is a PhD Student at the
Department of Industrial Design,
Eindhoven University of Technology.
She’s part of the Smart Textiles Services
project that is part of Creative Industry
Scientific Program (CRISP). She has
a MA in Fashion Design and BSc in
Informatics.
Dr. Oscar Tomico is Assistant Professor
of the Designing Quality in Interaction
Research Group at the Department of
Industrial Design, Eindhoven University
of Technology. He is the project leader
of the Smart Textile Services project,
part of the Dutch Creative Industry
Scientific Program (CRISP 2011). He
gained his PhD in 2007 in Innovation
Processes in Product Design.
Dr. Ir. Geert Langereis is an Assistant
Professor in the Designed Intelligence
group at at Eindhoven University
of Technology. Before joining the
university, he was a senior scientist at
the industrial research laboratories
of Philips and NXP Semiconductors.
His Ph.D. work was on intelligent
self-learning systems for washing
machines.
Dr. ir. Stephan Wensveen is Associate
Professor Interaction Design at the
Mads Clausen Institute at the
University of Southern Denmark in
Sønderborg, Denmark. He has an
MSc and PhD in Industrial Design
Engineering.
All images belong to the authors
8The Nordic Textile Journal 9
The Nordic Textile Journal
Crafts and everything related to them are much more than some
old techniques. Sennett (2008, p. 9, 149) describes craftsman-
ship as “basic human impulse, the desire to do a job well for its
own sake,” and craft as a more advanced level of technique,
such that the “technique will be intimately linked to expression”.
Everything from the cultivation of the plant up to the finalization
of a garment used to be done by a specialized hand, therefore
each step, stitch and loop had their own personalized share of
attention and time. Processes were slow and people involved
could put their own personalities into it – “learning about
themselves through the things they made” (Sennett, 2008, p.
8). With mechanical production textile and garment processes
got standardized, automated and, due to the shift towards
consumer culture mindsets, extremely wasteful.
Smart textiles are around for a while now with a great technology-
driven emphasis on what is possible to develop. There are many
inspirational examples around that express how technology and
textiles could exist together creating effects or even feelings. For
example, stage targeted products of CuteCircuit (2012), Hussein
Chalayan (2012), XS Labs (2010) or Ying Gao (2012). What
if now that new techniques emerge, in order to craft a more
sustainable future, we would get inspired from ancient tech-
niques and meanings as well? Many rules for life, ways of living
and making things got changed during industrialization. Certain
decisions and directions towards efficiency and standardizations
killed older and long-lived principals of quality, individualized ap-
proach and value of handwork. Crafts were considered too time
demanding for mainstream in that period, but now re-consider-
ing some decisions that led us to mass production, they sound
inspiring and worth looking into. Could we learn values passed
on for generations through making and transfer/translate them
to the smart textiles applications? What would have a similar
meaning to us today and what would get lost in translation?
Technology and material developments allow us to create smart
objects, like apparel. Garments are able to sense, track and out-
put movements, temperature, touch, sound, moisture, pressure,
bend, orientation, light, etc. Textile objects react to whatever
we wish for; data gets transferred between desired parties in
no time. For example, the Hug Shirt (CuteCircuit, 2012) that as
a very clever hoodie senses characteristics of a hug (strength of
the touch, skin warmth, heartbeat rate) from one person and
transfers those via Bluetooth and mobile network to the recipi-
ent. Now, all these possibilities may act rather as gadgets unless
they find a meaning during the design process.
Fashion industry, suffering in exhaustive sustainability issues,
doesn’t need a further drive by the “next cool” thing that is
growing the pile of waste in few months. Next to all the efforts
done in wiser material use, reuse and recycling, vintage promo-
tion, new business models, it needs a way to close the loop
from materials and energy use to the industry and user, and
back to the industry and user. (Fletcher and Grose, 2012) This
is not a material driven change: it must be a deeper behavioral
turn. A change that makes garments more valuable to the users:
through the combined influence of the process, materials, final
outcome, care taking and disposal. Influential steps need to be
taken by the designer, producer, supplier and with the greatest im-
pact: the user. This change asks for a multi-stakeholder approach,
currently researched in the “CRISP Smart Textile Services”
project (Bhömer, 2012), with the goal to integrate the differ-
ent design and production processes of textile, technology and
services. However, considering the ungraspable complexity of the
whole system, how to make sure the “smart” garments created
are actually leading us to a desired direction?
