Reframing Arts-and-Tech Experimentation: (Re)Generative research rituals for an ecology of technology

Soenke Zehle and Sónia Alves

Contributors: Mert Akbal, Hannes Kaefer, Michael Schmitz, and Jan Tretschok

Responding to advances in artificial intelligence, the OECD (2023) has defined AI systems in terms of the relationship between “inference” and “generation.” Since such systems affect a wide range of cultural techniques, we examine the role of “generation,” arguably one of the most widely used metaphors to describe the capabilities of a new generation of data-driven systems in the dynamic of socio-technical-ecological systems (STES) design and introduce two new multidisciplinary sites of research—our Generative Arts and Design Lab and our Regenerative Economy Lab, both co-initiated by the authors at an academy of fine arts to collaboratively prototype new research rituals.

Rather than accepting that the accelerating rhythms of technological innovation end up determining the rhythms of analysis, we reclaim the multiple temporalities of arts-and-technology-inspired research and reflection—from explorations of historical archives to possible futures framing systemic design efforts—to explore and better align such system design processes with social and ecological dynamics. Methodologically, the two labs are inspired by the “extended lab model” (Wershler et al., 2022) as well as ongoing research on triple-loop learning (Zehle & Alves, 2023ff) and learnings from Design Journeys through Complex Systems (Jones & Van Ael, 2022).

Whereas AI research uses “generation” to describe the functionality of such systems, we reframe the concept within a broader ecology of technology to align it with ideas of ecological, economic, and social regeneration. Ethnographic methods for the listening and understanding phases of systemic design and related methodologies, such as Sharpe’s Three Horizons and developmental evaluation, provide context for questions related to the value of participant observation conducted in teams vs. individual investigators, integrating observation with interviews and other data, and what sources for ethnographic methodology systemic designers have found useful, e.g. organizational ethnography, design ethnography, or rapid ethnographic assessment as used in public health or rural development. Additional questions raised include the range of “participation” in participatory ethnographic methods and the role of participatory approaches not just in data collection during the listening phase but also in utilising participatory modes of analysis for the understanding phase.

Presenters & contributors