Authors: Professor Aisling McMahon, Professor of Law & Principal Investigator of the ERC PatentsInHumans Project, Maynooth University, & Eimear McNally, artist and visual facilitator.
This blog article involves a reflection by Prof Aisling McMahon, Principal Investigator on the European Research Council funded PatentsInHumans project, with Eimear McNally who is an artist and visual facilitator, on their experience of using art as a means to encourage wider dissemination and public engagement with emerging research findings from the project. Here they reflect on the aims, process and motivations for using art in such contexts to engage a range of audiences and disseminate research within and beyond the university context.
Introduction
In this piece, as a researcher, I (Aisling) will reflect on why as part of the PatentsInHumans project I looked to art as part of how we disseminate research findings, and aspirations for how this can be used to engage a range of publics beyond traditional academic audiences. Alongside this, Eimear will reflect on her experience, as an artist whose work includes illustration, graphic recording and visual facilitating, on the process for employing art in research contexts, and the ways that art can be an effective and powerful conduit for research dissemination and public engagement.
At the outset, a note on terminology, illustration is essentially creating a visual image to represent a certain argument(s), for example in an article, graphic recording is whereby an artist is listening and drawing to reflect discussions for example, providing a live illustration of workshop discussions, and visual/creative facilitation is whereby an artist is designing, facilitating and capturing in a workshop-style event – facilitating the process using visual tools which may include some graphic recording but can also include visual templates, context maps, customer journey maps etc.
We reflect here on the process leading to the first artwork, an illustration, created for the PatentsInHumans project – this illustration acted as a visual representation of key findings in an article I published in Medical Law Review, that maps key ways patents (and how such rights are used) can impact patients and healthcare practitioners’ interests, including access to health care
We use a conversational format to reflect on the process used to bring art into PatentsInHumans and to create this first artwork – we have chosen this format for reflection as it mirrors the practical process and cross disciplinary conversation we embarked upon as we worked together as a researcher and artist to develop a visual representation of key elements of the research findings.
Reflecting on the Role of Art as part of the PatentsInHumans Engagement and Dissemination Process: A Researcher’s Perspective
Why did you look to role of creative art as part of dissemination approach for ERC PatentsInHumans project?
Aisling: The ERC PatentsInHumans project explores to what extent patents over a range of health-technologies can give rise to bioethical implications, and whether or to what extent current legal (or soft law) systems address such bioethical issues. To explain the role and importance of the focus on public engagement and art as part of this in the project, requires deeper reflection on the project’s aims and purpose. Essentially, at the core of this project is a study about the (potential) impacts of patents on people, and how to develop patent (and related) systems so they are better designed for human flourishing. Therefore, I felt it was critical that we try to disseminate findings broadly, including by seeking to reach various people who can be affected by how patents over health-technologies are used, even if they may not know this.
To explain this, a patent is type of intellectual property right that gives the rightsholder(s) a 20-year term of legal exclusive rights over who can produce, develop, and sell the patented technology for commercial purposes. This means that patents can have important economic functions (allowing rightsholders to have an income stream from the technology thereby incentivizing the development of certain technologies), but also an important private governance function by enabling rightsholders to control key aspects of the development, access and use of the patented technologies. Increasingly, a range of technologies which relate to how we treat the body (such as medicines), how we use elements of the body (such as isolated genes or elements of diagnostic tests), and how we modify or enable better functioning of the body (such as medical devices), are patentable. Patents over such technologies – given the underlying function of the technology – give rightsholders important governance functions over how we treat, use or modify human bodies.
The PatentsInHumans project explores the implications of such governance functions for people who use patented technologies, such as impacts of patents on access to technologies which can impact patients autonomy, dignity or broader bodily integrity interests. Accordingly, the project at its core is concerned with the impacts of patents on people – specifically, although not exclusively, on patients, medical device users, and/or healthcare providers, such as doctors and nurses.
Given the project’s focus on the potential impact of patents on people who use patented health-technologies, I feel that it is critical that we seek to ensure that research findings are disseminated widely in an accessible way within academic contexts and also to the public and policy makers to encourage deeper engagement.
As principal investigator (PI) of the PatentsInHumans project, my hope is that such findings are accessible outside of traditional audiences for academic law/bioethics papers, to include people who may be affected by patents over health-technologies (patients and members of the public), scientific communities whose work leads to the development of such technologies, and healthcare practitioners etc. Accordingly, as part of the project we have sought to use a range of strategies to broaden public engagement and help increase the potential impact of the project with wider communities both inside law and outside law.
Having researched different avenues to encourage broader engagement with research, the important role of art and visual representation in public engagement and dissemination of research was evident.
Reflecting on the Role of Art within the Research Engagement and Dissemination Processes: An Artist’s Perspective
What do you think is the benefit of art in research dissemination contexts? Are there any particular benefits for academic subjects or technical subject matter?
Eimear: Visuals can make conferences/knowledge-sharing events more impactful. Quite often we attend conferences and the words wash over us and we can leave thinking, “what does that really mean?” I hope the visuals help people to make sense of the ideas being presented – it is another form of meaning-making. When people look at a graphic recording of an event I notice they really engage – they are using their brain in a different way. This more deliberative engagement can support richer meaning-making. They can’t speed read a graphic recording like they might a paper abstract! This also reminds me that our brains are neural networks – so a graphic that shows ideas connected in non-linear ways is, I believe, more aligned to how our minds actually work. The ideas being presented by researchers, for example, are often quite complex and embedded in a wider academic ecosystem. I feel that visuals help us navigate complexity without simplifying the knowledge in a reductive way – all knowledge is contextual.
