0515評論_A-design-anthropology-of-collaborative-making--Exploring-shoe_2023

A design anthropology of collaborative
協作的設計人類學

making: Exploring shoemaking and
製作：探索製鞋和

embroidery practices 刺繡實踐

Sofie Verclyte and Catherine Willems, KASK & Conservatorium, School of
Sofie Verclyte 和 Catherine Willems，KASK & Conservatorium，學院

Arts of HOGENT, Ghent, Belgium
Arts of HOGENT，根特，比利時

Design anthropology covers various design practices and research. While some
設計人類學涵蓋了各種設計實踐和研究。雖然有些

researchers/pactitioners rely on anthropological insights to enhance design,
研究人員/契約者依靠人類學的洞察力來增強設計，

others use design as a tool to gain anthropological knowledge. This paper
其他人則將設計作為獲取人類學知識的工具。本文

explores the symbiotic relation between design and anthropology and proposes a
探索設計與人類學之間的共生關係，並提出

‘design anthropology of collaborative making’. It contributes to gaining insights
“協作製作的設計人類學”。它有助於獲得洞察力

in plural ways of knowing while providing contextual insights that inform design
以多元的認知方式，同時提供為設計提供資訊的上下文見解

practices. Starting from a common skill from an ‘in-habitat’ position, we
實踐。從「棲息地」位置的共同技能開始，我們

consider both perspectives and invite collaborative engagement between people
考慮兩種觀點，並邀請人與人之間的協作參與

and materiality. Based on collaborations with the San community in Namibia on
和重要性。基於與納米比亞桑族社區的合作

shoemaking and with Syrian refugee women through embroidery, we explore the
製鞋和敘利亞難民婦女通過刺繡，我們探索

added value of this tactile engagement through making to bridge theory and
通過橋接理論和

practice. 實踐。

Keywords: Design anthropology, Design research, Design practice, Collabora
關鍵詞：設計人類學，設計研究，設計實踐，合作

tive design, In-habitat position
設計，在棲息地位置

Design anthropology as a field of study covers a wide range of design
設計人類學作為一個研究領域涵蓋了廣泛的設計

and anthropological research focusing on making and practice used
以及專注於使用和實踐的人類學研究

in different ways and for different purposes.1 While some re
以不同的方式和不同的目的.1 雖然有些人重新

searchers and/or practitioners start from anthropological insights to enhance
搜索者和/或從業者從人類學的見解出發，以增強

design practices, others use design as a tool to gain anthropological knowl
設計實踐，其他人使用設計作為獲得人類學知識的工具

edge. Both positions are conceived within the span between design and an
邊緣。這兩個位置都是在設計和

thropology, as researchers and practitioners stem from different
人類學，因為研究人員和從業者來自不同的

backgrounds into the field. This paper explores symbiotic relationships be
該領域的背景。本文探討了共生關係

tween these perspectives and proposes a design anthropology of collaborative
結合這些觀點，提出了一種協作的設計人類學

making. This approach combines common skills with the concept of ‘in
製作。這種方法將通用技能與“in”的概念相結合

habitat’ position to foster engagement between people and materiality. In do
人居署在促進人與物質之間的接觸方面的立場。在做

ing so, we gain insights into plural ways of knowing and learning and how
因此，我們深入瞭解了多元的認知和學習方式以及如何

Corresponding author: Sofie Verclyte
通訊作者： Sofie Verclyte

sofie.verclyte@

hogent.be

context shapes design practices. This focus resonates with the design studies field described by Escobar (2021) but attributes a more central role to the tactility and collaborative aspect of making.
上下文塑造設計實踐。這一重點與 Escobar （2021）描述的設計研究領域產生了共鳴，但將更核心的作用歸因於製作的觸覺和協作方面。

www.elsevier.com/locate/destud

0142-694X Design Studies 87 (2023) 101191
0142-694X 設計研究 87 （2023） 101191

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2023.101191

We illustrate the value of collaborative making through our design/research practices which start from a similar skill set (or being knowledgeable in a spe cific skill). We are both trained as designers, makers, and researchers, one in footwear design and cultural sciences, the other in fashion design and conflict and development. The focus on common skill e in these cases on sandal mak ing and embroidery - as a base for collaborative making inspires and facilitates engagement through materiality within a particular context. Engagement in this process, which can range from co-design to sitting together while prac tising a similar skill, helps to unravel the multiple meanings behind the mate riality of the designed products.
我們通過我們的設計/研究實踐來說明協作製作的價值，這些實踐從類似的技能組合（或精通特定技能）開始。我們都接受過設計師、製造商和研究人員的培訓，一個是鞋類設計和文化科學，另一個是時裝設計以及衝突與發展。在這些案例中，對涼鞋和刺繡的共同技能的關注 - 作為合作製作的基礎，通過特定環境中的物質性激發和促進參與。參與這個過程，從共同設計到坐在一起練習類似的技能，有助於解開設計產品背後的多重含義。

Before presenting our field projects (and their methodologies) in Namibia and Lebanon, we first formulate how making and research blend together in a forward-looking design anthropology of collaborative making and secondly how this influences positionality of practitioners from an ‘in-habitat position’. Finally, we explore the added value of this approach for designers (including our interlocutors), anthropologists and, by extension, social researchers.
在介紹我們在納米比亞和黎巴嫩的實地專案（及其方法）之前，我們首先闡述了製作和研究如何在協作製作的前瞻性設計人類學中融合在一起，其次是這如何影響從業者從“棲息地位置”的位置。最後，我們探討了這種方法對設計師（包括我們的對話者）、人類學家以及社會研究人員的附加價值。

1 Making as a conversation between design and anthropology
1 設計與人類學的對話

Anchored in the disciplines of anthropology and design, design anthropology gained prominence as a field of study over the past decades (Gunn et al., 2013; Smith, 2022). Gladwin (1970) offers an early example of how design can be used to gain anthropological knowledge. In his book ‘East is a big bird’, he de scribes the skills of canoe making and the related complex navigational sys tems of the Puluwat natives in Micronesia. In the course of his project, he moves away from focusing on the finished canoe towards its making context. While focusing on the canoe-making, Gladwin gets to know the context specific navigation system.
設計人類學立足於人類學和設計學科，在過去幾十年中作為一個研究領域獲得了突出地位（Gunn et al.， 2013;史密斯，2022 年）。Gladwin（1970）提供了一個早期的例子，說明如何利用設計來獲得人類學知識。在他的著作《東方是一隻大鳥》中，他描述了密克羅尼西亞普魯瓦特原住民的獨木舟製作技能和相關的複雜航海系統。在他的項目過程中，他從關注完成的獨木舟轉向其製作背景。在專注於獨木舟製作的同時，格拉德溫瞭解了特定環境的導航系統。

Focusing on the making process in which the object is still incomplete, rather than on the finished objects, is also a tenet in the work of Leach (2013), who states that form and meaning are generated in tandem. He illustrates the example of Naie, a dyed bark-fibre string skirt made by people in a province of Papua New Guinea. Plaiting is part of the making process where women sit together and share stories. The aesthetic power of the skirt weaves together the relationships between women, trees, their flowing water spirits, and the dy namics of marriage and kinship. The work of making Naie is to render these relationships visible. By focusing on design as a form of making, anthropolo gist Leach (2013) aims to explore the multi-dimensional character of design and how this contributes to a sense of empowerment rooted in local practice.
關注物體仍然不完整的製作過程，而不是完成的物體，也是Leach（2013）工作的一個原則，他指出形式和意義是同時產生的。他舉例說，巴布亞紐幾內亞的一個省的人們用樹皮纖維製成的染色樹皮纖維裙子。編織是製作過程的一部分，女性坐在一起分享故事。裙子的審美力量將女性、樹木、流水精靈以及婚姻和親情之間的關係交織在一起。製作 Naie 的工作是使這些關係可見。通過關注設計作為一種製作形式，anthropolo gist Leach（2013）旨在探索設計的多維特徵，以及這如何有助於植根於當地實踐的賦權感。

Besides the contextual emphasis, recognising design as embedded in a broader corpus of social knowledge (Gunn et al., 2013), anthropology contributes with
除了強調情境，認識到設計嵌入到更廣泛的社會知識語料庫中（Gunn et al.， 2013），人類學還有助於

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

its comparative and empirical-inductive perspective to this discipline, starting from observations in the field. As a field of study, anthropology strongly fo cuses on context and strives to produce knowledge that is situated, or grounded, by the specific historical, cultural, and environmental context in which it was produced. Likewise, the discipline of design, contributes to design anthropology as a future-oriented activity trying to find context-related solu tions for everyday lives. In doing so, interventions and transformations in ex isting realities (often) through a collaborative process between different disciplines, contexts, and people are possible outcomes. These contributions challenge anthropologists’ modus operandi trying to mitigate their own impact on the field. Although they are interested in social change, they do not aim for immediate action (Otto & Smith, 2013). Design and practice based research projects connect the making, doing, and knowing in ways that such positions become inseparable.
它對這門學科的比較和經驗歸納視角，從實地觀察開始。作為一個研究領域，人類學強烈關注語境，並努力產生由其產生的特定歷史、文化和環境背景定位或紮根的知識。同樣，設計學科也有助於設計人類學作為一項面向未來的活動，試圖為日常生活尋找與背景相關的解決方案。在這樣做的過程中，通過不同學科、背景和人之間的協作過程（通常）對現有現實進行干預和轉變是可能的結果。這些貢獻挑戰了人類學家試圖減輕自己對實地影響的作案手法。儘管他們對社會變革感興趣，但他們並不以立即行動為目標（Otto&Smith，2013）。基於設計和實踐的研究專案將製作、執行和了解聯繫起來，使這些職位變得密不可分。

Within the growing literature of design anthropology, these discipline-specific features are combined in different ways and for different purposes, leading to various theoretical and methodological constellations. As stated by Smith (2022: 1) “New forms of interdisciplinary engagement with and across the field” produce a wide arrange of pathways. “These encounters are concerned with exploring possible futures through research and intervention in specific cultural sites, social processes and situated everyday contexts” (Smith, 2022, p. 1). While some authors (Singh et al., 2021) propose design as an instrument for doing anthropology, others stress the importance of anthropological insights for in terventional design practices (Murphy & Marcus, 2013; Smith, 2022).
在越來越多的設計人類學文獻中，這些特定學科的特徵以不同的方式和不同的目的結合在一起，導致了各種理論和方法論的星座。正如史密斯（2022：1）所說，「跨學科參與和跨領域參與的新形式」產生了廣泛的途徑。“這些相遇涉及通過對特定文化遺址、社會過程和日常環境的研究和干預來探索可能的未來”（史密斯，2022 年，第 1 頁）。雖然一些作者（Singh et al.， 2021）提出設計是做人類學的工具，但其他人則強調人類學見解在地球設計實踐中的重要性（Murphy & Marcus， 2013;史密斯，2022 年）。

