Curating the Land: Artist-led remediation projects on former mine sites

University of New South WalesCollege of Fine Arts

School of Art History and Theory

Curating the Land: Artist-led remediation projects on formermine sites

Christiane Keys-Statham

A project submitted in partial fulfillment of the

requirements

for the degree of Master of Art Administration

November 2013

Contents

Contents..................................................IAbstract.................................................II

Curating the Land: Artist-led remediation projects on former mine sites.....................................II

Acknowledgements.........................................IVList of Figures...........................................VChapter one: Introduction.................................11.1 Writing in the field.................................1

Chapter two: Framing the Discussion.......................62.1 What is remediation?.................................62.2 Contemporary Earth art, environmentalism, relational aesthetics...............................................92.3 Creative placemaking: Integrating civic memory and looking to the future...................................11

Chapter three: Experimental practice.....................143.1 Art, science and transdisciplinary experimentation..143.2 Politics and participation: Art as activism.........153.3 Democratic discourse and the benefits of collaboration........................................................17

Chapter four: Case studies of artist-led remediation projects in Europe and North America.....................194.1 AMD&Art, Pennsylvania...............................194.2 Nine Mile Run Greenway Project, Pennsylvania (NMR-GP)........................................................234.3 Emscher Park, Ruhr Valley, Germany..................264.4 Evaluation of case studies..........................29

Chapter five: Curating the land: Applications in Australia.........................................................305.1 Using action research methodologies.................305.2 Projects involving former mine sites in Australia...32

Chapter six: Recommendations for the future..............346.1 Guidelines for remediation projects in Australia....346.2 Further thoughts....................................37

Bibliography.............................................38

I

Abstract

Curating the Land: Artist-led remediation projects on formermine sites

“My own experience is that the best sites for ‘earth art’ are sites that have been

disrupted by industry, reckless urbanisation or nature’s own devastation”

Robert Smithson, 1966

Over the last twenty years a number of projects all over the

world have developed from collaborations between artists,

architects, landscape designers, curators and communities.

These projects involve the remediation and regeneration of

former mining sites, which are often contaminated and

environmentally depleted.

The creation of landscaped parks, community gardens, outdoor

exhibition spaces or art parks give rise to a confluence of

art, technology and social engagement, and can even be

II

considered to be a new form of multidisciplinary practice.

In this thesis, I use case studies of such artist-led

projects in North America and Europe, which have taken place

on former mine sites, in order to provide suggestions for

possible projects for Australia in the future.

The prevalence of such contaminated sites in Australia

provides opportunities for this new field of artistic

practice. This research is written from the point of view of

a curator interested in land, earth and environmental art,

artistic collaborations geared towards community cultural

development and experimental, interdisciplinary practices.

My study explores the proposition that Australia has

numerous potential sites for such artist-led remediation

projects on disused former mine sites.

This research employs the qualitative research method, using

the AMD&Art project in Pennsylvania, the Nine Mile Run

Greenway Project in Pittsburgh, and Emscher Park in the Ruhr

Valley in Germany as case studies. These projects are

examined for success factors, collaborative models and best

practice. My research identifies the key factors behind the

success of these projects and assesses the ways that they

could be adapted for Australian contexts.

Based on the results of this research, a list of best

practice guidelines is provided for artists, curators and

communities to assist them in developing projects for the

III

regeneration and remediation of former mine sites in

Australia.

IV

Acknowledgements

This paper is dedicated to my core team: my husband, my

mother and my son. You are my tribe, my inspiration and my

greatest gifts. Without your love, support and energy, I

would never have made it this far. Thank you!

Love and gratitude to my UK support team: Patrizia, Sally

and family, Helen and Ben.

I would like to acknowledge my lecturers and supervisors at

COFA who have been so encouraging and generous with their

time and advice, namely Arianne Rourke, Felicity Fenner,

David McNeill and Kirsten Davies.

V

List of Figures

Figure 1: The Ghost Town Trail bicycle track, part of the

AMD&Art site.

© Abigail Rome, 2011 (http://abitravelblog.wordpress.com)

Figure 2: Emscher Landschaftspark

© Walter Menzies, 2011 (http://wsmenzies.blogspot.co.uk)

VI

Chapter one: Introduction

1.1 Writing in the field

Reclamation art developed in the United States, emerging

from the Land and Earth art movements of the 1960s and 70s.

Robert Morris’ article ‘Notes on Art as/and Land

Reclamation’, published in October magazine in 1980, marks

the beginning of academic literature on this topic, and is

thus an important point from which to start this research.

Morris is a conceptual artist who created one of the first

Land Art pieces with his work Steam in 1967, and his work

Untitled: Johnson Pit No. 30. in King County, Washington was

arguably the first piece of reclamation art. His article

provides an insight into attitudes towards Land Art at the

time, and some of the questions that were already beginning

to develop around reclamation (or remediation) art. Some of

these issues persist to this day, while many have been

discounted or rendered irrelevant.

It is striking to note the similarity between some of the

key issues articulated in Morris’ article and continuing

problems echoed in contemporary art practice. Morris wrote

that, “ for some time there has been public concern over the

effects of constantly accelerating programs for the

extraction of non-renewable resources from the land” 1

(Morris, 1980, p. 87). Sadly, three decades on, these

problems persist, and indeed are increasing across the

globe. Despite our knowledge of the limitations of fossil

fuels, we continue to extract minerals and fuel from the

earth at an unimpeded rate. These issues are addressed

today in much environmental or ‘eco’ art, and across all

mediums and genres. In this respect, Morris’ text is as

relevant today as it was when written, and it provides a key

starting point for this paper.

Morris’ paper has framed my research parameters in both its

inclusions and omissions. Morris defined his subject

clearly and introduced some of the key debates that emerged

from early reclamation art practice and which persist today.

These include issues of indigenous rights, the integration

of technology into society and potential collaborations

between artists, government and industry. I will be

developing these ideas in conjunction with more current

research, as discussed below.

Most noticeable in Morris’ writing, however, are certain

outdated attitudes, which have rendered some of Morris’

concerns irrelevant today. These attitudes are interesting

because they help the reader identify the changes that have

occurred in reclamation art since its early days.

Particularly of interest is the author’s treatment of

technology – he ascribed structural features to technology

2

including ‘fragmentation’ (Morris, 1980, p. 93), and

contrasted its use to ecological art, which, he argued,

aimed for the opposite: presumably, holisticism. I will

argue that contemporary reclamation art, as with many other

forms of contemporary practice, now aims to conjoin

technology, environmentalism and social activism, rather

than being conflicted by the competing aims described by

Morris.

These ideas are further developed in a body of academic

literature written since Morris’ seminal text. My two North

American case studies have been the focus of research

examining their models and approaches. Specifically,

Collins et al., 1997, examined the ethical implications of

reclamation art in further depth, building on Morris’

tentative questions. The debate revolving around the

concept of aesthetics is evident in this paper, and is also

explored in later texts (Carney, 2010; Turner, 2007 and

Collins, 2003)

The issue of aesthetics will be examined in the second

chapter of my paper. Frederick Turner’s examination of the

meaning of remediation, and his consideration of the nature-

vs-culture aspect of remediation projects (2007) will also

be considered and built upon in my definition.

I will also examine the proposition that the visual arts can

be a “medium for negotiating the interface between culture

3

and nature” (Hicks et al, 2007, p. 332). My chapter on

remediation will delineate specific aspects of the debate

about remediation and reclamation art and identify key

factors in reclamation art that can be applied to an

Australian context.

Recent texts (Fain, 2011; Brisini, 2012) contain criticism

of aspects of participation and community engagement in

remediation and reclamation projects. Brisini, in

particular, deconstructs the application of relational art

practices in remediation projects and artists who “cultivate

fleeting, intentional communities among their audiences”

(Brisini, 2012, p. 22). Fain (2011) questions the potential

for reclamation art works being created for greater

community purposes, and art’s instrumentalisation as part of

a government or industry agenda. I intend to demonstrate

that the most successful case studies arise primarily from

direct collaborations between artists and communities,

rather than being instigated by mining companies or local

government as part of a public relations exercise.

