Engaging the public during unsustainable times

1
Engaging the public during unsustainable times

• Elin Kelsey, PhD
• www.elinkelseyandcompany.com
• Elin_at_iname.com

2
October 6, 2007

• Ecological Debt Dayhttp//www.footprintnetwork.or
  g/gfn_sub.php?contentovershoot

3
Tell people there is a problem

• drought
• development
• habitat degradation
• endangered species
• over fishing
• pollution
• climate change
• etc

4
Tell people how to fix it

• Decide-announce-defend approach to policy
• Public Understanding of Science (PUS) (Lehr et
  al., 2007).

5
Belief If the public knew better, they would act
better
6
Assumption about the public

• The public is ignorant
• The public has a deficit with respect to knowledge

7
Assumption about education

• Education one way transfer of information
• Expert ? novice
• investment in telling devices clearing houses
  for information, brochures, magazine articles,
  speeches, websites, content for curriculum

8
Trouble is, the public isnt ignorant

• When science is seen as relevant to an
  individuals concerns, these individuals
  demonstrate considerable resourcefulness in
  locating sources and impressive capability in
  translating scientific knowledge into forms which
  support practical action (Jenkins, 1998)

9
Knowledge depends on context

• The way in which a message is conveyed, and who
  conveys it, is as important as what is being said
  (Howlett, 1991 Weiss Tschirhart, 1994).
• Public uptake (or not) of scientific knowledge is
  influenced by factors having to do with social
  access, trust, relevance and negotiation as
  opposed to authority (Wynne,1991).
• The interaction of the public with science is
  rarely, if ever, a narrowly cognitive one based
  simply on knowledge (Layton et al., 1993).

10
Trouble is, telling isnt how people learn

• Constructivist learning theory - knowledge is
  individually and socially constructed
  http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructivism_(learn
  ing_theory)

11
Learning through conversation

• Value of conversation for changing knowledge,
  attitudes, behaviors, and values
• (Baker, Jensen and Kolb, 2002 Jenkins 1993
  Jickling, 2004 Leinhardt, Crowley Knutson
  2002 Lave and Wenger, 1991)

12
Learning through conversation

• Conversation increases engagement in real world
  issues and environmental action projects
• (Barber, 1984 Bobbio, 1987 Bohman Rehg, 1997
  Chambers, 1996 Cohen, 1989 Elster, 1998
  Fishkin, 2003 Gutmann Thompson, 1996 Keane,
  1991 Page, 1996 Public Conversations Project,
  2005 Zeldin, 1998).

13
The deficit model of the public no longer applies

• the deficit model hasin theory, at leastbeen
  firmly rejected in response to a series of crises
  in the public trust of science and the government
  in the 1990s (for example, the BSE and
  genetically modified foods controversies), and a
  new mood for dialogue between scientists,
  policy-makers, and various publics has emerged as
  its replacement (House of Lords Select Committee
  on Science and Technology, 2000)

14
So, if the belief that if the public knew
better, they would act better is false
15
And, justtelling people what science says they
should do doesnt work
16
What should environmental education look like?
17
Create new forums for conversational learning

• Dialogue events ex. Dana Centre, London Science
  Museum, http//www.danacentre.org.uk/
• Conversation Cafes http//www.conversationcafe.org
  /

18
Consensus conferences

• Measuring chemicals in People What would you
  say? Boston Consensus Conference on
  Biomonitoring. September 2007. US EPA and Boston
  University http//es.epa.gov/ncer/publications/mee
  tings/09_25_07/scammell_092507.pdf
• Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network.
  Museum of Life and Science, Durham, NC
  http//www.nisenet.org/page.php?page_ID27

19
Deliberative polling

• Center for Deliberative polling, University of
  Texas www.la.utexas.edu/research/delpol
• A random sample of citizens
• 200-300 paid to attend a conference
• briefing document sent in advance
• random sample polled on their opinions
• small group discussion sessions
• expert panels
• polled again

20
Re-conceptualize environmental literacy in terms
of participation rather than content

• people are convinced they will be listened to as
  well as told about current science
• people involved in such discussions quickly
  become adept at quizzing experts, mastering a
  brief, asking questions and unmasking political
  assumptions masquerading as scientific
  conclusions.

