24.05.2026

Tactile Interfaces in Architecture

Building design

Architectural details on a modern building facade, photographed by DANSH

Feeling Our Way Through the Future – Tactile interfaces in architecture promise a new sensibility, a fusion of hand, space, and digital intelligence. Amid high-tech gestures, real-time feedback, and haptic sophistication, the question arises: Will architects soon return to being Baumeister who think with their hands? Or is this all just a pretty gimmick for design trade shows?

Tactile interfaces are more than just touchscreens—they are revolutionizing the design and use of architecture.
Germany, Austria, and Switzerland are experimenting, but the major breakthrough has yet to come.
Digital and AI-powered systems combine physical interaction with data-driven construction.
Sensory usability meets sustainability requirements—with surprising results.
Professional expertise is shifting: materials science, sensor technology, and digital modeling are becoming essential.
The debate: Is this a return to craftsmanship or a new game with the illusion of control?
Global examples show how tactile interfaces democratize complex processes—and create new risks.
An in-depth look at opportunities, hurdles, and the future of the sense of touch in digital design.

Tactile Interfaces: The State of Affairs Between Hype, Hope, and Craftsmanship

Tactile interfaces hold a promise: they aim to finally make the digital world tangible—not just visible or audible. This may sound like science fiction, but it has long since produced real prototypes and concrete applications. Architects, planners, and users are meant not only to design or inhabit a space, but also to physically experience, control, and transform it—with their hands at the heart of architecture. But how far has the German-speaking world come? In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, most projects are still in the experimental stage, often funded by universities or innovation programs. In some flagship projects, such as those in Zurich or Vienna, interactive walls, smart surfaces, or reactive materials are already being used in educational buildings, museums, or innovation labs. In Berlin, researchers are working on facade elements that respond to touch, changing light, or acoustic feedback. But we are still a long way from widespread adoption, for example in residential construction.

The reasons for this are multifaceted. For one thing, technical standardization is often lacking. Different vendors supply incompatible systems, and integrating them into existing building technology is both complex and prone to errors. On the other hand, there is a great deal of skepticism: Is this really necessary, or is it just another feature that will disappear into the maintenance abyss after two years? The construction industry in Germany has traditionally been cautious when it comes to new technologies—and for good reason. Investments must pay off, and sustainable maintenance must be ensured. But the pressure is mounting, especially in the context of digitalization and smart buildings. Those who don’t keep up risk falling behind—or remaining stuck in a niche.

In Switzerland, people are more daring. Here, tactile interfaces are increasingly being used in pilot projects to control lighting, climate, and acoustics, often coupled with real-time data from sensors and IoT systems. The goal: spaces that intuitively adapt to users’ needs while saving energy. Austria, on the other hand, is increasingly focusing on participatory approaches. In Vienna’s innovation districts, tactile interfaces are used to actively involve residents in design processes. Through physical interaction with city models, citizens can run through scenarios, feel materials, and thus provide decision-makers with feedback that goes beyond the purely visual.

Despite these approaches, the big breakthrough has yet to materialize. The majority of planners are preoccupied with the day-to-day reality of construction—and that is rarely as glamorous as an interactive table in an innovation lab. Changes are needed not only in technology but also in culture. The discipline must ask itself: Is the sense of touch really the future of digital architecture, or is this all just a nice add-on for the next trade show? The discussion is passionate but often goes in circles. One thing is clear to everyone: Those who only focus on the immediate future miss the big picture.

Another obstacle is education. Tactile interfaces require skills beyond traditional design. An understanding of materials, sensor technology, software integration, and usability design suddenly become key qualifications. Universities are responding—slowly, but at least they’re responding. The next generation of architects will have to work not only with a pencil, but also with a touchpad and sensors. Those who ignore this will be left behind.

