Eco-Art and Public Space: A Reflexive Account of a Campus-Based Installation and the Ethics of Engagement

Dr. Kasturi Hazarika

PhD Sociology,

Department of Sociology,

University of York

Abstract: This essay provides a reflexive account of a campus-based environmental art installation aimed at promoting awareness of sustainability and environmental conservation. Utilizing natural and biodegradable materials, the installation symbolized the Earth’s vulnerability and the need for ongoing ecological stewardship. The essay examines the practical and ethical challenges encountered during the project, including institutional approval processes, risk management, and ethical considerations related to public engagement. Drawing upon established placemaking and public art theories, the discussion highlights the complexities of community consultation and the necessity for clearer ethical frameworks to support artists working in public spaces. The essay concludes by advocating for enhanced institutional support and funding to enable socially engaged eco-art practices that contribute meaningfully to environmental discourse and community development.

On October 31st, 2020, Halloween day, I took the opportunity to put up a public art installation to raise awareness about the issue of environmental protection and conservation. I used easily available materials from the environment to create my piece, including pumpkins and maple leaves. I also used some paint to colour one of the pumpkins. The largest pumpkin was painted to resemble the globe, representing planet Earth, around which a few smaller pumpkins were placed. Maple leaves were used to decorate the installation.

The aim of this art installation was to urge people to think about the source of their annual supply of fresh pumpkins, i.e., planet Earth, and to realize that to ensure we continue receiving fresh pumpkins, we need to keep our planet healthy, so it can keep producing harvests, including pumpkins, every year. I chose pumpkins for this concept because the installation was done on Halloween day. Pumpkins were also selected for their aesthetic appeal, as their shape and size helped shape how I had envisioned the installation. Since time immemorial, pumpkins have been part of many folk tales and fairy tales, which gave a magical and timeless appeal to their use in art and aesthetics.

Photo courtesy: The author

The venue for this installation was Gregg's Place at the University of York, where I am currently enrolled as a PhD research scholar. It is a strategic location at the university, next to Central Hall, a key building on campus. This work draws on placemaking theories by Jane Jacobs, Jan Gehl, and William H. Whyte, which emphasize the role that art plays in creating lively interactions, promoting social connections, and providing a sense of belonging (Nyaiyonga, 2004). Public art can serve as focal points that define and animate recreational areas, transforming them into spaces where people can connect, relax, and engage with their surroundings (Nyaiyonga, 2004, p.18). Gregg’s Place is a high-traffic area, central to campus activities, where many students gather. The area is also aesthetically pleasing, with views of the campus lake and a fountain. There are architecturally attractive, beautifully designed seating areas that allow people to sit and enjoy the surroundings. These features made Gregg’s Place an ideal location for my installation.

I had spoken to a few people I thought would be relevant to gather opinions on how to proceed with my public art project. From these informal discussions, I learned that I did not need to go through an ethics process if I was carrying out the project out of my own interest in the cause. However, even though I received informal opinions about not needing an ethics process, I still took into account the ethical issues I had learned about during my Ph.D. research studies. This was to ensure that I was adhering to proper protocols while doing everything on university premises. I decided to formally seek permission from the university for using the location, and for this, I sought support from the Graduate Student Association (GSA). I had several meetings with GSA, where I shared my interest in doing a public art installation to raise awareness about environmental protection, and they offered to support my work by helping me secure permission for the use of the space on campus. I asked GSA if they could review my brief and the ethics process. However, they said they were not able to review the ethics process since they lacked the necessary expertise. Nonetheless, in our meetings, I discussed all the potential ethical concerns I thought were relevant to the project.

I completed a risk assessment myself and informed them that there would be no risk to myself or any member of the public due to this installation. A risk assessment involves considering potential dangers and determining measures to address any risks. For example, it looks at the kind of harm one could be exposed to while carrying out the project, and what steps would be taken if such circumstances arise. On their part, the GSA advised that the only risk would be if someone attempted to vandalize the installation, in which case I would contact security.

I also wanted to engage in activities around the installation, such as observing passers-by and gathering comments from visitors. However, due to my uncertainty about whether I needed ethical approval for these activities, I decided against conducting them. GSA said they were unable to advise on this matter, so we agreed that I would consult my supervisors. Since I had not received concrete information or guidance about the ethics process, I decided to forgo these activities, which would have provided valuable insights into how public art can influence change by engaging people. Not having the confidence to carry out these activities became a challenge for me during the installation. This is also an issue in public art: there is a lack of clear guidance on what formal ethics processes are required, and artists are left unsure about where to seek advice.

In discussions with the GSA about data protection and regulations, they suggested that if I decided to proceed with gathering comments, I might want to use a “burner” email address to avoid receiving spam. We also discussed the possibility that some comments I might receive could be unpleasant. It was clarified that the installation was not being done "through" the GSA, and thus was not officially a GSA activity. They were merely assisting me in securing the location and permission. I approached GSA for support to ensure that the university was aware of and had approved my project on campus.