Also, the visuals humanise the ideas being presented. Perhaps this is most effective when the subject matter is academic or technical. I draw people – people struggling with their thoughts, people celebrating, people having all kinds of emotions, people engaging with each other. It brings the content to a level that grounds it in human experience. Sometimes this can risk being silly or glib but I try to anchor it in the core ideas being presented.
What are the ways in which people seek to employ or could use art to engage broader audiences?
Eimear: I think there are a variety of levels that art/ visuals can be used to engage the public, and all are valid. You can use visuals to communicate information more effectively so that more people absorb it. You can also aim for deeper levels of engagement where the public are invited to respond to the work and are supported to make sense of it in a way that might have an impact on how they live.
What is the process, as an artist, that you need to engage in for the design of an artwork as part of a live workshop recording versus an illustration?
Eimear: For a graphic recording event I usually try to learn a bit about the context beforehand – I work across a wide variety of sectors and I have to orient myself to each. It is a bit like being a traveler and reading the Lonely Planet guidebook before you visit, perhaps learning a bit of the language and customs. I will prepare my paper canvas in advance with titles and a basic structure for each part of the day. So in this way the final outcome will be fairly predictable. On the day it is really about listening and organising information and then translating it into visuals as quickly as possible. Sometimes I can improvise and create a really unified composition without any planning – it just emerges. Other times it is more like a series of visual vignettes.
When designing an illustration of course the process is different. I can do a number of revisions before committing to a final outcome. I will start with reading the content and making notes and little visuals that spring to mind. Then I will do a really rough sketch. I try to balance an overall composition with the details- so there is a flow between the separate elements. It really can be a puzzle to solve – placing all the elements in a legible way but maintaining a sense of the “whole” at the same time.
A Reflection on the Process: Researcher and Artist’s Perspectives on creating an Illustration for PatentsInHumans
What was the process used to create the first illustration for the PatentsInHumans project (highlighted below)?
Aisling: As a researcher, as I was thinking about disseminating the findings to a wider audience, I had already prepared a policy brief which acted as a summary of the main arguments in the article written for a public audience. This required me to reflect on the article to distill it down to the key arguments focusing on why these mattered for the public and how to best explain these arguments. Creating this briefing took time and reflection, to provide a summary of the main take-home messages from the article highlighting key findings in language which minimized use of jargon, but which also explained key technical terms so as not to lose meaning.
In creating the accompanying artwork for this article, I first had a call with Eimear to discuss the research and key findings as I saw them and the process of creating the policy brief was also helpful for this. I then sent her the full article and also the policy brief, which aimed to inform her process for visualizing key findings and the artwork. Eimear then created a draft artwork, and we had a further call to discuss this, questions which emerged from this process, and any potential clarifications needed. Eimear then created a final image. I was delighted with the image created, as it visually captured key arguments in ways that I could fully appreciate but could not have imagined myself. It also allows me to see how the arguments might be interpreted and viewed by publics outside of law, which also led to interesting reflections and conversations with Eimear and the team.
You can find a full-sized version of this illustration here.
As an artist, what are your reflections on the process for creating an artwork for PatentsInHumans, particularly as some of the subject matter is quite technically complex, does this impact visual representations or how do you as an artist prepare for such interdisciplinary representations?
Eimear: So, I do love a challenge actually and I love learning new things. I was very curious about the patent system and its links to human rights and bioethics issues. So – perhaps that is the starting point: curiosity! It helps you to navigate the sticky technical weeds. I read the material and make notes and clarify anything I don’t understand. Then I do a very quick sketch of how I make sense of this – this could be so quick it is not legible to anyone but me. I will do maybe 5 more versions of this, each time clarifying the elements and how they connect to each other- maybe reorganising the whole composition.
One struggle I have is how to represent key concepts (e.g. health, innovation). It has to be recognisable to most people, so I have a visual vocabulary that I draw on to signify important key concepts. Sometimes I would like to have a more creative visual vocabulary but that risks losing some accessibility. When I have a good rough sketch I will send it to the client for feedback. This is the most important stage of feedback. It might be the first time a client has seen their work visualised and they will have new ideas and crucial clarifications. After that, it is a process of solving the puzzle of how everything fits together, applying the colour scheme and line style. I usually draw everything on my iPad in an app called Procreate. It keeps the hand-drawn feel but if there is a lot of text I’ll bring it into Adobe Illustrator or InDesign.
Concluding thoughts
Art has come to play a key role in the ERC PatentsInHumans dissemination strategy. Since working on this first artwork, Eimear has also more recently acted as a graphic recorder for two project workshops. In this role, she created visuals on the day of the first workshop which illustrated key themes from papers and discussions at a workshop exploring the human rights implications of patents over technologies related to the human bodies, and opportunities and limits that human rights mechanisms offer to address such implications. She also created a post-event graphic recording of a second workshop on Intellectual Property Rights and MedTech which was organized as a collaboration with Professor Leanne Wiseman (Griffith University) and Prof Jessica Lai (Victoria University, Wellington). Both artworks will be launched on the ERC PatentsInHumans website in coming weeks.
As a team, we have also used the graphics Eimear created as part of recent project presentations which allows us to convey arguments succinctly with accompanying visualization to a range of audience. As the adage goes often a picture paints a thousand words – and my hope is that such artworks can, overtime, support wider dissemination of research findings across disciplines including outside legal/bioethics fields within the university context, and help disseminate the research beyond the university context, to wider publics who are ultimately affected by access, development and use of emerging health-technologies, shedding light on the multiple and varied ways in which patents can impact this.
You can find out more about the PatentsInHumans project on our website and by watching this short video.
The PatentsInHumans project is funded by the European Union (ERC, PatentsInHumans, Project No. 101042147). Views and opinions expressed are however those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Research Council Executive Agency. Neither the European Union nor the granting authority can be held responsible for them.