21
Embrace the multiple identities of your
institution

• Informal science and environmental institutions
  (ISIs) have a distinguished history as purveyors
  of science authority and expertise.
• This expert identity reinforces a
  transmission-based learning culture
• Embrace the multiple roles that ISIs now have
  with respect to environmental issues (educator,
  regulator, land acquisition, political advocate,
  role model, public dialogue sites, etc) ex.
  Monterey Bay Aquarium

22
Reflect current societal trends

• Post-ecologism, (Bluhdorn, 2000)
• People switch off when confronted by an
  environmental issue with which they are already
  overwhelmed
• they know that the environment is a mess, but
  they feel hopeless and powerless to do anything
  about it?
• They may actively try to sustain the
  unsustainable over consumption, materialism

23
Shift emphasis from despair to hope

• Latent environmental depression (Zeyer, in
  press)
• Environmental grief (Kervorkian, 2004)
• Ecophobia (Sobel, 1995)

24
Engaging the public during unsustainable times

• Challenge the ignorant public and education as
  telling
• Create forums for conversational learning
• Conceptualize ecoliteracy in terms of
  participation
• Embrace multiple institutional identities
• Consider post ecologism and other societal trends
• Shift from despair to hope

25
References

• Baker, A., Jensen, P., Kolb, D. (2002).
  Conversational Learning An Approach to Knowledge
  Creation. Wesport Quorum
• Barber, B. (1984). Strong democracy
  Participatory politics for a new age. Berkeley
  University
• Bobbio, N. (1987). The future of democracy A
  defense of the rules of the game. Cambridge
  Polity
• Bohman, J., Rehg, W. (Eds.). (1997).
  Deliberative democracy Essays on reason and
  politics. MA MIT Press
• Chambers, S. (1996). Reasonable democracy Jurgen
  Habermas and the politics of discourse. Ithaca,
  NY Cornell University Press.
• Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and Democratic
  Legitimacy. In The Good Polity, eds. Alan Hamlin
  and Philip Pettit. New York Blackwell.
• Elster, J. (Ed.). (1998). Deliberative democracy.
  Cambridge, England Cambridge University Press.
• Fishkin, J. (2003). Online "Deliberative Poll"
  Gives Picture of Informed Public Opinion in
  Election http//cdd.stanford.edu/
• Gutmann, A. Thompson, D. (1996). Democracy and
  disagreement. Cambridge, MA Belknap Press of
  Harvard University.
• House of Lords Select Committee on Science and
  Technology (23rd February 2000) Third Report
  Science and Society, downloaded from
  www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk
  October 2004
• Howlett, M. (1991). Policy instruments, policy
  styles, and policy implementation national
  approaches to the theory of instrument choice.
  Policy Studies Journal, 19(2), 1-21.

26
References

• Jenkins, E. (1998). Scientific and
  Technological Literacy for Citizenship What Can
  We Learn from the Research and other Evidence?
  Paper published on the Leeds University,
  Education Department website http//www.leedsac.uk
  /educol/document
• Jickling, B. (2004). Making ethics an everyday
  activity how can we reduce the barriers?
  Canadian Journal of Environmental Education, 9,
  11-30.
• Keane, J. (1991). The media and democracy.
  Cambridge, England Blackwell.
• Kervorkian, K. (2004) http//environmentalgrief.o
  rg/
• Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated
  Learning Legitimate Peripheral Participation.
  Cambridge Cambridge University Press.
• Layton, D., Jenkins, E., Macgill, S., Davey, A.
  (1993). Inarticulate Science? Perspectives on
  the Public Understanding of Science and Some
  Implications for Science Education. Nafferton
  Studies in Education Ltd.
• Lehr, J.L., McCallie, E., Davies, S., Caron,
  B.R., Gammon, B. Duensing, S. (2007). The role
  and value of dialogue events as sites of informal
  science learning. International Journal of
  Science Education Special Issue on Informal
  Science Education.
• Leinhardt, G., Crowley, K. and Knutson, K.
  (2002). Learning Conversations in Museums.
  Mahwah, NJ Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Page, B. (1996). Who deliberates? Mass media in
  modern democracy. Chicago University of Chicago
  Press.
• Public Conversations Project http//www.publicconv
  ersations.org/pcp/index.asp
• Sobel, D. (1995) Beyond Ecophobia Reclaiming the
  heart in Nature Education. http//www.haven.net/de
  ep/council/sobel2.htm
• .

27
References

• Weiss, J.A. Tschirhart, M. (1994). Public
  information campaigns as policy instruments.
  Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 13(1),
  82-119.
• Wynne, B. (1991). Knowledges in Context.
  Science, Technology and Human Values, 16(1),
  111-21.
• Zeldin, T. (1998). Conversation How talk can
  change your life. London Harvill Press.
• Zeyer, A. (in press) Students post-ecological
  Discourse in a Secondary One STSE
  (Science-Technology-Society-Environment)
  Education

28
Thank you

• Lisa Tolley, Director, North Carolina Office of
  Environmental Education

29
Elin Kelsey, PhDElin Kelsey and
companywww.elinkelseyandcompany.com/home

• Elin_at_iname.com