-
Asked by ArcherK on 12 Nov 2021.
Question: Would you say that showing lab results or getting people to protest creates a larger effect on people changing their lifestyles to stop climate change?
- Keywords:
-
Alexander Munnoch answered on 12 Nov 2021:
A combination of both. The actions taken against CFCs and ozone depletion are a reasonable example of science informing governmental action. Protest will capture public interest and raise their Science Capital, creating more conscious citizens, voters and consumers which will have a more direct impact on peoples lifestyle choices and changes.
-
Sebastiano Gadolini answered on 12 Nov 2021:
As Alexander said, a combination of both will be ideal. However, the issue for scientists is to reach public engagement and audiences outside “our world”. Training programme for the new generation of scientists to be more creative and in communication skills is helping to fulfill this language gap. Protests are the sparkle to get the light on. So, the attention of everyone.
-
Georgina Brogden answered on 12 Nov 2021:
Lab results are important because they help people to understand climate change. Protests are important because they encourage people to care about climate change. Both are needed to convince someone to change their lifestyle.
-
Alexander De Bruin answered on 12 Nov 2021:
As others have said, the protest can inspire people to be more interested in an issues, whereas the lab results will provide the solutions (pun intended) to the issues
-
Jayne Roberts answered on 13 Nov 2021:
I also agree with what others have said. We need the data to show what the issues are and help decision making but sometimes we need the protest to show the decision makers that the wider population cares about that particular issue and want to see change. As scientists we have to be open and transparent about what the data does or doesn’t show and we have to learn to communicate with external audiences in a way in which they will understand. A good example of trying to use data to explain decisions to the population at large in order to get their buy in was with the Covid briefings during the pandemic.
-
Maike Wilschnack answered on 15 Nov 2021:
I think that protesting has a larger effect on politics. It also helps to make people see that climate change is a problem, and maybe they want to change their lifestyle, too. However, how would we know that we need to protest without the lab results?
We need to protest and tell everyone to listen to scientists. -
-
Michael Short answered on 16 Nov 2021:
Both are absolutely needed. I am personally of the view that individuals’ choices on their own lifestyles are not going to make the massive changes needed to avoid climate change. While individual lifestyle actions help, I think that protesters should continue their focus on government and industries. This will force lifestyle change. A silly example is that one person becoming a vegetarian is less effective than meat prices increasing (due to regulatory changes) and forcing an entire country to eat less meat per week. So protesters need to focus on industry (boycotting products, avoiding investments into unethical/polluting companies etc.) and government (to force policy change) rather than trying to convince individuals to change their lifestyles.
This is also why scientific results can make massive differences. If I can prove (using my results) to a industrial decision-maker that we can cost-effectively reduce emissions with my technology/process, or that some policy decision will reduce emissions – this can make a massive difference!
Comments