INTRODUCTION

Whether generated by anthropological or natural sources, environmental challenges impact broad regions of the Earth’s interconnected ecosystems. Assessing these challenges often requires complex methods, analysis, and solutions. A major barrier to addressing environmental challenges through scientific solutions is the slow policy response to both new and longstanding issues (Weitz et al. 2017, Mahony and Hulme 2018). Due to the broad reaching nature of environmental challenges, large-scale actions in the form of societal shifts and policy changes are necessary to adequately address these issues (Smajgl et al. 2016). These challenges are often referred to as “wicked problems,” in which problems and potential solutions are complex and non-linear, and where no single optimum solution can be tested with full confidence in advance (Rittel and Webber 1973, Ross et al. 2022). Unlike more traditional linear problems, these wicked problems require groups of individuals with diverse perspectives to come together and view the problem from a wide range of lenses. To add to the challenge, individuals in the general public, including those who are impacted by wicked problems (such as climate change), may be receiving biased, potentially incorrect information due to the current era of media punditry and rhetoric that is not based on scientific realities (Cook et al. 2017, Pennycook and Rand 2021, Roozenbeek et al. 2022). Environmental issues can be remediated, prepared for, or even avoided, if an informed society, which engages with both scientific findings and lived experiences, can hold equitable discourse to inform policy (Kliskey et al. 2021, Rabonza et al. 2022). Given the intricacies of wicked problems, approaches like convergence research, which emphasize collaborative and interdisciplinary strategies, become essential.

Convergence research is defined by the National Science Foundation (NSF) as having two key characteristics: research that is driven by a specific and compelling problem, and research that is deeply integrative across disciplines (https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2018/nsf18058/nsf18058.jsp). Convergence research seeks to address the wicked problems by incorporating multiple ways of knowing, transdisciplinary collaboration, and the interconnectedness of actions (Sundstrom et al. 2023). The field of convergence research and education is currently in a dynamic phase of growth and exploration (Fleerackers et al. 2022). Despite its progressive approach, gaps exist that hinder its full potential. Such gaps include (1) the inadequate representation of diverse disciplines, cultures, and worldviews; (2) the inadequate pedagogical strategies that foster cross-disciplinary integration and collaboration beyond merely co-existing in parallel; and (3) under-utilization of social sciences and humanities in convergence efforts (National Research Council 2014). These gaps inhibit the comprehensive and meaningful fusion of different perspectives, limiting the depth and breadth of convergence (Sundstrom et al. 2023). In addition, conventional scientific methods might not suffice to foster genuine interdisciplinary thinking, which forms the bedrock of convergence research and education (Bowman and Arnold 2019). One example of a significant convergence research effort is the Intermountain West Transformation Network, which aims to build resilient communities and ecosystems throughout the Intermountain Western United States and has been working to further define convergence and create new frameworks and models to support convergence research (Morgan et al., in press). Shared.Futures is part of the broader Intermountain West Transformation Network.

To realize its potential in addressing wicked problems, a shift to a more equitable and inclusive convergence model is essential, one that embraces the fusion of disciplines and perspectives. This is where the role of ArtScience becomes pivotal. Science and art are key methods for both envisioning possible futures (Glăveanu 2023) and designing toward sustainable futures (Irwin 2015). ArtScience interplays meaningfully with the intersection of equity and convergence. ArtScience refers to art that has been developed through a deeply collaborative process between scientists and artists (Root-Bernstein et al. 2011, Jung et al. 2022). The main distinction between ArtScience and other forms of art and science such as “science communication” is the process and purpose under which the art is created. Science communication tends to be a more linear, unidirectional process, whereby the science has been completed and is handed off to a creative team/person to communicate the findings more broadly beyond an academic audience. There often is limited feedback between the final output and the scientist’s future research. In contrast, deeply interdisciplinary and collaborative modes of ArtScience are intended to be a process in which the scientific and artistic development are co-developed, in which the scientific process informs the artistic process, and the artistic inquiry can also have an impact on the scientific inquiry. ArtScience is a means to explore uncertainty, not through the examination of probability but through the lens of possibility (Clark et al. 2020). ArtScience melds the analytical with the creative, unlocking diverse perspectives essential to convergence and to the promotion of inclusivity (Jonsson and Grafström 2021). By exploring scientific concepts through various forms of art and by positioning art as an epistemology (e.g., Hawkin 2020, Gibbs 2014, Magrane and Johnson 2017), ArtScience allows individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and education levels to understand and engage with these concepts in a more personalized and meaningful way. Thus, the integration of ArtScience within convergence research promotes not just intellectual diversity, but also cultural and social equity, reinforcing the importance of diverse ways of knowing and inclusivity in our pursuit of knowledge and understanding.