Behavioral Turn
In the 18th century, when people used to craft textiles and gar-
ments for their personal and family use there was much more
supporting it than just the act of knitting, weaving, sewing etc.
Rituals of making together used to bring people into workshops
to craft high quality items. Those activities tightened bonds
between makers and made them share much more than a skill
with each other. They shared life experiences.
Everything was made with a heart and soul in it, therefore with
exceptional quality and purpose to last as long as possible.
With industrial age “The machine introduced a new element
concerning the relation of quantity and quality,” (Sennett, 2008, p.
109) reversing the relation between the two got expressed through
waste. Not only post-consumer waste, but also pre-consumer
waste and production waste started to grow in uncontrollable
amounts. Garments go through systems that are invisible to
consumers and lack of value and appreciation due to it. Combined
together with the mindset of nowadays where “the function of
culture is not to satisfy existing needs but to create new ones -
while simultaneously maintaining needs already entrenched or
permanently unfulfilled” (Bauman, 2011, p. 17) we have achieved
a fashion industry proud of low quality cheap disposable clothing.
Everyone needs to change constantly. As Bauman (2011, p. 24)
puts it “Time is indeed passing, and the trick is to keep pace with
it. If you don’t want to drown, you must keep on surfing: that is to
say, keep changing, as often as you can, your wardrobe, furniture,
appearance and habits, in short - yourself.”
This opposes to the culture mentioned before, that used to
build a person up stitch-by-stitch, day-by-day and year-by-year.
Handicraft used to be an important part of it. “Just one hundred
years ago a woman’s worth in Setu was judged by her skills
in handicraft. There couldn’t be any small mistake for the girl
to be seen as a good future mistress. It was thought to be her
mother’s fault when a girl could not manage handicraft” (Sum-
matavet, 2005, p. 68). She says that before marriage a girl had
to have woven all the material needed for her future husband’s
clothes. This was seen as a preparation to step into independent
life. And the care for each detail in handicraft was seen as one’s
ability to craft the life in general.
According to Bauman (2011, p. 52) these traditional rules
for life had become a hindrance rather than help in the new
conditions. “It did not matter that under other conditions,
now receding into the past, they had helped people to live in
a spontaneously created, but change resistant, atrophied and
corroded society: now these rules were turning into “supersti-
tions” and “old wives tales” becoming a burden and the main
impediment on the road to progress and the full realization of
human potential”. (Bauman, 2011, p. 52) Education and social
reform took people further from the old beliefs and fashioned
us according to the dictates of reason and rationally designed
social conditions.
In times of blooming handicrafts sewing, knitting, weaving and
crochet were part of the skill-set of each respectful girl/woman.
Putting aside reasons for keeping woman’s hands busy, like
keeping them in houses or away from politics and general discus-
sions, those meditational hand practices were part and also built
further valuable traditions and rituals of making together, giving
meaning to things done, ornaments on clothing and accessories.
Those mindsets supported and developed very personalized local
approach to living. Each piece had an author who’s life story
was also known to the rest of the community and therefore val-
ues such as unstoppable drive for quality and tight bonds within
a family and community were honored.
Today we are overwhelmed by new emerging technologies and
tools, such as laser cutting, 3D printing and smart materials, like
conductive textiles, yarns, thermochromic dyes, Arduino etc that
get more and more accessible and easy to handle for the end-
user. We have different problems and priorities than there used
to be in the 18th century. Technology developments have given
us new ways of looking at things and tools to play with. We like
to be connected and belong, similarly to what used to be, but in
a new non-geographical way.
There seems to be a nice synergy between craftsmanship with
its drive for detail and quality and values applied through tradi-
tion and rituals, and the modern culture of sharing and con-
nectedness. Also combining craft techniques and the hands-on
approach with knowledge and tools emerging and still to come,
we have the potential to achieve a very sustainable combined
value of old and new. Maybe some of the decisions and direc-
tions (not) taken while pursuing the efficiency in production
and development lines that has shaped our “the way it’s being
done” could be questioned or changed. Fashion designers are
inventing and proposing new ways for sustainability, but since
this means asking questions about speed and “fast fashion”
principles, also doubts economics as we know it, those alternative
emerging directions take time to get adapted and appreciated.