The authorization process involved navigating through various stages of approval from different university departments, including Porter, Estates, Security, Catering, Facilities Management (FM), and Health and Safety. These stages are part of the standard process for securing permission to conduct any events on university premises, although, in some contexts, it can feel like a mere formality. For example, my project didn’t require catering or porter services, making it unclear why I needed approval from those departments. After securing all necessary permissions, I was able to install my environmental public art project on campus.

Once the installation was in place at Gregg’s Place, I went to sit on a bench a few yards away at Vanburgh College, a strategic location from where I could monitor the installation. People passed by, some stopped near the installation, and others took pictures with it. In general, passers-by noticed the artwork. I had originally planned to gather feedback from the public, including asking them about their engagement with public art, such as whether they stop to look at it, understand it, or want to engage with it. However, due to the lack of formal ethics approval, I was unable to carry out these activities, which would have provided valuable insights into the impact of public art. Not having the ability to collect such feedback was a limitation of my project. Public art projects often lack clear guidance on what steps need to be taken in terms of ethics approval, leaving artists uncertain about the process and support available.

An example of a large-scale public art project is The Angel of the North by Antony Gormley, which underwent a community consultation process. However, there were controversies associated with it, including opposition from some members of the public. Despite this, Gormley and his team successfully dealt with the opposition, largely due to the project's media success (Usherwood, 2001). Through a conversation with an artist I interviewed during my Ph.D. research, I gathered the impression that the community consultation for such projects is often superficial, with little direct engagement from the artists themselves.

Reflecting on my own experience with the environmental installation at the University of York, I have several questions about the role of community consultation in public art projects. Is it feasible to carry out community consultation before executing public art projects? Should there be a formal body dedicated to guiding and supporting community consultation? Who should be responsible for conducting the consultation—the artist or a designated body? These are critical questions that need to be considered if we are to better support artists engaged in community-based art projects.

One unfortunate incident during the installation was the theft of one of the smaller pumpkins while I was away. I also noticed that some young people, who had sat near the installation for a long time, attempted to vandalize the artwork. When I approached, they ran off. I was traumatized by their attitude toward my work. This experience led me to reflect on how artists can safely conduct public art projects without fear of harm or vandalism.

This was an experimental, one-person-run public project, self-funded to raise awareness about environmental preservation, using perishable materials on university premises. Unlike large-scale projects that involve funding and expert committees, my project was small-scale and lacked external support. I see this as a limitation in achieving the maximum possible impact with my artwork. While large-scale public art projects have support systems in place to discuss progress and reception, my project lacked such a network. Additionally, my installation was temporary, unlike permanent public art projects that are meant to remain in place indefinitely. The use of biodegradable materials, such as pumpkins, made the installation susceptible to vandalism. However, the advantage of using biodegradable materials is that it reinforced the theme of environmental sustainability and the use of eco-friendly materials in creative pursuits. While there are online resources like Public Art Online, offering documents for artists, there is a lack of practical support in terms of one-on-one guidance. Artists often face difficulties when trying to bring their projects to public spaces without clear directions on who to contact for advice or support.

Public art is widely acknowledged for its role in both physical and socio-economic regeneration (McCarthy, 2006). It can fulfil various functions, such as community cohesion, providing a sense of identity, and instilling pride (Miles, 1997; Rose, 1997; Sharp et al., 2005; Simpson, 2011, in Schuermans et al., 2012). Public art is definitely gaining recognition and its role is steadily growing in the near future. It adds significant value to placemaking and the conceptualization of future cities and urban spaces. Public art projects vary greatly, ranging from large-budget ones like The Angel of the North to smaller, experimental projects like mine, which began on university premises but aimed to extend to public spaces with a wider audience, such as city centres.

Based on the experience discussed above, my concluding thoughts are that artists engaging in community art projects need more comprehensive support; mentally, emotionally, and logistically. The government should allocate more funding toward research on social practice in public art and support artists involved in such transformative practices. This would help artists make a meaningful impact through their art and contribute to societal transformation at large.

References

Gormley, A. and Gateshead Council (1998) Making an angel. London: Booth-Clibborn Editions.

Grodach, C. (2010) ‘Art spaces, public space, and the link to community development’, Community Development Journal, 45(4), pp. 474–493.

McCarthy, J. (2006) ‘Regeneration of cultural quarters: Public art for place image or place identity?’, Journal of Urban Design, 11(2), pp. 243–262.

Nyaiyonga, B. (2024) ‘The impact of public art installations on urban recreation spaces’, International Journal of Arts, Recreation and Sports, 3(2), pp. 13–24.

Schuermans, N., Loopmans, M.P.J. and Vandenabeele, J. (2012) ‘Public space, public art and public pedagogy’, Social & Cultural Geography, 13(7), pp. 675–682.

Usherwood, P. (2001) ‘The media success of Antony Gormley’s Angel of the North’, Visual Culture in Britain, 2(1), pp. 35–45.