This paper integrates the above-mentioned perspectives by focusing on collab orative making through common skills. We do not intend to outline the state of the art but indicate how our view on design anthropology impacts our meth odology and concrete methods. Drazin (2021) argues for a design anthropol ogy based on collaboration and communication, more than on making. We base our understanding of a design anthropology primarily on making, and as such, we see collaboration and communication as an inherent part of mak ing. Specifically, we link design and anthropology through a methodology of collaborative making of artifacts such as carving wood, weaving textile, or making footwear. While Leach (2013) and Gladwin (1970) also consider design practice central in their work, they still rely on observation and descrip tion to gain insights into the broader meaning of the making process. Instead, we move beyond a merely documentary perspective and highlight the perfor mative aspect of design. Or as Fabian (1990: 19) argues, when using the concept ‘performative ethnography’, the researcher “does not call the tune but plays along”. This view corresponds with the work of Palmieri et al. (2021) on dwelling patterns who indicate that “a situated, dialogic and material approach” can enable people to engage differently (Smith, 2022). Starting engagement based on common skills allows us to bridge theory and practice
本文整合了上述觀點，重點關注通過共同技能進行合作演講。我們不打算概述最先進的技術，而是指出我們對設計人類學的看法如何影響我們的技術學和具體方法。Drazin （2021）主張設計人類學基於協作和溝通，而不是製作。我們對設計人類學的理解主要基於製作，因此，我們將協作和溝通視為設計過程的固有部分。具體來說，我們通過合作製作人工製品的方法將設計和人類學聯繫起來，例如雕刻木頭、編織紡織品或製作鞋類。雖然Leach（2013）和Gladwin（1970）也認為設計實踐是他們工作的核心，但他們仍然依靠觀察和描述來深入瞭解製作過程的更廣泛含義。取而代之的是，我們超越了單純的紀錄片視角，突出了設計的性能方面。或者正如Fabian（1990：19）所指出的，當使用“表演民族志”的概念時，研究人員“不是在叫調，而是在演奏”。這一觀點與 Palmieri 等人（2021 年）關於居住模式的工作相對應，他們指出“一種定位、對話和物質的方法”可以使人們以不同的方式參與（Smith，2022 年）。基於共同技能開始參與使我們能夠在理論和實踐之間架起橋樑

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

by collaboratively exploring the interplay between design practice and its meanings.
通過合作探索設計實踐與其意義之間的相互作用。

Following Otto and Smith (2013), we approach design anthropological prac tices as a “distinct style of knowing one that moves beyond developing insights and perspectives based on empirical research” where designers and researchers engage with possible futures situated within everyday life and concerns to explore sustainable solutions for societal challenges (Smith, 2022: p 2). Through engagements of collaborative making, knowledge can (literally) be formed. In accordance, Tunstall (2019: p 351), being a researcher and a designer, states that: design anthropology is “not just about the application of anthropological theories and methods toward the better design of products, ser vices, and systems”. Instead, she highlights that “the outcomes of design anthro pology include statements providing some deeper understanding of human nature as well as designed communications, products, and experiences” (Tunstall, 2019, p. 351).
繼 Otto 和 Smith （2013）之後，我們將設計人類學實踐視為一種“獨特的認知風格，超越了基於實證研究的見解和觀點”，設計師和研究人員參與日常生活和關注的可能未來，以探索應對社會挑戰的可持續解決方案（史密斯，2022 年：第 2 頁）。通過合作製作的參與，知識可以（從字面上）形成。與此一致，作為研究人員和設計師的 Tunstall（2019 年：第 351 頁）指出：設計人類學“不僅僅是將人類學理論和方法應用於更好的產品、服務和系統設計”。相反，她強調“設計人類學的結果包括提供對人性的更深入理解的陳述以及設計的溝通、產品和體驗”（Tunstall，2019 年，第 351 頁）。

These perspectives become particularly relevant when working with vulnerable groups and/or indigenous communities where making practices can be an alternative way to tell stories.5 Engaging through these material practices is a way of ‘knowing by doing’ as it can shed light on what makers perceive to be the most important challenges around them and how they use the design process to navigate these. An example of knowing by doing through design practices is given by Ewart (2013) in the article ‘Building Bridges in the High lands of Borneo’. As an engineer turned anthropologist Ewart compares two types of building bridges with Kelabit people in Borneo. The first bridge, a traditional bamboo bridge, is grounded in local traditions and ‘grows’ while doing. The second, a suspension bridge, demands architectural plans and was not constructed along local traditions, evoking a lot of discussion. This type of design research can be seen as countering design from a merely Euro centric point of view. Escobar (2021: p 27) in ‘Design Struggles’ points to the fact that it can make visible hidden design histories and practices.
當與弱勢群體和/或土著社區合作時，這些觀點變得尤為重要，在這些社區中，製作實踐可以成為講述故事的另一種方式.5 通過這些物質實踐參與是一種“邊做邊知”的方式，因為它可以闡明製作者認為他們周圍最重要的挑戰是什麼，以及他們如何使用設計過程來駕馭這些挑戰。Ewart（2013）在「婆羅洲高地的橋樑建設」一文中給出了一個通過設計實踐來瞭解的例子。作為一名工程師轉為人類學家，尤爾特將兩種類型的橋樑建築與婆羅洲的凱拉比特人進行了比較。第一座橋是一座傳統的竹橋，它植根於當地傳統，邊做邊“成長”。第二座是懸索橋，需要建築規劃，並且不是按照當地傳統建造的，引起了很多討論。這種類型的設計研究可以被視為僅從以歐洲為中心的角度來對抗設計。Escobar（2021年：第 27 頁）在“設計鬥爭”中指出，它可以使隱藏的設計歷史和實踐變得可見。

Starting from this design anthropology, we clarify in what follows the philo sophical background of the in-habitat position and how it influences multiple verbal and non-verbal dialogues between a variety of agents in different contexts.
從這種設計人類學出發，我們闡明瞭棲息地位置的哲學詭辯背景，以及它如何影響不同語境中各種主體之間的多種語言和非語言對話。

2 An in-habitat position: a matter of correspondence The ‘in-habitat’ position, a term we borrow from Ingold (2000, 2013), brings the acknowledgement that the researcher is implicated in the field of study and consequently influences it (Gatt & Ingold, 2013). This interaction is also known under the term ‘praxeology’ e the science of human action e and used by Pierre Bourdieu (1977). Together with other sociologists and
2 棲息地內位置：對應關係「棲息地內」位置，我們從Ingold（2000,2013）借用的一個術語，帶來了對研究人員與研究領域牽連並因此影響它的承認（Gatt&Ingold，2013）。這種相互作用也被稱為「語用學」 e 人類行動的科學 e 並由皮埃爾·布迪厄（1977）使用。與其他社會學家一起，以及

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

anthropologists (Fabian, 1990; Ingold, 2000; Pinxten, 2010), he argues that all human and scientific research is a form of interaction and, therefore, depends on the quality of the relationship between the agents involved.
人類學家（Fabian，1990;Ingold，2000年;Pinxten，2010），他認為所有人類和科學研究都是一種互動形式，因此取決於所涉及的主體之間關係的品質。

The ‘in-habitat’ position starts from the idea that design is embedded in a broader corpus of social knowledge. The designer takes an insider perspective, participating in an encompassing process in a transforming world (Ingold, 2013). Design from this view does not merely focus on the final product, but on the making process that takes place in a particular context. From the outset the maker is placed as a participant amongst a world of active materials. Ingold (2020) refers to the concept of correspondence where the maker moves along with the material and the people involved. During this act of moving together, hopes and dreams are formulated. He also points to the importance of correspondence through making when words seem to fail (Ingold, 2020). Therefore, design, from an in-habitat position is open-ended and foregrounds the ‘improvisatory dynamic of the everyday’ (Gatt & Ingold, 2013, p. 141). In addition, a focus on process and context allows us to redefine functional cau sality between form and matter; instead of form dictated upon a material, we move towards a co-existence of form and matter, or, even, to let form be dictated by material (Deleuze & Guattari, 1988). To give an example, in the book ‘The Wild Thing’ Bouchez (2017) describes how felting women in Kyrgyzstan not only use wool to make a blanket or a carpet. Mumbling love while felting is done by generations to connect and acquire or pass along prosperity. The focus is not on the final carpet but on the process of making, the story it tells and the closeness it brings upon the family (Bouchez, 2017).
“人居”立場始於設計嵌入更廣泛的社會知識語料庫的想法。設計師從內部人士的角度出發，參與到一個不斷變化的世界中（Ingold，2013）。從這個角度來看，設計不僅關注最終產品，還關注在特定環境中發生的製作過程。從一開始，製造商就被置於活性材料世界中。Ingold（2020）指的是對應的概念，即製造者與材料和所涉及的人一起移動。在這種共同行動中，希望和夢想被制定出來。他還指出了在文字似乎失敗時通過製造來通信的重要性（Ingold，2020 年）。因此，從棲息地的角度來看，設計是開放式的，並突出了“日常生活的即興動態”（Gatt&Ingold，2013，第141頁）。此外，對過程和語境的關注使我們能夠重新定義形式和物質之間的功能因果關係;我們不是將形式強加於材料，而是走向形式與物質的共存，甚至讓形式由材料決定（德勒茲和瓜塔里，1988）。舉個例子，Bouchez（2017）在《The Wild Thing》一書中描述了吉爾吉斯斯坦的毛氈婦女如何不僅使用羊毛製作毯子或地毯。在氈毡時喃喃自語的愛是幾代人為了聯繫、獲得或傳遞繁榮而完成的。重點不在於最後的地毯，而在於製作過程、它講述的故事以及它給家庭帶來的親密關係（Bouchez，2017）。

In a nutshell, starting from an in-habitat position as a designer requires a dia lectic process e constantly going back and forward, to refine the active making process in interaction with the people involved, the context and its materiality. Without denying the creative agency of the designer, this approach moves beyond the individual to consider the social and cultural contexts of creativity, including the role of collaboration in the creative process. In the book ‘Crea tivity and cultural improvisation’ Hallam and Ingold (2020) question the idea that creativity stems merely from individual expression and talent. If we are to understand the how and why of design practices, it is through the earlier described correspondence that we must attend (Ingold, 2020).
簡而言之，從設計師的棲息地位置開始，需要一個不斷來回的轉換過程，以在與相關人員、環境及其物質性的互動中完善積極的製作過程。在不否認設計師的創造性能動性的情況下，這種方法超越了個人，考慮了創造力的社會和文化背景，包括合作在創作過程中的作用。在《創造力與文化即興創作》一書中，Hallam 和 Ingold （2020）質疑創造力僅源於個人表達和才能的觀點。如果我們要了解設計實踐的方式和原因，我們必須通過前面描述的通信來參加（Ingold，2020）。

