Stephen H. Schneider: pioneering an engagedinterdisciplinary science

Thomas Dietz

Published online: 30 March 2011# AESS 2011

This inaugural issue of Journal of Environmental Studiesand Sciences (JESS) is dedicated to Stephen H.Schneider. Steve died suddenly on July 19, 2010. Withhis passing, we lost a friend and colleague whose entirecareer was emblematic of our hopes for JESS andAssociation for Environmental Studies and Sciences(AESS) and so it is only fitting that we pay tribute tohim here.

Like many of his generation, Steve’s interest in theenvironment was sparked by the activities around thefirst Earth Day in 1970. He was then a Ph.D. student inMechanical Engineering at Columbia. His dissertationconcerned modeling plasmas as complex fluid systems.In his autobiography, Science as a Contact Sport(Schneider 2009), he tells us that a graduate seminar onclimate modeling inspired him to pursue a postdoctoralfellowship at Goddard Institute for Space Studies, wherepioneering work was then being done on the dynamics ofplanetary atmospheres. In 1971, he and S. IchtiaqueRasool published an important paper on the relativeclimate impacts of carbon dioxide and aerosols (Rasooland Schneider 1971). The debate surrounding their workwas important to the evolution of climate change science.Participating in the discussion, Steve published the firstpaper showing that more accurate modeling of thesecompeting forces projected warming, a result that contra-dicted the 1971 paper and shows Steve’s intellectualintegrity in following the evidence rather than any prior

belief.1 Calculating the effects of aerosols remains acentral issue in understanding climate change.

Steve moved to the National Center for AtmosphericResearch2 in Boulder and eventually to Stanford. He soonbecame a leading researcher in modeling and interpretingthe dynamics of the planetary atmosphere. But from thestart, his interests were interdisciplinary. In 1975, helaunched the journal Climatic Change specifically toprovide a home for interdisciplinary scholarship. ClimaticChange has always welcomed papers from the full range ofdisciplines that speak with an interdisciplinary view onsalient aspects of climate change: physical, biological andsocial sciences, engineering, health sciences and thehumanities. While interdisciplinary journals, includingJESS, are now not rare, their path to legitimacy was pavedin no small part by Steve’s efforts. Climatic Changeremains a highly respected and influential venue more that35 years and 100 volumes later.

Steve was not only a supporter of interdisciplinary work;he was a major contributor to it. I first met Steve at an openmeeting of the International Human Dimensions Pro-gramme held at Duke University. Gene Rosa and I werepresenting an early paper on our STIRPAT approach tostudying human drivers of global change. Steve was in thesame session, presenting results of a linked economic andclimate model he was using to assess policy. He was fullyengaged with the social scientists in the room, offeringprobing questions based on knowledge of literatures wellbeyond his disciplinary background.

1 Peterson Thomas et al. (2008) provide a useful history of this debate.2 Woody Allen’s Sleeper was shot at NCAR and Steve appears in thefilm as an extra in the role of one of the security police.

T. Dietz (*)Michigan State University,East Lansing, MI, USAe-mail: tdietz@msu.edu

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:3–5DOI 10.1007/s13412-011-0002-7

Perhaps the most important of his interdisciplinarycontributions was his initiative with Richard Moss topersuade authors of climate assessment such as the Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change to be explicit aboutuncertainty (Moss and Schneider 2000). Recently, severalprominent statements on climate policy have urged the useof an adaptive risk management framework for guiding ourresponse to climate change (e.g., US National ResearchCouncil 2010a, b, c, d). I attribute this approach in no smallpart to Richard and Steve’s efforts. His work with TerryRoot, his wife, on the ecological effects of climate change,was also pioneering (Root et al. 2010; Root and Schneider2002). Learning from Terry, he also became an avid birder,characteristically linking a passionate personal interest withrigorous science.

From the start of his career, Steve also engaged inpolicy and political debates. He traced this commitmentto his early involvement while still a Columbia graduatestudent in negotiations between student activists andColumbia’s Board of Trustees. In April 1968, students atColumbia occupied two campus buildings, protestingColumbia’s involvement in weapons research and theconstruction of a gym at Morningside Park in Harlem. Atthe time, this was among the most visible US studentprotests. Already, Steve was working to move thingsforward on tough, controversial issues. Throughout hislife, he remained tireless in his efforts to make debatesconstructive, never hesitating to testify at governmentalhearings, or to talk with the media, or to engage indebates. A web search reveals over 100 videos of Stevebeing interviewed, answering questions, and lecturing togeneral audiences. These videos are a lesson of how toeffectively engage the public.