The intersection of art, technology and social activism is

examined in many texts (McHenry, 2011; Comp, 2008; Loures et

al, 2008); however, there is a need for this type of

experimental practice (Bennett, 2012) to be considered

specifically in the context of artist-led reclamation or

remediation projects. The question of the effectiveness of

4

a transdisciplinary approach, when considering remediation

of former mine sites, has been considered (Fain, 2011;

Carney, 2010; Stokols, 2006) but not yet in an Australian

context. My paper aims to lay the groundwork for more

thorough research into this area in future. Building on

recent literature on the impact of the mining industry and

its resulting landscapes in Australia (Mudd, 2013), I will

consider the future possibilities for communities, artists,

government and industry stakeholders in the implementation

of artistic remediation projects.

My exploration of international case studies benefits from

three decades of academic literature, providing detailed

examination of their successes and failures. The case of

Nine Mile Run in Pittsburgh was considered in detail by its

own co-directors (Collins et al, 1997) and by other

academics (Fain, 2011; Carney, 2010) and individuals

involved with remediation projects examined elsewhere in my

paper (Comp, 2008). AMD&Art in Pennsylvania, initiated by

T. Allan Comp, a major remediation project on a former mine

site, has also been examined thoroughly (Brisini, 2012;

Reece, 2002).

To balance these North American case studies, I will employ

the literature surrounding the European scenario, using

Emscher Park in the Ruhr Valley as a case study. This

particular project has been examined in its ecological,

5

architectural and sustainable aspects (Franz et al, 2008;

Shaw, 2002; Almaas, 1999) but I will employ it here as an

example of a project that responds directly to the needs of

its local and regional communities, rather than one that was

initiated for the development of the tourism industry

(Verbeke, 1999). As Shaw has pointed out (2002), it is also

a project that has successfully incorporated and reimagined

its industrial heritage in a cultural context.

Using these three case studies, I will propose that the most

successful artist-led remediation projects address ecology,

community and indigenous rights in a very different manner

to early Earth and Land art works, such as those undertaken

by artists like Robert Morris and Robert Smithson, which can

be considered to be heterotopic (Heyd, 2007). The long-term

success, usage and development of future projects will be

shown to be dependent on communication between stakeholders,

democratic discourse rather than an independent artistic

vision (Collins, 2003), collaborative and transdisciplinary

practice, and site-specificity.

Action research is a way of bringing these aspects together,

and the application of action research methodologies

(Thering, 2007; Stokols, 2006) will be discussed in chapter

five of this paper. According to Thering (2007), action

research is a potentially successful method for allowing

communities, especially those that have undergone

6

environmental or social traumas, to enhance their capacity

to imagine a better future. The author uses the AMD&Art

project as a case study, and includes actual survey results

and baseline data to measure community capacity for

imagining a better future. The author herself admits “the

validity of the process is more dependent on the

researcher’s familiarity with the complexity of issues

facing the community in question than on knowledge of

statistics” (Thering, 2007, p. 7) and this gives an

indication of the problems inherent in measuring the success

of all projects, past and future. The subjectivity of a

project’s success will be considered and predicted in my

paper, and suggestions will include alternatives for

measuring data within the community.

Finally, as the recent literature has not sufficiently

covered Australia’s potential for artist-led remediation

projects (Mudd, 2013; Unger et al, 2013; McHenry, 2011;

Digby, 2008), focusing instead on issues of mining industry

failures, public participation and rural empowerment, I aim

to produce a set of guidelines for artists and communities

wishing to undertake such projects. These guidelines will

acknowledge the necessity for projects to be site-responsive

and site-specific (Heyd, 2007), but will also aim to include

recommendations such as the vital contribution of key

stakeholders. Using the North American and European case

studies, I will distill the core contents of the relevant

7

texts in order to ascertain the most successful aspects of

the case studies, with the aim of uncovering those success

factors that are transferable to Australian contexts.

Chapter two: Framing the Discussion

2.1 What is remediation?

Any discussion of the remediation of former mine sites, or

indeed any other site, should begin with an analysis of what

remediation actually is: who is it for, what does it

involve, what has it been in the past and how could it be

improved?

8

The terms remediation and reclamation have emerged with

growing awareness of the environmental devastation wreaked

by humans, which has come to the forefront of social

consciousness since the 1960s. In 1973, draft legislation

in the United States defined reclamation of a former mine

site as restoration of the land back to its original state

(Morris, 1980, 88). This was, however, protested by mining

companies, who decried the economic impossibility of

restoring, for example, a huge open cut mine back to its

original natural state. The cost of a reclamation project

of this sort could have been in the billions of dollars, and

would have been so prohibitive that mining operations could

not have commenced in the first place. In 1980, legislation

came into effect in the United States that referred to

‘rehabilitation’ of polluted sites (Heyd, 2007) to be paid

for by the companies that had incurred the pollution in the

first place.

The use of the words rehabilitation, remediation,

reclamation and regeneration are in most texts on this

subject almost interchangeable. The word ‘remediation’

comes from the Latin remedium, which means to heal or to

cure, whereas ‘reclamation’ has a more proprietary tone,

implying the retrieval or recovery of a piece of land. In

this paper, I will use employ the word remediation to mean

9

not only the environmental healing but also the reimagining

of a site: looking forward and being active in that

reimagining, rather than sleepwalking into “a future we are

aimlessly concocting” (Lippard, 1997, 7).

The shifts in social, environmental, economic and political

systems that have occurred since the time of the first Land

Art works in the 1960s cannot be underestimated, but they

can be traced through the changing descriptive language for

this kind of art: the kind that exists outside the gallery,

is site-specific and employs found materials or landscapes

to create large-scale works. This kind of art was called

Land or Earth art in the 1960s and 70s, and is now more

often called Eco Art or Environmental Art, and this shift in

nomenclature reflects some of the political and ethical

debates in this field over the last 50 years.

Developed in the United States and Europe, Earth and Land

art was one of last nails in modernism’s coffin, when the

dematerialisation of the art object and the expansion of

art’s field of operations beyond the gallery walls were well

underway. The movement’s roots were firmly planted in

conceptual and minimal art, installation art and the Fluxus

and Arte Povera movements, and many artists from those early

years, including Robert Smithson, described the influence of

10

landscape and garden design on their work (Fain, 2011, p.

25).

Terms such as Earth or Land art have been used to refer to a

wide range of works: large-scale outdoor sculptures,

temporary interventions in a landscape, the installation

within a gallery of work made from natural or found

materials, earthworks, ecological performance art, art parks

and sculpture gardens, architectural installations and of

course, remediation or reclamation projects. In contemporary

art, it is likely that all of these works would be described

as Environmental or Eco Art.

The change in the way this sort of work is labelled reflects

a shift in the way this kind of art is made, and how it is

considered. Originally, Land art was almost exclusively

conceived and built (or its construction directed) by a solo

male artist, who rarely resorted to what we would now

describe as “collaboration”, “community consultations” or

“participatory practices”. Works such as Smithson’s famous

Spiral Jetty (1970) were grand designs that, although often

responding to the landscape in some way, represented the

vision of a single artist, rather than attempting to engage

the wishes or needs of the local community, or to address

the history of a place or its Indigenous people.

11

Environmental or social concerns were not the primary

impetus behind the first Land Art works.

A brief summary of some of the ethical issues revolving

around remediation art is necessary. The early Earthwork

artists such as Smithson were criticised for their ‘macho’

gestures in the land, for treating the land as “mere

material” (Heyd, 2002, p.6), for the imposition of their

aesthetic vision on land that had been effectively

transformed into a blank canvas by the ravages of industry.

The site-specificity of these large monumental works has

been described as “incidental” (Brisini, 2012, p. 53), and

their construction methods often appropriated those of

industries such as mining, using large earth-moving

machinery and invasive procedures.