Innovation Trends: From Smart Materials to AI-Controlled Interfaces

The pace of innovation in the field of tactile interfaces is tremendous. While traditional touchscreens have long been part of everyday life, new materials and user interface concepts are evolving at breakneck speed. Smart surfaces that respond to pressure, temperature, or even gestures are setting new standards. In materials research labs, polymer blends are being developed that function as both sensors and actuators. In Germany, for example, researchers are working on concrete surfaces that can be used as giant control panels thanks to embedded sensors. In Austria, researchers are experimenting with wood that becomes a haptic interface through microfine conductors. In Switzerland, adaptive facades are being developed that change their appearance when touched, thereby adapting to climatic conditions.

The major focus is on the integration of artificial intelligence. AI-supported systems can analyze usage data, recognize patterns, and dynamically adjust surfaces. A wall that recognizes who is touching it and responds with personalized feedback? What sounds like science fiction is already a reality in pilot projects. The possibilities range from individual lighting moods and acoustic adjustments to controlling complex building systems with the touch of a finger. In Zurich, for example, there is a project underway in which the entire indoor climate is regulated via a single tactile control panel. The key feature: The panel learns from user behavior and automatically suggests optimizations.

The trend is toward the convergence of the physical and digital worlds. Mixed-reality applications, in which real models and digital simulations are linked via tactile interfaces, are opening up new horizons in the design process. In Vienna, users can not only modify shapes on interactive models but also feel material samples, thereby directly experiencing the effects on acoustics, lighting, and energy consumption. Architecture becomes a multisensory experience—and the design process a dialogue between hand, eye, and algorithm.

The issue of interoperability plays a central role here. Tactile interfaces must integrate seamlessly into existing building management systems. This requires open interfaces, standardized protocols, and an understanding of the complexity of modern construction projects. This is currently one of the biggest challenges. Many solutions are isolated systems that shine in pilot operations but fail in everyday use. Only when the systems are truly scalable and maintainable will a breakthrough be achieved.

Another driver of innovation is collaboration with other disciplines. Architecture intersects with product design, computer science, psychology, and sociology. Only those who understand users’ needs and make intelligent use of technical possibilities can create sustainable solutions. The best interfaces are invisible—they recede into the background and allow the space itself to take center stage. This is an art that is still far too rarely mastered.

Sustainability and Social Responsibility: Sensory Technology with a Dark Side

Tactile interfaces are often marketed as sustainable innovations. And indeed, they offer the potential to reduce energy consumption and optimize resource use. Smart control systems prevent unnecessary heating or cooling, and adaptive surfaces adjust to user behavior. But the reality is more complex. Many of the materials used are high-tech products whose manufacturing is energy-intensive and poses challenges for recycling. Sensors, circuit traces, and control units consist of rare raw materials whose environmental footprint remains questionable.

Another problem: The systems are prone to malfunctions and wear and tear. What shines in the lab must prove itself in everyday life. Robust solutions are especially needed in public spaces, such as schools or train stations. Vandalism, dirt, and heavy use place high demands on materials and technology. Anyone relying on tactile interfaces must also provide for maintenance and replacement parts—a cost factor that is often underestimated.

Social sustainability is another area of concern. Tactile interfaces promise inclusion, for example for people with visual impairments. Yet in practice, designs that work only for a small group of users often dominate. Anyone who truly wants to create accessible spaces must plan for diversity in usage. This means that haptic, acoustic, and visual feedback must work together. The industry is still in its infancy in this regard.

Data protection and data sovereignty are other areas in need of attention. Many systems collect usage data to optimize the user experience. But who controls this data? Who guarantees that it won’t be misused? In Germany, there is a high level of sensitivity to these issues, and that’s a good thing. Systems must be transparent, traceable, and secure. Openness and control are mandatory, not optional. Only then will the trust necessary for widespread adoption grow.

Sustainability also means that technology must not be an end in itself. Tactile interfaces must offer genuine added value—for users, operators, and the environment. If they end up being nothing more than a gimmick, they will have missed their chance. The industry faces the task of honestly weighing benefits against costs and creating solutions that stand the test of time. This is challenging, but essential.