We now present two concrete design practices and highlight how a design an thropology of collaborative making can provide insights in multiple ways of knowing while simultaneously shaping design practice. The first practice con cerns traditional shoe making with the JuIhoan San (Namibia), while the sec ond practice involves embroidery with women from Syria displaced to the Shatila refugee camp (Lebanon). Both examples start from similar design knowledge, but eventually aim to address issues related to knowledge creation,
現在，我們介紹了兩種具體的設計實踐，並強調了一種設計，一種協作製作的人類學，如何在塑造設計實踐的同時，以多種方式提供見解。第一種做法是與JuIhoan San（納米比亞）一起製作傳統製鞋，而第二種做法則涉及從敘利亞流離失所到Shatila難民營（黎巴嫩）的婦女進行刺繡。這兩個例子都從相似的設計知識開始，但最終旨在解決與知識創造相關的問題。

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

ownership, power relations, and/or ecology (e.g. sustainable production systems).
擁有權、權力關係和/或生態（例如可持續生產系統）。

3 Collaborative shoemaking and embroidering Starting from a common skill in an in-habitat position, both cases use collab orative making as a methodology to gain insights in the relationship between people, material, and their surroundings. This way of engaging includes non verbal and verbal types of qualitative data collection such as experimental learning through design practices, open-ended interviews, collaborative map ping of making practices, and/or co-design.3 Both projects can be considered ‘multi-actor’ as different stakeholders are involved who participate in making and give meaning to it.
3 合作製鞋和刺繡從居所位置的共同技能出發，兩個案例都使用合作口頭製作作為一種方法論，以深入瞭解人、材料和周圍環境之間的關係。這種參與方式包括非語言和語言類型的定性數據收集，例如通過設計實踐進行實驗學習、開放式訪談、製作實踐的協作地圖和/或共同設計.3 這兩個專案都可以被認為是“多參與者”，因為不同的利益相關者參與其中並賦予它意義。

To explore and accumulate different perspectives, and promote specific out comes, our practices pair collective making with other disciplines. In the case of the sandal project biomechanics adds quantitative data on walking habits (for example, kinetics and kinematics) and foot strength (Curtis et al., 2021; Willems et al., 2020). Combined, this results in a conceptual vocabulary on body-culture connection through footwear and walking (Willems et al., 2022). In the case of the embroidery project, a focus on rights yields informa tion on how people formulate and give meaning to lived experience, which often include ideas about rights and justice (Destrooper & Verclyte, 2022). Furthermore, the length of iterative encounters and the longevity of collabo rations is inherent to this design anthropology of collaborative making. A common aspect of this methodology is the dynamic way of analysing data, which results in living documents that ground the research and can enrich the design practices. An iterative narrative analysis of both visual and verbal data - stemming from collaborative making - gives theoretical and practical benefits. This results in processual and non-static interpretation (Fabian, 1990, p. 259), which will be discussed after the following cases.
為了探索和積累不同的觀點，並促進具體的發展，我們的實踐將集體創作與其他學科相結合。在涼鞋項目的情況下，生物力學增加了關於步行習慣（例如動力學和運動學）和腳部力量的定量數據（Curtis 等人，2021 年;Willems 等人，2020 年）。綜合起來，這導致了通過鞋類和步行建立身體文化聯繫的概念詞彙（Willems 等人，2022 年）。就刺繡專案而言，對權利的關注可以了解人們如何制定生活經驗並賦予生活經驗以意義，這通常包括關於權利和正義的想法（Destrooper & Verclyte，2022）。此外，反覆運算相遇的長度和合作口糧的壽命是這種協作製作的設計人類學所固有的。這種方法的一個共同方面是分析數據的動態方式，這導致了為研究奠定基礎並可以豐富設計實踐的活文檔。對視覺和語言數據的反覆運算敘述分析（源於協作製作）提供了理論和實踐上的好處。這導致了過程和非靜態的解釋（Fabian，1990，第259頁），這將在以下案例之後討論。

3.1 The San-dal project: a project that asks you to tread lightly on the earth
3.1 San-dal 專案：一個要求你在地球上輕裝上陣的專案

The San-dal project is one of the projects Future Footwear Foundation (FFF) is involved in. FFF is a centre of excellence that fosters the understanding of human walking and creativity, and looks into the plenitude of ways in which people engage with their environment (Future Footwear Foundation, n.d.). To this end, FFF collaborates with different shoemaking communities (Willems, 2013; Willems, 2015; Willems et al., 2020; Willems & Roelandt, 2018), one of them within the Ju/‘hoan San. The Ju/‘hoan San (Bushmen) are among the few African indigenous peoples who have been able to retain some of their original land. Owing to the physical remoteness and harsh climate provided by the Kalahari, the traditional way of life of the San sur vived longer than in more readily accessible regions. Today, the Ju/’hoansi,
San-dal專案是未來鞋業基金會（FFF）參與的專案之一。FFF是一個卓越的中心，旨在促進對人類行走和創造力的理解，並研究人們與環境互動的多種方式（Future Footwear Foundation，N.D.）。為此，FFF與不同的製鞋社區合作（Willems，2013;威廉姆斯，2015 年;Willems 等人，2020 年;Willems & Roelandt， 2018），其中之一在Ju / 'hoan San中。Ju/'hoan San（布須曼人）是少數能夠保留部分原始土地的非洲土著民族之一。由於喀拉哈裡人提供的地理偏遠和惡劣的氣候，桑蘇爾的傳統生活方式比更容易到達的地區存活的時間更長。今天，Ju/'hoansi，

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

who number some 12 000 people on both sides of the NamibiaeBotswana border, are coping with significant social, political, economic, and environ mental change (Biesele & Hitchcock, 2013; Marshall Thomas, 2006; Suzman, 2017).
在納米比亞博茨瓦納邊境兩側約有12000人，他們正在應對重大的社會、政治、經濟和環境心理變化（Biesele & Hitchcock，2013;馬歇爾·湯瑪斯（Marshall Thomas），2006年;Suzman，2017 年）。

The project has many dimensions, including biomechanical research and links to 3D printing and sustainable production, but within the scope of this paper we focus on the aspect of interactive sandal making with, by, and for the com munity, and on the recognition and unravelling of layer-upon-layer of commu nity connections through skill, livelihood, and cultural heritage. In this context, we touch upon the roles both of the interactive making process and of community representatives, including healers and hunters, in connecting the present with the past and the tangible with the spiritual and, in turn, how this strengthens the community and rekindles the interest in the practice of making sandals, once designed for persistence hunting.
該專案有許多方面，包括生物力學研究以及與3D列印和可持續生產的聯繫，但在本文的範圍內，我們專注於與社區互動涼鞋製作方面，以及通過技能，生計和文化遺產來識別和解開社區聯繫的層層疊疊。在這種情況下，我們談到了互動製作過程和社區代表（包括治療師和獵人）在將現在與過去、有形與精神聯繫起來方面的作用，反過來，這如何加強社區並重新點燃對製作涼鞋的興趣，曾經是為堅持狩獵而設計的。

Originally hunter-gatherers with a mobile lifestyle, the San moved around in the Kalahari Desert covering most of Botswana, and parts of South-Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe. They protected their feet from hot sand and thorns using a sandal made of the hides of the eland, the largest antelope of Southern Africa. The hunting sandal made out of eland skin, named n!ang n|osi, was worn by the San people until the 1950ies. When the eland became less acces sible towards the end of that decade, sandals began to be made out of car tires (Willems & Roelandt, 2018). The switch to car tires and other types of foot wear happened in part because of colonial history and border policy. In addi tion, over the past decade their natural habitat has been reduced to a small, relatively dry part of the Kalahari, the Nyae Nyae conservancy, a region where it is hard to survive and where the eland is not prone to wander around (Marshall Thomas, 2006). Western fashion habits, social media, and the dumping of second-hand shoes added to the decline in the use of traditional footwear from eland hide. In fact, by 2016 only a few San elders still knew how to make the eland hunting sandal from observing the previous generation.
桑人最初是狩獵採集者，過著流動的生活方式，他們在卡拉哈裡沙漠中四處走動，覆蓋了博茨瓦納的大部分地區，以及南非、納米比亞和辛巴威的部分地區。他們用南部非洲最大的羚羊伊蘭的皮製成的涼鞋保護自己的腳免受熱沙和荊棘的傷害。這種由伊蘭皮製成的狩獵涼鞋，名為 n！ang n|osi，直到 1950 年代才被桑人穿著。在那個十年結束時，當 eland 變得不那麼容易使用時，涼鞋開始用汽車輪胎製成（Willems & Roelandt，2018 年）。轉向汽車輪胎和其他類型的鞋類的部分原因是殖民歷史和邊境政策。此外，在過去的十年中，它們的自然棲息地已經減少到卡拉哈裡（Kalahari）的一小塊相對乾燥的地區，即Nyae Nyae保護區，該地區難以生存，並且不容易四處遊蕩（Marshall Thomas，2006）。西方的時尚習慣、社交媒體和二手鞋的傾銷加劇了傳統鞋類使用率的下降。事實上，到 2016 年，只有少數聖族長老仍然通過觀察上一代知道如何製作獵犬涼鞋。

FFF’s interest in the design practice of making footwear, a shared passion for and knowledge of materials, and a commitment to equity and respect were starting points for a long-term collaboration on re-creating footwear that is handmade by the San community.4 The following fragment shows a common interest in the sandal:
FFF對鞋類設計實踐的興趣，對材料的共同熱情和知識，以及對公平和尊重的承諾，是長期合作的起點，以重新創造由San社區手工製作的鞋類.4以下片段顯示了對涼鞋的共同興趣：

“I used to wear sandals made out of eland [Daba, n!ang] skin [n|o] to run
“我以前經常穿用 eland [Daba， n！ang] 皮 [n|o] 製成的涼鞋跑步

behind eland, kudu, and warthogs. For hunting a special type of sandals
在伊蘭、捻角羚和疣豬身後。用於狩獵特殊類型的涼鞋

was used, named ||orkos, different from the one you are making now.
被使用，命名為 ||Orkos，與你現在正在製作的不同。