Implicit in these criticisms of Earth Art is an idealised

vision of nature as a pure and untouched system, before

humans negatively impacted upon it. Recent texts such as

those by Brisini (2012), Carney (2010) and Turner (2007)

have exposed this utopian approach, critiquing it as a

refutation of nature’s entropic systems, its elemental chaos

and its boundless capacity for change. As Heyd (2002, p. 1)

points out, the phrase “nature restoration” is an oxymoron,

as humans could never restore a thing or place that was not

created by them in the first place.

12

Remediation art has also been accused of condoning the

destructive practices of industry by creating aesthetically

pleasing spaces from its waste, particularly when it is

funded by government or mining companies (Collins et al,

1997 and Morris, 1980). There is a fine line to be walked

in any such project, and the guidelines created by writers

such as Tim Collins (2003) on the treatment of post-

industrial space are useful: these include revealing

industrial heritage rather than cloaking it in nostalgia,

revealing social conflicts and the potential for dynamic

change, rather than suppressing them, and embracing and

supporting ecosystems and sustainability. Contemporary

participatory art practices are best placed to adhere to

these principles, as can be seen in the case studies

discussed in Chapter 4.

Another ethical concern has centred on the concept of

aesthetics. Art has traditionally been seen as representing

the interface between culture and nature (Hicks et al, 2007,

p. 332), an interpretation of our place within the world.

This has often manifested as artists or designers attempting

to impose a human aesthetic order on the natural world, in

the form of gardens, parks or other designed landscapes.

Frederick Turner, in his pivotal text Valuing Alteration (2007),

suggests that remediation or reclamation art must not

attempt to impose order on a landscape; rather, it should

13

facilitate entropic change and set up systems of control

that are responsive, and are “based on feedback rather than

coercion or force” (Turner, 2007, p. 9). My evaluation of

the three case studies in Chapter 4 will consider whether

this is indeed a successful approach; but first, a

discussion of the aesthetics of collaboration and relational

aesthetics in contemporary art.

2.2 Contemporary Earth art, environmentalism, relational aesthetics

The rise of participatory, collaborative practices in

contemporary art has been linked to the rise of the biennial

form (Bishop, 2006). Biennials present work that is often

internationalist in outlook yet addressing the local, a

phenomenon sometimes referred to as “glocalisation” (Holton,

2000, p. 144). Work created for biennials is often

temporary, site-specific or responsive, and often involves

artists working with local residents or community groups in

order to realise the work. This kind of work is also

described as relational aesthetics, a term coined by curator

Nicolas Bourriaud in his 1998 text of the same name.

The rise of ideas of relational aesthetics embodies a

continuing resolution of those criticisms of early Earth Art

mentioned in Chapter 1: that artists were imposing their

14

singular aesthetic values and artistic vision on landscapes.

Employing relational aesthetics in the creation of work is a

way to ensure that contemporary Environmental Art is site

and community-responsive, rather than intrusive or

insensitive to landscape and communities. In Australia, any

engagement with the land must address Indigenous histories

and rights.

The very nature of remediation projects, among other forms

of Earth or Environmental Art, ensures that these works are

not “commodity production items” (Morris, 1980, p. 97): ie.

they exist outside traditional art markets and therefore

outside modernist narratives and capitalist processes. They

are, however, inextricably linked to capitalism at their

core – the development (and boom and bust cycles) of world

resource markets has led us to the present. Therefore, a

method of artistic practice involving relational aesthetics,

which involves participation and collaboration, is the best

approach for remediation projects. The collaborative input

of people of many different backgrounds and with diverse

skills is also beneficial for large remediation projects

that may require social, artistic and scientific expertise.

Claire Bishop criticised Bourriaud’s idea of relational

aesthetics, suggesting that he was promoting aesthetic

judgement of a work based on the quality of its

15

participatory elements (Bishop, 2004). She stated that the

sort of participatory art to be found in contemporary art

biennials was not democratic at all, that its forms of

participation and the ‘relations’ it produced were not

reflective of an actual democracy as they did not encompass

or produce conflict. Bishop carefully selected as examples

work which could indeed be interpreted as utopian or

microtopian, such as Liam Gillick and Rirkrit Tiravanija. It

is, however, more important to apply this concern to

contemporary environmental art, which does require

participation in a more urgent way than art that exists to

be shown within a gallery or museum space. Environmental

art intersects with the daily activities of communities in a

way that much contemporary art does not, and its frame of

operation is often long term and even permanent, unlike the

temporary art of biennials and exhibitions. Therefore, the

‘relationality’ of a remediation project is a vital aspect

of its creation and intention.

2.3 Creative placemaking: Integrating civic memory and looking to the future

Alongside relational aesthetics, another phrase has entered

today’s cultural jargon: ‘creative placemaking’. This

expression is a more politically correct way to describe

16

urban regeneration or redevelopment, and also applies to a

more abstract and long term transformation of a piece of

land, with cultural usage in mind for the future. Many

authors have considered the words place and landscape, and the

difference between the two, including Lucy Lippard (1997)

and Thomas Heyd (2007). Contemporary artists working in

remediation and reclamation would do well to consider

Lippard’s thoughts on the two words: “place...is a layered

location replete with human histories and memories…the

external world mediated through human subjective experience”

(Lippard, 1997, p. 7).

A mine site is an illustration of this definition: sites

where immense physical changes have been wrought on the

land, and where human lives have been changed and, often,

lost. Often a mine was the foundation of the nearby town

and brought into being entire communities, made up of

countless personal histories. As time passes, the land

becomes depleted and mining companies move on. In the past,

there were no measures or legislation to protect mine sites

or to ensure their remediation after the miners or mining

company had moved on. Of course, there is often also no

economic protection for communities that depend on these

industries for their continued livelihoods and quality of

life. As Hicks and King point out, “activists and scholars

within the environmental justice movement and civic

17

environmentalism have pointed out how threats to the natural

world intersect with issues of social injustice and

disempowered communities” (Hicks et al, 2007 p. 334).

Deindustrialisation has led to unemployment and the collapse

of communities across the world. Along with this social

disintegration can come the dissolution of a community’s

sense of place, particularly if the local mine was an

integral part of its history. Part of the discussions

revolving around remediation are considerations of the

possibilities of site: leaving a former or derelict mine

site as is (the cheapest option, and arguably a method that

allows for the most ‘natural’ form of reclamation),

restoration to the site’s original state (prohibitively

expensive in most cases, and open to interpretation

concerning the definition or dating of an ‘original’ state)

and the third option: remediation incorporating industrial

histories and heritage, and a sort of redemption through

art. Remediation is the only option that can allow for

healing of both community and landscape, as part of the

creation of place.

When Morris wrote his text, Notes on Art as/and Land Reclamation in

1980, technology and its uses were perceived by Western

society in very different ways than in contemporary (and,

increasingly, global) societies. Technologies including

18

online access, data sharing and also more environmental

technologies such as the use of renewable fuels, have now

become much more integrated into our daily lives. Morris

wrote that “the structural feature of technological

application is one of fragmentation; that of ecological

thinking is, of course, the opposite” (Morris, 1980, p. 93).

This way of thinking is now out of date: the impetus behind

current theories of the democratisation of data, access to

the Internet, and the National Broadband Network, all hinge

on a way of thinking that promotes technology as inclusive

and accessible to all. The time has long passed when

technology was the enemy of nature, and the rise of social

media and its implementation by both social justice

advocates and social and environmental activists has shown

this change in our attitudes towards technology and its

uses.

The harnessing of new technologies is no longer only the

remit of large corporations. The democratisation of data

sharing has shown in the last twenty years that innovative

projects can be instigated and completed by communities,

even with little funding, as seen by the case studies in

Chapter 4. Remediation artists now have at their disposal a

much larger pool of expertise that the Earth artists of the

1960s and 70s, and the ability to source and share

information quickly and easily online. Using social media

19

avenues along with transdisciplinary collaborative methods,

contemporary remediation artists have possible avenues of

working undreamt of by artists such as Morris. The use of

new technologies such as solar power, rainwater harvesting,

sustainable building methods and bioremediation are also

within reach of artists and communities, giving remediation

projects an innovative and cutting-edge aspect that resounds

with the forward-looking nature of creative placemaking.