Shifting Competencies and Professional Challenges: Between Craftsmanship and High Tech

The introduction of tactile interfaces is drastically reshaping the architect’s professional profile. Anyone who wants to succeed today must be able to do more than just draw and model. Sensor technology, materials science, software integration, and user psychology are suddenly essential skills. The traditional distinction between designer and technician is dissolving. Interdisciplinarity is essential, and that means communicating on equal footing with engineers, computer scientists, and designers.

Many universities are lagging behind in their educational programs. While there are pilot projects and specialized seminars, the integration of these new skills has not yet become widespread. Those who rely on the traditional curriculum will quickly hit a wall in their professional lives. The demand for experts who combine technology and design is growing rapidly. Companies are desperately seeking talent that is not only creative but also technically savvy.

Workflows in everyday office life are also changing. Designs are no longer created solely on a computer; they must be tested for interactivity and usability. Prototyping, user testing, and iterative design are suddenly no longer foreign concepts. Those who aren’t willing to embrace these processes will be left behind. The era of ivory-tower architecture is over. The future is collaborative, agile, and open to experimentation.

This is also changing the relationship with the client. Where plans and renderings used to suffice, clients today expect interactive models, smart interfaces, and customized interactions. The line between design and use is blurring. Architects are becoming facilitators who must mediate between user needs, technical feasibility, and creative vision. This is challenging—and opens up new opportunities for those willing to take on responsibility.

Another key issue: liability and maintenance. Anyone who designs and builds tactile interfaces bears responsibility for their functionality and safety. The systems must be reliable, maintainable, and capable of receiving updates. This requires new contractual models, clear lines of responsibility, and close collaboration between planning, execution, and operation. Those who fail to think ahead in this area risk unpleasant surprises—and serious damage to their reputation.

Debates, Visions, and Global Perspectives: The Future of the Sense of Touch in Architecture

The discussion surrounding tactile interfaces is as old as the relationship between humans and machines. Critics complain that this represents another step toward technological domination and alienation. Does everything really have to be digital and interactive? Is the sense of materiality and craftsmanship lost when walls suddenly provide feedback? Or, on the contrary, are we witnessing a return to an architecture that puts people at the center—this time using new means?

Visionaries see tactile interfaces as a tool for democratization. When citizens experience urban development through interactive models, when users can intuitively control their spaces, their sense of connection to the built environment grows. Architecture becomes an open process—participatory and dynamic. But this carries risks: Who controls the interfaces? Who decides which data and functions are accessible? The danger of technocracy is real—and the temptation to relinquish control is great.

In an international comparison, cities like Singapore, Copenhagen, and New York demonstrate how tactile interfaces are used to manage complex processes, conserve resources, and engage users. In Germany, Austria, and Switzerland, people are more skeptical—and rightly so, because the challenges are considerable. But the direction is clear: Those who ignore these possibilities will fall behind global developments. The future of architecture is hybrid, sensory, and data-driven.

Technology alone is not a panacea. What matters is the intelligent use of these possibilities. Those who view tactile interfaces merely as a gimmick are squandering their potential. Those who see them as part of a comprehensive strategy—for sustainability, participation, and innovation—will reap the benefits. The industry stands at a crossroads: continue as before, or move forward boldly? The answer will determine how architecture is experienced and shaped in the future.

The debate is ongoing. Between euphoria and skepticism lies the opportunity to break new ground. Tactile interfaces are not a panacea, but a tool that can enrich the design process—if used wisely. Those who want to retain control over space must learn to dance with technology rather than let it lead them.

Conclusion: More Than Just a Gimmick—The Sense of Touch as the Key to Tomorrow’s Architecture

Tactile interfaces are here to stay. They are changing how we design, experience, and use spaces. Between high-tech and craftsmanship, between control and interaction, they open up new horizons—but also present new challenges. Anyone who embraces the sense of touch as an interface must be prepared to cast aside old certainties and acquire new skills. The digitization of architecture is not a sure thing, but rather a balancing act between innovation and responsibility. The design of the future literally lies in our hands. Those who experiment now can shape the architecture of tomorrow—everyone else will become a bit player in their own building. Welcome to the age of sensory intelligence.