The sole was not flat but concave, touching the ground at two points
鞋底不是平坦的，而是凹陷的，在兩個點接觸地面

and giving a better grip while running. When you come next time, bring
並在跑步時提供更好的抓地力。下次來的時候，帶上

along some eland skin or even kudu or wildebeest and I will show you
沿著一些伊蘭皮，甚至捻角羚或牛羚，我會告訴你

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

how to make them.” IKunta, Bo. (2018, January 15) Interview, Doupos Nyae Nyae Conservancy, Namibia.
如何製作它們。IKunta，博。（2018年1月15日）採訪，納米比亞Doupos Nyae Nyae保護協會。

In 2019, IKunta Bo e the headman of Doupos - sat down with Willems, both skilled as shoemakers they re-made the ‘IIorkos’, the sandal for hunting (see Fig. 1). They worked the skin and spoke about the sandal, hunting and the connection with healing dances. Indeed, this traditional sandal, which has been tested over many generations, is not only a beautiful (and functional) ob ject, but also a fascinating source for understanding the maker’s mindset and worldview. It became clear that the making of the sandal is very much linked to the hunt, of which the eland skin is a by-product. .
2019年，Doupos 的負責人 IKunta Bo e 與Willems坐下來，他們都是熟練的鞋匠，他們重新製作了“IIorkos”，一種用於狩獵的涼鞋（見圖 1）。他們研究皮膚，談論涼鞋、狩獵以及與治癒舞蹈的聯繫。事實上，這款經過多代測試的傳統涼鞋不僅是一款美觀（且實用）的產品，而且是了解製造商心態和世界觀的迷人來源。很明顯，涼鞋的製作與狩獵密切相關，而狩獵皮是狩獵的副產品。.

For the San community of Nhoma, more than the sandal itself, the narrative and history around the sandal is important. This means the cobblers carry the project into the future, giving it new meaning and exploring new approaches to sustainable design (and livelihoods). Hitchcock, an anthropologist who has worked since the 1970ies with the San describes it as follows:
對於 Nhoma 的 San 社區來說，比起涼鞋本身，圍繞涼鞋的敘事和歷史也很重要。這意味著鞋匠們將專案帶入未來，賦予其新的意義，並探索可持續設計（和生計）的新方法。希區柯克是一位人類學家，自 1970 年代以來一直與桑人一起工作，他這樣描述它：

“The Ju/‘hoansi are seeking to assert the politics of belonging through care fully constructing their self-identity, demonstrating their long-standing ties to the land, recording their histories, and documenting the innovative ways in which they manage and use natural resources. The San are quick to point out that they want to take full advantage of the benefits of modernity and development, while seeking to protect and promote their language and culture with the aim of passing on” (Hitchcock, 2018: p 119).
“Ju/'hoansi 正在尋求通過充分構建他們的自我認同、展示他們與土地的長期聯繫、記錄他們的歷史以及記錄他們管理和使用自然資源的創新方式來維護歸屬感政治。桑人很快指出，他們希望充分利用現代性和發展的好處，同時尋求保護和促進他們的語言和文化，以傳承下去“（希區柯克，2018年：第 119 頁）。

In the San-dal project, the sandal is treated as a living object, with a past and a future, and is studied in-depth, not out of preservation but out of epistemolog ical, emancipatory, and ecological needs.
在San-dal專案中，涼鞋被視為一個有生命的物品，有過去和未來，並被深入研究，不是出於保護，而是出於認識論、解放和生態需求。

Part of the communication is in Afrikaans, and members of the community are involved in interpretation of group interviews and translations to and from JuIhoan. A focus on the JuIhoan language provides opportunities for learning and for sharing ideas about sustainable footwear production and distribution. Concerning the health of people and feet, in-depth biomechanical analysis has shown that the sandal can be considered as ‘minimal footwear’, in that it does not restrict the foot (Willems et al., 2020). Based on this information the school board of Nhoma decided to use the San-dal as part of their school uniform. Using local materials and the fact that production is often individualized, thus avoiding waste, indigenous footwear inspires sustainable production and clean-up of a polluting industry (Willems & Roelandt, 2018). The described crowdfunding campaign is in line with the personalised, immediate-return economy of hunter-gatherer communities, whereby people obtain a direct return from their labour. Indeed, delayed reimbursement and excessive (mass) production conflicts with this traditional way of distribution
部分交流是用南非荷蘭語進行的，社區成員參與翻譯小組訪談和往返JuIhoan的翻譯。對JuIhoan語言的關注為學習和分享有關可持續鞋類生產和分銷的想法提供了機會。關於人和腳的健康，深入的生物力學分析表明，涼鞋可以被認為是“最小的鞋類”，因為它不會限制腳（Willems 等人，2020 年）。根據這些資訊，Nhoma 的學校董事會決定使用 San-dal 作為校服的一部分。使用當地材料以及生產通常是個性化的，從而避免浪費，本土鞋類激發了可持續生產和污染行業的清理（Willems & Roelandt，2018）。所描述的眾籌活動符合狩獵採集社區的個人化、即時回報經濟，人們從勞動中獲得直接回報。事實上，延遲報銷和過度（大規模）生產與這種傳統的分配方式相衝突

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

Photo 1 IKunta Bo, headman of Doupos, interviewed by !Ui Kunta on hunting, healing and the making of the n!ang nIosi, Doupos, Nyae Nyae, Namibia (Nolf, 2018, p. 27)
圖1 Doupos負責人IKunta Bo接受採訪！Ui Kunta on 狩獵、治療和 n！ang nIosi 的製作，Doupos，Nyae Nyae，納米比亞（Nolf，2018 年，第 27 頁）

(Marshall Thomas, 2006; Suzman, 2017). Understanding the meaning of im mediate return economy related to a different worldview as well as listening to the aspirations of the community, seem conditions that determine the future of this and other projects in that region.
（馬歇爾·湯瑪斯，2006年;Suzman，2017 年）。理解與不同世界觀相關的即時回報經濟的意義，以及傾聽社區的願望，似乎是決定該地區該專案和其他專案未來的條件。

3.2 Migrating Heritage: embroidering as a narrative
3.2 遷徙遺產：刺繡作為敘事

‘Migrating Heritage’ is another design and practice-based research project at the same institution. This project focuses on embroidery as a narrative in con flict in displacement. It is a collaboration with 43 women from Syria who fled the conflict in their country to escape war and are now living in Shatila refugee camp in Lebanon. Based on literature within anthropology and trauma studies, this research starts from the epistemological premise that not all knowledge can be expressed in a verbal or discursive way (Eastmond, 2007; Fabian, 1990). The limitation of the spoken or written language is especially salient in the context of forced displacement. As Eastmond (2007: p 259) states, “those who have suffered extreme experiences will often find that these resist narrative ordering and verbal expression”.
“遷移遺產”是同一機構的另一個基於設計和實踐的研究專案。這個項目的重點是刺繡作為流離失所的敘事。這是與來自敘利亞的43名婦女合作的，她們為了逃避戰爭而逃離了本國的衝突，現在住在黎巴嫩的夏蒂拉難民營。基於人類學和創傷研究中的文獻，本研究從認識論前提開始，即並非所有知識都可以以口頭或話語方式表達（Eastmond，2007;Fabian，1990年）。在被迫流離失所的情況下，口頭或書面語言的局限性尤為突出。正如伊斯特蒙德（2007：第259頁）所說，“那些遭受極端經歷的人往往會發現，這些經歷抵制敘事秩序和口頭表達”。

The ongoing Syrian conflict did not only result in massive displacement of ci vilians., but also resulted in massive human rights violations (Human Rights Watch, 2022). As a result, many Syrians are traumatised by experiences of
持續的敘利亞衝突不僅導致大量公民流離失所，還導致了大規模的人權侵犯（人權觀察，2022）。因此，許多敘利亞人因以下經歷而受到創傷

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

Photo 2 N!ang n|osi, featuring a back strap, a double lace between the toes, and a two-layer sole. Nyae Nyae, Namibia (Willems, 2022
照片 2 N！ang n|osi，配有背帶、鞋頭之間的雙蕾絲和雙層鞋底。納米比亞 Nyae Nyae（威廉姆斯，2022 年)

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

harm and/or the subsequent (forced) displacement. They are deeply affected by injustices afflicted to them, their families, their relatives, and their country (Chatelard & Kassab-Hassan, 2017). Besides the many internally displaced persons, most people who fled (outside) Syria settled in neighbouring countries due to the geographic proximity and pre-existing relationships (Sharif, 2018).
傷害和/或隨後的（被迫）流離失所。他們深受他們、他們的家庭、他們的親戚和他們的國家的不公正的影響（Chatelard & Kassab-Hassan，2017）。除了許多國內流離失所者外，大多數逃離（境外）敘利亞的人都由於地理上的接近和預先存在的關係而定居在鄰國（Sharif，2018）。

With an estimated 1,5 million, Lebanon hosts the largest number of refugees per capita in the world (UNHCR, 2020). Aside from the recent influx of people from Syria, Lebanon has been a refuge for many Palestinians since the establishment of Israel in 1948. To date, these people have not been able to return to their home land and often still live with their children, grandchildren, and great grandchildren in Palestinian refugee camps. Shatila, a refugee camp located in the southern suburbs of Beirut, is one of the places established in 1949 because of the massive Palestinian displacement. The camp population has increased over the years, bringing together people from different regions and backgrounds with salient growth since the onset of the Syrian conflict in 2011 (UNHCR, 2016).
黎巴嫩估計有150萬難民，是世界上人均難民人數最多的國家（聯合國難民署，2020年）。除了最近從敘利亞湧入的人外，自1948年以色列建國以來，黎巴嫩一直是許多巴勒斯坦人的避難所。迄今為止，這些人一直無法返回家園，往往仍然與他們的孩子、孫子和曾孫一起生活在巴勒斯坦難民營中。夏蒂拉是位於貝魯特南郊的一個難民營，是1949年因大規模巴勒斯坦人流離失所而建立的地方之一。多年來，難民營的人口不斷增加，彙集了來自不同地區和背景的人，自2011年敘利亞衝突爆發以來，難民營人口顯著增長（UNHCR，2016）。

