Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-72crv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-07T06:59:57.045Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2023

Ana Matias*
Affiliation:
Centro de Investigação Marinha e Ambiental (CIMA) / ARNET - Infrastructure Network in Aquatic Research, Universidade do Algarve, Campus of Gambelas, Faro, Portugal
A. Rita Carrasco
Affiliation:
Centro de Investigação Marinha e Ambiental (CIMA) / ARNET - Infrastructure Network in Aquatic Research, Universidade do Algarve, Campus of Gambelas, Faro, Portugal
Bruno Pinto
Affiliation:
Centro de Ciências do Mar e do Ambiente (MARE) / ARNET - Infrastructure Network in Aquatic Research, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
Jaime Reis
Affiliation:
ESML/IPL—Escola Superior de Música de Lisboa, Instituto Politécnico de Lisboa, IDI&CA, Lisboa, Portugal ESART/IPCB—Escola Superior de Artes Aplicadas, Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco, Castelo Branco, Portugal INET-md/FCSH-UN—Instituto de Etnomusicologia—Centro de Estudos de Música e Dança da Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisboa, Portugal
*
Corresponding author: Ana Matias; Email: ammatias@ualg.pt
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Sustainability is a universal goal that requires balancing social, economic and environmental dimensions, and that applies to both terrestrial and marine environments. Several authors argue that arts are valuable tools to frame and engage with current environmental issues related to sustainability, including pollution, climate change and biodiversity loss. Accordingly, our research question is: What is the role of art in the sustainability of coasts and seas? We searched our research question on the two most important scientific databases of articles (Scopus and Web of Science) and retrieved 1,352 articles. We narrowed the articles to 79 studies that actually address our question through screening. The dataset describes a variety of artworks from the four art categories (literary, media, performing and visual) around the world, although the more frequent countries are the US, the UK and Australia. We found that visual arts are more common (~40%), and engagement is a highlighted pursued impact (~40%) by these artistic practices. Other authors also intend to promote marine conservation and restoration, management, education and activism. Only 19 articles of the dataset measured the impact of artistic activities on their audience. This subset shows evidence of art contributions to sustainability mainly through raising awareness, learning, and promoting engagement and enjoyment of project participants. Through this work, we set the current state of knowledge on this emerging topic, and argue that further research and new strategies of impact measurement are needed to thoroughly understand the effect of art on coastal/marine sustainability.

Topics structure

Information

Type
Review
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Figure 1. Conceptual scheme of environmental sustainability and connected human actions, when embedded into coastal and marine resources.

Figure 1

Figure 2. (A) Word cloud constructed from the text of all articles in the dataset. (B) Distribution by country of the reported artistic activities around the world.

Figure 2

Figure 3. Examples of artworks in the dataset. (A) One of ‘hybrid’ series sculptures by Jason deCaires Taylor in Museo Atlántico, Lanzarote, Spain (image from Meyers, 2020). (B) Performance by Susanna Rechia on ‘Beach-dancing Day’, 2014, in Wales, UK (image from Olsen, 2018). (C) A 360° film ‘A Calling, Deeply’, by Kristina Pulejkova, 2019 (image from Frangovska, 2020). (D) Poem ‘Up/down/fragile’ by Lorenzo Carnevali, translated to English by Larry Mayer, 2018 (from Nesci and Valentini, 2020). (E) Mural ‘The guardians of water’ by students from Esmeraldas, Ecuador, 2017 (image from Sanchez et al., 2020). (F) The ‘Microbial Bebop’ by Peter Larsen and Jack Gilbert, 2013 (image from Larsen and Gilbert, 2013).

Figure 3

Figure 4. (A) Frequency of the four artistic categories described in the articles, grouped according to the classification of art forms defined in Matias et al. (2023; adapted from McCarthy et al., 2001). Note that because there are articles that describe more than one artistic category, the sum of frequencies in more than 100%. (B) Frequency of pursuit impacts by artistic practices reported in the dataset.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Systematisation of actions and associated impact categories, based on the sub-dataset (containing 19 articles) with impact analysis.

Author comment: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R0/PR1

Comments

Dear editor,

this is to let you know that this submission is a commissioned review article to be considered for publication in Cambridge Prisms: Coastal Futures, to be published at launch in January 2023 with the title “The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability”.

The submission deadline was agreed with the senior scientific editor Jessica Jones for 09-12-2022.

On behalf of all authors, kind regards,

Ana Matias

Review: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R0/PR2

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: This paper does provide a new discourse on the role of art to sustainability and adds to existing literature and I recommend that it is published with minor revisions to address the following:

I encourage the Authors to include a commentary of the proposed role of art within the Ocean Decade and the SDGs and how their findings relate to those aspirations, and how they can be achieved/enhanced as these are key influencers for coastal and ocean sustainability. This could also include some text on how scale – international to local – of initiatives can influence outcomes. In addition, how could impact measurement be used to inform the design of future art initiatives?

I think Section 7 could be expanded. For instance given that art projects may not be reported in academic literature, what does this mean in terms of a study such as reported here and should different approaches be taken given the authors have adopted a fairly ‘standard’ method that whilst proven to be robust in the past may not be so for an investigation spanning such diverse subjects? I would like to see more detail from the authors in regard to what sort of scientific work, to what end, and what different strategies are needed. Lastly, what should impact assessments be measured – what would constitute a success?

Some specific points from the text are below:

Line 26: include the question.

Line 42: should say what context of societal challenges – presumably in regard to sustainability/resilience?

Line 67: Given the holistic nature of the SDGs and the interconnectedness of social, economic and environmental dimensions is it justified to constrain the conceptual scheme to environmental sustainability only?