Some examples as the impact-led fashion models replacing
trend-led ones as defined by Fletcher and Grose (2011) would
be adaptable garments, that can be adjusted and changed
in order to fit or suit a certain situation, including trans- and
multifunctional clothing that replace several other garments or
are meant to be worn in various scenarios. Also clothes that can
be worn through seasons, modular play of assembly or shape
change.
Another example could be optimizing garment lifetimes or pro-
moting their low-impact use, that can be achieved by enhancing
emotional connection of the wearer with the garment, creating
durable clothes that can actually be used more than few wash-
Fig 1: Possible merging combinations for culture and technology
10 The Nordic Textile Journal 11
The Nordic Textile Journal
cycles or changing the way people take care of the garments.
Textiles that require no washing and garments designed to
accept stains, spills and wrinkles as well as low ironing heat play
its role here.
An alternative way towards sustainable business-models are
repair services that allow the industry to get other kind of
income besides from selling more material and garments.
Designing and working with local materials and artisans for
local culture helps to develop smaller communities, which means
improving from inside. Biomimicry - another exciting emerging
field - “.. is not simply a tool for copying. Rather it is under-
standing and applying nature’s principles - surprisingly simple at
their core - that is more the point.” (Fletcher and Grose, 2012,
p. 115). That means changes starting from material level up
to processes and proposals for seeing completely different, in
harmony with nature, business models.
“Slow is not a simple description of speed. Rather it represents a
different worldview that names a coherent set of fashion activity
to promote the pleasure of variety, the multiplicity and the cultural
significance of fashion within biophysical limits. Slow fashion
requires a changed infrastructure and a reduced throughput of
goods” (Fletcher and Grose, 2012, p. 128). Slow fashion means
accepting diversity, producing in small scale, and trusting the
partners, valuing making and maintaining and a true price of
the product incorporating ecological and social costs.
Within smart textiles and garments development, the main
issue today is yet to explore possibilities, push borders of what
is possible and propose scenarios of potential use. It is very
much material, technology driven - more as a hack to prove that
something can work, rather than fulfilling a need and growing
upon that. Crafting smart textiles makes it a slow process,
hands-on experience; it allows craftsmen to grow together with
their creation and the smart textiles to record a narrative, story
— tradition.
Because we envision meaningful results from the tension be-
tween crafts/culture and modern technology, our approach is to
explore the design options of where these two come together.
In figure 1, we can see the existing axes from culture (upper-left)
to technology (lower-right). We may expect inspiring design
with respect to craftsmanship/connectedness (lower-left) and
crafts/technology (upper-right). In the next sessions we explain
our explorations.
QR-coded Traditions
Looking into such developments Kristi Kuusk wanted to incorpo-
rate some of the forgotten old wisdom into the new possibilities
of digital and otherwise new technologies. While approaching
the integration of textiles and technology she aimed to show
and, through that also, see how new ways of communicating
can be a mean towards sustainability in the fashion field. After
first steps of exploring different combinations of crafts and
technology, and seeing what would be more valuable in terms
of transferring meaning from one society to the other she ended
up pursuing an exploration of embroidered Quick Response (QR)
codes carrying cultural information in several layers (Fig. 2). This
was a first tryout in this series of practicing a craft (in current
case embroidering with a machine) and giving it a new modern
use while keeping values that inspired the integration in first
place within the final concept.
There is a clear parallel between information stored in folkloric
garments, accessories expressed by colors, ornaments and plac-
ing, and data revealed by QR codes. Both require a key to get
accessed. Folkloric embroidery, traditional patterns on mittens
and socks, the variations of colors on skirt-stripes – they all
meant something specific for the family or village producing
and wearing those. The symbols used to be taught and developed
traditionally within local communities. It used to be a personal
story only understood through the knowledge of the local con-
text and an outsider could only see or hear the meaning if she
was given the key to it. (Summatavet, 2005, p. 95) Similarly, in
order to understand what is hidden linked to a QR code, it has
to be first recognized by software on a mobile device. Whereas
now in the “connected world” we have symbols readable by
machines universally. The mean of reading might be the same,
even message composed with same data, but meaning still
varies in different parts of the world for communities used to
other kind of inputs.
Furthermore, to ask the question, how could traditional craft
support or guide technology as a new craft, Kristi experimented
quite a while with merging QR-codes with folkloric embroideries.
