Role of science art projects in the development of the urban environment

The article analyzes modern science art projects, which represent a new and actively developing area, relevant in the context of the transformation of the urban environment and increasing attention to the pressing problems of modern megacities. The purpose of the study is to consider the heuristic potential of science art in the context of the transformation of the modern urban environment, as well as to identify the key mechanisms of the influence of this practice on the socio-cultural and environmental processes taking place in modern megacities. The empirical analysis of successful projects in various cities has made it possible to identify key aspects that are of the greatest importance for the sustainable development of urban spaces today. This study analyzes in detail the heuristic potential of science art in the context of urban research, paying attention to both its theoretical aspects and practical application in urban studies. The possibilities of the influence of this trend on the social dynamics, cultural practices and quality of life of modern megacities are considered. The analysis showed that science art has the ability to form new forms of interaction between people and the urban environment, as well as stimulate the processes of cultural and ecological rethinking. As a result, two key areas of science art development have been identified in terms of its integration into the urban environment, which open up prospects for further research and practical implementation. In addition, the analysis showed that science art projects play a significant role in understanding and overcoming the current challenges faced by residents of modern megacities. The analysis demonstrated that science art has significant heuristic potential, influencing the development of the urban environment.

1. Levchenko O.E. Science art – high-tech entertainment? Artistic culture. 2017;2:6–7. (In Russian).

2. Eisner E., Powell K. Art in science? Curriculum Inquiry. 2002;2(32):131–159.

3. Zamkov A.V. Science art as a media model of a possible future. Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 10. Journalism. 2018;6:213–234. (In Russian). http://doi.org/10.30547/vestnik.journ.6.2018.213234

4. Butkevich N.V., Shmotyeva A.O. Science-art technologies in contemporary art. In: Synthesis of arts in environmental design: Proceedings of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference, Omsk, June 22–23, 2020. Omsk: Omsk State Technical University; 2020. Pp. 22–31. (In Russian).

5. Fadeeva T.E., Staruseva-Persheeva A.D., Davydov D.G. Science art as an impetus for the development of high-tech cities. In: Cities as development centres: Proceedings of the Scientific and Practical Conference, Obninsk, August 21–22, 2020. Obninsk: Obninsk Institute of Atomic Energy – Branch of the National Research Nuclear University “MEPhI”; 2020. Pp. 54–63. (In Russian).

6. Strosberg E. Art and science. New York: W.W. Norton; 2013. 546 p.

7. Miles M. Art, space and the city. London: Routledge; 2005. 278 p.

8. Ramadan S., Askar I. State of the art of city technology (technicity) and planners to improve cities’ living. In: Towards a better quality of life: Proceedings of the 1st International Conference, El Gouna, November 24–26, 2017. Cairo: Housing & Building National Research Center; 2017.

9. Bibri S.E., Krogstie J. On the social shaping dimensions of smart sustainable cities: a study in science, technology, and society. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2017;29:219–246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2016.11.004

10. Pushkareva T.V. Socio-cultural practices of “science art” and environmental problems of the metropolis. In: Cities of the future. Spatial development, participatory management and creative industries. Moscow: Delo; 2022. Pp. 298–313. (In Russian).

11. Park R. The city as a social laboratory. Sociological review. 2002;2(3):3–12. (In Russian).

12. Sertakova E.A. Research of the “city” in the classical concepts of foreign scientists. Modern problems of science and education. 2013;4:381–381. (In Russian).

13. Allam Z., Sharifi А., Bibri S.E., Jones D.S. The metaverse as a virtual form of smart cities: opportunities and challenges for environmental, economic, and social sustainability in urban futures. Smart Cities. 2022;3(5):771–801. https://doi.org/10.3390/smartcities5030040

14. Angelidou M., Panori A. Enhancing sustainable urban development through smart city applications. Journal of science and technology policy management. 2018;2(9):146–169. https://doi.org/10.1108/JSTPM-05-2017-0016

15. Hunter M.G., Soro A., Brown R.A., Harman J. Augmenting community engagement in city 4.0: considerations for digital agency in urban public space. Sustainability. 2022;16(14):98–103. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14169803

16. Pachenkov O.V., Voronkova L.V. “New urban activism” and “public policy” in Russia (on the example of St. Petersburg). Journal of Social Policy Studies. 2021;19(2):253–268. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.17323/727-0634-2021-19-2-253-268

17. Rassolova E.N., Galkin K.A. New practices of urban activism in a post-industrial Russian city. Monitoring public opinion: economic and social changes. 2023;3(175):153–168. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2023.3.2378

18. Baycan T., Girard L.F., Nijkamp P. Creative and sustainable cities: a new perspective. In: Sustainable city and creativity. New York: Routledge; 2016. 236 p.

19. Blumenstock J.E., Chi G., Tan X. Migration and the value of social networks. Review of Economic Studies. 2023;1(92):97–128. https://doi.org/10.1093/restud/rdad113

20. Wilson D.S. The neighborhood project: using evolution to improve my city, one block at a time. London: Hachette UK; 2011. 363 p.

21. Jaglarz A. Perception of color in architecture and urban space. Buildings. 2023;8(13). https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings13082000

22. Bush J., Ashley G., Foster B., Hall G. Integrating green infrastructure into urban planning: developing Melbourne’s green factor tool. Urban Planning. 2021;1(6):20–31. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.v6i1.3515

23. Elgheryeni A. Bio-art and the environment. Complexity within interconnectedness. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing; 2021. 276 p.

24. Kohout M., Kopp J. Green space ideas and practices in European cities. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 2020;14(63):2464–2483. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1716698

25. Niemelä J. Ecology of urban green spaces: the way forward in answering major research questions. Landscape and urban planning. 2014;125:298–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.07.014

26. Sahan A.H. Alienation in the urban structure and its impact on the individual and society. Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues. 2021;6(24).

27. Szejnfeld M. Spaces excluded and exclusion of space as an element of urban transformation. International Journal of Arts & Sciences. 2014;5(7).

28. Castellar J.A.C., Popartan L.A., Pueyo-Ros J., Atanasova N. Nature-based solutions in the urban context: terminology, classification and scoring for urban challenges and ecosystem services. Science of the Total Environment. 2021;779:146–157. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.07814

29. Hartig T. Restoration in nature: beyond the conventional narrative. In: Nature and psychology. Biological, cognitive, developmental, and social pathways to well-being. Cham: Springer; 2021. Pp. 89–151.

30. Zikirov M.C., Qosimova S.F., Qosimov L.M. Direction of modern design activities. Asian Journal of Multidimensional Research (AJMR). 2021;2(10):11–18. https://doi.org/10.5958/2278-4853.2021.00043.4.