Transcript Sciencemethods06 - University of Leeds

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’
Column centimetres
Case Study: Media coverage of COP6 Pt.1 versus
other stories in three national newspapers (629th November 2000)
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0
The Sun
The Mirror
The Daily Mai
The Telegraph
COP 6 at Fuel Duty
UK
the
Floods
Hague
Elton
John
Court
Case
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 Method
How 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
experimentation
modelling
• 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
 Induction
Knowledge gained only from facts of experience
Observation driven, not theory driven
• Problems:
Not logical - e.g.
Some Env and Society lectures are dull
This lecture is for Env and Society
This lecture is dull
Impossible to do inductive research –
can’t measure everything
Deductive Approach
Views 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 theory
Problems:
• 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 nonsustainable 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 approval
BUT - 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
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
4
– “Weak sustainability” - just increase total capital
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.