Key Summary

• E-textile standards create shared expectations for reliability, safety, durability, and performance across textiles and electronics.
• IPC standards support real-world testing for wearable e-textiles, conductive yarns, printed electronics, and textile-based electronics manufacturing.
• Global Electronics Association is helping scale e-textile innovation by bringing global experts together to develop practical standards and guidance.

By Chris Jorgensen, senior director, next generation standards, Global Electronics Association

Imagine a neonatal monitoring wrap used in a hospital to track an infant’s vital signs during transport between units. It looks and feels like a soft textile. But embedded within it are conductive pathways, sensors, interconnections and electronics that must perform in a critical moment. If the product fails, the issue is not simply a garment defect or an electronics defect. It could affect clinical decision-making.

That is what makes e-textiles so promising and so challenging.

When Textiles and Electronics Must Speak the Same Language

E-textiles bring together industries that have historically operated with different materials, design rules, performance expectations and vocabularies. Textile experts think about comfort, drape, stretch and laundering. Electronics teams think about conductivity, resistance, interconnections and reliability. Medical, defense, automotive, consumer wearable and industrial users each bring their own expectations for safety, reliability, durability and performance.

The opportunity is enormous. E-textiles are being developed for biometric monitoring garments, smart medical wearables, connected worker systems, defense applications, adaptive automotive interiors and responsive consumer products. Even with some product in the field, in order for this industry to scale, it needs shared expectations, common test methods and a framework that helps customers and suppliers define what “reliable” actually means.

That is where the Global Electronics Association brings unique value. Through its IPC standardization efforts, and with a network of e-textiles specialists from more than 20 countries, the Association is helping create the common language and technical foundation this emerging sector needs to scale.

Testing for the Real World

One important example is IPC-8981, Quality and Reliability of E-Textiles Wearables. This standard establishes a reliability framework for wearable e-textile products and defines tests that reflect real-world conditions, including abrasion, stretching, flexing, bending, moisture, perspiration, UV exposure, washing and drying. Just as important, it allows testing to be aligned with the product’s intended use.

Going back to the neonatal monitoring wrap example, that means customers and suppliers can agree to test the product as a high-reliability, short-term-use device. Testing can focus on the areas where reliability matters most, such as conductive pathways, sensor zones and connector attachment points, without requiring exposure tests the product will never encounter. The result is a more meaningful qualification plan, less unnecessary testing and greater confidence in product performance.

Building Reliability from Material to Finished Product

Reliability also begins earlier in the supply chain. IPC-8911, Requirements for Conductive Yarns for E-Textiles Applications, provides a standardized way to describe, characterize and compare conductive yarns. That matters because a conductive yarn is not just a material choice; it can determine how an e-textile performs under stretch, abrasion, moisture and electrical load. This standard provides a testing framework for apples-to-apples comparison of yarns and a clear designation system for specifying product. The result is a reduction in confusion between conductive yarn suppliers when discussing product by end-use application and a consistent approach to conductive yarn performance comparisons.

Additional standards extend this framework across other manufacturing pathways. IPC-8921 addresses woven and knitted electronic textiles, with an upcoming revision that will expand the standard to include braided products. For printed electronics on textile substrates, IPC-8952, IPC-8971 and the forthcoming IPC-8922 help connect design, electrical testing, qualification and production acceptance. Together, these resources create a more consistent path from material selection to finished product performance.

A System-Level Challenge

The Association’s work also recognizes that e-textile development is a system-level challenge. Textile engineering, electronics manufacturing, materials science, garment design, software, cybersecurity, sustainability and human factors can all intersect in a single product. 

That is why the Association released Fundamentals and Best Practices for E-Textile System Development, the first publication in its next-generation series of guidelines. Developed by leading experts in the field, it helps teams connect disciplines, anticipate failure modes and make better decisions before materials, test plans and manufacturing routes are locked in.