She prepared some more concrete proposals of use of this nationa-
lized QR code embroidery. One of them is a concept of bed-sheets
that, while scanned, start telling a fairy-tale that originates from
the region which patterns and colors are used in its design. For
example, sheets with Danish colors would tell a bedtime story
about The Little Mermaid or The Ugly Duckling while one imitating
Muhu skirt in Estonia shows a cartoon about a princess or
allows a parent to read out a story about The Gold Spinners.
The beauty of the approach lies not only in the integration of
traditional local colors and patterns with new technologies but
also in the values, which have been taught through family-line
for centuries. Maybe the bed sheets could talk about the kid’s
own family and therefore enhance the interaction between
generations daily basis. The information referred by the code
can change in time, so it is another way a garment to become
more valuable while being used. It carries tradition and history
in many levels while encouraging new ways of interaction. For
example bringing fairytales back into our daily knowledge, not
forgetting old wisdom.
Such interactive ornaments on our textiles, on one side feel
right - they look and feel familiar. It is just embroidery as it
has been used on garments since ancient Egypt. On the other
side, it is used in a new way taking into account possibilities of
technology today and values important to the current society.
It has potential to contribute for a more sustainable fashion
and world with the combination of static ornament on a textile
being linked to digital dynamic information changing in time.
First examples that were made with the QR embroidery were
embodying the garment’s history into the code. The story of the
item: where and by whom did it get grown as crops or melted
from what kind of oil, where did it get woven, knitted, laminated
into a textile, what kind of finishes were used, dyes, treatments.
Where and by whom did the garments get designed, cut, sewn,
finished, sold etc.? Maybe it had another user before - who was
it, pictures of her using it? Maybe the garment got assembled
into a second life already? Was the bag in its previous life a
dress? It could be a way to make garments foot-print more
visible and used or second-hand items more appreciated by their
rich visible history. This information could be shown intimately
to the wearer or exposed to whoever cares to read it. It could
be protected with a key that the owner can share or openly
accessible by anyone. The data linked to the embroidery could
tell a predefined story or be configured by users. For example,
Tiina would get an item with the embroidered code on it. She
would enter a website and define in what conditions the specific
code would result in what outputs. It could tell a mutual joke on
Monday, suggest a cake recipe on Tuesday, play a selected video
on Wednesday or even change the output every hour, on special
occasions etc. Then, Tiina gives the item to her friend Tom, who
gets a new surprise every time he scans it. It is very personally
customized gift from Tiina to Tom, therefore embodies potentially
great emotional value. Or imagine every morning waking up with
an inspirational quote suggested by your group of friends!
Now that the value of the item can grow in time, it does not
just get old - it might hide new exiting message next day and
the user plays a clear role in the lifecycle of the specific textile
object, he must also pay more attention to the care process. If it
gets treated in a wrong way the user loses more than merely a
cover-cloth. He loses a certain connection to a friend or group,
or to a certain database of information.
The QR coded traditions concept can be seen as a physical rep-
resentation of a virtual value. May it be connected to a local wis-
dom, inspiring quote, personal message from a friend, fairy-tale,
history of the item or something else, the digital data is ever
changing and always growing. While the physical embroidery is
static and always present. Maybe those could be the tools and
artifacts Milli John Tharakan (2011) is asking for, that would
help us to find a balance when the changes, caused by rapidly
developing technology, are happening too fast.
Towards Crafting Smart Textiles
Application used to be the force demanding material innovation.
Now we are strongly driven by the new technologies - anything
is possible and that might be the problem! Development in the
smart textiles area is mainly driven by material sciences, new
opportunities in fiber level. But not everything technologically
possible is necessarily valuable. Creating something technologi-
cally very challenging and fancy has no value if nobody needs it.
Tharakan (2011, p. 189) suggests creating narratives for smart
textiles. Referring to the modern constant lack of satisfaction
she argues, “The ability to transcend the physical through myths
and the slowness in the making and use of craft artifacts could
be some of the missing ingredients that our soul and senses are
longing for.”
Fig 2: QR-coded Fairy-tale pillows by Kristi Kuusk
12 The Nordic Textile Journal 13
The Nordic Textile Journal
New valuable concepts can be achieved mixing traditional and
new in different levels. There are various approaches possible to
take to integrate technology and crafts. We have done series of
explorations in Eindhoven Technical University (TU/e), Industrial
Design, Wearable Senses theme. And based on that we are
making first attempts to create a mutual language to talk about
crafts mixed with technology.