We identify the transition design framework as a key framework to connect the methodology of ArtScience with the broader goals of moving toward sustainable futures and addressing wicked problems. The transition design framework is defined by four co-evolving areas of knowledge, action, and self-reflection: vision for transition, theories of change, mindset and posture, and new ways of design (Irwin 2015; Fig. 1). Transition design was first proposed as a concept in 2011 by Gideon Kossoff (2011), developed as a framework by Terry Irwin (2015), and is in part inspired by the grassroots Transition Town Movement (Hopkins 2008) that seeks to build resilient local communities in the midst of global climate change, reliance on oil, and economic instability. Transition design as a design framework stands in contrast to more mature design approaches (e.g., design for service or for social innovation approaches) for its emphasis on long-term thinking, as opposed to designing for short- or mid-term solutions, and for its explicit emphasis on social and environmental concerns (Irwin 2015). Transition design has since prompted a growing field of research in design (e.g., Sangiorgi 2011, Odabasi et al. 2023, Irwin et al. 2022), including the establishment of a PhD program focused specifically on this framework (Irwin 2015).

The Shared.Futures Workshop and Exhibit, guided by the transition design framework (Irwin 2015), serves as an exemplar of how ArtScience can drive convergence research toward sustainable and inclusive solutions for wicked problems (summarized in Fig. 1). While ArtScience provides an epistemological approach for Shared.Futures, informed in part through a greater body of geohumanities literature (e.g., Hawkins 2020), and convergence research provides the theoretical foundation for greater connection between the academia and broader society and between disciplines (e.g., Morgan et al., in press), transition design brings into focus the specific goals of designing toward sustainable futures and provides a framework for how we can adaptively stitch together a variety of evolving tools, theories, and methods. Embracing place-based visioning and cosmopolitan localism, which is defined as small, local, diverse, and place-based communities that are also connected globally through exchange of information, technology, and awareness (Irwin 2015), Shared.Futures' diverse collective of artists and scientists demonstrated the power of collaborative innovation across disciplines. This case study, detailed through reflexive research and documented in this paper, underscores the potential of integrating ArtScience and transition design principles (Irwin 2015) to enrich education and practice in convergence.

WORKSHOP DESIGN

Shared.Futures is well positioned to cultivate a transition design framework by acting as a “visioning space” (see Fig. 1) that can promote the idea of cosmopolitan localism. The five-month long workshop structure, consisting of five meetings, was designed by Lin, Casuse-Driovínto, Meyer-Driovínto, A. Stone, and M. Stone. The five began to meet regularly starting in the fall of 2021 on a semi-monthly basis, approximately five months before the start of what would be the initial program meeting and envisioned the development of this ArtScience program. This included co-creating the name Shared.Futures and identifying its founding principles of ArtScience convergence visualized in the Shared.Futures logo, shown in Figure 2. The logo is intentionally designed to be read in multiple orders, such as “Artists empowering scientists; scientists inspiring artists,” or “Artists inspiring scientists; scientists empowering artists.” We present the process of finding the Shared.Futures identity, goals, and philosophy throughout the first year of implementing the transdisciplinary workshop structure and reflecting on the ArtScience generated and outcomes.

One key goal of Shared.Futures is to grow and develop both organizational and participant capacity to converge with other fields to promote interdisciplinary relationships that can develop and share solutions and narratives of possible futures. Shared.Futures intentionally allocates time and funding to host a visioning space for the convergence of science and art. Through annual programming, adaptation and evaluation processes, Shared.Futures acts as a “co-evolving body of knowledge” (see Fig. 1) with the intention of growing and adapting annually and expanding in a way that supports and maintains a placed-based approach.

In these early stages, we identified three core values for the program.