E-textiles will not reach their full potential through invention alone. They will scale when the industry can trust how products are designed, tested, compared and qualified. That is the role of standards and the value of bringing the right experts together to build them.

Get Involved in E-Textiles Standards Development

As materials, applications and reliability expectations continue to evolve, so will the standards and guidance that support this field. Industry participation is essential to that process. Whether your expertise is in textiles, electronics manufacturing, materials, medical wearables, defense, automotive, sustainability, cybersecurity or product design, there is a place for your perspective in this work.

We invite companies and technical experts to get involved in the Association’s e-textiles standards development activities and help shape the next generation of reliable, scalable e-textile products.

Contact FranciscoFourcade@electronics.org to learn more.

Key Summary

In the latest installment of Five Questions With…, Lorena Villanueva, Mexico Operations Director, discusses the forces shaping Mexico’s rapidly growing electronics industry and shares why collaboration, continuous learning, and strong relationships are essential for building a robust electronics ecosystem.

1. What is the most important shift happening in the electronics industry right now, and why does it matter?

I think the biggest shift is that companies are realizing they can't succeed alone anymore.

Of course, AI, automation, and new technologies are changing our industry, but what I see every day in Mexico is that the companies growing fastest are those that collaborate. They work with universities, government, suppliers, and even other companies.

Nearshoring has created a great opportunity for Mexico, but taking advantage of it is not just about building more factories. It's about building a stronger ecosystem. For me, that's the real shift, and that's why it matters.

2. What is one challenge the industry must solve in the next 3–5 years, and what will it take to get there?

Talent. Without a doubt. The demand for skilled people is growing much faster than we can prepare them. We cannot expect universities to solve this alone, and companies cannot solve it alone either. The only way forward is by working together. Industry, academia, government, and organizations like the Global Electronics Association all have a role to play.

I've seen amazing things happen when you bring the right people into the same room. Sometimes one conversation can start a collaboration that changes opportunities for hundreds of students. And that’s what we are here for, to change the future of the electronics industry in México through better preparing its talent for the next 3 - 5 years. 

3. What differentiates companies in Mexico that are thriving right now from those that are struggling?

The companies that are thriving stay connected. They don't wait for opportunities to come to them. They participate, build relationships, invest in learning, and become part of the community. The ones that struggle are often working in isolation. They may have great technology, but they miss what's happening around them.

One of the biggest differences I see is how companies think about training. The ones who see it as an investment rather than a cost are the ones who are thriving.

In Mexico, business is still built on trust. Technology is important, but relationships still make a big difference.  I have a saying I’ve lived by for most of my career: Relationship Precedes Results.  And I truly believe it. 

4. What can companies do to better attract and retain talent?

I think we spend too much time asking how to attract talent, and not enough time asking how to make people want to stay.

People want to keep learning, they want mentors, they want to feel that their work matters, and that someone believes in their potential.

Training is important, of course, but creating a sense of belonging is just as important.

When people feel they are part of something bigger than their job, they usually give their best.

5. What’s one lesson you’ve learned that still shapes how you lead today?

One lesson I've learned is that relationships always come first.

Early in my career, I thought leadership was about having the right answers. Today, I think it's more about bringing the right people together and creating the conversations that lead to solutions. That is why you see me every week connecting people through an event, an interview, a keynote somewhere, or even a social media post. 

I've always liked the saying, "Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way." As I've gained more experience, I've realized that sometimes the best way to lead is by helping others connect, collaborate, and succeed.

Some of the best projects I've been part of didn't start in a boardroom -and you can ask Rebeca, our brilliant Marketing Manager. They started over a cup of coffee, a late-night dinner after a conference, or with a simple introduction between two people.

At the end of the day, technology connects devices, but people connect industries. That's something I never want to forget.