20

Chapter three: Experimental practice3.1 Art, science and transdisciplinary experimentation The links between artistic and scientific practice have

recently begun to be examined by writers such as Jill

Bennett, who makes a link between the uses of

experimentation in both fields (Bennett, 2007). Art is

described in this text as a form of open-ended

experimentation, one that uses material, form and content;

artists, particularly those who form the avant-garde, also

test social boundaries and conventions. Science is

traditionally seen as a more rational process, a rigorous

and controlled form of experimentation with outcomes that

are measurable. Bennett does not discuss the traditional

dichotomy between art and science, but states merely that

contemporary art has “a long and productive engagement with

this sector [Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics]

and with its contrasting formulations of experimentalism”

(Bennett, 2007, p. 1).

Remediation and Reclamation Art is a demonstration of this

engagement. Fain (2011) adopts Bennett’s brief description

of these productive collaborations and applies it

specifically to the remediation of mine sites led by

contemporary artists. Representing an artistic field that

has as an integral part of its practice the collaboration

21

between artists and scientists, remediation art presents an

opportunity to evaluate the success of transdisciplinary

processes between art and science. In Fain’s 2011 text,

this evaluation is overwhelmingly positive, although

tempered by the harsh realities of government policy and

arts funding.

Measuring the success of collaborations between artists and

scientists is a challenging undertaking. Can the success of

these temporary working partnerships be measured at all, and

if so, how: aesthetically, practically or statistically?

Bennett describes projects that are “impelled by external

conditions” (Bennett, 2007, p. 2) and which have addressed

these in measurable ways. These are projects initiated by

artists such as Nigel Helyer, David Dunn and Natalie

Jeremikenko, which have involved working with scientists or

with scientific approaches or methods. The measurable

outcomes of these projects are linked to the external

conditions by which they are impelled, and therefore the

aesthetic value of the work is an evaluation not made in

this text. Indeed, it may be an aspect that becomes

increasingly unimportant in contemporary transdisciplinary

art works, as suggested by Bishop (2004), particularly when

they are created in response to a specific problem.

22

In the case of remediation art, when the artist is

“reconceptualising public space in a way that inserts an

artist’s viewpoint into a set of pragmatic operations”

(Bennett, 2007, p. 2), an aesthetic evaluation can become

secondary to environmental and community concerns. Most

remediation art has not only subsumed scientific methods and

approaches, but also a form of experimentation traditionally

the preserve of scientists: that is, experimentation with

measurable outcomes.

3.2 Politics and participation: Art as activism

Remediation and reclamation art works do, however, have an

added component to these measurable outcomes, a component

that is more unpredictable: activism. As discussed by

Bishop in her text on collaborative contemporary art

practices, these works often form part of a “socially

ameliorative tradition” (Bishop, 2006, p. 180), a

description that implies past conflicts and crises of a

community or group of people. To these ingredients can be

added the problems experienced by a landscape impacted by

social histories, such as mining practices. Activism enters

this debate when issues are addressed, and is the impetus

behind much contemporary Environmental Art.

23

In Chapter 2, the criticisms levelled at some of the early

Land and Earth artists such as Smithson and Morris were

considered. These included criticisms of interventionism

and insensitive practices, in the name of aesthetic value.

Environmental activism has developed and strengthened since

the 1960s and 1970s, and with the awareness of environmental

issues, is now far more widespread than at that earlier

time. The rise of social media, ‘clicktivism’ and

‘glocalisation’ has occurred concurrently to this growing

awareness. It could be argued that social media is

contributing to increasing activism, even in regional areas,

due to increased connectivity locally and more widely. Comp

(2007, p. 65) suggests that small or regional towns are

unlikely sites for civic activism but this is becoming

increasingly untrue.

Remediation Art can be considered the logical outcome of

decades of environmental activism: the next step in a

healthy system, whereby artists and communities address the

“external conditions” described by Bennett (2007, p. 2),

taking future urban and landscape development and

reclamation into the hands of the participants, rather than

waiting for government intervention. Indeed, in the case

studies examined below, the projects are, to varying

degrees, the end results of years of civic activism,

political engagement and social organisation.

24

Some contemporary art (particularly landscape photography)

that addresses environmental degradation has been accused of

depicting the “toxic sublime” (Peeples, 2011), transforming

toxic landscapes into aesthetically pleasing art works, such

as in the photographs of Edward Burtynsky. The stated

intention of these works may be to raise awareness of human

impact on landscapes, but the result, as described by

Peeples, is the creation of a new image of the ‘sublime’, a

“mental state caused by our inability to fathom the power,

vastness, magnitude and magnificence of an object witnessed”

(Peeples, 2011, p. 379). The danger in this awe is

complacency, a lack of critical evaluation and engagement

with the reality depicted. Remediation Art does not simply

reflect social or environmental problems, nor seek to create

what Heyd, after Foucault, refers to as ‘heterotopias’

(Heyd, 2007, p. 343): spaces that are perfect, well-arranged

and meticulous in their construction. The political

challenge of remediation art lies in its representation of

both the entropic chaos of nature, as well as the disordered

and dangerous results of human intervention in a landscape,

whilst simultaneously seeking to address the negative

aspects of these issues.

25

3.3 Democratic discourse and the benefits of collaboration

It is in collaboration that the political and aesthetic

aspects of remediation can be merged. A defining and

thoroughly examined aspect of remediation and reclamation

projects (Brisini, 2012; Fain, 2011) has been the input of

the communities concerned, although this process is bound to

result in some of the antagonism described by Claire Bishop

(2004). This antagonism is described by Bishop as being an

integral part of democratic processes: and therefore, the

remediation artist must be prepared to act as mediator

between conflicting interests and opinions within

communities on the future uses of land.

Democratic discourse must involve long-term processes of

consultation, workshops, the collecting of oral histories,

evaluating community concerns and desires. These processes

are a vital and necessary part of a successful project, as

demonstrated by the case studies discussed below, as well as

by past projects internationally, whose success can be

measured in their longevity and cultural development

contributions, even if the aesthetic value is open to

debate.

26

The remediation artist must tread a fine line between the

roles of political activist, visionary, designer, mediator

and project leader. The labour intensiveness of

collaborations, and the potential for conflict, has been

described by many writers (Brisini, 2012; Carney, 2010;

Stokols, 2006) as a problem that must be addressed by

remediation artists and in the design of their projects: it

must be allowed for, and anticipated. This aspect of

collaboration should not be seen as a deterrent and rather

considered a positive ingredient in a successful remediation

project. If conflict is predicted, it will not outweigh the

ultimate benefits of collaboration. These include a project

that can heal a landscape and a community, provide economic

benefits and an increase in regional tourism, along with

providing environmental benefits to the landscape, cross-

cultural communication during the processes of

collaboration, and stimulating experimentation in artistic,

scientific and technological practices.

The case studies in the following chapter share an important

factor: none of them are known by the names of the

initiating artists. AMD&Art, the Nine Mile Run Greenway

Project and Emscher Park are named in response to site and,

in the first case, to the environmental problem that gave

rise to the project itself. This renunciation of “authorial

presence” (Bishop, 2006, p. 183) is an important and often

27

overlooked component of remediation art. It is vital that

the artist or artists who initiate future projects consider

themselves part of a larger whole, be it a landscape, a

project, a community or a future. Their artistic autonomy,

whilst not being subsumed by the state or by industry

interests, should come second to the project, wherein “the

experience of the work is the experience of the place”

(Collins et al, 1997, p. 191).

28

Chapter four: Case studies of artist-led remediation projects in Europe and North America

4.1 AMD&Art, Pennsylvania

The small town of Vintondale in Pennsylvania, USA, began to

undergo a transformation in 1994. Growing from the Earth

art traditions of the 1960s, AMD&Art was a not-for-profit

organisation founded by Dr T. Allan Comp, a historian

working in the US Department of the Interior’s Office of

Surface Mining. The project involved collaboration between

artists, engineers and scientists, along with the entire

community of Vintondale. The town, with a population of

around 500 people, was a former coal-mining community, and

its landscape had become severely affected by Acid Mine

Drainage (AMD), a toxic mix of sulphuric acid and iron that

affects waterways, plant and animal life. The mining

operations had been unregulated and had abandoned the site

in the 1970s.