Relationality and relationship building

As an example of how deeply integrated relationship building is incorporated into the Shared.Futures structure, the founding organizers met over meals and have built genuine relationships with one another both in a professional and interpersonal manner. Building strong relationships within the organizing team is seen as a foundation for developing relationships within and external to Shared.Futures. In particular, we strive to build non-hierarchical relationships, while acknowledging the need for specialized responsibilities. As another form of relationality and relationship building, Shared.Futures is also built as a place-based practice. As a place-based program, we emphasize connection with the local landscape, culture, and people in and around Albuquerque, New Mexico. These relationships that Shared.Futures seeks to foster exist within the academic spheres (e.g., between disciplines), between academia and the general publics, and between academia and other relevant sectors (e.g., non-profits). As such, our program is also designed for in-person interactions and participation is limited to the greater Albuquerque metropolitan area. By engaging local science researchers and working artists in the community who are focused on global wicked problems, this emphasis on relationality within our local community and care for the global community embodies principles of cosmopolitan localism (see Fig. 1).

Catalyzing active hope for sustainable futures

Rather than focusing on the more dominant “doom and gloom” conversations that flood our news outlets and other mainstream conversations (Knowlton 2017, Rabonza et al. 2022, Rozado et al. 2022), we wanted to create a space that could catalyze active hope to uplift our community. Active hope is hope that is accompanied by action to move toward a more positive, sustainable future (Macy and Johnstone 2012, Wiek and Iwaniec 2014). Being overridden by fear can lead to learned helplessness and inaction (Schmid 2019). Instead, active hope provides a powerful antidote to combat fear, and action can act as a hope-making strategy. Creative activities serve as a powerful medium for processing emotions about complex issues like the climate crisis. Such activities facilitate visualization of a hopeful future, which in turn becomes a strategy for instilling hope when combined with shared expressions (Marks et al. 2023).

Excellence through diversity, equity, inclusion

Diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) extend beyond mere aspirational values; they’re essential for addressing the grand challenges of our resilience and well-being. To solve complex wicked problems, convergent approaches are essential. Diversity brings different viewpoints, equity makes sure every voice is heard, and inclusion means everyone gets engaged. A convergence approach is optimal when DEI principles are practiced. The Shared.Futures program, built on these DEI principles, focuses on local design while considering worldwide insights to address environmental issues and seek environmental justice. By merging ArtScience with DEI, Shared.Futures creates an environment in which science and art work together toward a resilient future.

These principles guided decisions around the application process, ArtScientist recruitment, program design, and partner organization collaborations.

Application, recruitment, and selection

Cultivating “posture and mindset” (Fig. 1) within the cohort of artists and scientists started with the design of the application, recruitment, and selection process. The application included questions meant to match teams based on their shared artistic and scientific interests and skills, as well as work and communication preferences and styles. To affirm our commitment to diversity and inclusion, the application also collected demographic information on racial/ethnic identity, pronouns, and education. In addition, the application asked about the applicant’s interest in participating, previous experience with ArtScience collaborations, their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, and gave the applicant the opportunity to share any previous work. Selected questions are included in Table 1. We also wanted Shared.Futures to welcome and represent a wide range of science, from engineering through natural and social sciences. The application questions were developed to promote willingness to collaborate and converge, and to foster a mindset of cultural humility, environmental justice, and optimism.

Recruitment efforts for artists and scientists for the workshop were locally based because the workshop was planned as an in-person workshop over the course of five months. We also wanted to facilitate connection between the workshop art-scientists as a cohort, and between the art-scientists and target outreach audience; as such, maintaining the scope of the greater Albuquerque area helped build additional points of connection between individuals. Recruitment for the scientist role was mainly through e-mail advertisement and word of mouth with relevant departments, centers, and projects at the University of New Mexico. For the artist role, organizers again used word of mouth and actively recruited potential individuals at the First Fridays Art Walk in Albuquerque. When seeking artists at the art walks, we sought art that had elements of storytelling. If the artist liked science and was interested in collaborating with scientists, we told them about Shared.Futures and invited them to apply.