Line 71: I would have like to hear how these authors experience fit with the findings from the study given that they have a strong background in this field.

Line 104: Worth mentioning how SDGs 13 and 14 are connected to other SDGs such that failure to achieve their targets means all SDGs cannot be achieved and vice versa.

Line 136: Is this not an argument for novel means of engagement and communication that can be facilitated by art-science collaborations? Leading into the next paragraph?

The text English is awkward in places but I assume this will be rectified during the copy editing process.

Review: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R0/PR3

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: Dear authors,

Compliments for your work on this systematic literature review and article! In my view, this article which provides an overview of academic work on the role of art/artistic practices in coastal and marine sustainability is very welcome. I have just a few minor comments/suggestions which I would like the authors to address, after which I feel the article is ready for publication. In order of appearance:

• In the introduction, you first discuss ‘science-society collaboration’ and then zoom in on the arts as tools to (re)frame and engage with controversial topics. Later, there is a quote on how people involved in art and science projects may envisage their experience. This is a bit confusing, as art practices do not necessarily entail a ‘science-society’ component, so please clarify / restructure.

• Consider deleting: “We do not provide our opinions or experience on this matter” – line 71-72.

• The last paragraph of section 2 on other concepts/terms related to sustainability (line 126-139) could be developed more, as in its current state it goes a bit quickly and the reader can be lost. I.e.: how is the concept of restoration ‘intimately related’ to energy transition? And participation – of whom? In what?

• The Supplementary Material figures are missing (S1, S2, S3).

• Consider adding a list of the 79 articles of your literature review, with the 19 sub-dataset articles highlighted, as Supplementary Material (perhaps online through a hyperlink in case there is not enough space in the article itself).

• When discussing the diversity of ‘art and sustainability’ projects in section 5, you note that there is no strong dominance of projects related to the coast or to the seas (and only 9% consider both areas), this makes me wonder whether you also analysed and compared the patterns within these two domains? And if yes, were there any differences / things that stood out? (e.g. I could imagine the coast-projects are perhaps more human-focused in their outcome actions rather than environment-focused).

• When discussing the findings, please use both numbers and % consistently, now sometimes the % is missing (lines 244-259).

• The transition between the last paragraph of section 5 and the start of section 6 could be improved (lines 316-324).

• The conclusion is very brief and deserves some further elaboration. You argue that further research is needed, but could you elaborate on this more? E.g. why are different strategies needed? And also overall, what’s the value in this (linking back to the introduction).

• I would move up the remark that “For sure, many more projects are being carried out, but are not the objects of published studies, hence were not detected by us”, as it is an important observation.

• Throughout the article: please use page numbers when quoting other work

I am looking forward to seeing the final publication in print!

Kind regards,

dr. Gwenda van der Vaart

Recommendation: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R0/PR4

Comments

Comments to Author: I read this article with great interest and I’m grateful for the authors' thorough, systematic review and analysis of this important topic. I concur with all of the reviewers’ recommendations and ask that the author’s carry through with each of the suggestions provided (and provide a point-by-point response indicating what was done). In addition, I ask that the authors address a few other additional items. A small point, but one that I believe is important -- please avoid the term “human development.” I know this is an acceptable phrase to some, however, as coastal work becomes more and more interdisciplinary, even intersecting with the health sciences, the phrase becomes problematic because it means development of humans, not development by humans. I would argue that all development at the coast is carried out by humans and therefore “coastal development” is sufficient and clear. I hope the authors agree. Also, I recommend gender neutral language, and thus rephrasing to avoid the term “manmade,” which only appears once, but best to avoid possible offense.

I appreciate the authors’ important acknowledgement that there is a large body of science-art, which is not the subject of published manuscripts and therefore is difficult to track and analyze within the context of a review such as the one provided. I agree heartily with one of the reviewers that moving this point up to the beginning of the paper, and expanding on it some, would be especially beneficial. I recommend that the authors offer their thoughts on how these other works might be traceable or considered in future analyses. I also encourage the authors’ to share what they can discern from their review about the role of scientists vs. artists in producing science-art. For example, what commentary you can provide regarding the degree to which artists worked independently vs. were advised by or even collaborated closely with scientists? Were there any scientists who turned artist to communicate science?

And, finally, rather than await copy editing to address the occasional awkward English usage (which may not be sufficient), I ask that the authors take care to do a thorough edit after all revisions have been made. I recommend fresh eyes of someone whose first language is English, which may be especially useful. Further smoothing of the text will improve the impact of this important work. I have selected minor revision as recommended by each of the two reviewers, and because no additional analysis is required, however, I want to note that, added together, the changes requested are substantive. I look forward to receiving the revision soon!

Decision: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R0/PR5

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Author comment: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R1/PR6

Comments

Dear editors,

On behalf of all authors, I would like to extend my sincerest thanks to you and the reviewers. The feedback and criticisms received have helped improve the overall quality and clarity of the paper. I hope the changes made to the manuscript address the recommendations to your satisfaction.

Kind regards,

Ana Matias

Review: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R1/PR7

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: Dear authors, thanks for the improved article and your detailed response to the reviewers‘ comments. It is also helpful that you created a ’dataset article' and made this freely available online. I believe you addressed all comments and concerns sufficiently and deem the article ready for publication. All the best, Gwenda

Review: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R1/PR8

Conflict of interest statement

Reviewer declares none.

Comments

Comments to Author: I think the Authors have carried out a very thorough job addressing the reviewer comments and their respnses and revisions are very good. I recommend this paper is now taken forward for publication.

Recommendation: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R1/PR9

Comments

No accompanying comment.

Decision: The role of art in coastal and marine sustainability — R1/PR10

Comments

No accompanying comment.