Climate Change – research topic or call to action?
The role of scientists during the global climate crisis
Ornithologists from around Europe gathered in Zurich to present
their most recent findings in ornithological research at the 7'th
meeting of the European Ornithologist's Union (EOU). The presented studies described any aspect of ornithology, from ecology, endocrinology, evolution, behavior and conservation.
A symposium was dedicated to the impacts of climate change on birds.
Those impacts are manifold, from changes in the timing of migration and
nesting, to changes in reproductive success and distribution. Changes
in the status and distribution of birds can help us better understand
how climate change will affect ecosystems, and indirectly also us
humans. Climate change is thus not only an extremely interesting and
fascinating research topic in ornithology, but also very important for
implementing effective climate change action plans.
But is it enough when researchers “just” study climate change or
other aspects of ecology and conservation? Or do scientists also have
the responsibility to pass on their knowledge and understanding to the
general public?
Those questions were discussed at a roundtable at the conference, led by myself.
My working hypothesis is that scientists understand complex
problems, think critically, and deeply care for the natural environment
which they study. Who else is more qualified to understand the issues
involved and to thus have the responsibility to educate the public
about it than scientists? Is it enough to publish papers in scientific
journals that the general public does not read? Is it enough to have
press releases that are often twisted in ways that change the meaning
of the results?
The memorandum of the recent Nobel Laureate Symposium
at St. James Palace states "“All scientists should be urged to
contribute to raising levels of public knowledge on these threats to
civilization and engage in a massive education effort.” In fact,
education was the one action that cristallized out immediately at our
roundtable discussion: we need to put more effort in the education of
the public, especially on teachers, students, and journalists. This, by
the way, is exactly what we want to do as part of the Clean Energy Project.
But most important is the direct interaction with politicians,
because politicians need to implement the needed changes. Scientists
need to provide politicians with tools to decide what actions are
needed. However, scientists have a hard time with this, as they do not
like to give a definite answer to most questions, because hardly any
scientific result is 100% definite. There is always a margin of error
which creates a certain likelihood (mostly under 5%) that results are
wrong. How to combine scientific correctness with clear statements to
politicians is a difficult task, but one that urgently needs to
undertaken.
Some schools and people are already quite active in outreach. For
example, according to Luc te Malverde (PhD student at the Netherland
Institute of Ecology, NIE), the NIE has its own press person to communicate to the public. Prof. Franz Bairein
(director of the Institute for Ornithology, Vogelwarte Helgoland) is
giving many presentations to the public and writes many articles for
local newspapers about climate change. Jim Hansen,
director of the NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies, is probably
the best example for a scientist that reaches out to the public and
politicians. Unfortunately, his actions are often not well perceived by
his scientific colleagues, as - in their opinion - he is overstepping
an invisible boundary between science and activism. But why do
scientists lose their credibility when they speak up for what they know
and understand?
Another important question is: Do scientists lose credibility when
they show emotions? "A purely scientific discussion does not include
elements of beauty and wisdom. But these feelings are important
elements for care and responsibility", wrote the German Pastor Hubert Meisinger. I
believe that science has to find a way to connect the brains to the
hearts of people, it needs to engage people not just on an intellectual
but also on a personal level.
"If
we believe that science has a rightful role in our society, then it is
the scientific community’s responsibility to enlighten the public as
to why and how. That doesn’t mean scientists need to be celebrities,
politicians, or lobbyists – just citizens." (Christopher Reddy, Director, Woods Hole Institute, Science 2009)
If scientists cannot speak up as scientists, then there is no reason
why scientists cannot act as global citizens. I believe it is time that
more scientists step out of their ivory tower and recognize their
responsibility to take part in an effort that will change the future of
humanity - for better or for worse.
Maiken Winter