In March 2022, the organizers held a meet and greet session to answer potential participants’ questions. The purpose of the March meeting was to explain what the commitment to Shared.Futures would look like in terms of time and end-product, answer any questions they might have, and provide the opportunity for them to identify a preferred artist/scientist partner. To facilitate finding possible connections between pairs, we engaged in a dominos activity in which everyone filled out a sheet with prompts on each edge (e.g., favorite artistic mediums, scientific topics of interest, hobbies). Gathered around a large table, we introduced ourselves within this framework and set our responses on the table. As commonalities emerged, we arranged the response tiles with matching responses. In the end, we had a visual depiction of how we were interconnected as a whole. The rest of the time was unstructured and open for each individual to make connections with others in the room. The application was due a couple weeks later.

Once applications closed (end of March 2022), the organizers matched pairs of artists (five artists) and scientists (five scientists) based on the application responses. In this case, there was an even number of artists and scientists, so the matching process was relatively straightforward; in the case of an imbalance of applicants on either side, the organizers considered forming larger teams (greater than two partners per team), participating themselves as artists or scientists in the workshop, or extending the deadline to purposefully recruit additional participants. This may be a necessary condition for future Shared.Futures workshops.

In their applications, the participants self-identified their races/ethnicities as follows: white (2), anglo (1), caucasian (1), hispanic (1), latina (1), chicana (1), Asian Indian (2), Black (1), and Native American (1). One participant identified as multi-racial. We refrained from using the conventional categorizing method to properly honor their identities. The application chose to inquire about the participants’ pronouns instead of their gender identities because they were more relevant to our communications and partnerships. Nine of the participants used she/her pronouns, and one participant used he/him pronouns. The participants’ interest areas were evenly spread with five interested in the artist role, four interested in the scientist role, and one interested in either. Those who expressed interest in the scientist role had a diverse background including biology, geography, earth and planetary science, environmental engineering, and law. Artists’ primary mediums included photography, abstract art, illustration and printmaking, film, and oil painting.

Workshop scientists represented a wide range of career stages. On the academic scientist end, our group included one scientist who had just completed their undergraduate degree; one master’s-level graduate student; one PhD-level graduate student; one assistant professor; and one full professor. Similarly, workshop artists ranged from newly emerging artists to more established artists.

Financial agreements

One key partner of Shared.Futures is Explora Science Center and Children’s Museum (hereafter, shortened as Explora). Before beginning the program, we had several meetings with Explora to determine the alignment and feasibility of our partnership. After identifying several key shared goals, we solidified our partnership through a memorandum of agreement. The agreement articulated our shared values in increasing awareness and participation of students and school-aged children in STEM + art and outlined our participation in Explora’s events, including the New Mexico Science Fiesta and Meet a Scientist. In addition, Explora committed space for our event and exhibit, and also agreed to administer payments to our ArtScience fellows (a stipend of $US500 per individual ArtScience fellow and up to $US200 per team for materials related to their ArtScience piece). These payments were budgeted for and provided by our grant funding, and by administering these payments through Explora, we were able to guarantee timely payments to all participants regardless of their university affiliation. To support Explora’s operations, we budgeted for a room rental to host a lunch reception on our opening exhibit day and agreed to an administrative fee, which was applied to stipend payments and materials reimbursements. The MOU also outlined other roles and responsibilities, intellectual property, the duration of the agreement, indemnity, liability, and also stated the principal contacts for each party.

Workshop meeting descriptions

Monthly meetings were hosted to check in with the ArtScience teams, to act as a resource, track team progress, and build community within the cohort. The target design is a series of concentric circles (Fig. 3), intended to depict a process of transformation and outward growth that acknowledges first the individual (ME), then the ArtScience team (WE), and finally the broader ArtScience Community (Shared.Futures). As we completed meetings in the program, participants were asked to move outwardly through each phase of the circle. The first phase was to identify and communicate participants’ individual identity (ME) by writing short biographies and then sharing them in the meeting. In the second phase, ArtScience pairs were asked to create a shared identity (WE) that encompassed positionalities from each participant in the ArtScience pair. The third phase (Shared.Futures ArtScience Community) encouraged participants to reflect on the collective identity of the Shared.Futures program cohort. The community phase communicated our overarching theme to the participants in such a way that allowed them to encompass it in their collective work and communicate stories of possible futures to the broader community. This workshop series of concentric circles starting with the self and moving outward was designed as a way to establish a firm foundation to deepen mutual communication and collaboration. This series is also designed to build capacity for behavior change, which allows for better communication and understanding of the dynamics of change between intertwined social, ecological, and technological worlds. The concentric circle design is also meant to symbolize the inherent interconnection between each individual ArtScientist and the whole of the Shared.Futures ArtScience community. Each meeting is described in detail in Figure 3. Through this process and cohort meeting progression, we co-created our mission and vision statement:

Shared.Futures is an ArtScience collaborative where we bring together local scientists and artists. Together, we aim to showcase what our shared futures can look like.

