Design for Planet

This paper explores different approaches taken when 'wearing two hats'; that of academic researcher and the industry entrepreneur. It considers the barriers and opportunities in combining these two roles in order to acquire new knowledge. To understand how future researchers could best do this and why this might be desirable, the paper presents Author1's insights from field research experience; wearing both hats within a textile industry context. A literature review, reflective practice and an annotated portfolio method enabled the authors to identify three approaches-Divide, Switch and Blend. These form a model for researching with any two hats on: Divide entails wearing both hats separately on different occasions; Switch is wearing both hats but interchanging between the two on a single occasion; Blend is wearing both hats simultaneously. The authors conclude that fluidity between approaches and an understanding of the dominant hat is vital.

Purpose: The aim of this research paper is to provide new insights from the Prato recycling model for woollen materials. Specifically, to examine the barriers presented but also opportunities that wool recycling might offer for future innovation within mixed fibre textile recycling. Originality/value: This paper examines the established Prato model from an alternative angle considering the mechanical textile recycling system alone. Considering the industry from this viewpoint has created value-added insights for design innovation for mixed fibre recycling of the future. Design/methodology/approach: Two visits to the city of Prato, Italy was undertaken to generate data collection. Using a field research approach, observed through the eyes of the designer, through unstructured interviews and documentation (note taking and photographing). Data was analysed using annotated portfolio techniques to draw out insights from the observations made during the visits. Finally, a hotspot analysis...

Textile recycling and the Circular Economy Don't be nervous. Circularity is the captain and she is picking her players-nobody wants to be picked last. We are consistently reminded that Chemical Recycling, although appearing to be the best player on the team, can hog the ball and won't involve any of the other players. We still need training in Re-use and more practice shots with Re-manufacture, but it is Mechanical Recycling that is truly stuck on the side lines. Could there be a new way to play? Textile recycling was born from a desire to reclaim wool and was quickly adapted to recapture cotton and then polyester. In 2006, the 'Well Dressed?' report condemned recycling technology for not progressing in over 200 years (Allwood et al.). Since this we have aspired to reach high-quality textile-to-textile recycling and chemical technology has boomed. In the wake of this invention we now find ourselves in a transition period, one where Chemical Recycling has not yet reached commercialisation. All the while academics start to call for new policies to advance chemical processes alone (e.g. Dahlbo et al., 2016) leaving Mechanical Recycling on the bench. However, it is this established and now forgotten Mechanical Recycling industry that is still dealing with the worlds textile waste. At this point do not be mistaken in thinking I am arguing against the development of Chemical Recycling. Rather I will argue that recycling, like the circular economy, is a team sport. We need both Mechanical and Chemical Recycling to play together.

The problem of difficult-to-recycle textile waste is usually laid at the designer’s door. However, the strategy ‘Design for Recycling’ is not only underexplored in the field of textile design, but the solutions offered are oversimplified and impractical for the complex materials that we have been producing. At the other end of the spectrum, much of the fashion industry has committed to using recycled fibres in their products. However, good intentions are not translating into actions. This is due to a seemingly unresolvable tension between the designers, recyclers and sorters. The circular economy demands everincreasing quality of recycled fibres. Any decreasing quality is condemned to downcycling or cascading. The quality of fibres is allegedly overcome by accurate sorting. However, the many different methods of blending used by textile designers makes this difficult. This research has been conducted across the realms of academia and industry and brings together three roles: industry-designer, academic-researcher and industry-based-expert. The methodological contribution of this thesis offers a way of steering the researcher through academic and industry collaboration. Using this approach, the study investigates the mechanical wool recycling system in which acrylic fibres are the main contaminant. Knitted acrylic textile waste falls straight into recycling sorting grades, without any reuse market, and are regarded as the lowest value fibres. Using this type of waste, the research explores the role of blending, sorting and cascading (reframed as spiralling) to enable designers to use recycled fibres and ensure their onward recyclability. Spanning the recovery and manufacture stages of the product’s life cycle, the ‘Design for Recycling Knitwear Framework’ proposes a way of extending the life of textile resources in the transition to a circular economy.

