AGI/AIPG SUMMER INTERNS
in particular offers an excellent opportunity for American sci- entists to improve their communication, as many citizens are not fully aware of the need to conserve water.4 Furthermore, eleven of the U.S. western-most states are currently experi- encing drought, leaving an imbalance between water use and availability. This challenge gives scientists a prime opportu- nity to inform policy and public action.
Using water availability as a tool for science communication is not unprecedented. A new study published in the journal WIRE’s Water examined Melbourne, Australia’s response to the Millennium Drought of 1997—2009.5 During the drought, water levels lowered to one quarter of normal levels, and the city of 4.3 million was able to cut its water consumption in half. The reductions were accomplished in large part due to the efforts of the government and scientists to communicate the dire nature of the drought.6 Without the level of public participation achieved through awareness programs, the reductions would not have been possible. One of the city’s more successful campaigns displayed reservoir levels on electronic billboards, which made the reality of the situation clear to the public. Candor combined with scientific insight helped pull Melbourne through its drought. At the end of the drought, one in three residents of Melbourne still had rainwater catchment tanks, and the government established a rebate program for residential communities that recycled their greywater, which is household water that has not come into contact with human waste.
It is easy and arguably preferable to rely on scientific inno- vation to solve crises instead of relying on changing public attitudes and behaviors, but innovation is unpredictable and, more often than not, slow. Melbourne commissioned a $6 million desalination plant in 2007, but it was not completed until three years after the drought’s end and has yet to be put into use. This example is not to say that basic research and support from technology do not provide valuable assistance, but rather that scientific communication needs be a part of technological initiatives. Future water resource management will rely on a combination of new technologies and lifestyle changes, and few things catalyze change like public participa- tion. Further, habits and reforms made during these public- driven upheavals tend to be long lasting. It is unlikely that the rainwater tanks, greywater recycling programs, and vast regional infrastructure established during the Millennium Drought will be shuttered now that the drought is over, and the progress made toward sustainability in the last drought better prepares Melbourne for the next one.
In the future, the practices established here and now for sharing scientific understanding with the public can be applied to more complex environmental challenges, like pol- lutants in our water or carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. Dan Kahan, a law professor at Yale University who studies sci- ence communication, argues that a large part of the disparity between scientific knowledge and public understanding can be explained by the statement, “What ordinary members of the public ‘believe’ about climate change doesn’t reflect what they know; it expresses who they are.”7 (Emphasis attributed to
Dan Kahan.) The solution in Kahan’s eyes is for scientists to teach scientific reality without a necessary demand for public consensus, which can be understandably difficult for scientists. Every individual interprets information through her or his own lens, regardless of how that information is presented. By allowing individuals to incorporate the facts presented into their identity, that process is simply made more productive. That principle was at work with Melbourne’s reservoirs ad campaign. Ads that state basic facts, like the water level of reservoirs or perhaps the areas served by agricultural land in a drought-affected region, take the opinion out of complex issues that are often intangible and tie them to the individual’s everyday life.
Grounding scientific consensus in common terms is a neces- sary step to successful wide-scale science literacy. Focusing on natural hazards makes the science immediately relevant; addressing water concerns makes the science immediately relatable; and establishing connections between the science community and the public creates the relationships needed to address more complex scientific concerns in the future. Among the scientific principles and mechanisms that guide our every- day lives, water quantity is a relatively straightforward con- cept to communicate to non-scientists. Water usage is intuitive, and the cycle of water is taught at an early age. Meanwhile, the value of water is lost on no one, and its ubiquitous presence in daily life makes it immediately relatable to all. Scientists can help bridge the gap between scientific knowledge on the sustainable use of water resources and public understanding of what “the sustainable use of our water resources” looks like.
Science communication easily falls into the category of things “easier said than done,” but understanding how the public responds to information will help scientists to better share crucial information. The burden of communicating sci- ence lies with scientists. The public can not be faulted for not addressing a problem they do not understand, and for better or worse, the public necessarily has to be a part of societal change. Thomas Jefferson said, “An enlightened citizenry is indispensable to the proper functioning of a republic.”8 Helping the public understand the challenges ahead will encourage scientific investment, bring society to a greater understanding of the world, and pave the way to cooperation and mobiliza- tion in the future.
Carbon Capture, Carbon Taxation: What is the Future of Emissions Management?
By Kalev Hantsoo
A quick scan through recent articles about Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) reveals a whirlpool of contradictory messages. Is it the silver bullet for mitigating climate change, or a cynical red herring
4. Attari, S. Z. “Perceptions of Water Use.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 111.14 (2014): 5129-134. Web.
5. Low Kathleen G., et. al. “Fighting drought with innovation: Melbourne’s response to the Millennium Drought in Southeast Australia.” WIREs Water 2015, 2: 315-328. doi: 10.1002/wat2.1087
6. “Policy Priorities for Managing Drought.” Public Policy Institute of California, Mar. 2015. 7. Kahan, Dan. “When Science and Politics Collide: Panelists Respond.” Social Science Space, 27 May 2015. 8. Jefferson, Thomas. Thomas Jefferson on Politics and Government.
Politheo.com.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56