by Harvey Leifert, environmentalresearchweb, December 23, 2010
Should scientists get involved in the public arena? “It’s a sensible thing to do, and to some degrees these days inevitable,” said one researcher who has been an activist for more than 30 years.
Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geoscience and public affairs at Princeton University, US, was chief scientist at advocacy group the Environmental Defense Fund for more than 20 years, where he headed its climate programme. He spoke to several hundred scientists specializing in global change at the American Geophysical Union’s Fall Meeting in San Francisco on 15 December 2010.
There are many ways to become involved, each with its own benefits and potential difficulties, Oppenheimer noted. Scientists are also citizens, with the same obligations as everyone else. The goal is to participate correctly, not confusing scientific knowledge with political wisdom.
In many areas of science, such as public health, it is taken for granted that experts will speak loudly about the dangers of smoking, bad diets or HIV and the implications of proposed policy initiatives, Oppenheimer noted. Geoscientists have been involved in such issues as ozone depletion and climate change and also have “a remarkable track record of actually affecting public policy (as far as we can tell),” he said. Some of these professionals have simply translated scientific data for a wider audience, while others have endorsed specific policy initiatives.
Oppenheimer applauds such activities. He said that he agreed with some of the scientists who have taken strong stands over the years, such as James Hansen of NASA, and disagreed with others, such as the late Edward Teller, the so-called “father of the H-bomb.”
“One cannot prove the world followed a better, or even a different, path due to their interventions but I think the quality of public discourse and the information reaching policy makers was better for their interventions, taken as a whole,” he said. He noted that Hansen believes that, in general, climate scientists tend to be reticent about making their views known.
So how could scientists get involved? Oppenheimer offered several levels of participation, saying each individual must determine the right one for himself:
  • Work in an election campaign for a party or candidate compatible with your interpretation of scientific knowledge;
  • Take sides publicly on what you consider to be the policy implications of your research, perhaps by blogging or writing op-ed pieces;
  • Participate in outreach activities of your scientific organization, or provide information or comments to reporters.
Never wander too far from your area of expertise, Oppenheimer warned. Although one is entitled to an opinion on any subject, do not pass off your value judgments as science-based when they are not. There is a price to pay for speaking publicly, Oppenheimer conceded: “Expect to be vilified, but never return the favour.”
Oppenheimer concluded with advice from the late Stephen Schneider, the Stanford University climate scientist who died earlier this year, and in whose honour Oppenheimer’s lecture was named. “Distinguish when you speak about your values – as a member of the human race – and when speaking as a scientist,” and “don’t let fear keep you from working on the most important problems facing society.”