Key Summary

• Biohybrid innovation: Researchers created a 3D-printed scuba system that lets cockroaches operate underwater for search, inspection, and hazardous-environment applications.
• Science self-corrects: A famous flatworm “memory transfer” experiment was revisited, reminding us that failed replications can be just as revealing as the original discovery.
• Building life from scratch: Synthetic “SpudCells” show how nonliving components can mimic key life-cycle functions, opening doors for medicine, manufacturing, and environmental sensing.

By David Bergman, vice president, international relations, Global Electronics Association

The Cockroach That Went Scuba Diving

If your first reaction is, “You’ve got to be kidding,” you’re not alone. Researchers have developed a tiny 3D-printed “diving suit” that allows a remotely guided Madagascar hissing cockroach (I remember these loud guys from Entomology class) to survive underwater for up to three hours. The suit delivers oxygen directly to the insect’s breathing openings (spiracles) using a miniature oxygen generator powered by a controlled chemical reaction. The result is an amphibious biohybrid capable of traversing both land and shallow floodwaters with remarkably little loss of mobility.

Before dismissing the idea as science fiction—or nightmare fuel—consider the engineering challenge. Small robots struggle with battery life, mobility, and navigating complex terrain. Cockroaches already excel at all three. By adding lightweight electronics and an innovative breathing system, researchers have created a platform that could one day search collapsed buildings, inspect flooded infrastructure, or explore hazardous environments too dangerous for humans.

Apparently, evolution spent 300 million years perfecting the hardware. Engineers just added the scuba gear.

My observation: The most elegant engineering solutions are often inspired by millions of years of R&D conducted by nature.

Burger Flashbacks?... Can you Eat a Memory?

In the 1960s, psychologist James McConnell proposed one of the strangest ideas in neuroscience: memories might be transferable. His experiments trained flatworms (planarians) to respond to light, then fed those trained worms to untrained worms. Astonishingly, the cannibalistic worms appeared to learn the behavior more quickly, fueling speculation that memories could somehow survive digestion. McConnell even embraced the publicity, dubbing himself “McCannibal” and publishing the delightfully unconventional The Worm Runner’s Digest.  

Fast forward six decades. Researchers at Harvard University set out to replicate the original experiments using the same species, protocols—even worms collected from the same locations. This time, however, the worms refused to cooperate. They couldn’t even be conditioned in the first place, leaving scientists with an even bigger mystery: what changed?  

While few neuroscientists believe memories are literally edible, the story is a fascinating reminder that science advances by questioning even its most celebrated discoveries. Sometimes the real breakthrough isn’t proving an old idea right—it’s discovering why it no longer works.

My observation: The best scientists don’t become attached to answers. They become attached to asking better questions.

“It’s Alive!” …Sort Of

For centuries, scientists have modified living cells. Now they’ve taken a remarkable step toward building one from scratch. Researchers at the University of Minnesota have created SpudCells, synthetic cells assembled entirely from nonliving components that can feed, grow, replicate their DNA, divide, and even compete with one another. While they aren’t yet fully independent life forms, they represent the first synthetic cells to complete a life cycle, offering an unprecedented platform for studying the fundamental processes of life. 

The achievement goes far beyond satisfying scientific curiosity. Synthetic cells could one day manufacture medicines, produce specialty chemicals, capture carbon, or perform environmental sensing with greater precision than today’s engineered organisms. Equally important, they provide researchers with a simplified “operating system” for understanding how life emerges from chemistry. 

The achievement isn’t about creating life, it’s about understanding the fundamental rules that make life possible.

My observation: The greatest engineering breakthroughs often begin when we stop asking, “How do we improve this?” and start asking, “Can we build it from the ground up?”

Key Summary

• AI was everywhere at Trellis Impact 26, shaping sustainability discussions beyond the dedicated track.
• Real use cases are live, from risk modeling and supplier data capture to reporting and siting analysis.
• Human verification still matters, as AI outputs can be inauthentic or not fit for purpose.

by Kelly Scanlon, senior director of sustainability strategy, Global Electronics Association 

I attended Trellis Impact 26 on behalf of the Global Electronics Association to deepen our understanding of how AI is shaping sustainability practices, the infrastructure behind it, the software powering it, and how various industry sectors, including the electronics sector, are wrestling with both the promise and the problems AI presents. What I didn't expect was how thoroughly AI had saturated every conversation at the event not just the sessions dedicated to the topic.

