Scientific Understandings: Methodological Approaches of

Scientific Community

• Science and Nature – Impact of Scientific Revolution?• Your Viewpoints on Government Funded Scientists

• Media Portrayal of Environmental Science • Scientific Method, Reliability & Public Perception• A ‘new’ view from science – “Sustainability Science”

Questions for today … • What role do you believe environmental

scientists can play in providing solutions to environmental and social problems?

• How do you view Government-funded research scientists in terms of what they say / advise with respect to environmental issues?

How do people think about the environment?

O’Riordan, 2000

Nature and Science: Historical Views• Scientific revolution from Copernicus in 1543 to Isaac

Newton’s Opticks in 1703• Francis Bacon (1561-1626) asserted that “scientific

knowledge equals power over nature” (Pepper, 1996; p.143) & viewed mastery over nature as a divine journey sanctioned by God

• He viewed that scientists should assume the moral duty of improving society’s material lot by mastering & manipulating nature

• A powerful justification that helped classical science become the dominant ideology over the last 250 years, with scientific advances seen as human progress (whatever their envtl or social impact)

• See Reading from Smith (1990) Uneven Development

Nature & Science : Todays Links• Science has become harnessed to industrial

capitalism as never before, but has gained independence from direct productive needs (e.g. through Universities, research centres etc.)

• Systems approaches dominate (as they have since Darwin)

• Reductionist approaches (based on understanding of ever smaller components of nature) remains central to scientific advances (e.g. GM, atm chemistry)

• Perpetuates view of nature external to human system

How do you view Govt-funded Research Scientists?

• “They do a good job, but Govt relay it to us wrong”

• “Fairly good”

• “An essential part of public education”

• “In very high respect”

• “Highly as they can back up theories to make people believe something needs to be done”

• “Very valuable and useful”

• “They are essential as they not only offer solutions, they also give opinions on proposed ideas”

• “Credible and should be listened to”

• “Increasingly effective”

•“Cynically” “Sceptically”•“with a ‘pinch-of-salt’ as they may be pressured into decisions”•“in the pockets of politicians, their views may be unreliable & unjustified”•“They are biased towards big business”•“Powerless as just argue about issues in offices rather than produce solutions”•“They never give the whole picture and tell the public what they want to hear”

•“I don’t believe them because they have a new theory every week”

•“Science is sometimes wrong so there must be some skepticism”•“cannot be truly independent of funders as would lose their jobs”

Other Interesting Views for Module

• “Advice is generally good but often too late for prevention as damage has already been done”– CC squabbles over extent rather than adaptation?

• “I think they should be a lot more radical & do something about issues rather than debating them”– Is this the role of scientists, society or politicians?

• “No real view”– Much public apathy & lack of awareness “No news is Bad News”

• “Often start with answer then look for the evidence rather than using all evidence to come to conclusion”– Are scientific methods rigorous and objective?

Reasons for Public Distrust of Science• A different knowledge culture !?

• Scientific approaches - deductive approach

• Media portrayal - sensationalist and ‘new’ alternative ideas

• Widened access to full range of ‘scientific’ views via internet, especially problem for trans-disciplinary subject such as ‘environmental science’

Case Study: Media coverage of COP6 Pt.1 versus other stories in three national newspapers (6-

29th November 2000)

0200400600800

100012001400160018002000

COP 6 atthe

Hague

Fuel Duty UKFloods

EltonJohnCourtCase

Co

lum

n c

en

tim

etr

es

The SunThe MirrorThe Daily MailThe Telegraph

From Common (2000)

Tabloids

• Stories about personalities & European politics

• Fuel duty not linked to carbon dioxide emissions

The idea that carbon dioxide emissions cause global warming is “wrong” (a “Distinguished Science Writer”)Failure of the Kyoto Protocol will 'doom mankind'

“It was revealed that Mount Everest was MELTING because of global warming”

Broadsheets

• More consistent• Before, during and after the conference

But:• Conspiracy theories & little review of real issues:

‘Real subtext' to transfer jobs & prosperity from USA to Europe and the developing world

• Unbalanced representation of scientific consensus:

A 'significant number of experts' deny the link from human activity to climate change.

How do Scientists Work??

• What do you perceive as the main characteristics of scientific studies?– – – – – –

Scientific principles ? - ‘The truth is out there’“.. Logical structure of the processes by which the search for trustworthy

knowledge advances”

– Marshall, 1985; p.113.

• Research “endeavour to discover facts by study or investigation.”

– Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1988

• Positivist view - science is about explanations to laws that can be used together to explain reality / ‘the nature of things’

• Laws tested by developing theories and testable hypotheses

Scientific MethodHow would you test the following statements?

• All Leeds students drink alcohol

• Environment and Society lectures are dull

• GM crops are damaging to insect life

• Global warming is the result of human actions

Scientific Methods Available

• Theories converted to hypotheses - propositions whose truth is subjected to analysis

• Scientific study = theory building, testing and ongoing analysis• Analysis: observations

experimentationmodelling

• Model - simplification of reality• “science is one of the few human activities in which errors are

systematically criticised, and in time, corrected”– Popper, 1974

• Peer review (by fellow scientists) ensures constant external evaluation:• www having an impact on this?

Scientific Approaches

• Two main philosophies InductionKnowledge gained only from facts of experienceObservation driven, not theory driven• Problems:Not logical - e.g.

