Landlog Apron

Digital Innovation for small scale agriculture

Project Overview

Project Overview

Small-scale sustainable farmers function very differently when compared to commercial farmers. Their views on technology is wide and varied, often due to their experiences with said technology and the people that use them.

The Context:

Design a provotype that explores novel and out-of-the-box uses of technology for the target farmers as well as foster curiosity, reflection, and debate.

The Goal:

Prototype Engineer, Narrative Designer and User Researcher


My Role:

May 2024


Project Duration:

Introduction:

This project builds on ongoing fieldwork conducted by a PhD researcher and colleagues at Newcastle and Northumbria Universities on the role of digital technologies in small-scale sustainable agriculture in North England, including organic farms, farming cooperatives, and community-supported agriculture (CSA) schemes.

Interview analysis

Understanding the farmers

We were provided with interview transcripts with small scale farmers in Newcastle. These farmers were employing a variety of techniques include cooperative farming, sustainable farming, volunteer farming and more. We analyzed these interviews to identify interesting themes that stood out in the conversations with farmers.

The interview was the primary research method used to collect in-depth information. Below are some questions asked

Identifying themes of interest from interview transcripts

Emotional attachment to farming as a concept

Classism in farming

Organizational control on farms

Underlying values behind the farm and the farmer

“Everything must have a purpose.”

Sense of worth attached to amount of work

Tech skepticism

Community involvement and its issues

Design thinking

Design Exploration

We used the identified research themes to guide our brainstorming approach. Based on these themes, we designed fictional scales, such as overly tech-y farms versus under tech-y farms, and sustainable farming versus commercial farming. We applied the “100 under 10” brainstorming method, where we generated 100 concepts in 10 minutes. We conveyed these concepts through drawings and short phrases inspired by the themes.

We voted on concepts that sounded interesting to the team and reworked them to add more details.

The 100 under 10 minutes brainstorming method - sticky notes galore!

Narrowing down themes of interest

We presented these initial concepts to the sponsors of the project. The sponsors of the project had been exploring the concept of understanding how fabrics and textile crafts were understood and represented by the small scale farmers and their families, and thus were intrigued about the idea of using aprons, that might be seen commonly on farms. They prompted further discussion upon the know-it-all apron.

Some of the design concepts surfaced in our research were:


A Monopoly-style farm based board game where farmers and volunteers work together to keep a farm running


A little seeds library that prompted farmers to share seeds amongst themselves


A campaign to promote personal farming - “Dig for Victory 2.0”


Personal farms in city spaces


A know-it-all apron that teaches wearer how to farm

Exploring a design space

Design Exploration

We discussed with our sponsors more about textile crafts and their significance specifically to small scale farmers. This brought up a vital piece of information that they had observed in their research - these crafts and their products often acted as heirlooms for farming families, passed down just as the farms had been passed down. This also led to an interesting observation by one of our sponsors. They explained how a lot of the methodologies and technologies were being followed on a farm because their previous owners were doing them as heritage, and that many farmers chose to keep using older machinery and methodologies out of sentimental value..

This theme of sentiment and heritage aligned with one of our identified themes, “Emotional attachment to farming as a concept” and “Underlying values behind the farm”. A discussion within the team made it clear that while the modality of the prototype of made sense given the background of the project as well as the sponsors’ interest in it, we were not satisfied by the lack of provocation that the know-it-all apron instigated. We decided to continue thinking of our provotype as an apron, but decided to rework its functionality.

Designing to be provocative

Prototyping

Looking back at the analysis of interviews, we realized that no two farmers did things the same way. Methods and machinery depended on the farms, the people handling the farms, and of course, the heritage that has been passed down. Some of the farmers in the interview pool were community farmers - their farms served within their small communities, and were often run by family or family-adjacent groups. On the other hand, there were also small scale commercial-adjacent farmers, whose farms functioned quite differently from community farmers in both organization and audience, and the technology they use.

To provoke some reaction in both these groups of farmers, we looked back at one of the scales we defined during our brainstorming approach. This was the “tech heavy vs the tech lacking farms” scale. On this scale, the tech-heavy side was predominantly composed of more commercial farmers, while the tech-lacking side included more community-based farmers. This scale was very interesting to us, because essentially, all of these farms would be classified as small-scale, but their ideologies were very different.

