Aquatic Science: Informing Policy, Management, and the Publicстатья из журнала
Аннотация: One of the goals of the ASLO Public Policy Committee is to facilitate the participation of members in policy discussions. Many scientists want to broaden the impact of their research, but don't know how or where to start. In a special session at the 2016 Summer Meeting in Santa Fe, students and scientists discussed how they have engaged with decision makers and the general public. In addition, Jon Sharp, emeritus professor at the University of Delaware, led panelists Kendra Spence Cheruvelil, John Downing, and Josette Garnier in a discussion of their success stories, lessons learned, and advice to scientists just getting started in the policy realm. Here, we share highlights from these events. Adrienne Sponberg, ASLO Director of Communication and Science, kicked-off the session with an overview of the science-policy “ecosystem.” She stressed that the use of science in policy decisions is not a linear process. It is important for scientists to recognize that the science-policy interface is as complex as an ecosystem with multiple feedbacks and the scientific community is just one of many actors (Fig. 1). Conceptual diagram showing some of the connections and feedbacks between different actors in the science-policy ecosystem. While we might think there is a deficiency of scientific knowledge in policy discussions, in many cases there is actually an over-abundance. Different actors use select facts and findings to make their case and, as a result, the science may appear unresolved or contradictory to decision makers and the general public. In these cases, it is critical that scientists are involved in policy discussions to provide context and the bigger picture. Influencing or informing policy does not mean that scientists need to put on a suit and walk the corridors of a legislative body. The science-policy ecosystem may seem intimidating, but there are actually many points in the process where scientists can insert themselves. We all can learn from experiences of aquatic scientists who engage with decision makers and communicate science to the general public. Here are some lessons and tips. This may seem obvious, but all science-policy engagement starts with solid research. Bob Howarth (Cornell University) described how using a conventional scientific approach to assess the green-house gas footprint of fracking ultimately led to media interviews, public lectures, and national headlines. And while legislators may not be reading scientific journals, scientists at government agencies do read scientific literature to inform their work. Jacques Oliver (USEPA) recalled how reviews and syntheses of the scientific literature has led to a shift from single to dual-nutrient focus (e.g., nitrogen and phosphorus) for protecting U.S. surface waters. One way for university-based scientists to influence and inform policy is by working with environmental protection agencies. Paul Bukaveckas (Virginia Commonwealth University), Kendra Spence Cheruvelil (Michigan State University), and Caitlin Peterson (University of Wyoming) shared their experiences assisting state and federal agencies with the development and implementation of water quality standards. Lushani Nanayakkara (University of Regina) described how questionnaires could be used to assess the public's knowledge of pressures facing lakes and inform the provincial government about opportunities to improve lake management. We heard many stories of how scientists, as members of the community, advise local governments and interface between different stakeholders. John Downing (Minnesota Sea Grant) gave an example of how university scientists took on the role of mediator between an unpopular regulatory agency and the public. Lesley Smith (University of Colorado - Boulder) shared her experiences as a volunteer on the Boulder Water Resources Advisory Board. In addition to providing advice on water resources, she noted a number of other personal benefits, such as community service, professional development, and networking. Lastly, Vicente Lopes (Texas State University) and Josette Garnier (Université Pierre et Marie Curie) described how scientists can foster participation among diverse stakeholders to protect and improve water quality at catchment scales. Debate articles and letters to the editor in news outlets can be effective means to reach both the general public and politicians. In addition, regulatory agencies and rule-making bodies ask for public comment on proposed rules or legislation. Michelle McCrackin (Stockholm University) gave an example of how scientists can show how scientific knowledge supports or does not support proposed legislation or rules during periods of public comment. Many scientists pursue careers in government or take temporary positions through fellowship programs (e.g., Knauss, AAAS). We need to value these career pathways because one person on the “inside” can make a tremendous difference. During her year on Capitol Hill, Adrienne Sponberg noted that other staff contacted her for information or fact-checks once they found out she was a scientist. Scientists on the inside may also seek out a broader perspective and ask colleagues on the outside for input. Indeed, it was through his scientific network that Bob Howarth was invited to give a briefing about methane from fracking to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. If you want your science to have an impact, you need to invest time and resources in telling your story. Look no further than the Sea Grant's network of 33 universities to find many different approaches to communicate science. Sharon Moen (Minnesota Sea Grant) gave examples of how clever headlines and dramatic photos can hook the audience. She also showed how involving people in the process of scientific discovery (e.g., octopus web cam) and using humor (e.g., whale-scat sniffing dog) can be effective ways to reach audiences. And while a picture may be worth a thousand words, Chris Bocast (Wisconsin Sea Grant) demonstrated how a soundscape is worth a thousand pictures. Sounds engage listeners on an emotional level and can reinforce important scientific findings. Your institution or university likely employs professionals who can help you hone your message, create infographics, and identify avenues for communication. Sometimes an event can draw attention to environmental issues in unexpected and furious fashion—think about the Deepwater Horizon spill or algal blooms in Lake Erie that shut down drinking water for the city of Toledo. Scientists need to be prepared not only to have their research ready in case they are asked to comment, but also to jump in and do science. Who can forget the images of the Animas River, which turned orange after the Gold King mine spill. Rob Runkel (USGS) gave a history of the political, technical, and economic factors that have contributed to the legacy of abandoned mines in the western U.S. and described ongoing work with this “wicked problem.” There is no one, best way to get started in communicating science to policy makers or the general public. Start with something small, like a letter to the editor or doing community outreach at a local science museum, and ramp up as you feel more comfortable. In addition, take advantage of opportunities that are available for both graduate students (e.g., Sea Grant Knauss Fellowship) and experienced scientists (e.g., AAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellowships or EU MEP-Scientist Pairing Scheme). Last, seek out advice from scientists who have engaged with science communication. Michelle McCrackin, Baltic Sea Centre, Stockholm University, 106 91, Stockholm, Sweden, michelle. mccrackin@su.se Lesley Smith, Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences University of Colorado-Boulder, Boulder, CO 80309, lesley.smith@colorado.edu Adrienne Sponberg, ASLO Director of Communications and Science, 10410 Kensington Parkway, Suite 314, Kensington, MD 20895, sponberg@aslo.org
Год издания: 2016
Издательство: Wiley
Источник: Limnology and Oceanography Bulletin
Ключевые слова: Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education, Climate Change Communication and Perception, Coastal and Marine Management
Открытый доступ: bronze
Том: 25
Выпуск: 4
Страницы: 134–135