Steve was quietly heroic. Like too many climatescientists with a high public profile, he and Terryreceived many death threats from those who respondedto scientific argument with vitriol, rage, and threats ofviolence. Steve believed in a democratic processinformed by the best science, and refused to be silencedwhen he felt the voice of that science was needed. In2001, he was diagnosed with non-Hodgkins B-celllymphoma. He continued speaking publically and effec-tively, engaging with climate “skeptics” even as hewrestled with his own serious health problems. Heapproached the disease with the same logic that guidedhis approach to climate change: examine the evidence,assess the uncertainty, take a course of action andcontinuously adapt to new information. The Patient fromHell: How I Worked with My Doctors to Get the Best ofModern Medicine and How You Can Too (Schneider andLane 2005) chronicled Steve and Terry’s fight withSteve’s cancer. The book is a compelling personal story.It also provides potentially life-saving guidance to those

struggling with cancer. I have given it to more than a fewfriends faced with this difficult challenge. And Stevecontinued to offer counsel to others despite his busyschedule. Bill Freudenburg, who we also recently lost tocancer, had breakfast with Steve the morning Steve died,with Steve, as usual, offering support and advice.

My first encounter with Steve was indirect, via hisfirst book, The Genesis Strategy—Climate and GlobalSurvival (Schneider and Mesirow 1976). For many of us,it was our first introduction to climate change as anenvironmental problem. I remember the book beingpassed among Ecology graduate students at UC Davis asa “must read” even though few of us were then workingon climate change. It shows another facet of Steve’srichly varied contributions to science and education—hiseffective efforts to communicate the science of climatechange to students and the general public. He wouldsubsequently write half a dozen other texts and popularbooks. My last conversation with Steve was over dinner.It ranged from a critical examination of how somecommentators on science policy were framing climatechange to the merits of Chardonnays and Pinot Noirsfrom the Russian River region of Sonoma County.Interdisciplinary to the last, later that summer, Steveattended the meeting of the International SociologicalAssociation in Göteborg, Sweden where he gave severaltalks. He died from a pulmonary embolism during theflight back home.

Steve readily accepted an invitation to participate on theBoard of Editors for this Journal and offered continuingencouragement, as well, to the new AESS that sponsorsJESS. As JESS and AESS progress, we will do well toremember Steve’s example. If we follow his path ofrigorous analysis refined by open, engaged and respectfuldebate, and work continuously to communicate this work tobroader audiences, JESS will make an important contribu-tion to the growth and enrichment of interdisciplinaryenvironmental scholarship, advocacy, and public policy.Steve would like that.

References

Moss, Richard and Schneider Stephen H (2000). Uncertainties in theIPCC TAR: recommendations to lead authors for more consistentassessment and reporting. Pp. 33–51 in Guidance Papers on thecross-cutting issues of the third assessment report of the IPCC,edited by R. Pachauri, T. Taniguchi, and K. Tanaka. Geneva,Switzerland: World Meteorological Organization

Peterson Thomas C, Connolley William M, Fleck John (2008) Themyth of the 1970s global cooling scientific consensus. Bull AmMeteorol Soc 89:1325–1337

Rasool SI, Schneider Stephen H (1971) Atmospheric carbon dioxideand aerosols: effects of large increases on global climate. Science173:138–141

4 J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:3–5

Root Terry L, Schneider Stephen H (2002) Wildlife responses toclimate change: North American case studies. Island Press,Washington, D.C

Root Terry L, Price Jeff T, Hall Kimberly R, Schneider Stephen H,Rosenzweig Cynthia, Pounds Alan J (2010) The impact ofclimatic change on wild animals and plants: a meta-analysis.USDA Forest Service, Washington, D.C

Schneider, Stephen H (2009) Science as a contact sport. NationalGeographic, Washington, D.C

Schneider Stephen H, Lane Jessica (2005) The patient from hell: howI worked with my doctors to get the best of modern medicine andhow you can too. Da Capo, Cambridge Massachusetts

Schneider Stephen H, Mesirow Lynne E (1976) The genesis strategy:climate and global survival. Plenum, New York

US National Research Council (2010a) Adapting to the impactsof climate change. National Academies Press, Washington,D.C

US National Research Council (2010b) Advancing the science ofclimate change. National Academies Press, Washington, D.C

US National Research Council (2010c) Informing an effectiveresponse to climate change. National Academies Press,Washington, D.C

US National Research Council (2010d) Limiting the magnitude ofclimate change. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C

J Environ Stud Sci (2011) 1:3–5 5