Scientists Should be Good Communicators.

What I learned from Architects as an Urbanist-Scientist is to try making art.

Background: A Map Maker and Geographer Amidst Designers.

I initially joined WTA, an architecture firm, as a GIS Specialist. While my background was mostly on mapmaking and making sense of spatial data, admittedly I was not the most adept in visual layout. If anything, I have been trying to improve it: playing with colors, with composition, with data; but when I joined the firm I also saw how visually demanding architecture as a trade was. A ‘concept package’, which is their pitch deck for a project in the earlier phases, really is a document of vision and imagination. They would need to create ‘renders’ from scratch, a task requiring a lot of photoshop skills; they would need to produce charts and graphs that encapsulate their diligence research about a project; they would often also need find good viewing vantage points for the building within the vicinity it would be seen. Even within the field of architecture, apparently the firm was already among the best in terms of such visual standard and intent. Surrounded by these artists, I felt the strong need to level-up my craft and be of the same calibre of excellence. But beyond such excellence, the impact of good visual design bridges and clothes the intent for their design. I can’t help but imagine how that could apply for scientists like me. 

As I have reached three years here as a scientist amidst architects, I reflect on what I learn and see from my colleagues, how they view the world as active (re)shapers of space and how they wield their ability to visually express their vision and intent. 

Visual Media is Powerful.

Both geographers and architects work on space. Architects design and build buildings, parks, interiors and whole neighborhoods. Geographers, on the other hand, study the many layers of space: the buildings, the people, the everyday. As architects work so well with painting an envisioned better version of our city with every project, scientists must also be able to capture both the grim and mundane realities towards making people understand our spaces in more scientific lenses. 

I have personally learned that not all maps need to look like those in technical documents. When we intend to post them online or to the general public, our intent must extend to how we ‘draw’ and color our maps. Post-processing maps from QGIS to Canva felt like doing care and having specific intentions of how the maps would be shown and received. Typically this includes adding artistic titles, gradients, labels and shapes that direct the eyes to specific areas of a map or image. 

Data must also be told like stories that are connected, cohesive and point to a bigger picture. Places can be dissected from its multiple layers, from its physical, natural, built and social layers and tying them back together. A given dataset is told one way through maps; but charts and graphs can tell another story; giving each point adds another dimension. 

For example, in one of WTA Labs’ previous studies Parks in the Greater Manila Area, we learned that there are at least 1,766 parks in the Greater Manila Area (Metro Manila and adjacent provinces), and almost half of it (803) are in Metro Manila. If we are to end the conversation there, it appears to debunk a long-standing collective understanding that we Filipinos lack parks. But, to add a dimension, among these 803 parks in Metro Manila, only 16 exceed 5 hectares. On the other hand, 88% of all parks in the GMA are less than 1 hectare. This means that (1) there are very few large parks and (2) we are dominated by microparks. Their effectiveness and impact probably varies (and is not within the scope of this study yet), especially with the thermal cooling effect. As smaller parks meant less tree cover, these small parks would be just as hot as their immediate boundaries.

At least according to land surface temperature data from Landsat-8, most parks do not have significantly lesser temperature compared to their immediate vicinities. We can infer that this is an issue of cities merely trying to reclaim what is left from decades of rapid urbanization and sprawling with less room for larger parks, more so the economic pressures of selling land to real estate developers. Speaking of real estate, of the 1,766 parks, 811 (almost half) are within gated communities, indicating limitations in open access and social interaction.

Concise board for: Parks in the Greater Manila Area

Access Parks in the Greater Manila: Parks in the Greater Manila Area | WTA Labs

Maps and Creative Works

Whenever I begin a map, I always ask myself: what’s the most interesting thing to show in this map? 

To go back to Parks in the Greater Manila Area, we initially thought of making a simple poster, summarizing the data as well as some angles of making sense of such information. In communicating them, we tried to produce photo essays on instagram as well as short-form videos. One of them was still our post with highest engagement: Filipinos only get less than 1 sqm of park space per capita, far from the ideal benchmarks. 