It was the question at the workshop tables, the follow-up during Q&A, the thread running through exhibitor demos and hallway side conversations. What agents and models are you using? What are you prompting them with? How do you check for accuracy? AI isn't just a topic anymore. It's the lens through which we are all starting to see everything.

The AI x Sustainability Track Highlights Real Use Cases

The dedicated AI x Sustainability track gave startups a platform to show what's actually being built and deployed using AI. I saw presentations about how AI is being deployed to assess fire risk and electrical grid vulnerabilities, collect supplier data through simple email exchanges and organize it for sustainability reporting, evaluate land use for data center siting, and analyze temperature readings at two meters above ground generating the kind of granular climate data that used to require significant manual effort to process. These aren't hypothetical use cases. These are products drawing real interest from partners and investors in the room and in the electronics industry.

"This Is New to Everyone, Isn't It?"

One of the most honest moments was in one of the first sessions of the conference event when someone prefaced their AI-related question with, "I'm new to this.” They didn't need to say it. Nearly everyone is new to this. And yet there's a tendency to feel like you're behind or like everyone else has figured out the prompt, the workflow, the verification process. You're not. This is genuinely new territory for everyone. Isn’t it?

There was something grounding about watching exhibitors, panelists, and attendees openly compare notes in real time; what's working, what's not, as well as where AI adds real value, and where it still needs a human check.

When AI Isn’t the Right Fit

As an anecdote to the rather intense AI-related questions and conversations happening, one attendee was trying to get a real photo from the conference photographer. He didn't like his AI-generated headshot. He wanted something more authentic.

Amid all the enthusiasm for what AI can generate, there's still a meaningful preference for what's human, -- for the thing a model can only approximate but not quite replicate. That tension isn't going away, and for an industry thinking seriously about AI's role across the value chain, it's worth noting.

When AI Does your Homework Before You Ask

I returned from the event to find an unsolicited email in my inbox. A company managing sustainability and utility data had used their AI system to generate a benchmarked energy report about the Global Electronics Association for free, as a marketing tool. It had pulled building data, cross-referenced public disclosures, layered industry-peer benchmarks, and added market intelligence.

The sample report wasn't accurate for us because as an industry association, our sustainability obligations look different from an electronics manufacturer's. We appreciated the effort and are impressed by the gesture, but it’s a warning that AI can be used to gather insights that might not be the right fit or give you meaningful answers.

Still, it told a story: a complete, benchmarked sustainability report generated automatically, delivered before you've even unpacked your conference bag.

What's clear is that AI is not peripheral for the global electronics industry; this industry is not a bystander to AI. AI is going to be central to how to set and meet sustainability targets like net zero goals, manage supply chain complexity, and manage regulatory pressures. The conversations at Trellis Impact 26 confirmed that questions about AI's environmental, economic, and social implications are being asked right alongside questions about what AI can do.

Key Summary

• AI in manufacturing use cases: Examples across consumer, pharma, and automotive.
• Adoption barriers + best practices: What helps AI succeed on the shop floor.
• Outcomes: Stronger compliance, lower costs, improved worker safety/communication.

By Sanjay Huprikar, chief global officer, Global Electronics Association 

AI is being leveraged in manufacturing environments globally in many unique ways to address important concerns and challenges facing all enterprises. This week I had the pleasure of reading three articles on this exciting topic depicting use cases in diverse verticals ranging from consumer to pharmaceuticals to automotive:   

• Overcoming AI Adoption Barriers in UK Manufacturing – Areti Iles
• #6 most read from article: Generative AI for Manufacturing 4.0 - Today's Medical Developments
• Manufacturers test AI-translation tech to improve worker communications | Manufacturing Dive

My quick takeaway is that if the tools and best practices are properly harnessed and resourced, it can lead to improvements on several fronts including regulatory concerns, cost engineering, and employee safety.   