The AMD&Art project’s main aim was to remediate a 35-acre

section of land, creating a combined water treatment

facility and public space. The aim of the project was

clearly stated in the organisation’s publicity collateral:

“Artfully Transforming Environmental Liabilities Into

29

Community Assets”, a mission statement that neatly

encapsulates the three aspects of all successful artist-led

remediation projects: art, environment and community.

AMD&Art built a series of passive treatment ponds that flow

into a seven-acre wetland area, before emptying into the

main creek. The park functions as an outdoor sculpture park

and a green public space for the community and tourists, who

are enticed to the area by the fame and innovation of the

project. Relics of colliery buildings and mining equipment

have been left to stand amongst the green space, as a

reminder of the area’s history.

When T. Allan Comp and his core team (which included

hydrologist Bob Deason, sculptor Stacy Levy and landscape

designer Julie Bargman) began this project, their first

action was to effectively undo the clumsy and unsympathetic

remediation attempts of a government-initiated Rural

Abandoned Mineland Project from the early 1980s (Comp,

2007). This earlier project had involved the abandoned mine

site being covered or capped with a large expanse of raw or

waste coal, which was four to eight feet deep across the

site. This was painstakingly removed by AMD&Art before the

creation of the passive treatment ponds and wetlands.

The artistic ingredients of this project are numerous: the

concept itself, the landscape design and the installation of

30

both temporary and permanent art works on site. The

innovation of the project lies in its conjoining of art,

science and participatory design. Community cultural

development is an integral part of the AMD&Art project, and

without the involvement of residents, the project would not

have been successful in its implementation or longevity.

The inherently experimental aspects of art-making (Bennett,

2007) lend themselves to remediation projects that stretch

over many years and require creative solutions to complex

problems. Experimentation is a “disposition, a drive to

question, transgress and reinvent” (Bennett, 2007, p. 1) and

this applies to experimentation in both artistic practice

and scientific research: the drive to explore, discover and

push boundaries. These are characteristics that make

artists and scientists increasingly open to cross

communication and interdisciplinary work, putting an end to

the traditional separation of the two fields. Reclamation

projects such as AMD&Art demonstrate the benefits of both

transdisciplinary practice and democratic discourse, as

discussed in Chapter 3.

31

Figure 1: The Ghost Town Trail bicycle track, part of the

AMD&Art site, with slag heap in the background.

The AMD&Art project won the 2005 EPA Phoenix Award, the

first national EPA Brownfields award presented for community

impact on mine-scarred lands, along with other awards for

green design and wetlands creation. Today, the site

attracts 75,000 bicyclists a year, along with hikers and

other visitors (Reece, 2002, 6). The community’s sense of

place has been restored, with their Town Planning Commission

restarted after 30 years of inactivity. (Reece, 2002, 7).

As an “art site whose existence goes beyond aesthetic

expression and actively seeks to ameliorate some

32

environmental harm or condition” (Brisini, 2012, 5) the

project is a roaring success. AMD&Art not only responded or

reflected an external condition, but it has actually

improved it.

T. Allan Comp has written about the problem of “being too

environmental for the arts funders and too artsy for the

environmental funders” (Comp, 2007, p. 66), and this is

surely a problem that has beset many remediation projects,

especially when seeking funding from government agencies who

require quantitative data and statistics as part of their

evaluations. Comp admitted that the entire project was

designed, staffed and managed almost exclusively by

volunteers, and yet he simultaneously and categorically

states that it would not have come to fruition without the

support of local, state and federal agencies, who “made the

project possible” (Comp, 2007, p. 66).

This is an issue that should be more clearly researched

before any remediation project commences, as it is untenable

for a project to be maintained indefinitely by volunteers or

unpaid community workers, regardless of the level of initial

government support. Although the AMD&Art project was a

success in terms of the creation of a renowned place that

succeeded in scientifically addressing the external issue of

Acid Mine Drainage, as well as providing a public space for

33

the community and a famous tourist attraction, measuring its

success in the long term will be dependent on continuing

support from funding bodies for maintenance of the site. As

the site was created as a public space, and was supported by

government funding initially, it should be maintained by

government funding in much the same way as a nature reserve

or public park.

The conflicts that arose during the planning of this project

included disparities between community and artistic wishes

for the site. The Vintondale community requested picnic

tables and a baseball course, rather than the design team’s

waterways and public art (Brisini, 2012, p. 13). As these

wishes emerged early in the processes of consultation, they

were honoured and the end result included community

resources and leisure facilities as well as public art

components. This proves that regular consultative processes

are vital to understand and respond to disparate desires and

plans amongst diverse stakeholders in any given project and

that a high degree of compromise and consensus can be

achieved.

The success of the AMD&Art Project has also been ensured by

the use of self-maintaining systems within the site

(Brisini, 2012). These systems include phytoremediation

methods that require little to no continuing maintenance,

34

such as the passive treatment ponds, reed beds and stands of

trees such as the Litmus Garden, which demonstrates the

progressive cleansing of the waterways using the colour of

foliage in the trees chosen. In Australia, the policy

concerning abandoned mines suggests that the maintenance of

a site be the responsibility of what is described as

“impacted stakeholders” (MCMPR, 2010, p. 31), ie. the

community and local businesses. A more realistic and cost-

effective approach is to follow the lead of AMD&Art,

maximising the use of self-maintaining bioremediation

systems in potential future projects. However, some

problems concerning maintenance of the site have been

reported (Fain, 2011, p. 94), despite the creation of the

local watershed association to manage the continuing care of

the site.

The AMD&Art project was an overall success in the eyes of

its own designers. T. Allan Comp, who initiated the

project, has been quoted as saying that he feels more

committed than ever to the idea that “arts and the

humanities are absolutely necessary to environmental

recovery…art and history, combined with science, will

ultimately change the way we think about an industrial

economy that is destroying the very ecosystems that sustain

us, and all life” (Reece, 2002, p. 10).

35

4.2 Nine Mile Run Greenway Project, Pennsylvania (NMR-GP)

The Studio for Creative Inquiry (SFCI) is a research

facility within the College of Fine Arts at Carnegie Mellon

University in Pittsburgh, USA. It is an interdisciplinary

department in which artists collaborate with scientists,

designers, architects and others on projects that provide

opportunities for collaborative exchange and learning.

The Nine Mile Run Greenway Project was developed within the

Studio for Creative Inquiry between the years of 1996 and

1999.

Nine Mile Run is a 23-acre valley site in Pittsburgh,

Pennsylvania, which had been used between 1930 and 1972 as a

dumping ground for a steel industry slag disposal company.

It featured heavily polluted waterways and slag heaps. In

1995, the City of Pittsburgh commissioned a plan for the

site, which resulted in zoning for 1200 residential units

and a 100-acre public park. To put this plan into reality,

the City was responsive to a proposal from the Studio for

Creative Inquiry to manage a remediation project on this

site.

36

The Nine Mile Run Greenway Project was designed in three

stages (Collins, 2003). The first involved a prolonged

series of community consultations, the second was a detailed

biological study of the site, and the third stage was a

presentation of possible designs to the local community and

the finalisation of a master plan for the site. In total,

the project took three years.

Tim Collins, one of the three main instigators of this

project (the others being Reiko Goto and Bob Bingham), has

written extensively on the subject of Nine Mile Run and the

challenges it presented. He stated that the project had its

roots in Joseph Beuys’ idea of ‘social sculpture’ (Collins,

2003, p. 463), whereby art is liberated from its

“objectness” (Fain, 2011, p. 22) and the boundaries of the

gallery walls. Beuys believed that society itself was

sculpture, and that the lines dividing nature and culture

were fluid and reciprocal. Collins and the other Nine Mile

Run Greenway Project leaders harnessed these ideas, ensuring

that ‘society’ was involved at every stage of the project.

