Perspectives of Bioartists and Community Lab Organizers on Working with Living Organisms

Title of the Literature

Perspectives of Bioartists and Community Lab Organizers on Working with Living Organisms

Literature Information

• Subject Area: Bioart, Community Labs, and Human-Computer Interaction
• Keywords: Living Organisms, Bioart, Transgenic Art, DIY Biology, Community Science, Biotechnology

Research Background and Issues

• Identified Problems or Challenges:

  • There is a growing interest in the HCI (Human-Computer Interaction) field in designing interactive systems using living organisms, but there is a lack of in-depth research on the perspectives of bioart practitioners and community lab organizers.
  • Ethical and practical issues related to bioart, such as agency and consent, and the ecological impact of incorporating living organisms into art or design, are rarely discussed.
  • Current bioartworks primarily focus on the production of art culture rather than substantive functionality or design possibilities.

• Significance:

  • Bioart can inspire public engagement with science, biotechnology, and societal dialogue.
  • Understanding practices at the intersection of art and biology can provide new directions for HCI innovation and offer insights into design ethics.

• Research Motivation and Related Work:

  • Previous research has primarily focused on DIY biology, user interaction, and functional design, with limited attention to the role of bioart in interdisciplinary collaboration and sociocultural production.
  • There is insufficient discussion on bioethics and a need to explore how art can address societal and technological structural issues.

Solution

• Proposed Method or Solution:

  • Conducted interviews with 12 professional artists, community lab organizers, and educators to explore their perspectives on working with living organisms, ethical considerations, and future directions.
  • Analyzed how bioart practitioners expand public knowledge and awareness through creative activities, promote interdisciplinary collaboration, and provide ethical recommendations for projects.

• Innovative Aspects:

  • Positions bioart as an effective tool for fostering public engagement with science, biotechnology, and societal issues.
  • Examines opportunities and challenges of Living Media Interfaces (LMIs) in education and interaction.

• Implementation Steps and Key Techniques:

  • Employed semi-structured interviews to gather participants' views on artistic practices, community activities, and design ethics.
  • Used grounded theory for thematic analysis to identify key themes and directions at the intersection of bioart and HCI (e.g., agency, sociocultural dialogue, and interdisciplinary collaboration).

Research Outcomes

• Specific Findings:

  • Education and Public Engagement: Bioart can serve as a learning tool to enhance public understanding of biotechnology and foster sociocultural awareness.
  • Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Bioart projects often require collaboration between artists and scientists, combining diverse perspectives to address project ethics.
  • Sources of Inspiration and Knowledge: Living organisms are viewed by artists as sources of inspiration and innovation for problem-solving, such as in biomimicry and sustainable design.
  • Design and Ethics: Discussions on agency and ethical issues surrounding living media encourage designers to approach the use of living organisms with caution.

• Comparative Advantages over Existing Solutions:

  • Highlights how bioart can provide critical insights into ethical and cultural issues that HCI has not fully explored.
  • Encourages design experiments incorporating biological materials to promote ecological sustainability and cultural production in interdisciplinary practices.

• Experimental or Evaluation Results:

  • Participants highlighted the distinct characteristics of living media compared to traditional digital system design, such as the unique agency and unpredictability of living organisms.
  • The study found that bioart effectively stimulates diverse design and ethical dialogues, particularly in addressing global ecological and societal challenges.

• Limitations and Future Directions:

  • A high proportion of participants were based in the United States, limiting cultural and contextual diversity. Future research plans to include participants from different countries.
  • Expand the study to include biodesigners and DIY biology enthusiasts to complement the perspectives of bioart practitioners.
  • Explore the practical design and implementation possibilities of hybrid living media interfaces to advance interdisciplinary collaboration.