Situated practices in digital jewellery research: The collective voices of the new generation of jewellers

Digital jewellery is an emerging field of research and practice that combines jewellery practices with microelectronics and employs methodologies from art, craft, design and Human-Computer-Interaction (HCI). This interdisciplinary approach offers exciting possibilities for designing innovative digital devices on the body. However, the field of digital jewellery remains loosely defined and underdeveloped. It is timely to give voice to jewellers and to lead them to shape the many ways in which digital technology can be meaningful to the wearer. This paper synthesises insights from the past five years of digital jewellery research conducted in two jewellery education programs in the UK and Denmark. In doing so, it amplifies the voices of the new generation of jewellers, analysing their practices and highlighting their potential to shape the future of wearable devices. By emphasising longevity, emotional resonance, embodiment and selfreflection, the new generation of digital jewellers offers a compelling alternative to tech-driven wearables.

“Whilst jewellers enthusiastically adopted CAD and 3D printing technologies, awareness of digital jewellery research grows slowly. Meanwhile, the wearable tech industry sees the contribution of jewellery as decorative enhancement for devices like fitness trackers, overlooking jewellers’ deep understanding of intimate body-device connections. Their expertise can transform digital applications, especially in health devices, and blur boundaries between jewellery and technology. This paper synthesises digital jewellery knowledge to build shared language and envision future directions. “(Koulidou, Henriksen 2025)

Scientific article: Situated practices in digital jewellery research: The collective voices of the new generation of jewellers

Acknowledgements

We sincerely thank all jewellery students across both institutions who acted as co-researchers in the field of digital jewellery and embraced the challenge of engaging with electronics and coding within their practices.

Methodology: Authors’ Positionality Statement

At the time of writing, the first author is a Senior Lecturer and Course Leader for the BA Jewellery Materials and Design at Sheffield Hallam University (SHU), and the second author is a Senior Lecturer on the BA Jewellery Design and Technology at EK Erhvervsakademi København (EK). At SHU, the digital jewellery project was conducted during 2021–2022 and 2022–2023, prior to the unforeseen closure of the course in 2024. At EK, the digital jewellery project has been running since 2015; however, it has been led by the second author since 2018. We acknowledge that our position as educators and researchers in the field of digital jewellery carries power dynamics that can influence the research context. Below we outline our methodological approach in ways we selected, analysed and discussed the examples. Our collaboration started in 2023 when we co-led and run the digital jewellery project at EK (at the time of the collaboration the institution was called KEA – Copenhagen School of Design and Technology). From this initial shared experience in teaching digital jewellery, we started ongoing conversations on the differences and similarities of the outcomes of our students’ work prior to the project and after, discussing how the backgrounds of the courses, the settings and resources, the methodology and the demands, fosters both contrasts and parallels in the students’ works, and therefore influence digital jewellery practices. The ambition of this paper is to contribute to a critical discourse on the emerging qualities of digital jewellery and to collectively articulate the values and innovations that digital jewellers bring to an increasingly digital world. Through this work, we aim to further define digital jewellery research while offering provocations for researcher-practitioners engaged in exploring its significance and potential applications.

Annotated Portfolios as part of our methodology.

The analysis of digital jewellery pieces was carried out following a research-through-design process (Durrant et al., 2017). In this study, we employ annotated portfolios of research products (Hauser et al., 2018) as a methodology to illustrate our approach, using digital jewellery to uncover intermediate knowledge and explore emerging qualities in the field. Annotated portfolios (Gaver & Bowers, 2012) are collections of designs that, when analysed together, reveal issues, values, and themes that connect and distinguish them, while preserving the uniqueness of each example. Löwgren notes that annotations exist in a space between specific artifacts and overarching theories, containing “intermediate-level knowledge” such as patterns, concepts, or experiential qualities (Löwgren, 2013). In this research, we recognise the complexity of research-through-design (Koskinen et al., 2011; Koulidou, Laier Henriksen

Manifesto-writing as part of our methodology

During our iterative analysis (Fig.4), we embraced the unexpected ways in which our reflections coalesced into new knowledge, opening a new design space for digital jewellery research. We noticed that the language used to annotate our examples echoed the bold, argumentative tone often found in manifestos. As design researchers, we seized this opportunity, integrating manifesto-writing into our annotated portfolio methodology to articulate findings and shape a collective voice for the field. Inspired by feminist manifestos, we adopted this approach to foster shared perspectives rather than mere disruption (Ahmed, 2017). Drawing on Padan et al. (2020) we view manifestos as dynamic events that cultivate a collective voice, where it exists. Similarly, Lack (2017) describes manifestos as spaces for marginalised voices to express their diversity. Here, digital jewellers seek to distinguish their perspectives from mainstream wearable technologies, articulating both opposition and core values. To avoid universalising readers’ intentions, we adopted Padan’s framework (2020)— manifesto as process, not product; consensus via dynamic, disruptive exchanges; shared values open to evolution—enabling us to forge individual and collective voices in digital jewellery research. This approach helped us find our voices and use this paper to shape a collective one for the field. We included brief descriptions of all examples that we initially selected and annotated in the Appendix 1, rooted in feminist collective dialogue. Feminist manifestos (Brueske & Weiss, 2018), unite diverse voices through shared authorship, reflection, and dialogue to address complex challenges. Some examples crossed categories, enriching analysis and highlighting the fluid, iterative nature of our manifesto-inspired methodology. Some examples spanned multiple categories, further enriching our analysis and underscoring the fluid, iterative nature of our manifesto-inspired methodology.