They did this by embedding community consultations,

workshops and surveys in their master plan and during every

evaluation period.

In 1998, a joint publication documenting the results of the

first two stages of the project was released, published by

37

the Studio for Creative Inquiry, the Carnegie Mellon

University, the City of Pittsburgh and the Carnegie Museum

of Natural History. It was titled The Nine Mile Run Watershed

Rivers Conservation Plan, and it encapsulated the progress of the

project to date, incorporating the results of expert designs

modified following community input. Artists, zoologists,

landscape architects and civil engineers contributed to this

document, which was used in the closing stages of the

project as a summary of work done and as an instruction

manual in the establishment of the Nine Mile Run Watershed

Association, which was formed to continue the management of

the site.

This planning aspect means that the continuing maintenance

of the site is assured, and the release of a publication

provides a snapshot of the site that can be referred to in

future. This is valuable documentation and can be used as a

template for other projects, in respect to its layout and

the collaborative authorship model used in its creation.

The input of researchers, scientists, artists, museum

curators and government workers represents an innovation in

publishing, ensuring that the document has a life outside

the academic or public service realms.

38

At the close of the project, Collins described the unifying

theory behind this project as “reclamation as an integrated

ecosystem restoration that embraces the complex goal of

'nature' in the context of contemporary urban culture”

(Collins, 2000, p. 462). This is a goal that requires an

experimental approach, as its complexity calls for detailed

study and input from many different sources. Collins also

refers in this text to the concept of ‘care’, an idea that

finds its complement in the concept of curating. The word

curate has its roots in the Latin verb curare: to care.

Caring for a site or a landscape can be compared to a

curatorial approach, which, in its most successful

manifestations, calls for detailed research and study.

Curating the land is a way of thinking about remediation

projects such as the Nine Mile Run Greenway Project.

4.3 Emscher Park, Ruhr Valley, Germany

39

Figure 2: Emscher Landschaftspark

40

The Ruhr Valley was the heartland of Germany’s mining

industry until the 1970s, when international steel and coal

markets shifted and mines began to close. The brownfields

of the Ruhr Valley presented a huge challenge for

remediation, and the Emscher River, running through the

Ruhr, became the focus for Europe’s largest remediation

project. The river flows for approximately 350 kilometres

through 17 different local authorities. As a result of the

extensive mining and industrialisation of the area, the

river had become severely contaminated, carrying both human

and industrial waste. In 1989, the Internationale

Bauaustellung (IBA) Emscher Park was formed by the State

Government of North Rhine-Westphalia, and the major

restoration program commenced.

The two objectives of the project were to repair the

environmental damage to the landscape and to design urban

communities of the future. Over a decade, IBA Emscher Park

hosted workshops, international design competitions and

public planning sessions, stimulating participatory design

in the creation of over 100 separate projects on five

different sites, covering 800 square kilometres between

Duisburg and Kamen. Innovative architectural designs were

created during these workshops, and the involvement of local

communities ensured that the final results responded to

regional needs, creating a sense of place whilst celebrating

the region’s industrial heritage.

41

The impetus behind this large project was to address the

“high rates of unemployment and a shrinking population” in

the region (Franz et al, 2008, p. 317). The work of

architects and designers was integral from the beginning of

the project, and it was instigated and overseen by Dr Karl

Ganser, a biologist and urban planner who was also trained

as a geologist and chemist. This visionary planner faced

numerous challenges in the project’s development, including

funding challenges, conflict with property developers and

public approbation. As a recent text points out, the

collective and collaborative planning approach utilised by

Ganser can lead to a “social acceptance of site… [and] the

opening of a site to the public should not only be

accompanied by a transparent risk communication but also a

strategy of ‘place-making’ as a concept of collective

appropriation” (Franz et al, 2008, p. 323).

The Emscher Park project incorporated into the final site

research centres, business parks, shopping centres,

renaturalised watercourses, recreational areas, a

“technology cluster” (Franz et al, 2008, p. 318) comprising

33 companies, and parks such as the Landschaftspark pictured

above. Its holistic approach meant that the regeneration of

the site was comprehensive, including not only cultural

centres, but also retail and business locations. This

42

project had the opportunity to repurpose industrial

buildings such as warehouses and factories, and its funding

was a mix of private, government and partnerships between

the two.

The artistic components of the project stimulated

controversy amongst the public consultations and workshops

in the initial stages of planning, with some members of the

public of the opinion that the funding of such art works

would be better spent on social concerns such as rent-

controlled housing. However, art works proved to be some of

the most popular aspects of the site. An example of this is

the night lighting that was designed in response to oral

histories describing the closing of the factories as “though

the night sky had died” (Labelle, 2001, p. 4). These night

lighting schemes, which incorporate renewable technology,

enliven the industrial landscape and also pay tribute to the

heritage of the past.

The success of this project was dependent on an innovative

scheme that integrated existing buildings with green spaces

(Franz et al, 2008; Loures et al, 2008). It also hinged on

the presence of a large population in the vicinity, a factor

not available to many potential projects repurposing

derelict mines in Australia. However, the Emscher Park

project also showed that regional tourism could be

43

dramatically increased to the area, along with local usage:

the ‘Route of Industrial Culture’ is a driving and biking

route for tourists which has been well used since it was

built (Labelle, 2001).

4.4 Evaluation of case studies

How are such projects to be assessed? In terms of wildlife,

community benefits, tourism? As discussed in earlier

chapters, an aesthetic evaluation of these remediation

projects is a subjective undertaking, and in terms of

community and social concerns, not particularly useful. The

result of the projects will almost always be an improvement

on the toxic, contaminated landscapes that remain in post-

industrial areas. There must be a balance between

evaluating such projects purely in terms of the amount of

collaboration, as debated by Bishop (2004, 2006), whether

that is interdisciplinary or between artists and

communities, and in terms of aesthetic value.

The best form of evaluation is to take a forward-looking and

broad view of such projects, encompassing communities,

environments and artistic concerns. Remediation must

involve not just the healing or recovering of a landscape

but also renewal, reimagining and recreating of site: in

44

short, the creation of place. In economic terms, the

investment in such projects must be weighed against the

long-term benefits and returns.

All three of the case studies examined above were successful

according to these measures. They were all specifically

designed with the site in mind, and in collaboration with

communities. Figures documenting increased tourist numbers

and employment in the regions in question show positive

change (Brisini, 2012; Heyd, 2007; Labelle, 2001; Collins et

al, 1997). Environmental improvement was not a difficult

change to make in such contaminated landscapes, and the

return of wildlife and natural diversity is also well

documented (Turner, 2007; Heyd, 2002; Collins, 2000).

45

Chapter five: Curating the land: Applicationsin Australia 5.1 Using action research methodologies

Kurt Lewin was a German-American social psychologist who in

1946 coined the term “action research” to describe a method

involving communities working closely with psychologists to

diagnose social problems and develop collaborative methods

for solving such problems (Stokols, 2006). This paper

suggests building on Lewin’s work by outlining programmatic

directions for the scientific study of transdisciplinary

research and community action. Three types of collaboration,

and the contextual circumstances that facilitate or hinder

them, should be examined before any remediation project

commences: collaboration among scholars representing

different disciplines; collaboration among researchers from

multiple fields and community practitioners representing

diverse professional and lay perspectives; and collaboration

among community organisations across local, state, national,

and international levels.

The process of action research has been shown to be one of

the most effective means of understanding these different

forms of collaboration, and a successful way of responding

to complex situations (Thering, 2007). Communities dealing

with the repercussions of environmental damage and economic

46

shifts are shown to benefit from projects that define their

capacity to imagine a better future, and action research

initiatives can enhance these projects, deepening community

engagement and long-term involvement. Action research is

also documented as effective in initiating action and change

towards sustainability (Stokols, 2006).