Beyond short form contents, we experimented with interactive maps through GeoCite. Admittedly at the start, when I was writing the manuscript for this research, I found it difficult on how to properly present the maps. The maps would easily feel like they’re mere accessories to the paper, rather than the very medium the topic is communicated at. Furthermore, with the multiple datasets joined, not everything can be put in detail. The idea of an interactive map would also help capture our intent to make the data openly available, not only to GIS practitioners and scientists, but to the curious public. Geocite is an interactive web map platform dedicated to be our medium for map access to the public. We consider this as a type of creative work, where we customize what scales to see, what buttons to put and how stories can be shown in data. When designing an interactive web map, or a creative work in general, user experience for our creative works must also be considered. We also sustained our visual standards, particularly having balanced colors, intentioned emphasis for the subject and general readability. We routinely tested out functions and buttons if it would be a clear and comfortable experience navigating it. Furthermore, feedback is welcome and very much needed hence feedback mechanisms like ticket submission for bug reports and comments may be issued.

Read more about Geocite and how it was made: Introducing GeoCite: Innovating Map Science Communication Through Interactive Platforms

Scientists can help reshape space the same way architects do; but must be able to articulate their perspectives

Beyond data, I have always found myself envious of the architects surrounding me on how they are able to visualize space, reimagined streets, new buildings with new sightlines. But at the same time, as a geographer who also sees several ‘layers’ occurring in a city; living in Manila, such layers can be neglected, like how heritage buildings across all periods can be overgrown, sometimes even eroding; trees here are not only neglected but also downright treated as an erasable, disposable feature, ignoring their environmental and social benefits to neighborhoods; in the human realm, ambulant vendors are oftentimes evicted and unrepresented in the planning process. While architects’ primary end products lead to a reimagined future, we scientists need to match the same level of articulation for our current realities. Our reimaginations are rooted in our current griefs, sufferings and longings. 

We live in slightly better times that AI tools help us: perhaps through prompts or even ‘collaging’ images via AI help articulate scientists' imagination. When using AI, we practitioners should always do so still upholding our intent as well as care in message, form and ethic. For example, you cannot AI maps, especially those that pose as GIS or cartography. AI will always produce maps that are grossly inaccurate.

While AI-use is one way, communication is not limited to the end product like images or videos or illustrations; but it is a process of trying to empathize with your subject and with the audiences, and with it, also knowing how people would react, agree and add more to your initiated discourse. The best case is that we are able to converse with people.

Beyond the midst of AI-assisted communication, we must not be afraid to do and try novel ways of communicating our observations. Make bad art! From simple photographs and photowalks, sketches on photos; collages, short-form video essays and many more. The rise of science-related content creators are more than inspiring, showing us that people are actually willing and eager to learn; and we scientists must also step up in making sense of our surroundings through our respective backgrounds. 

4 Ways Scientists Can Wield Communication and Story Telling Empower People

To summarize, what I have learned from architects is to be an artist, whose works are made with utmost care, intent and quality. Particularly, I condense them into the following four points:

1. Always begin with a question that your medium and research will answer. Being guided by motivation will help align both the message and the way that message is presented. Communication starts with good intentions.

2. Data can be told like a story. It can be visual, it can be graphed, it can be plotted on a map. Several data points and angles can be tied together to create a coherent story with clear messages of where we are and what the issue is about.

3. Historical, cultural, political and social contexts broaden our understanding, beyond the patterns data tell. We must always have a critical eye on the social background of our science. Who is in power? What policies shaped the issue? Who suffers and who benefits from our everyday problems? Here, we’ll see science is not merely making sense of data and information, but also empathizing towards knowing how we can wield it for our collective benefit.

   
   

4. Scientists should also do art, to articulate and to reimagine. While not all scientists are artists, we must try to be! In art, we appreciate the whole process of relating our science to everybody towards cascading them to others. For non-artists, it can be bad art, and using AI to illustrate must be done with utmost caution and care. But as long as intent, articulation and empathy is there, science serves our community.