Some Env and Society lectures are dullThis lecture is for Env and SocietyThis lecture is dull

Impossible to do inductive research – can’t measure everything

Deductive ApproachViews science as:• Problem Theory Test

– E.g. GM field trials to assess impact on insect life

• To test a hypothesis much easier to prove it wrong than right• Impossible to prove a hypothesis as ‘true’- e.g. all swans are white• Requires a refutable hypothesis - aim is to disprove• It is anomalies that advance theoryProblems:• Possible not to reject hypothesis even when falsified• Requires split into multiple working hypotheses• You never fully prove anything

Implications of Deductive Approach on Environmental Science

• Uncertainty may provide justification for non-sustainable use of resources

• May create a false sense of security• Link to political distortion a real concern - is there a

political agenda to exaggerate env problem to maintain scientific funding?

• Needs new science-policy relations to meet public concerns over the integrity of science

Scientific Realities and Information Sources

• Science is constantly evolving its view

• Can never offer definitive statements of “how it is”

• Advances often lead to major changes in current thinking (paradigms) with major effects on best policy

• A model is never perfect, but can be constantly improved

• Published science advances through peer-review in academic journals (e.g. Nature, Science, Scientific American)

• No review of material posted on world-wide web, and yet widely accepted as legitimate information source

Scientific Community• Science operates as a society of its own,

perpetuating certain ways of working & power relations (based on status, gender, age, social networks)

• Career success based on publications & grant successes regulated through v. thorough peer review process

• E.g. NERC QUEST 3 Proposal on Socio-economic Implications of Climate Change reviewed by 14 leading scientists from across the globe

Societal Implications• Must avoid using scientific uncertainty as an excuse for

doing nothing to conserve envtl resources

= ‘Precautionary principle’

Must use science to anticipate and avoid, rather than react and mend

“Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation”– Rio Declaration, Principle 15 (UNCED, 1992)

Science and Policy• Different perspectives of scientists & policy-makers• Needs dialogue between generalisation and specific contexts

= case-study approaches (Trudgill & Richards, 1997)• Must admit, and attempt to quantify, uncertainty• Must involve users - policy makers & public• Science must beware of misuse for political, economic or

social reasons

Uneasy interface between science & people

• Scientific problems due to -– Speed of research & manner knowledge evolves

– Selective use of data

• Environmental sciences’ role is to -– Retain clarity of the issue

– Identify env responses to human disturbances

– Monitor extent of problems

– Identify appropriate scales of remedial action

The modern environmental science framework (O’Riordan, 2000)

• No longer simply ‘science for science’s sake’• Interdisciplinarity and self-criticism• Problem-focused and policy-relevant• Still based on scientific principles• Powerful in affects on industry, Governments & NGO’s• Helps to guide public response and approvalBUT - remains a different knowledge culture …

Problems in Adopting Interdisciplinarity

• Modern scientific tradition does not share its culture with other cultures of knowing & understanding

• Career advancement in science accelerated if peer review accepts research & use of scientific method

• Multiple authorship difficult & not held in as high status as individual publication

• Hard to extend beyond boundaries of single-discipline departments within University system

• Few truly interdisciplinary training programmes or degrees

Sustainability Research Strategies• “Sustainability science differs to a considerable degree in

structure, methods and content from science as we know it” (Kates et al., 2001, p.641). It must -– Span range of diverse scales (e.g. globalisation & local farming

practices)– Account for temporal inertia and urgency of problems– Deal with functional complexities of societal root causes of

environmental problems– Recognise the wide range of outlooks on the use of ‘knowledge’ within

both science and society

• Need to ‘Rethink Science’ • Must adopt Precautionary Principle & shift burden of proof from

the victim to the developer (Polluter Pays Principle)

Institutions and Infrastructure• Need for sustainability science driven from public in both

North and South, but needs improved research and institutional structures

• Need to bridge digital divide and use internet to build interdisciplinary, inter-regional research, including capacity building in the South

Example of Sustainability Science Debates – Niger Farming Systems

Example of Sustainability Science Debates• See Sahelian Soils debates of Warren et al., 2001 – The

Geographical Journal, 167(4), 324-341.• Examines whether ‘capitals’ framework helps assessments of

sustainability ‘strength’– “Strong sustainability” - no loss of natural capital (e.g. soil)– “Sensible sustainability” - conversion of some natural into other

forms of capital

– “Weak sustainability” - just increase total capital

1

2

3

4

1

2

3

4

Sahelian Soil Erosion - E. Niger• “Despite high rates of erosion, we find it difficult to decide

whether the system is sustainable (using the capitals or any other framework). It is even dubious whether sustainability is an urgent concern”– Warren et al., 2001; p.324

• Other (more important?) concerns -– Rainfall (climate change)– pests– lack of labour / illness– prices

• Livestock / urbanisation futures => why conserve soils ??• Shows need to extend science into worlds of sociology, politics

and commerce

Problems of Environmental Sustainability

• Drive for soil conservation from agronomists and soil scientists, rather than from local communities

• Can the sustainability of natural capital conflict with the sustainability of livelihoods (social sustainability)– “to be ‘socially sustainable’, some farmers must engage in

practices that lead to erosion” (Warren et al., 2001; p.333)

• How can you monitor / assess the ‘critical natural capacity’ needed for ‘sensible sustainability’ ?– Often relates to maintaining environmental diversity that enables

risk management by societies– Concept has serious operational and methodological difficulties

Key Readings• O’Riordan, T. (2000) Environmental Science for Environmental

Management. Prentice Hall, London. Chapters 1 and 2. • Kates, R.W. (2001) Sustainability Science. Science 292: 641-

642.• Pepper, D. (1996) Modern Environmentalism: An Introduction.

Routledge, London. Section 3.2. - 3.4.

• Simpson, D. (2003) Francis Bacon (1561-1626). In: The Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy - http://www.iep.utm.edu/b/bacon.htm (see Induction section)

• Warren, A. et al. (2001) Sustainability & Sahelian Soils: Evidence from Niger. The Geographical Journal, 167(4), 324-341.