Many of the women living in Shatila have in common a knowledge of embroi dery, often with skills linked to their geographic region of origin. It is an everyday practice rooted in the rich textile tradition in the region and present since the establishment of the camp. Although stories are shared verbally while doing embroidery, it is also a non-verbal and visual language. As (Ghnaim, 2018, p. 44), a Palestinian-American woman, states in ‘Tatreez5and Tea’:
許多生活在夏蒂拉的婦女都具有刺繡知識，通常掌握與她們原籍地理區域相關的技能。這是一種植根於該地區豐富的紡織傳統的日常做法，自營地建立以來一直存在。雖然在做刺繡時會口頭分享故事，但它也是一種非語言和視覺語言。正如（Ghnaim，2018 年，第 44 頁）一位巴勒斯坦裔美國婦女在“Tatreez5and Tea”中所說：

“Our art is our language. Our embroidery is our dialect. Our dress is our
“我們的藝術就是我們的語言。我們的刺繡是我們的方言。我們的著裝就是我們的

book to be read. And to read this book is to decode our stories on fabric.
要閱讀的書。閱讀這本書就是在織物上解碼我們的故事。

To know this dialect is to hear our truth”.
瞭解這種方言就是聽到我們的真相」。

The influx of Syrian refugees has rekindled the attention for embroidery both as a practice and a product. Local and international organisations introduced new design initiatives, making embroidery more prominent in the daily life of the women living in Shatila. Moreover, the practices do not require a lot of space, material, or machinery. By harnessing skills and knowledge that people carry along when they flee, these organisations try to rebuild livelihood and so re-establish independence (MADE 51, n. d.).
敘利亞難民的湧入重新點燃了人們對刺繡作為一種實踐和產品的關注。當地和國際組織推出了新的設計舉措，使刺繡在夏蒂拉婦女的日常生活中更加突出。此外，這些實踐不需要大量的空間、材料或機械。通過利用人們在逃離時攜帶的技能和知識，這些組織試圖重建生計，從而重新建立獨立性（MADE 51，未註明日期）。

Starting from a common interest in embroidery, the Verclyte undertook pre liminary fieldwork in the spring of 2020 to explore what the skill means for these recently displaced women. Although the covid-19 pandemic shortened the period of fieldwork, she nevertheless acquired insights in embroidery prac tices and their meanings. It soon became apparent that the meanings inter twined with this practice were widely divergent and had changed because of the conflict and ensuing displacement. The importance of embroidering was far from limited to income-generating opportunities or re-establishing inde pendence. Instead, these women referred to multiple, often coexisting
出於對刺繡的共同興趣，Verclyte 於 2020 年春季進行了初步的田野調查，以探索這項技能對這些最近流離失所的婦女意味著什麼。儘管 covid-19 大流行縮短了實地考察的時間，但她仍然獲得了對刺繡實踐及其含義的見解。很快人們就發現，與這種做法交織在一起的含義大利，並且由於衝突和隨之而來的流離失所而發生了變化。刺繡的重要性遠不僅限於創收機會或重建獨立生活。相反，這些女性指的是多個，通常共存

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

functions, including giving voice, meaning-making, and identity formation in disruptive life courses (Destrooper & Verclyte, 2022). As one of the makers stated, “we welcome the work, but we also have stories to tell” Artisan (2020, March 9) Interview, Shatila, Lebanon.
功能，包括在破壞性生命過程中發出聲音、創造意義和身份形成（Destrooper & Verclyte，2022 年）。正如其中一位製作者所說，「我們歡迎這項工作，但我們也有故事要講」工匠（2020 年 3 月 9 日）採訪，黎巴嫩夏蒂拉。

Although we do not share the same background, nor speak the same (verbal) language, we share an interest in skill from a joint position as makers. Exchanging knowledge about design practice generated trust and dialogue among each other. It became clear that embroidery’s value went beyond the final piece and that many women experienced the actual making process as essential. One of the women stated, referring to the making process: “We share emotions [.] What we cannot say in our houses, we can say here” Artisan (2020, March 7) Interview, Shatila, Lebanon. Through the repetitive character of binding stitches onto the fabric and sitting together, for example, these women voiced lived experiences and exchanged stories. Hence, embroidering together offers possibilities to engage in ways that do not exclusively rely on the spoken or written word. Instead, it starts from the context and provides a vernacular narrative rooted in the agency and strengths of these people. Nevertheless, as stories are shared verbally as well, Verclyte collaborated with a translator, a woman who grew up in Shatila, to overcome the lingual challenges.
雖然我們沒有相同的背景，也沒有說相同的（口頭）語言，但我們作為創客的共同立場對技能有著共同的興趣。關於設計實踐的知識交流產生了彼此之間的信任和對話。很明顯，刺繡的價值超出了最終作品的範疇，許多女性都認為實際的製作過程是必不可少的。其中一位婦女在談到製作過程時說：“我們分享情感[]我們在家裡不能說的話，我們可以在這裡說” 工匠（2020年3月7日）採訪，黎巴嫩夏蒂拉。例如，通過將針腳綁在織物上並坐在一起的重複性特徵，這些女性表達了生活經歷並交流了故事。因此，刺繡在一起提供了以不完全依賴口頭或書面文字的方式參與的可能性。相反，它從上下文出發，提供植根於這些人的能動性和優勢的白話敘事。然而，由於故事也是口頭分享的，Verclyte與一位在夏蒂拉長大的翻譯合作，克服了語言方面的挑戰。

Unfortunately, the ongoing covid-19 pandemic postponed a second and more extended visit to Shatila, prompting her to develop a hybrid strategy of digital and actual presence in the field. As contacts were already established, we continued collaboration with stakeholders online through (often visual) dis cussions. This online exchange led to a digital embroidery session in the autumn of 2020, where we shared insights regarding material, techniques, col ours, patterns, and composition. By jointly making, we further explored the colourful language of embroidery, a reciprocal learning experience that al lowed us to interact on a more equal footing and mitigate existing power re lations. The collaborative making, here, took the shape of experimental learning, where the Verclyte took on the role of apprentice while the women in Shatila were the experts on the matter.
不幸的是，持續的covid-19大流行推遲了對Shatila的第二次和更長時間的訪問，促使她制定了數位和實際存在的混合戰略。由於已經建立了聯繫，我們繼續通過（通常是視覺的）討論與利益相關者在線合作。這次在線交流促成了 2020 年秋季的數位刺繡會議，我們分享了有關材料、技術、我們的產品、圖案和構圖的見解。通過共同製作，我們進一步探索了刺繡的豐富多彩的語言，這是一種相互學習的經歷，讓我們在更平等的基礎上進行互動，並減輕現有的權力影響。在這裡，合作製作採取了實驗學習的形式，Verclyte 扮演學徒的角色，而Shatila的女性則是這方面的專家。

While these experiences were valuable in times of limited access to the field, focusing on what makers perceive to be the challenges and opportunities around them and how they use the design processes to navigate these requires more context-sensitivity. For example, embroidery is usually practised while sitting alongside each other and transmitted through careful mentorship in a shared place. The online experiment did not allow us to take part in this expe rience; not being part of the same context caused fragmented observation and interaction. When steering the camera on the movement of hands guiding the needle and thread, for example, facial expression was not visible. In addition,
雖然這些經驗在進入該領域的機會有限的時候很有價值，但關注製造商認為他們周圍的挑戰和機遇，以及他們如何使用設計流程來駕馭這些挑戰和機遇，需要更多的上下文敏感性。例如，刺繡通常是在彼此並排坐著的情況下練習的，並在共用的地方通過仔細的指導進行傳播。在線實驗不允許我們參與這種體驗;不屬於同一背景導致了零散的觀察和互動。例如，當在引導針和線的手的運動上操縱相機時，面部表情是不可見的。另外

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

these online platforms did not provide a safe and secure space to touch on more sensitive topics.
這些在線平台沒有提供一個安全可靠的空間來觸及更敏感的話題。

Therefore, real-live fieldwork was conducted at a later stage during several en counters where this exercise was repeated to learn the vocabulary of this lan guage. This experimental learning did not only provide insights in technical aspects such as mastering certain stitches, but also unravel the meaning behind material choices. These classes took place in the practitioners’ homes or an organisation where embroidery was practised, according to the women’s preferences.
因此，在後來的幾個櫃台中進行了真實的實地考察，重複了這個練習，以學習這個語言的詞彙。這種實驗學習不僅提供了技術方面的見解，例如掌握某些針腳，而且還揭示了材料選擇背後的含義。根據婦女的喜好，這些課程在從業者的家中或從事刺繡的組織中進行。

After the embroidery classes, Verclyte practised the skills she had learned while the women were embroidering their personal stories. Most of the time, this was done in small focus groups of 4e5 women. In this research phase, she was making together in the same space, but each woman worked on her own piece of fabric. Some women already finished their embroidery in advance and preferred to give some verbal clarification based on their embroidered work to better understand their stories or join the conversation with the other women. Documentary photographer Aaron Lapeirre visualised this process.
刺繡課結束後，Verclyte練習了她學到的技能，而婦女們則在刺繡她們的個人故事。大多數時候，這是在 4e5 女性的小型焦點小組中完成的。在這個研究階段，她在同一空間裡一起製作，但每個女人都在自己的一塊布料上工作。一些女性已經提前完成了刺繡，更願意根據自己的刺繡作品進行一些口頭澄清，以更好地了解她們的故事或加入與其他女性的對話。紀實攝影師亞倫·拉皮爾（Aaron Lapeirre）將這一過程可視化。

Photo 3 Embroidery class. Shatila, Lebanon (Lapeirre, 2021a
圖3 刺繡課。黎巴嫩夏蒂拉（Lapeirre，2021a)

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

Photo 4 Embroidering. Shatila, Lebanon (Lapeirre, 2021b
圖4：刺繡。黎巴嫩夏蒂拉（Lapeirre，2021b)

Inspired by the embroidered works, Verclyte made collages with the photo graphs of the (making) context. During a fifth visit in October 2022, the women commented on the collages by embroidering on them. The collabora tive making in this phase did not result in individual works but in co-designed pieces generated in correspondence. One of the women interpreted a collage with two birds as something negative because of its dark colour. She continued elaborating on this idea and transformed the biggest bird into a Syrian soldier. Underneath the big bird, she embroidered her nephew who gets suffocated by the bird. Furthermore, she embroidered the small bird, as a symbol for inno cence and hope. Inspired by the collage, this woman embroidered the injustice she experienced in Syria and aspiration for the future.
受刺繡作品的啟發，Verclyte用（製作）環境的照片圖表製作了拼貼畫。在 2022 年 10 月的第五次訪問中，這些婦女通過刺繡來評論拼貼畫。這一階段的合作並沒有產生個人作品，而是產生了共同設計的作品。其中一位女士將一幅有兩隻鳥的拼貼畫解釋為負面的東西，因為它的顏色很深。她繼續闡述這個想法，並將最大的鳥變成了一名敘利亞士兵。在大鳥的下面，她繡了被鳥窒息而死的侄子。此外，她還繡上了這隻小鳥，作為純真和希望的象徵。受拼貼畫的啟發，這位女士繡上了她在敘利亞經歷的不公正和對未來的憧憬。