This paper builds on traditional portfolio annotation to aid the design researcher to capture and interpret practice-based research through design. Going beyond an object to understand the researcher's observing, designing and making experiences the method spans systems, processes and materials. The approach is discussed through a short literature review followed by a case study which uses traditional field research methods such as conversation and note-taking, as well as placing a particular emphasis on photography. Using a zoomed in photographic technique, this generates the 'portfolio of images' ready for annotation. Drawing on Kolb's experiential learning theory, accentuating reflection and abstraction in the research process, this adapted annotated portfolio method crosses three progressive stages; Reflective, Thematic and Holistic. This involves the capturing and organising of complex data in a visual way that broadens and deepens insights and facilitates Cathryn Hall, PhD Researcher, Centre for Circular Design (CCD), University of the Arts London; was previously CCD research assistant, Mistra Future Fashion research project. Cathryn is currently undertaking her practice-based doctoral study under Dr. Kate Goldsworthy and Professor Rebecca Earley.

is famously quoted saying "I never teach my pupils; I only attempt to provide the conditions in which they can learn". This paper explores the conditions and adaptive methods used by practice design researchers to enable circular design knowledge exchange between a university research community and the student body. This paper explores and draws on the experience of the authors across three academic years (2018-2020) as PhD practice researchers at Centre for Circular Design (CCD). It unpicks the adaptive practice research approaches used by the authors which enabled them to set up and deliver a series of activities under the 'Circular Design Lab' an education and teaching platform at CCD. Through its creation it supported a thriving community of circular designers. Using reflective practice, the paper explores the authors practice design methods to create a bridge between emerging research practice and the taught courses.

Background: The problem of difficult-to-recycle textile waste is an ongoing challenge.  One of the issues is the lack of exchange between the recovery sector and design/manufacture of recycled materials. This paper seeks to addresses the gap in knowledge between sorting (in recovery) and blending activities (in manufacture), expanding current design strategies towards textile recovery. To achieve this, the research explores sorting practices of wool/acrylic blends in the mechanical wool recycling industry and applies this knowledge to the design of new yarns. Methods: A bricolage of methods was used to conduct this research in three parts. First, an overview of a previous study by Author1 is presented from which this research builds. Second, field research using conversation methods with the owner of a closed wool recycling company was conducted centring around their material archive. Thirdly, practice research was conducted in a spinning facility where Author1 applied knowledge fro...

Nobody is an island. As Reverend John Donne said, we are all a piece or a part of the main. Therefore, in order to avoid isolation, we need to connect to those around us. Design is a rather young discipline that, while small, is fl ourishing with variety. Our little design land is shared by communication, graphic, industrial, accessory, fashion, and textile design to name only a few. Island life is thriving and therefore, it is easy to forget that there are other islands of knowledge just a short distance away that have developed their own cultures; so diff erent from our own. To build bridges and exchange knowledge, we need to fi nd ways to communicate and combine diff erent perspectives. This is especially vital when we endeavour to fi nd solutions to complex problems that no-one discipline alone can solve. As the world strives towards sustainable transitions, it requires multi/inter/trans-disciplinary teams to combine knowledge and develop solutions. However, these islands of knowledge can be diffi cult to bridge. In the context of the ReSuit project (Recycling Technologies and Sustainable Textile Product Design), this chapter will explore what role design research can play in building bridges between a variety of stakeholders, including the social sciences (anthropology), and STEM (process engineering). This form of terrain, one with multi-stakeholders, can be tricky to navigate. This is particularly true, based on my-the authors-own experience (Hall, 2021), with industry partners that often work at a different pace and have different perspectives to their academic counterparts. This chapter will explore specific examples of how Design School Kolding (DSKD) and other funded research projects have constructed bridges for easier communication and collaborative working methods that could be applied to the ReSuit project. However, it is ultimately the pathways these bridges create that form the core of this chapter. To continue the metaphor, a bridge provides access, enabling you to get where you want to be, but you need to know where you are going first. For sustainable transitions, we need a clear route forward, not just for the industry and academic stakeholders but for the next generation. So, the questions I am asking are: How has design research built bridges between stakeholders? How can we use this knowledge to map pathways for knowledge exchange with the design school?