Roles Beyond Research: Climate Scientists in Society
PhD Candidate Physical Oceanography Daan Reijnders
Should climate scientists actively contribute to the public debate on climate change and sustainability? And if so, what are the best ways to do this? In the climate science sphere this is the topic of many seminars, panel discussions, and Twitter threads. Personally, I believe that climate scientists are essential to the public debate, and that participating in it is even a responsibility. While explaining this view, along the way I will give examples of how to engage.
A sound debate, whether in parliament or over the dinner table, can only take place when the underlying facts are clear to all parties involved. Still, while most people have some idea of what climate change is, concepts like the difference between 1.5°C versus 2°C warming are not concrete to everyone. While the implications of climate change can remain relatively vague, to make well-informed decisions, policy makers need to map the various scenarios linked to actions and inaction. Scientists should help understand and contextualize these scenarios. They can explain the implications of climate change, the related policies and associated uncertainties to politicians and the wider public. By contributing to executive reports, but also by reaching out through science communication, scientists can make climate change more tangible. An initiative that sets out to do exactly that is the KlimaatHelpdesk, which lets experts answer climate questions that anyone can ask.
Next to clarifying scientific knowledge and raising new issues, I also see it as a responsibility for scientists to warn about problems that society should be aware of.
Climate scientists can also bring entirely new ideas to the table. Take the Northern European Enclosure Dam (NEED) by oceanographers Sjoerd Groeskamp and Joakim Kjellsson: this proposal for a massive dam surrounding the North Sea gathered significant media attention. While to some the proposal sounded tongue-in-cheek, it not only reiterates the obvious benefits of mitigating climate change, but it explores new ideas to keep our delta dry in the long run. It is important to put high-stake considerations like these on the agenda well in time.
Next to clarifying scientific knowledge and raising new issues, I also see it as a responsibility for scientists to warn about problems that society should be aware of. In the consensus statement of Scientist4Future, which was signed by IMAU during the climate strikes of 2019, the role of climate scientists is likened to that of doctors. Just like doctors that know about an impending pandemic have a duty to warn about it, climate scientists have a duty to inform and warn the public about the state of the planet. To do this effectively, we should think beyond solely publishing in journals. Rather than waiting for critical information to slowly percolate to society, we should engage with society directly.
Still, climate scientists are also citizens. An expert in ice sheets can have personal ideas about whether we should reduce CO2-emissions by chiefly investing in solar and wind energy or in nuclear power plants. When participating in the public debate, it is important to guard the boundary of where one’s expertise lies, because those boundaries are harder to see for the public than for the experts themselves. When leaving the domain of your expertise, you should acknowledge this. However, this does not mean you are limited to only reach out within your specific research niche. As an ambassador of science, you can support other experts in helping them spread their expertise to wherever it is needed. When it comes to climate change, the necessity of sharing such expertise is evident.