This mission and vision statement has since been used on our website and in advertising subsequent Shared.Futures events and future workshops.

Teams were expected to organize meetings with both the scientist and the artist of their team to cogenerate the concept and physical manifestation of the final ArtScience piece. Some teams met regularly and spent a large amount of time together, whereas others met minimally. This aspect was not regulated by the organizers due to the acknowledgement of variable life circumstances and availability for the teams to meet.

In addition, there were two public events as part of the workshop program: an in-progress exhibit at the New Mexico Science Fiesta (see Fig. 4) and a final exhibit at Explora.

ART OUTCOMES AND EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION

On the opening day of the exhibit, the ArtScience teams and Shared.Futures organizers were featured as part of Explora’s Meet a Scientist and Artist event (10 a.m.– 1 p.m., August 6, 2022). The Meet a Scientist event is a regular, recurring event that Explora organizes for children to meet local STEM professionals. For this event, Explora modified the event title to Meet a Scientist and Artist to reflect the nature of our group. Each team, plus the organizers, had a station set up near their art piece. Over 500 people attended the opening of the Shared.Futures exhibit on August 6, 2022. Upon entering the museum, the first station visitors encountered was the organizer’s station. This was designed to be the first and last station that visitors interacted with. Upon arrival, visitors received a Scavenger Hunt activity (Fig. 5) to guide children and people of all ages through each of the exhibits and encourage them to visit all the ArtScience team stations (original ArtScience work and descriptions shown in Figs. 6–11).

This was especially helpful given that two of the ArtScience stations were integrated into unconventional spaces that were not obviously on the main exhibit floor (e.g., in an elevator, in the case of “a talk with Land,” see Fig. 9, and in a theater for “Food, Energy, and Water Resources in New Mexico,” see Fig. 10). It also was intended to create an atmosphere of discovery and adventure for the exhibit visitors. Each station had unique stamp shapes and colors as part of the scavenger hunt. To receive a stamp at each station, the scavenger hunter had to interact with the ArtScience team and/or participate in their station’s activity when applicable.

Following the scavenger hunt distribution station, visitors were free to visit any booth in any order. On the first floor of the museum, visitors were able to view “Connective Flow” (Fig. 6), “Saunter” (see Fig. 7), and “Beneath Our Feet” (Fig. 8). “Connective Flow,” a mixed-media piece by Arelis Haskamp and Melinda Morgan, was installed near an existing water section on the first floor of the museum. “Saunter,” an oil painting collaboratively created by Noami DeLay and Sonia Luévano, was installed near the same water section behind an interactive water exhibit. “Beneath Our Feet,” a screenprint on wood by Malcolm King and Abigail Granath, was installed on the wall beneath the central staircase, such that visitors could view it from the first floor, and the piece would indeed be beneath their feet as they walked up the stairs to see the rest of the Shared.Futures exhibit.

Another way to get to the second floor is by taking Explora’s room-sized elevator, complete with a couch, coffee table, and piano, where visitors would find yet another Shared.Futures ArtScience team. The installation from M. J. Rain Song and Ria Mukerji, “a talk with Land” (see Fig. 9) was an immersive and interactive experience. The video was projected on one wall of the elevator. After watching the video, viewers were encouraged to write on paper leaves about what they viewed as important about the land. This activity was a demonstration of harmony and reciprocity: viewers wrote down what they love about the land on a leaf and hung it up on the reciprocity trees located on the second floor outside of the elevator; in return, they were given a flower to symbolize that the land loves them back.