Involving communities in the action research process builds

capacity within the communities as well as provide

significant impetus for them to critically examine

sustainability issues and contribute to local mine site

rehabilitation and reuse. In particular, project teams

working in partnership with members of the communities in

undertaking the action research projects provide significant

incentives for them to become agents of change within their

own communities. This is developed by a system of community

consultations that define relevant local requirements for

any future remediation. By involving the community in the

initial stages of planning, future concerns can be

ascertained and addressed in the project’s infancy. These

community needs should be documented to allow for project

results to be evaluated successfully throughout the stages

of the remediation.

The method of action research is structured around a

sustained series of consultative meetings, evaluations and

47

translation of research findings into policies. A staggered

series of grassroots-level consultations within communities

has been shown to be more effective in identifying social

issues than top-down, one-off projects initiated by local or

State government (Thering, 2007). The findings of these

consultations shape and direct the relevant research, which

is represented to community representatives at each stage of

the project, before being legitimised in policy.

Communities dealing with the repercussions of environmental

damage and economic shifts are shown to benefit from

projects that define their capacity to imagine a better

future, and action research initiatives can enhance these

projects, deepening community engagement and long-term

involvement. Action research is also documented as

effective in initiating action and change towards

sustainability, and can produce results that transcend

“civilian boundaries” (Thering, 2007, p. 5).

Action research encourages communicative learning, and is

particularly useful in projects involving not only

communities, but also experts in diverse fields such as

biology, environmental science, design and architecture.

Transdisciplinary research is facilitated by action research

methodology, by making the community and its needs the

central impetus for any project and thereby giving experts

48

an external focus and a goal around which to structure their

collaborations.

5.2 Projects involving former mine sites in Australia

As the Australian mining boom begins to show signs of

fading, the time is ripe to consider the future of the

50,000 abandoned mine sites across the nation, although this

must be managed carefully (Unger et al, 2012). Since 2010,

when the Strategic Framework for Managing Abandoned Mines in the

Minerals Industry was released by the Ministerial Council on

Mineral and Petroleum Resources, together with the Minerals

Council of Australia, Australian government departments,

communities and private companies have been considering ways

to rehabilitate and remediate former mine sites. These

abandoned mines are defined as: “mines where mining leases

or titles no longer exist, and responsibility for

rehabilitation cannot be allocated to any individual,

company or organisation responsible for the original mining

activities” (MCMPR, 2010).

49

The problem of unremediated and derelict mine sites is not

limited to Australia. The three remediation projects

examined in Chapter 4 involved transdisciplinary practice;

experimental, collaborative practice that is impelled by

arguably more dramatic “external conditions” than Bennett

discussed (Bennett, 2012, 11). In the situations examined

here, the external condition was an abandoned mine site,

which presented very different and complex problems in each

context.

In Australia, the remediation of mine sites is, for the most

part, entrusted to the mining companies or to government

departments. A recent disastrous attempt at remediation in

the Sugarloaf State Conservation Area resulted in massive

subsidence and a concreted creek bed, with untold damage to

local animal and plant species. Some mining companies in

Australia are, however, involved in positive change and

creative projects. Rio Tinto is collaborating with

Fremantle-based arts organization DADAA Inc., to realise a

project addressing mental health in rural communities.

Harnessing the skills of miners and the knowledge of

Indigenous leaders, artists will work towards creating

large-scale public art works. Arts Victoria is also joining

in, with its Small Towns Transformation funding towns such

as Neerim and Dookie, where an old mining quarry will be

repurposed to a performance and projection space. In New

50

South Wales, the town of Broken Hill is a thriving artistic

centre, with many galleries and museums celebrating its

mining history. This year it will play host to an outpost

of the Sydney Fringe Festival. Meanwhile, in Tasmania,

David Walsh’s Museum of Old and New Art will host a ‘Heavy

Metal’ Festival to raise awareness of contamination in the

Derwent River in 2014. This project aims to bring

scientists and artist together in a series of symposiums to

explore options for remediation.

These small projects are a good start, but there is still

much to do. More research into international precedents of

mine reclamation and remediation should be undertaken.

Site-specific projects must be supported by the incoming

Australian government, and suitably funded. A new approach

needs to be developed for a positive and innovative take on

'rehabilitation' that is of simultaneous interest in

corporate, environmental and social contexts, which could be

applicable to a wide range of mine rehabilitation

situations, regardless of funding, community size and level

of artistic exposure and literacy. By embedding visual

artists, scientists and creative practitioners within

regional communities during the initial stages of

remediation projects, resulting benefits will include skills

development in small towns, and the potential to develop

interdisciplinary methodologies between art and science.

51

Chapter six: Recommendations for the future 6.1 Guidelines for remediation projects in Australia

Many rural communities in Australia have shown themselves to

be resilient, creative and dynamic, and the arts have been

proved to contribute towards this resilience (Anwar McHenry,

2011). However, Australia has conditions that differ

greatly from other countries and any remediation projects

here must consider the impact of the tyranny of distance and

small rural populations. Emscher Park in the Ruhr Valley

benefited from millions of people living in the vicinity, a

captive audience who were invested in the region in personal

histories and cultural connections. However, the AMD&Art

project demonstrates the potential success for much smaller

communities: the population of Vintondale is small (around

500 people) and remains small to this day. The project’s

success was shown not only through community engagement but

also in increased tourism numbers.

52

Internationally, groups like the Centre for Land Use

Interpretation in Los Angeles, the Studio for Creative

Inquiry at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, the

Land/Art group in New Mexico, and the College of Fine Art

(University of NSW) Curating Cities project are moving

things along, but a concerted effort in Australia is

required to facilitate creative projects on former mine

sites, of which there are no shortage. Funding needs to be

sourced and artists inspired. One way of stimulating

artistic interest and engagement is through national and

international artist residencies, which should be

established at derelict mine sites. Another is by offering

incentives for art/science collaborations experimenting with

new forms of phytoremediation and renewable technologies, or

tax incentives to mining industry stakeholders who wish to

fund such projects.

The remediation of sites like the Sydney Olympic Park has

shown that it is feasible and beneficial for such projects

to take place in Australia. Other sites, such as the Museum

of Old and New Art, prove that domestic tourism is a

significant economic force and that people are willing to

travel to far-flung destinations if the venue is outstanding

and innovative.

53

The literature on the three case studies in Chapter 4 is

lacking in detail in one important respect: documentation of

liaison with Indigenous groups and collaboration with them

on expressing the history of the site and its Indigenous

cultural significance. Any large remediation projects to

take place in Australia must take the rights and histories

of the First Australians, who were creating Land and Earth

Art much earlier than the 1960s, into account. The success,

ethical strength and long term survival of any such

remediation project depends on this collaboration. Just as

it is vital that the local community is involved in a

remediation project, so too is it crucially important that

Indigenous members of those communities are consulted and

included in all stages of planning.

Ten suggested guidelines for remediation projects in

Australia are:

54

1. Setting an example: Consider any project a potential

framework for future projects. Consider the project a

learning process, rather than focusing on the end

product. Document each stage so that future project

leaders can make use of problems and conflicts,

negotiations and solutions.

2. Use local resources: Establish everything that can be

sourced locally, be it labour force, in-kind support,

volunteers, designed products or artistic and

scientific input. The more involvement the local

community has in the project, the more successful it

will ultimately be.

3. Foster local identity and aim to create a sense of

place: Gather local histories, both human and natural,

and use the project as a form of placemaking. Public

participation in recounting oral histories and

narratives will serve to give any remediation project a

focus, and a site a documented history of its own.

4. Broaden the policy environment: Documentation of each

stage of the project will expand the possibilities for

policy change, and can be used in future legislative

amendments. Both quantitative and qualitative data

should be gathered during the project for this purpose.

55

5. Set goals: define goals at each step of the project,

and change them if necessary. The project should be

clearly and transparently managed, and a series of

defined goals will make large projects manageable.

Action research methodologies support this process.

6. Facilitate innovation and creativity: consider as

integral the input of artists, as well as scientists

and other experts. Go out on a limb and take risks.

7. Publicity: A successful project should generate

publicity and interact with the public through a

variety of online outlets, particularly in areas where

the population may be widely dispersed, and where

accessibility is an issue.