Please feel free to drop me a line at SanjayHuprikar@electronics.org if you saw value in reading these items or if you disagreed with the stances taken by these authors; and feel free to highlight some additional articles on this subject that you have read and think I should be looking at them too!

Key Summary

• Policymakers, industry leaders, and technical experts convened in Brussels for a summit hosted by the Global Electronics Association, concluding that Europe's competitiveness requires a coordinated, whole-ecosystem approach across the entire electronics value chain, not just semiconductors. 
• The path forward requires translating this growing strategic consensus into concrete, coordinated action across EU policies, investments, and partnerships.

On 23 June, 80 policymakers, industry leaders, and technical experts gathered in Brussels and reached an agreement: Europe's competitiveness cannot be built by strengthening individual technologies in isolation. It requires a coordinated approach across the entire electronics value chain, from chips to systems.

Why This Matters

This "whole ecosystem" perspective shaped the day's most important takeaways: The European Commission proposed its Chips Act 2.0 on June 3rd. Its extension to include printed circuit boards (PCBs), electronics manufacturing services (EMS), and suppliers will reshape Europe’s technological sovereignty for years to come. Industry has a vital opportunity now to ensure that the proposed approach is endorsed and ultimately adopted into funding programmes and electronics strategies also at the Member State level. 

The summit, “Europe’s Electronics Industrial Strategy: Leadership or Independence”, was hosted by the Global Electronics Association, with support from TLT PCB and CalcuQuote. Representatives from the European Commission, European Parliament, European Defence Agency, and the OECD joined companies from across the electronics ecosystem.

A Big Shift

In recent years, European industry policy for the electronics industry has focused on semiconductors. The Brussels discussions marked a clear evolution in thinking. As several speakers emphasized, semiconductors are only one piece of the puzzle. PCBs, EMS, equipment suppliers, and systems integration are equally critical and equally at risk.  

In the words of MEP Eva Maydell, "If we get this right, Chips Act 2.0 won't be remembered as a piece of legislation, but as the moment Europe chose to lead."

The OECD reinforced the stakes: since the semiconductor shortages of 2020, policymakers have increasingly recognized that Europe's competitiveness depends on the full electronics ecosystem and sustained collaboration between industry and government.

Clear Areas of Consensus Identified

Broader Scope of Chips Act 2.0

The proposed package would extend beyond semiconductors to connect chips with cloud infrastructure, AI, and end-use applications through a wider Technology Sovereignty Package. Participants welcomed the inclusion of the broader value chain, including PCB and EMS in the scope of the Chips Act 2.0

Defence and space resilience

• Rather than pursue complete self-sufficiency, to preserve critical manufacturing expertise, support SMEs and emerging technologies, and create predictable demand, all underpinned by a strong commercial electronics base.

AI and data centres

• Compete at scale in AI and data centres. Leading global players increasingly compete across integrated value chains rather than individual technologies. Europe needs an end-to-end industrial strategy to keep pace.

Automotive – Protect its supply chain

Against the backdrop of the proposed Industrial Accelerator Act, sustain Europe's automotive supply chain amid intensifying global competition.

The Path Forward

The summit revealed genuine and growing alignment on Europe's industrial future. From Chips Act 2.0 to defence, AI, and automotive, every discussion pointed to the same conclusion: strengthening Europe's competitiveness, resilience, and technology sovereignty demands an integrated approach spanning the entire value chain.

The challenge ahead is turning that consensus into coordinated, concrete action across the EU—translating strategic ambition into the policies, investments, and partnerships that will secure Europe's electronics future.

Interested in joining our working group? Contact AlisonJames@electronics.org

For full event summary: https://www.electronics.org/europes-electronics-industrial-strategy-leadership-or-dependence.