This difference is where we make our case. How would a community farmer react to being told about the state of their farm by a random piece of technology? How would a commercial farmer react? Would the technology be met with resistance on both sides, or will some lean towards it? How would small scale farmers react to being told to give up their instincts and follow as a machine instructs? What if this was something that was “passed down”? Would they use it if it was passed around by their predecessors?

Reactive threads, a fictional technology

Prototyping

Reactive threads are a technological innovation - a variation of the normal sewing threads that are used commonly in stitching and embroidering. These threads respond dynamically to environmental changes in the area that they are associated to. The threads change color and texture based on data they receive from the surrounding environment. This data is transmitted through a structure called the associator, which functions similar to a cell tower, gathering and relaying real-time environmental information such as temperature, humidity, and soil conditions. The threads are then able to modify their physical properties to reflect these changes, providing a visual and tactile feedback to whatever garment they have been used on.

Apron design

Prototyping

I took charge of designing and prototyping a part of the apron which would be used as an artifact to present the concept. Our sponsors connected the team the Makerspaces of the Northumbria University School of Design. Conversations with the head of the Makerspaces opened a discussion of prototyping modality, as well as material design and selection. They guided us during our initial concept brainstorming sessions, helping us understand which of our ideas would be feasible to prototype during the short duration of our project. Once the modality of our provotype was finalized, I was then introduced to the Fashion Department of the School of Design. I had conversations with the professors about the concept and idea about our project, and they were able to guide me through the types of textile crafts I could use in their Department spaces.

The form that the reactive threads would take on the apron was something the team discussed in detail. In the end, we decided to use the threads to form a map of the farm. The threads would be associated to certain areas of the farms, and used on the map to depict changes in those areas. After a discussion with the professors at the Fashion Department, I decided to use embroidery as a way to depict this map of the farm.

I used a cotton blend fabric to embroider, as cotton blend was commonly used in aprons to make them light and breathable. This piece of fabric was selected from one of the scrap bins of the Fashion Department, and thus had a yellowed and crumpled look to it, which added to the narrative we were building.

Embroidering as a part of prototyping

Landlog Apron

The story

The Landlog Apron acts as a live representation of the farm, having an embroidered map of the same. A farmer can associate each reactive thread to a location on their farm and then embroider said location onto the apron. To do this, an ‘associator’  is installed on the field. Once connected, the threads will depict the current state of the associated location. If a location lacks water, the thread turns dull brown and feels rough, mimicking dry earth. High temperatures cause the thread to turn red and feel warm to the touch


The Landlog Apron - Digital Prototype

The Landlog Apron - Embroidered artifact

Landlog is multifunctional - it can help track the state of a farm in real time. The reactive nature of the apron will allow farmers have a new level of connection with their land, and it acts as a heartfelt heirloom for the successors of a farm!



Storyboarding

The story

John and Pam owned Farm Zen, a small scale sustainable farm in Newcastle, UK.

As time passed by, they decided to hand their farm to their nephew Ron. Ron had no previous experience in farming, so he decided to copy what John and Pam used to do.

Ron was new to farming, and had a lot of trouble understanding what he needs to do for the farm. He was afraid of destroying his crops or the farm land.

Ron discussed this issue with Tess, a volunteer on the farm who used to work for John and Pam as well.

Tess explains how John used to use his apron to identify and tell the volunteers what work needs to be done. Ron realizes that his grandmother’s heirloom is more than just a simple apron!

Ron teaches his daughter how the apron works, so that she can start learning about it sooner.

Ron starts using the apron to identify tasks on his farm. With the apron’s guidance, soon the farm starts thriving!

What are we provoking?

With this design, we are asking farmers to reflect about their:

Relationship with technology

Relationship with their farm as an artifact of history

Emotional connection with their farm and farming practices

Our goal is for this design fiction story in combination with the physical provotype to stir up interesting conversations between farmers and our sponsors. We aim to create a tangible artifact that sparks dialogue around the future of farming, the role of technology, and how these innovations could reshape their daily lives. The apron becomes more than just a tool—it acts as a bridge between old and new, prompting both ideas and reflection on what’s possible for the next generation of farming solutions.

Conclusion

Say hi!

tpemmara@iu.edu