8. Ensure transparency: allow the project to be

independently audited at regular intervals and for the

community to be aware of planning decisions.

9. Organisational structure: Initiate a clear management

structure and allocate appropriate roles.

10. Take responsibility: the onus must be on the

mining industry to fund projects, and if there is no

corporate social responsibility for the site, the

project should be jointly funded by public and private

stakeholders.

56

6.2 Further thoughts

These guidelines are by necessity non-specific, but this is

due to the fact that the most important part of any

potential remediation project is site-specificity. A

project will differ from site to site, and cannot be simply

transposed across the nation. The diversity of our

landscape, histories and population will not allow for

consistency in projects, either in size or in design: this

is, however, a positive fact. Our diversity should be

reflected, and celebrated, by the artists and other creative

minds who will initiate such projects in the future.

For an artist or artist collective approaching the task of

remediation, bearing in mind the lessons of the past is

vital. That past includes the ethical controversies and

debates around Earth and Land Art of the 1960s and 70s, but

also worth considering is the minefield that can await

contemporary artists working in large remediation or

reclamation projects, such as those mentioned above.

Although the literature is overwhelmingly positive on the

outcomes of these projects, it is clear that the process is

a long and involved one, and is not necessarily conducive to

the development of a solo artist’s career. In other words,

transdisciplinary work must not be considered lightly or

superficially; rather, an artist must be prepared to have

57

his or her artistic work subsumed in, or transmogrified by

the overarching reclamation project. Imposing an

individual’s vision on the landscape is not the right

approach, but there is a balance to be struck between this

and interminable projects that become fraught with conflict.

That said, the artist’s role within this sort of project is

crucial: as a visionary, as an instigator, as a project

leader. The expertise of an artist in progressive, long-

term experimental practice is highly relevant and applicable

to reclamation and remediation projects, which encompass

numerous different fields, audiences and materials. The

artist can be seen to be not only collaborating with

scientists, engineers and communities, but also with nature

itself. Embracing entropy and unpredictable systems is part

of an artist’s daily work, and the healing work of

remediation is best overseen by a dedicated and visionary

artist or artists.

58

BibliographyAlmaas, I., 1999. Regenerating the Ruhr. The Architectural Review,

205(1224), pp.13–14.

Anwar McHenry, J., 2011. Rural empowerment through the arts:

The role of the arts in civic and social participation in

the Mid West region of Western Australia. Journal of Rural

Studies, 27(3), pp.245–253.

Bennett, J., 2012. Living in the Anthropocene, dOCUMENTA13 - 100

Thoughts series. Berlin: Hatje Canz.

Bennett, J., 2007. What is Experimental Art? Studies in Material

Thinking, 8, pp.1–7.

Bishop, C., 2004. Antagonism and Relational Aesthetics.

October, (110), pp.51–79.

Bishop, C., 2006. The Social Turn: Collaboration and its

discontents. Artforum, 44(6), pp.178–183.

Bourriaud, N., 1998. Relational Aesthetics. Dijon: Les Presse du

Reel.

Brady, E., 2007. Introduction to “Environmental and Land

Art”: A Special Issue of Ethics, Place and Environment.

Ethics, Place & Environment, 10(3), pp.257–261.

59

Brisini, T.P., 2012. AMD&Art: Performativity and Participation in

Ecological Remediation. Thesis submitted to the Graduate Faculty

of the Louisiana State University, in partial fulfilment of

the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,

Louisiana State University.

Carney, L.S., 2010. Ecology and the Ethics and Aesthetics of

Collaboration: The case of Nine Mile Run. RACAR XXXV, (1),

pp.63–72.

Collins, T., 2000. Interventions in the Rust Belt: The art

and ecology of post-industrial public space. Ecumene, 7(4),

pp.461–467.

Collins, T. & Goto, R., 1997. Urban Reclamation: Place,

value, use: The Nine Mile Run Project. Leonardo, 30(3),

pp.191–192.

Comp, T.A., 2007. Science, art, and environmental

reclamation: Three projects and a few thoughts. In A.

Berger, ed. Designing the Reclaimed Landscape. Taylor & Francis,

pp. 63–76.

Del Tredici, P., 2008. Disturbance ecology and symbiosis in

mine-reclamation design. In A. Berger, ed. Designing the

Reclaimed Landscape. London and New York: Taylor & Francis, pp.

13–25.

60

Fain, J., 2011. Remediation by Inspiration: Artist-driven models for

environmental cleanup. Thesis submitted to the Department of

Urban Studies and Planning, in partial fulfilment of the

requirements for the degree of Master of City Planning,

Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Franz, M., Gueles, O. & Prey, G., 2008. Place-Making and

“Green” Reuses of Brownfields in the Ruhr. Tijdschrift voor

Economische en Sociale Geografie, 99(3), pp.316–328.

Hawkes, J., 2001. The Fourth Pillar of Sustainability:

Culture’s essential role in public planning. Cultural

Development Network Victoria, pp.1–80.

Heyd, T., 2002. Nature Restoration Without Dissimulation:

Learning from Japanese gardens and earthworks. Environmental

Aesthetics, 3(1), pp.1–13.

Heyd, T., 2007. Reflections on Reclamation through Art.

Ethics, Place & Environment, 10(3), pp.339–345.

Hicks, L. & King, R., 2007. Confronting Environmental

Collapse: Visual culture, art education, and environmental

responsibility. Studies in Art Education: A journal of issues and research,

48(4), pp.332–335.

Holton, R., 2000. Globalization's Cultural Consequences.

Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 570,

pp.140–152.

61

Jonsen Verbeke, M., 1999. Industrial heritage: A nexus for

sustainable tourism development. Tourism Geographies, 1(1),

pp.70–85.

Labelle, J., 2001. Emscher Park, Germany: Expanding the

definition of a “park.” The George Wright Society Forum, 18(3),

pp.1–5.

Lippard, L., 1997. The Lure of the Local, New York: The New

Press.

Loures, L. & Crawford, P., 2008. Democracy in Progress:

Using public participation in post-industrial landscape

(re)-development. WSEAS Transactions on Environment and Development,

4(9), pp.1–10.

MCMPR, 2010. Strategic Framework for Managing Abandoned Mines in the

Minerals Industry, Minerals Council of Australia.

Meech, J.A. et al., 2006. Transformation of a derelict mine

site into a sustainable community: the Britannia project.

Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(3-4), pp.349–365.

Morris, R., 1980. Notes on Art as/and Land Reclamation.

October, 12, pp.87–102.

Mudd, G., 2013. Australia's Mining Legacies. Arena Magazine,

(124), pp.19–24.

62

Peeples, J., 2011. Toxic Sublime: Imaging Contaminated

Landscapes. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and

Culture, 5(4), pp.373–392.

Reece, E., 2002. Profile 5: “Art the Works”: T. Allan Comp

and the Reclamation of a Toxic Legacy. Democratic Vistas Profiles,

pp.1–13.

Scarfone, A., 2007. One Place After Another: Site-Specific

Art and Locational Identity by Miwon Kwon. Rhetoric Society

Quarterly, 37(2), pp.209–212.

Stokols, D., 2006. Toward a Science of Transdisciplinary

Action Research. American Journal of Community Psychology, 38(1-2),

pp.63–77.

Thering, S., 2007. A Practical Theory-Based Approach to

Action-Research in Survivor Communities. Journal of Extension,

45(2), pp.1–9. Available at:

http://www.joe.org/joe/2007april/a3.php. Last accessed 22

October 2013.

Turner, F., 2007. Valuing alteration. In A. Berger, ed.

Designing the Reclaimed Landscape. London and New York: Taylor &

Francis, pp. 3–12.

63

Unger, C., Lechner, A.M. & Glenn, V., 2013. Mapping and

Prioritising Rehabilitation of Abandoned Mines in Australia.

In Mine Conference 2012. pp. 1–14.

64

Curating the Land: Artist-led remediation projects on former mine sites

Documents

Transcript of Curating the Land: Artist-led remediation projects on former mine sites