22.01.2025

Project

Co-creation instead of participation

Building design

Management

Participation versus co-creation: Would the Superkilen work better today if citizens had been integrated into the process from the outset?

Superkilen in Copenhagen has failed. The citizens as a whole use the square more as a place to pass through than to linger, even though they were integrated into the planning process through participation – according to a long-term analysis by students at the Danish Institute for Study Abroad. During the design and development process, the Superkilen planners asked citizens to suggest artifacts from their countries of origin for the new city square. Holistic planning with co-creation and prototypes would have been one way of increasing acceptance of the square.

Co-creation

Co-creation originally comes from the business world, which began to involve consumers in the product development process in the 1990s. The Leading Cities research group defines co-creation in urban development as “the active flow of ideas and information between five sectors: government, business, academia, non-profit organizations and citizens that promotes participation, engagement and development.”

What is the difference to citizen participation? Public participation is a means for planners to learn more about the attitudes and opinions of local residents and to develop new ideas. They increase acceptance for a project. Co-creation, on the other hand, involves the most important sectors of society on an equal footing from the outset.

It therefore offers citizens and citizens’ organizations a better opportunity to be truly heard and gain more influence in planning processes. Co-creation views users as proactive citizens rather than consumers, and focuses on long-term cultural change and the whole community rather than individual user groups. Where citizen participation seeks to integrate citizens’ opinions into an already prescribed program, co-creation helps future users to shape and enforce their own decisions. Co-creation is an endless process in the best sense of the word, with regular exchanges taking place between those involved.

Co-creation has a number of advantages. The public provides input and feels equal, citizens feel they are taken seriously. They become much more aware of their living environment. In return, the government has to be much more responsive and responsive to citizens and other sectors. In return, however, it saves costs because only what is actually needed and used is implemented and the risk of a new project is correspondingly low.

Prototypes

In large design projects such as Superkilen, it is extremely important to test ideas in advance before they become a permanent part of the landscape or city. It is a long way from the abstract idea, analysis and public participation to the concrete installation. The prototype should be seen as a learning tool that can be optimized and changed in the next step. Prototypes are a democratic way of dealing with public space, they also reduce the risk of a failed project and unnecessary expenditure.

The holistic approach

Combining co-creation with the prototyping approach makes it easier to explore the potential of a space. This holistic approach leads to more sustainable and vibrant places in the city. However, the Superkilen started with an assumption that co-creation and prototyping would have led to a different design. Users would accept the space better and make it more their own. Perhaps a more critical examination of the initial idea would also have been achieved.

You can read Bianca Hermannsen’s current analysis of the square here.
Robert Schäfer visited Superkilen in 2012, directly after the opening. You can read his review of the new city square in Copenhagen here.
Watch the video here to see how BIG travels with local residents to their countries of origin to select artifacts for Superkilen.

19.12.2024

Design

Heavyweight with a message

Building design

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work by stone sculptor Marc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains what message he wants to convey with his sculpture, why he only uses white marble and […]

The Globo Uovo sculpture is an impressive work bystone sculptorMarc Reist and is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. The artist made the 6.5-ton “global egg” out of white marble. In an interview with STEIN, the Swiss artist explains the message hewants to conveywith hissculpture, why he only works with white stone and why he launched an appeal to collect eggshells before the opening.

Marc Reist: It’s a logical consequence of my artistic work and how I reflect on my surroundings by observing them. I notice how certain rules and mechanisms are similar on both a small and large scale. I never consciously came up with the topic, it just developed. I think it started in 2005.

The Globo Uovo symbolizes the world and the origin of life. Was there a specific reason for this idea?