During a project TechCrafts Bachelor students started up each
getting to know one craft rather deeply. They researched about
weaving, silversmiths, crocheting, knitting, bobbin lace making
etc. and found themselves a master of the specific craft to learn
from. From practicing the skill, they took a step further and
started to merge the old technique with new materials and elec-
tronics keeping in mind what the craft traditionally had served
for. The intention was to learn the wisdom of the old craft and
to bring it into today, not as a museum would do - preserving it,
but hacking, cracking, re-thinking and inventing way.
Unlace (Fig. 3) is an interactive lace lingerie garment which
allows two-way interaction for the piece to react on touch and
heat up thermochromic yarns, while also the interactive change
invites and guides the touch into desired places. Combining
bobbin lace making together with its values of slowness and
details with new smart materials, we have a very delicate piece
of technology.
Morrow (Fig. 4) is a fence made for climbing plants. The stimulat-
ing lights will turn on when a person interacts with the fence.
In this way the plants will grow towards the light. It creates a
moment for observation and realization between plant and the
one taking care of it.
Intimacy tower (Fig. 5) is a circular woven tower that uses the
textile to represent the complexity of one’s inner self and the
growth of it with his experience. It plays with the privacy and
the allowance to reach it. The goal of the tower is to create
empathy between people that have the same experience at the
same time.
Discussion
“Technology can be part of the actual textile (e.g. smart textiles),
a tool for their creation (e.g. the software CAD), or used to
manipulate the input (e.g. using wearable technologies).” (Sey-
mour, 2008 p. 173). From the described and other realized proj-
ects conducted in TU/e we can see that the concepts developed
through making with one’s hands and learning straight from a
master even after combining with high technologies still carry
the core values of the craft started with. And even if the proto-
types are not technically perfect, they incorporate a strong value
for relationships between people or environment and people.
“Skills are also a certain way against superficiality. Skills lead to
quality, to refinement, to depth.” (Trotto, 2011, p. 42).
Fig 3: Unlace by Eef Lubbers as part of the TechCrafts project
Fig 4: Morrow by Liza Blummel as part of the TechCrafts project.
Fig 5: Intimacy tower by Orfeas Lyras as part of the TechCrafts project.
14 The Nordic Textile Journal 15
The Nordic Textile Journal
Strong Do-it-yourself (DIY) communities and Fablabs around the
world are supporting open-source digital fabrication, which
unites global design, and local assemble, production. Making
things helps us to learn about ourselves (Sennett, 2008, p. 8)
and give values to the objects around. With those developments
part of the making process becomes visible again. “Work created
with the hands gives birth to new ideas.” (Trotto, et al.,
2009, p.13)
When talking about crafting smart textile we don’t necessarily
mean applying the skill of handicrafts, but moreover the attitude
to make things ourselves, give personalities to them and to
appreciate the value created by combining time and attention
– our most valuable resources. The rapid prototyping tools and
digital technology can be seen as a key element here.
“In response to the excess of globalization and over the top
industrialization, there’s a renewed interest in local traditions
and crafts. Since the eighties Van Slobbe holds a passionate
plea for the value of crafts and says it is the “new luxury” the
world is in need of.” (Hirvonen, 2009) Joining the new luxury
of slowness, time and attention provided by craft together
with possibilities provided by the advancements in technology
and ways of communication and living there might be an idea
towards more sustainable (fashion) world.
Crafts incorporate a lot of layers of value in them; it has to be
made explicit. Textile realm that has naturally step by step
developed from handicrafts into industrialized factories has a
new challenge as smart textiles, to tackle. It missed the slow
need-driven beginning, as textiles had, and has to start already
from industrialized point of view. The field is too immature and
deserves a childhood of playing hands-on trying to figure out
how and why everything could function. We could let smart
textiles find its own way of seeing the world, without the
dominating industrialized-consumer glasses.
Similarly to the development of digital applications, websites users
need to have access to the tools, skills and inspiring materials
to craft the smart textiles in order to the revolutionary valuable
things to happen and be noticed. For this platforms, such as
Kobakant, introducing techniques and do-it-yourself projects, by
Mika Satomi and Hannah Perner-Wilson (2012) are essential as
much as availability of small amounts of new functional materials.