This example shows how collaborative making can be a way to gain insight into lived experiences of conflict and displacement while at the same time in fluence the design process in unforeseen ways. In sum, all these little encoun ters influenced the direction of the design practice, the positionality of the people involved, and so the usage of design anthropology. As Fabian (1990: p 13) argues, this performance is not based on a ‘pre-existing script’ but evolves in the making through dialogue between interlocutors. It underscores the focus on process and the malleability of embroidery practices that trans form through interaction between people and their context. As such, the
這個例子展示了協作製作如何成為一種深入了解衝突和流離失所的生活經歷的方式，同時以不可預見的方式流暢地參與設計過程。總而言之，所有這些小因素都影響了設計實踐的方向，相關人員的位置，以及設計人類學的使用。正如Fabian（1990：第13頁）所指出的，這種表演不是基於“預先存在的劇本”，而是通過對話者之間的對話而發展起來的。它強調了對過程的關注和刺繡實踐的可塑性，這些實踐通過人與環境之間的互動而改變形式。因此，

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

Photo 5 Embroidering collages. Shatila, Lebanon (Lapeirre, 2022
圖5：刺繡拼貼畫。黎巴嫩夏蒂拉（Lapeirre，2022 年)

emancipatory character of this research does not lie in a pre-formulated change as conceived in many design projects. Instead, it lies in exploring the language of embroidery to visualise lived experiences and imagine the future of people whose voices are often side-lined when merely focussing on the ver bal or written word.
這項研究的解放性特徵並不在於許多設計專案所設想的預先制定的改變。相反，它在於探索刺繡語言，將生活經歷可視化，並想像人們的未來，當他們僅僅專注於ver bal或書面文字時，他們的聲音往往被邊緣化。

4 When making, doing, and knowing come together
4 當創造、行動和認識結合在一起時

Even if the San-dal and embroidery project differ in important aspects, such as start date, quantity of visits, interactions and time spent by the authors in the field, both cases highlight the possible value of a design anthropology through collaborative making. We discuss this value by digging into the related key concepts (common skill and in-habitat position) and focus on the mutual in fluence between theory and practice. In line with Singh et al. (2021), we
即使桑達爾和刺繡專案在重要方面有所不同，例如開始日期、訪問次數、互動和作者在該領域花費的時間，但這兩種情況都突出了設計人類學通過協作製作的潛在價值。我們通過深入研究相關的關鍵概念（共同技能和棲息地位置）來討論這一價值，並關注理論與實踐之間的相互銜接。根據 Singh 等人（2021 年）的說法，我們

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices 15
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐 15

relocate design from being an object of anthropology towards an instrument of doing anthropology, and simultaneously highlight the transformative char acter of this approach (Marcus & Murphy, 2013; Smith, 2022). Due to the specificity of each skill and context, we will illustrate the methodological influ ence on design practices through concrete examples.
將設計從人類學的對象轉變為人類學的工具，同時突出這種方法的變革性特徵（Marcus & Murphy，2013;史密斯，2022 年）。由於每種技能和背景的特殊性，我們將通過具體的例子來說明方法論對設計實踐的影響。

First, the merging between design and anthropology centralises around a skill that the researcher and interlocutors have in common, although from a different context. When skilled, you are familiar with the operations executed through hands, fingers, and eyes, through which a common language can be developed. It allows us to move away from the merely spoken and written word using the language of design to engage and communicate with people. The story told through collaborative making, including the material, takes the collaborators on a common journey. Being a novice practitioner requires learning a skill that is not impossible but requires many hours of dedication. Sennett (2008) describes in his book ‘The Craftsman’ that for every skill learned an average of 10 000 h is needed to understand the basics. To put in context: with 8 h a day, five days a week, 48 working weeks a year, this would be well over five years. The ‘trick’ that both design (‘art’ in the original word ings of Taussig, 2009) and anthropology make tangible and alive is the ability to slow down or even block and divert the way by which we so speedily, even instantaneously, transform sensory knowledge into knowledge (Taussig, 2009, p. 188). And, so, design anthropology can make us slow down and pause before our habitual, almost automatic way of thinking and allow a moment to imagine how things could be otherwise.
首先，設計和人類學之間的融合圍繞著研究人員和對話者共同擁有的技能，儘管來自不同的背景。熟練后，您熟悉通過手、手指和眼睛執行的操作，通過這些操作可以發展一種共同的語言。它使我們能夠擺脫單純的口頭和書面文字，使用設計語言與人互動和交流。通過協作製作（包括材料）講述的故事將合作者帶入共同的旅程。作為一名新手從業者，需要學習一項並非不可能但需要大量時間奉獻的技能。Sennett（2008）在他的《工匠》一書中描述說，對於學習的每一項技能，平均需要10 000小時才能理解基礎知識。舉個例子：每天工作 8 小時，每周工作 5 天，每年工作 48 周，這將遠遠超過五年。設計（Taussig，2009年原詞中的“藝術”）和人類學都使“技巧”變得有形和生動，是能夠減緩甚至阻止和轉移我們如此迅速地、甚至瞬間將感官知識轉化為知識的方式（Taussig，2009 年，第 188 頁）。因此，設計人類學可以讓我們在習慣性的、幾乎是自動的思維方式之前放慢腳步，停下來，讓我們花點時間想像一下事情會怎樣。

Slow research and long-term involvement also relate to the design projects described above as they help to explore and make visible viable designs stem ming from populations that use contextually embedded knowledge. For example, the embroidered stories in Shatila are shaped while making, informed by the context they live(d) in. The slow character of binding stitches onto the fabric gives people time to reflect, which affects the final design. A woman used different types of stitches to emphasise emotions she experienced while embroidering about forced displacement. Besides expressing lived expe riences and imagining a more just future, the repetitive nature of embroidery helps to address emotions and cope with sorrow and pain. Exploring embroi dery as a common language makes it possible to ‘talk’ about these topics in a contextual embedded, performative, and non-linear way.
緩慢的研究和長期參與也與上述設計專案有關，因為它們有助於探索和使可見的可行設計源於使用上下文嵌入知識的人群。例如，夏蒂拉（Shatila）中的刺繡故事是在製作過程中塑造的，取決於它們所處的環境。將針腳綁定在織物上的緩慢特性使人們有時間反思，這會影響最終設計。一位女士使用不同類型的針腳來強調她在刺繡被迫流離失所時所經歷的情緒。除了表達生活經驗和想像更公正的未來外，刺繡的重複性還有助於解決情緒並應對悲傷和痛苦。探索刺繡作為一種共同語言，可以以上下文嵌入、表演和非線性的方式“談論”這些主題。

Secondly, and besides the common skill, exploring the meanings behind design practices through collaborative making demands close physical interaction and attentive encounters between people and materiality. Therefore, we must recognise and acknowledge the agents involved co-creating knowledge and things. Framed from an ‘in-habitat position’ and in line with Ingold’s (2020) notion of correspondence, this approach allows for more horizontal
其次，除了共同的技能之外，通過協作製作探索設計實踐背後的意義需要密切的身體互動和人與物質之間的細心接觸。因此，我們必須認識和承認共同創造知識和事物的主體。從「棲息地位置」出發，與Ingold（2020）的對應概念一致，這種方法允許更多的水準

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

ways of positioning, as a methodology ‘with’ rather than ‘of’ people. We acknowledge, as mentioned by Lawther et al. (2019), that power relations can be amplified when researching as an ‘outsider’ within a post-conflict context or when working with groups that have been marginalised. When moving between the global North and South, historical backgrounds, wealth disparities, and access to education can create barriers between researchers and the populations with whom we work. A shared interest in skill equally pushes forward a dialectic process of constantly going back and forth between the people involved while reflecting together on the design and research process.
定位方式，作為一種“與人”而不是“人”的方法論。我們承認，正如 Lawther 等人（2019 年）所提到的，在衝突後背景下作為“局外人”進行研究或與被邊緣化的群體合作時，權力關係可以被放大。在南北之間移動時，歷史背景、貧富差距和受教育機會可能會在研究人員和我們合作的人群之間造成障礙。對技能的共同興趣同樣推動了一個辯證過程，即在相關人員之間不斷來回交流，同時共同反思設計和研究過程。

Consensus decision-making with all agents happens on the smallest unit of set tlement in ways that are supportive and respectful of the needs and rights of the people involved. This includes negotiating the set-up of the research, the process, and its outcome, as well as positionalities which may shift throughout the projects among different interests, backgrounds, and expectations (Boeykens, 2019). Although we reflect on our positionality, this cannot be seen separately from the positionalities of the people with whom we work. Within the embroidery project, the researcher shifted from being a maker interested in embroidery towards an apprentice, towards a facilitator, towards a co-designer. Also, within the sandal project, the role of the researcher shifted between being a person who knows a lot about shoes, towards a facilitator, looking with them and adapting the sandal to different circumstances and bringing to the fore the linked meanings of making. Depicting the different layers behind making goes hand in hand with the shift in positionalities, including creating other positionalities that were not at play during the start of the collaboration.
與所有代理人的共識決策以最小的設定單位進行，以支援和尊重相關人員的需求和權利。這包括就研究的設置、過程及其結果進行談判，以及在整個專案中可能因不同利益、背景和期望而改變的立場（Boeykens，2019）。儘管我們反思了自己的立場，但這不能與與我們一起工作的人的立場分開來看待。在刺繡專案中，研究人員從對刺繡感興趣的製造商轉變為學徒，轉變為促進者，轉變為共同設計師。此外，在涼鞋專案中，研究人員的角色從一個對鞋子瞭解很多的人轉變為一個促進者，與他們一起觀察，使涼鞋適應不同的環境，並突出製作的相關意義。描繪製作背後的不同層次與位置的轉變齊頭並進，包括創建在合作開始時沒有發揮作用的其他位置。