On the second floor, in Explora’s theater room, the “Food, Energy, and Water Resources in New Mexico: Past, Present and Future” piece featured videography playing on a projector and custom-made photo stands with six photographs and accompanying essays by the ArtScience team, Lisa Hurst and Anjali Mulchandani. One of the photographs is shown in Figure 10, and the whole exhibit is available for digital viewing; the link is available through the Shared.Futures online gallery (https://www.sharedfutures.gallery/gallery). Outside the theater, the team set up a board to invite attendees to share visions and actions for future food, energy, and water resources. Some example responses include “compost more!” and “plant seeds.”

After visiting these five stations, visitors had one more stamp to gather back at the organizer’s table. After experiencing the five ArtScience pieces, we asked viewers to reflect on what they would like to see in their shared future, write (or draw) their vision on a strip of fabric, and then weave the fabric into the collective weaving (Fig. 11). Responses in the weaving ranged from serious reflections on our shared futures, such as “the world to respect each other a little more,” “sharing resources,” “peace,” and a “socialist revolution,” to playful responses including one young child wishing to see a world “made of candy,” and another who dreamed of “unicorn kitties.”

OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES OF CONVERGENCE THROUGH ARTSCIENCE AND TRANSITION DESIGN

A major goal of the coauthor team for this paper, inclusive of all artists, scientists, and organizers that collaborated in Shared.Futures 2022, is to share the process and work that goes into a cross-disciplinary, convergent collaboration across traditional academic, professional, and community boundaries. We identified key practices, opportunities, and challenges in organizing and participating in this type of convergent art and science collaboration within a transition design framework. These key opportunities and practices are informed through two sources. First, through qualitative content analysis of written and oral reflections, the coauthor group discerned themes that consistently emerged as a common thread during ongoing dialogues (see Table 2 for questions included in the post-workshop reflection discussion). These identified themes were also consistently observed and validated through the analysis process. Second, the organizers engaged in a reflexive evaluation through a qualitative research method of a collective visioning process to determine short-term, mid-term, and long-term goals, as well as identify strengths and areas of improvement of the inaugural program. This three-part process, which included collecting responses through sticky notes, guided conversation, and group diagramming, is detailed in Table 2.

Breaking down barriers between academia and the broader public

Shared.Futures is designed to foster relationships between artists and scientists. By emphasizing understanding and trust, the program aims for convergence through personal bonds. We believe that with mutual respect, communication about expertise becomes simpler. A major success indicator for the program was the genuine friendships that emerged. When asked what the ArtScience Fellows gained from participating in Shared.Futures, every person’s response mentioned connections and new friendships. One example of this: “I loved getting to know the amazing people involved. The connections I gained were the best part.” Several teams continued collaborations beyond professional mandates. However, holding cohort meetings at UNM sometimes made them feel lecture-like, highlighting the importance of choosing inclusive, conversational settings. This was an important finding because the program aspires to bridge the general public and academic spheres through genuine partnership in decision making and creativity. Shared.Futures seeks to advance an environmentally just future by genuinely including community members in knowledge generation and communication to advance community self-determination. Although academia offers technologies and insights for a better future, barriers like technical jargon, paywalls, and accessibility limit public access. ArtScience combines art’s narrative power with scientific insights, presenting research in an inclusive manner. Shared.Futures harnesses ArtScience to address environmental issues, aiming for a sustainable future for all. It provides a platform for meaningful dialogues and a space to share visions for transition (Fig. 1), letting community and academia discuss shared experiences and knowledge, which can lead to new ways of designing.

Embracing different ways of knowing

Embracing diverse ways of knowing in ArtScience is essential for equity in convergence (Morales 2022). Ensuring both scientists and artists are equitably compensated acknowledges the value of each of their contributions, fostering mutual respect. Moving beyond task-based collaboration to a partnership model in which scientists and artists share insights enhances interdisciplinary understanding. This facilitates the fusion of perspectives, promoting co-creation of the knowledge central to convergence. In addition, a key challenge in environmental justice is including marginalized community voices in creating policies that protect against environmental hazards and ensues fair distribution of benefits (Shilling et al. 2009). To make the process more equitable and fair, communities need to understand the systems and science shaping environmental risks. Using ArtScience can help make these complex topics more accessible to diverse audiences. Thus, ArtScience that intentionally integrates DEI goals and approaches can powerfully enhance equity in convergence, welcoming diverse perspectives in shaping our future with a focus on new ways of designing and on emphasizing posture and mindset within the transition design framework (Fig. 1).