“Ornaments used to protect, cleanse, heal and also communicate
and serve as a ritual sign. People used to leave part of themselves
together with the ornament” (Summatavet, 2005). Having
similar ambitions for smart textiles we must gather patience to
let time craft the path for it.
“Our economy is stressed because our material world opeartes
on the basis of physical resources that we do not have, and
waste we have nowhere to hide. Perhaps the first change we
should make is to stop producing and consuming things we
do not really need that make the waste that no one wants,
especially waste that is toxic to ourselves and our fellow beings
on this planet.” (Pauli, 2010, p. 7) Toxic waste is a gentle topic
around smart garments. Let’s make really sure to learn from
what fashion industry is already able to teach us today, to treasure
quality over quantity, trusting relationships over dependency and
meaningful applications guiding people to that direction.
Conclusion
Clothes and objects provide a crucial “carrier” service, helping
to bond the relationships between others and us and with the
society as a whole. The continued relevance of things to people
through change or novelty is essential in this context, for all of
these relationships are in constant flux as our own perspectives
and the values of society co-evolve (Fletcher and Grose, 2012,
p. 138).
Textile industry is heading towards smart and interactive gar-
ments valuing our need for connectedness and sharing. With
lost craftsmanship approach of drive for detail and quality and
values applied through tradition and rituals, craft techniques
and the hands-on approach this next stage could be ecologically
more responsible stepping stone for the next eras approaching.
Acknowledgments
We thank the TechCrafts students of the Industrial Design
Department at the Technical University of Technology, more
specifically Eef Lubbers, Liza Blummel, Orfeas Lyras whose work
was presented in the current paper. In part the Dutch government
and industry funded Creative Industries Scientific Programme
(CRISP) funded this work.
References
Bauman, Z. (2011). Culture in a Liquid Modern World.
Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bhömer ten, M; Tomico, O; Kleinsmann, M; Kuusk, K; Wenveen, S.
(2012). Designing Smart Textile Services through value networks,
team mental models and shared ownership. In: Proceedings of
ServDes.2012: Service Design and Innovation Conference.
Espoo, Finland 8-10 February 2012.
Chalayan LLP. (2012).Chalayan Art projects.[online] Available at:
<http://chalayan.com/art-projec> [Accessed 30 May 2012 ].
CuteCircuit. (2012). CUTECIRCUIT | future fashion now. Hug
Shirt. [online] Available at: <http://www.cutecircuit.com/collec-
tions/special-projects/hug-shirt> [Accessed 30 May 2012 ].
Fletcher, K. and Grose, L. (2012). Fashion and sustainability,
design for change. London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd.
Gao, Y. (2012). Ying Gao interactive projects. [online] Available
at: <http://yinggao.ca/eng/interactifs/projets-interactifs>
[Accessed 30 May 2012].
Hirvonen, P. (2009). Songs and stories: inspiration for new
European identities. Tallinn: Tallinna Raamatutrükikoda.
Pauli, G. (2010). The Blue Economy. Taos: Paradigm Publications.
Satomi, M. and Perner-Wilson, H. (2012). Kobakant. How to get
what you want. [online] Available at: <http://www.kobakant.at/
DIY/> [Accessed 30 May 2012].
Sennett, R. (2008). The Craftsman. New Haven & London: Yale
University Press.
Seymour, S. (2008). Fashioning Technology: The Intersection
of Design, Fashion, Science, and Technology. Wien: Springer
Verlag.
Summatavet, K. (2005). Folk Tradition and Artistic Inspiration:
A Woman’s Life in Traditional Estonian Jewelry and Crafts as
Told by Anne and Roosi. PhD thesis. University of Art and Design
Helsinki.
Tharakan, M. (2011). Neocraft: Exploring Smart Textiles in the
Light of Traditional Textile Crafts. In: Ambience. Boras, Sweden
28-30 November 2011. CTF Publishing, Borås.
Trotto, A. (2011). RIGHTS THROUGH MAKING Skills for Pervasive
Ethics. PhD thesis. Eindhoven University of Technology.
Trotto, A., Hummels, C.C.M., Overbeeke, C.J., Cianfanelli, E.,
Frens, J.W. (Eds.). (2009). Rights through Making: wearing
quality. Firenze: Edizioni Polistampa.
XS Labs. (2010). XS Labs Work. [online] Available at: <http://
xslabs.net> [Accessed 30 May 2012 ].