Interaction along different backgrounds, perspectives and positionalities can influence design processes, in a way that the design ‘grows’ along the process. In the embroidery project, the embroidered stories inspired the researcher to make collages based on the works of the women. Subsequently, associations were made among the women in Shatila. Inspired by these collages, they elab orated certain ideas by embroidering on them. A collage holding an emblem of the United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in the shape of a pomegranate tree, for example, was associated with the concept of refugeehood, the lack of dignity and self-determination. A woman erased UNHCR’s logo by adding colourful flowers on top of them, which made the tree flourish again. As such, the co-creation influenced the design and converted a negative connota tion into aspirations for the future.
不同背景、視角和位置的互動可以影響設計過程，設計會隨著設計過程的“成長”而變化。在刺繡專案中，刺繡故事激發了研究人員根據女性的作品製作拼貼畫的靈感。隨後，夏蒂拉的婦女之間建立了聯繫。受這些拼貼畫的啟發，他們通過刺繡來表達某些想法。例如，一幅以石榴樹形狀印有聯合國難民署（難民署）標誌的拼貼畫與難民概念、缺乏尊嚴和自決有關。一名婦女在難民署的標誌上添加了五顏六色的花朵，從而抹去了難民署的標誌，使這棵樹再次蓬勃發展。因此，共同創造影響了設計，並將負面內涵轉化為對未來的期望。

Thirdly, this notion of acquiring, sharing, and transferring skills helps us explore multiple forms of knowing stemming from various worldviews and practices, including non-Western design. We strive for what Connell (2018, p. 30) calls a “mosaic epistemology, where separate knowledge systems sit beside each other
第三，這種獲取、分享和轉移技能的概念有助於我們探索源於各種世界觀和實踐（包括非西方設計）的多種形式的知識。我們努力實現康奈爾（2018年，第 30 頁）所說的「馬賽克認識論，其中不同的知識系統彼此相鄰

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

like tiles in a mosaic, each based on a specific culture or historical experience, and each having its own claims to validity”. Design from this perspective is reoriented toward creative experimentation with forms, concepts, and materials which are deeply embedded in a broader worldview. Design here can bring about partic ular ways of being, knowing, and doing, and add to a mosaic world. This is in line with Escobar (2018) who pursues an autonomous design that can foster plu riverse openings. Dynamic documenting of design practices not only opens doors towards refining tactile output, but also yields openings towards fields such as biomechanics and human rights, equally raising questions, e.g. owner ship related to cultural heritage.
就像馬賽克中的瓷磚一樣，每塊瓷磚都基於特定的文化或歷史經驗，並且每塊瓷磚都有自己的有效性主張“。從這個角度來看，設計重新定位為對形式、概念和材料的創造性實驗，這些形式、概念和材料深深植根於更廣闊的世界觀中。這裏的設計可以帶來獨特的存在方式、認知方式和行為方式，並增加馬賽克世界。這與Escobar（2018）一致，他追求一種可以促進多面開口的自主設計。對設計實踐的動態記錄不僅為完善觸覺輸出打開了大門，而且還為生物力學和人權等領域提供了機會，同樣提出了一些問題，例如與文化遺產相關的擁有者身份。

Through the collaborative re-making of the sandal, the importance of the eland, the narrative and the material, became obvious. The eland is linked to the San creation story, to healing, to the eland dance and songs, to the hunt, and to pu berty initiation rites (Keeney & Keeney, 2013; Lieberman et al., 2020). Addi tional biomechanical research confirmed the positive impact of the sandal on foot health (Willems et al., 2020). Matter is no longer considered inert and pas sive but receives agency and becomes an actant. In ‘Vibrant Matter’ Bennett (2010) advocates that such a view on matter (and non-human forces) can advance ecological and materially sustainable ways of production and consump tion. The design of the San-dal is dynamic and changes visually depending on the contexts and its users (e.g. closing systems). Nevertheless, after common reflec tion on the scarcity of hides, one thing was clear, all agents preferred to use only eland skins, and to not use cow hides alien to their hunter-gathering culture.
通過對涼鞋的合作重新製作，eland、敘事和材料的重要性變得顯而易見。伊蘭與聖人的創世故事、治療、伊蘭舞蹈和歌曲、狩獵和 pu berty 入會儀式有關（Keeney & Keeney，2013 年;Lieberman 等人，2020 年）。額外的生物力學研究證實了涼鞋對足部健康的積極影響（Willems 等人，2020 年）。物質不再被認為是惰性的，而是獲得能動性並成為行動者。Bennett（2010）在「充滿活力的物質」中主張，這種關於物質（和非人類力量）的觀點可以促進生態和物質上可持續的生產和消費方式。San-dal的設計是動態的，並根據環境及其使用者（例如關閉系統）在視覺上發生變化。然而，在對獸皮稀缺性進行普遍反思之後，有一點是明確的，所有特工都喜歡只使用伊蘭皮，而不使用與他們的狩獵採集文化格格不入的牛皮。

To conclude, via collaborative making we move beyond the empirical, towards transformative interventions impacting both theory and practice. Our exam ples correspond to Smith (2022: p 4), who describes design anthropology’s po tential to “bring to the fore the temporal, past-present-future entanglements, and frictions that such processes entail, especially when dealing with inclusive ap proaches to sensitive cultural and historical issues”.
總而言之，通過協作製作，我們超越了經驗，走向影響理論和實踐的變革性干預。我們的考試與史密斯（2022 年：第 4 頁）相對應，他描述了設計人類學的 po tential，即“突出這些過程所帶來的時間、過去-現在-未來的糾葛和摩擦，尤其是在處理敏感文化和歷史問題的包容性問題時”。

5 Conclusion 5 結論

Proposing a design anthropology of collaborative making means facilitating a negotiated process as a mode of engagement with the people involved and the materials used. In this paper, this engagement starts from common interests in a similar skill.
提出一種協作製作的設計人類學意味著促進談判過程，作為與相關人員和所用材料接觸的一種模式。在本文中，這種參與始於對類似技能的共同興趣。

We first situated making as a conversation between design and anthropology and how we understand the liaison between theory and practice. We continued by explaining the ‘in-habitat position’, as a way to horizontalize the relations between all agents. We then illustrated a design anthropological approach through a methodology of collaborative making based on shared skills with
我們首先將製作定位為設計和人類學之間的對話，以及我們如何理解理論與實踐之間的聯繫。我們繼續解釋「棲息地內位置」，作為水準化所有主體之間關係的一種方式。然後，我們通過基於共用技能的協作製作方法說明了設計人類學方法

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023
設計研究 2023年7月第87卷第C期

cases from shoemaking (Nhoma, Namibia) and embroidering (Shatila, Lebanon).
製鞋（納米比亞恩霍馬）和刺繡（黎巴嫩夏蒂拉）的案例。

After describing the methodology and context of both cases, we discussed the value of collaborative making based on common skills. We conclude this approach allows for plural ways of knowing while at the same time nourishing a more balanced and inclusive way of design. In doing so, these engagements open up towards other dimensions and opportunities for change where de signers (including our interlocutors), anthropologists and, by extension, social researchers can benefit from. To grasp the full understanding of what this change entails and how it impacts the broader public, further experimental and comparative research is required.
在描述了這兩個案例的方法和背景之後，我們討論了基於共同技能的協作製作的價值。我們得出的結論是，這種方法允許多種認知方式，同時滋養一種更加平衡和包容的設計方式。在這樣做的過程中，這些參與為其他維度和變革機會開闢了大門，簽名者（包括我們的對話者）、人類學家以及社會研究人員可以從中受益。為了充分理解這種變化意味著什麼以及它如何影響更廣泛的公眾，需要進一步的實驗和比較研究。

Funding statement 資金聲明

The research project On Migrating Heritage is financed by the HOGENT Arts Research Fund [1SA-OF1902], awarded to Catherine Willems, with PI Sofie Verclyte.
“遷移遺產”研究專案由HOGENT藝術研究基金[1SA-OF1902]資助，授予凱薩琳·威廉姆斯（Catherine Willems）和PI Sofie Verclyte。

Catherine Willems’s current research Future Footwear 2.0 is financed by the HOGENT Arts Research Fund [1SA-OF1602].
凱薩琳·威廉姆斯（Catherine Willems）目前的研究“未來鞋類2.0”由HOGENT藝術研究基金[1SA-OF1602]資助。

Declaration of competing interest
利益爭奪聲明

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
作者聲明，他們沒有已知的相互競爭的經濟利益或個人關係，這些利益或關係可能會影響本文所報告的工作。

Data availability 數據可用性

The data that has been used is confidential.
已使用的數據是機密的。

Acknowledgements 確認

The authors wish to thank Prof. Tine Destrooper, Prof. Rik Pinxten, Elke Ev rard, Brigitte Herremans, Anne-Mie Engelen, and the (design) students of KASK & Conservatorium of the School of Arts of HOGENT for their com ments during the drafting process, fieldwork assistant Farah Hindawi for facil itating and contributing to the exploratory fieldwork in Shatila and the research collaborators in Shatila and the Ju’Ihoan San and Flora Blommaert from Nhoma (Nhoma Safari Camp) in Namibia for their participation and sharing their insights. Furthermore, we want to thank the anonymous re viewers for their helpful suggestions.
作者要感謝Tine Destrooper教授、Rik Pinxten教授、Elke Ev rard、Brigitte Herremans、Anne-Mie Engelen和KASK和HOGENT藝術學院音樂學院的（設計）學生在起草過程中的辛勤工作，感謝田野工作助理Farah Hindawi為Shatila的探索性田野工作提供便利和貢獻，感謝Shatila的研究合作者以及來自納米比亞Nhoma（Nhoma Safari Camp）的Ju'Ihoan San和Flora Blommaert的研究合作者感謝他們的參與並分享他們的見解。此外，我們要感謝匿名的 re 觀眾提供的有用建議。

Notes 筆記

1. Both authors contributed equally to this article.
1. 兩位作者對本文的貢獻相同。

1. A comprehensive overview can be found in the Editorial by Smith (2022), in the Special
1. 全面的概述可以在 Smith 的社論（2022）中找到，在

Section on Design Anthropology.
設計人類學部分。

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices
探索製鞋和刺繡實踐

2. In the book The Tacit Dimension Polanyi (1966, p. 4) states, that “We can know more than we can tell” in which he refers to the fact that our knowledge grows through the experience and practice of design.
2. 在《隱性維度》（1966 年，第 4 頁）一書中，波蘭尼指出，“我們可以知道的比我們能說的更多”，他指的是我們的知識是通過設計的經驗和實踐而增長的。

5. ‘Tatreez’ means embroidery in Arabic (Ghnaim, 2018).
5. “Tatreez”在阿拉伯文中是刺繡的意思（Ghnaim，2018 年）。

3. Although collaborative making corresponds to Participatory Design e and other forms of co-creation e Participatory Design is not necessarily the same as how we describe a design anthropology of collaborative making. The latter starts from a similar skill set within different contexts that bring along knowledge.
3. 雖然協作設計對應於參與式設計 e 和其他形式的共同創造，但參與式設計不一定與我們描述協作製作的設計人類學相同。後者從不同背景下的類似技能開始，帶來知識。

4. Simultaneously a crowdfunding campaign was launched in 2016 through the kickstarter platform, called ‘the original San-dal’. It was a collaboration between the San commu nity (including 9 cobblers), UK based company Vivobarefoot, and a local NGO. In 2016, 633 backers pledged GBP92,000 to help bring this project to life (Willems & Roelandt, 2018).
4. 同時，2016年通過kickstarter平台發起了一項眾籌活動，稱為“原始 San-dal”。這是 San commu nity（包括 9 名鞋匠）、英國公司 Vivobarefoot 和當地非政府組織之間的合作。2016年，633 名支持者承諾提供92,000英鎊來幫助實現該專案（Willems & Roelandt，2018年）。

References 引用

Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant Matter, a political ecology of things. USA: Duke Uni versity Press
貝內特，J.（2010 年）。充滿活力的物質，事物的政治生態學。美國：杜克大學出版社.