Yes, that was in 2011. I was invited by a newspaper in Switzerland to write a few columns. I started to write about resources and food in these texts and about what bothers me: the way we deal with food, the way we deal with our environment. And during this phase, I designed the globe and then the egg. The eggs actually always resonate with me. Regularly for my wife – I only mention this in passing – for her birthday, for Mother’s Day, there are always drawings of chicken and egg. I either start with the chicken or the egg, but the egg always resonates.

Do the many openings in the sculpture also have a meaning?

The openings were created by the lines of longitude and latitude. And I found them very special as soon as I was able to work in the egg. There is a feeling of protection when you are in your human egg and you can see the outside world through these openings. At the same time, it could also be a prison. These feelings arose in me when I was working in the egg.

From a professional point of view – I trained as a stone sculptor and also took the master craftsman’s examination – I know almost all the materials. But even so, I used to only work with black stone for my shapes. And now, for years, I’ve only been working in white. For the small sculptures I make, I use a bright white marble. There is no other solution for me and for my forms. I have never used any materials with textures. They are beautiful, but not for my shapes.

But the marble for the egg has a certain texture. Was a block of 55 tons in pure white not available?

For the Globo Uovo, the stone is a little more marbled. Because this size in pure white – that would have been almost impossible and would have meant such a long wait. And the egg in this size in pure white would almost be a little too beautiful(laughs), almost baroque. That’s impossible. Visually too, it’s almost not rock anymore.

So the egg also looks much more “alive”.

Exactly, that’s what I mean. This methamorphosis of the rock, this mountain, that has to resonate.

How did the change from black to white rock come about?

That’s an interesting question. I have to go back to that. I wanted to make a really big sculpture in the 1990s. I chose a large block in Carrara without knowing what I was going to do with it. I wanted to be inspired by the material, by the block. I normally proceed differently. I have a drawing or a model and then work on the stone. But now I wanted to be influenced by the block. At the time, it was 20 tons in size. And that put an enormous strain on me(laughs). I suddenly realized that the further north the block was transported from Italy, the greater the strain in my head became. I was very blocked! And suddenly I found the solution. I then worked out a light cloth from this block. That was probably my solution, to release this heaviness in me in relation to the block. And since then I’ve only worked with white stone.

Are there purely visual reasons why you like to work with marble a lot, or is it also because of its properties?

Both, actually. My sculptures are also a matter of light. Not only with the large egg, but also with the other sculptures. The way the light passes through the opening and the edges is what makes it so good. And the properties for working are a pleasant side effect. It is easy to work with because it is so even, so homogeneous. But I mainly use marble because light and shadow are important for my sculptures.

You also want to send out a message with your art objects.

Yes, absolutely. I think that’s the greatest task of an artist. That his work is seen and heard, as the case may be. Communication is important. It makes no sense at all if I make an egg like this just to have another beautiful sculpture in a park somewhere. That wouldn’t be enough. It needs a message.

What message is that?

We have great difficulties with resources in general. This is most sensitive when it comes to food. And I really want to draw attention to the fact that people need to deal with the issue of food and resources. That a small train of thought changes.

Your sculpture is currently on display at the Dürrenmatt Center in Neuchâtel, Switzerland. Before the exhibition began, you launched an appeal to collect eggshells. What was the reason?

We had planned a performance with a dancer for the vernissage. I needed a lot of eggshells for that. Over the course of a year, people collected around 35,000 eggshells, washed them and brought them to me. Something you would normally throw away. For the exhibition opening, we laid them out on the floor of the museum and cleared paths, like a labyrinth. The dancer danced her way through it. But every now and then she made missteps on the eggshells, causing them to crack. And at the same time, with every misstep, a part of her body died. Because the shells represent our resources and if they are destroyed, the person dies too. And so she danced through the labyrinth and gradually died a dramatic death after three or four missteps.

Find out more about the project and the natural stone work in the February issue of STEIN. You can also find more information at www.stein-magazin.de/skulptur-des-monats-globo-uovo.