Biesele, M., & Hitchcock, R. (2013). The Ju/’hoan San of Nyae Nyae and Nami bian independence. Development, democracy, and indigenous voices in Southern Africa. New York & Oxford: Berghahn Books
Biesele，M.和Hitchcock，R.（2013）。Nyae Nyae 和 Nami bian 的 Ju/'hoan San。南部非洲的發展、民主和原住民的聲音。紐約和牛津：Berghahn Books.

Boeykens, T. (2019). Exile, return, record: Exploring historical narratives and community resistance through participatory filmmaking in ‘post-conflict” gua temale. Journal of Extreme Anthropology, 3(1), 30e56
Boeykens，T.（2019 年）。流亡、回歸、記錄：通過參與式電影製作探索歷史敘事和社區抵抗「衝突後」的瓜馬利。極端人類學雜誌，3（1），30e56.

Bouchez, H. (2017). Het wilde ding. Ghent: Art paper editions. Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a theory of practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni versity Press
Bouchez，H.（2017 年）。嘿根特：藝術紙版。布迪厄，P.（1977 年）。實踐理論大綱。劍橋：劍橋大學出版社.

Chatelard, G., & Kassab-Hassan, H. (2017). Survey report: Intangible cultural her itage of displaced Syrians. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
Chatelard，G.和Kassab-Hassan，H.（2017）。調查報告：流離失所的敘利亞人的非物質文化。聯合國教育、科學及文化組織.

Connell, R. (2018). Meeting at the edge of fear. Theory on a world scale. In B. Reiter (Ed.), Constructing the pluriverse: The geopolitics of knowledge (pp. 19e38). Durham: Duke University Press
康奈爾，R.（2018 年）。在恐懼的邊緣相遇。世界範圍內的理論。在 B. Reiter（編輯）中，構建多元宇宙：知識的地緣政治（第 19e38 頁）。達勒姆：杜克大學出版社.

Curtis, R., Willems, C., Paoletti, P., & D’Aout, K. (2021). Daily activity in min- ^ imal footwear increases foot strength. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 1e10. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1988). A thousand plateaus. Capitalism and schizo phrenia. London: Althlone Press.

Destrooper, T., & Verclyte, S. (2022). Artistic practices as a site of human rights. How performative ethnography can facilitate a deeper contextual understand ing. Journal of Human Rights Practice, 13(3), 565e584.

Drazin, A. (2021). Design anthropology in context. An introduction to design mate riality and collaboration thinking. New York: Routledge.

Eastmond, M. (2007). Stories as lived experience: Narratives in forced migration research. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(2), 248e264.

Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Durham: Duke University Press.

Escobar, A. (2021). Autonomous design and the emergent transnational critical design field. In C. Mareis, & N. Paim (Eds.), Design Struggles: Intersecting his tories, pedagogies, and perspectives. Amsterdam: Valiz.

Ewart, J. I. (2013). Designing by doing: Building bridges in the Highlands of bor neo. In W. Gunn, T. Otto, & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Design anthropology: Theory and practice (pp. 85e99). London & New York: Bloomsbury.

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023

Fabian, J. (1990). Power and performance ethnographic explorations through pro verbial wisdom and theater in shaba, zaire. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin

Press.

Gatt, C., & Ingold, T. (2013). From description to correspondence: Anthropology in real time. In W. Gunn, T. Otto, & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Design anthropology:

Theory and practice (pp. 139e158). London & New York: Bloomsbury.

Ghnaim, W. (2018). Tatreez & Tea: Embroidery and storytelling in the Palestinian diaspora. In Brooklyn: Self-published (2nd ed.).

Gladwin, T. (1970). East is a big bird: Navigation & logic on Puluwat Atoll. Lon don: Harvard University Press.

Gunn, W., Otto, T., & Smith, R. C. (2013). Design anthropology: Theory and prac tice. Taylor & Francis.

Hallam, E., & Ingold, T. (2020). Creativity and cultural improvisation: An intro duction. In E. Hallam, & T. Ingold (Eds.), Creativity and cultural improvisa

tion. New York: Routledge.

Hitchcock, R. (2018). The Ju/’hoansi of Nyae Nyae, Namibia: A historical and anthropological perspective. In C. Willems (Ed.), Do you want your feet

back? (pp. 108e123), (Ghent: Art Paper Editions).

Human Rights Watch. (2022). World report 2022: Events op 2021. from. https:// www.hrw.org/sites/default/files/media_2022/01/World%20Report%202022%

20web%20pdf_0.pdf. (Accessed 13 March 2023).

Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.

Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archeology, art and architecture. Abing don: Routledge.

Ingold, T. (2020). Correspondences. Oxford: Polity Press.

Keeney, B., & Keeney, H. (2013). Reentry into first creation: A contextual frame for the Ju/’hoan bushman performance of puberty rites, storytelling, and heal

ing dance. Journal of Anthropological Research, 69(1), 65e86.

Lapeirre, A. (2021a). Collaborative making: Embroidery class. Lebanon: Shatila.

Lapeirre, A. (2021b). Embroidered stories. Lebanon: Shatila.

Lapeirre, A. (2022). Embroidered collages. Lebanon: Shatila.

Lawther, C., Killean, R., & Dempster, L. (2019). Working with others: Reflec tions on fieldwork in postconflict societies. International Journal of Transitional

Justice, 13(2), 387e397.

Leach, J. (2013). Waterfall, movement, life: Woven bark-fibre skirts on the rai coast of Papua New Guinea. In L. Bolton, N. Thomas, E. Bonshek,

J. Adams, & B. Burt (Eds.), Melanesia: Art and encounter (pp. 83e95). Lon

don: British Museum Press.

Lieberman, D. E., Mahaffey, M., Cubesare Quimare, S., Holowka, N. B., Wallace, I. J., Baggish, A. L., Ij€as, M., Levi, J. M., Liebenberg, L., &

Martin, D. Q. (2020). Running in Tarahumara culture: Persistence hunting,

footracing, dancing, work, and the fallacy of the athletic savage. Current An

thropology, 61(3), 356e379.

Marshall Thomas, E. (2006). The old way: A story of the first people. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

Murphy, K. M., & Marcus, G. E. (2013). Epilogue: Ethnography and design, ethnography in design. Ethnography by Design. In Design anthropology the

ory and practice (pp. 251e268). Bloomsbury Academic.

Nolf, T. (2018). IKunta Bo, headman of Doupos, interviewed by !Ui Kunta on hunting, healing and the making of the n!ang nIosi, Doupos, Nyae Nyae,

Namibia. In C. Willems (Ed.), Do you want your feet back?. Ghent: Art paper

editions (pp. 27).

Exploring shoemaking and embroidery practices

Otto, T., & Smith, R. C. (2013). Design anthropology: A distinct style of knowing. In W. Gunn, T. Otto, & R. C. Smith (Eds.), Design anthropology: Theory and practice (pp. 1e29). London & New York: Bloomsbury.

Palmieri, T., Huybrechts, L., & Devisch, O. (2021). Co-Producing, curating and reconfiguring dwelling patterns: A design anthropological approach for sus tainable dwelling futures in residential suburbs. Design Studies, 74.

Pinxten, R. (2010). The creation of God. New York: Peter Lang. Polanyi, M. (1966). The tacit dimension. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Sennett, R. (2008). The craftsman. USA: Yale University Press. Sharif, H. (2018). Refugee-led humanitarianism in Lebanon’s Shatila camp. Forced Migration Review, 57, 10e12.

Singh, A., Romero Herrera, N., van Dijk, H., Keyson, D., & Strating, A. (2021). Envisioning ‘anthropology through design’: A design interventionist approach to generate anthropological knowledge. Design Studies, 76.

Smith, R. C. (2022). Editorial: Design anthropology. Design Studies, 80, 1e6. Suzman, J. (2017). Affluence without abundance: The disappearing world of the Bushmen. USA: Bloomsbury Publishing.

Taussig, M. (2009). What color is the sacred? Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Tunstall, E. (2019). Decolonizing design innovation: Design anthropology, critical anthropology, and indigenous knowledge. In E. Resnick (Ed.), The social design reader (pp. 345e360). London & New York: Bloomsbury.

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2016). The situation of Pales tinian refugees in Lebanon. https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/56cc95484.pdf. (Accessed 9 December 2021).

United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (2020). Fact sheet Lebanon. from. https://www.unhcr.org/lb/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2020/02/ UNHCR-Lebanon-Operational-Fact-sheet-January-2020.pdf. (Accessed 9 December 2021).

Willems, C. (2013). 100% bag tanned: Action research generating new insights on design processes. Critical Arts, 27(5), 474e489.

Willems, D. (2022). N!ang n|osi, featuring a back strap, a double lace between the toes, and a two-layer sole. Namibia: Nyae Nyae.

Willems, C. (2015). Nuvttohat, perfect for feet!: shoe design as cultural heritage. Volkskunde, 116(3), 371e382.

Willems, C., Curtis, R., Pataky, T., & D’Aout, K. (2020). Plantar pressures in ^ three types of indigenous footwear, commercial minimal shoes, and conven tional Western shoes, compared to barefoot walking. Footwear Science, 13(1), 1e17.

Willems, C., Littleben, C., Toadlena, B., & Anderson, E. (2022). Alternative di mensions behind making and walking. In J. Boden, & R. Pinxten (Eds.), Plu riversal worlds in a grain of sand (pp. 213e224). Berchem: EPO.

Willems, C., & Roelandt, E. (2018). Do you want your feet back? Ghent. Art Paper Editions.

Design Studies Vol 87 No. C July 2023