BY NEIL EISBERG | EDITOR
It has never really been enough just to do great science; you need to tell people about it, too.
A discovery that sits in a lab notebook won’t do much to benefit society (or do much to help boost the career of a researcher, either). That’s why publishing research is so important to both academics and industry; it’s the evidence of the steady progress that contributes to the huge scientific revolutions that underpin modern society.
Scientists also need to think about the bigger stories that connect their work to the wider world, and how they and their research are perceived by the public.
First, the good news. Recent data shows that internationally there is a still a clear belief in the power and importance of science.
The majority of Americans say it is very important for the US to be a leader in science, and the number that think so is growing. More than eight-in-ten Americans say government investments in scientific research aimed at advancing knowledge are worthwhile, according to a newly published report from the Pew Research Center.
And there is still plenty of trust in scientists, too. True, that confidence may be lower than it was prior to the start of the Covid-19 pandemic, but Americans still have more confidence in scientists than many other groups (including journalists and business leaders).
Separate research by the European Union has presented a similar picture with 83% of the public reporting the overall influence of science and technology as positive. In the UK too, the long-running Public Attitudes to Science survey recently found that most people think that scientists make a valuable contribution to society, and that research and innovation makes a direct contribution to economic growth.
However, there were some worrying signs too. This report found the number of people feeling informed about science has fallen. Three-fifths felt they saw or heard too little information about science and just 12% felt that the public was sufficiently involved in decisions about science and technology.
Part of the problem: the impact from scientific R&D is more tangible in sectors such as life sciences or food, but can feel distant and intangible in other sectors, conducted by mysterious people in featureless buildings.
That needs to change. Science and R&D needs to get better at showcasing real-world examples of achievements that focus on specific problems or priorities that are relevant to the public right now.
The Public Attitudes to Science report uses the concept of ‘science capital’ here. The more science capital someone has, the more they have interacted with science and scientists, through friends, family, careers, media and more: higher levels of science capital were associated with more positive attitudes to science. Building up that science capital would be a good first step to ensure that everyone understands the impact of science.
Why this matters is because the R&D landscape is changing. Over the last quarter century China has increased its share of world R&D by an ‘unprecedented’ 23 percentage points according to WIPO, while other big players such as the US and Japan have seen relative declines, even if they too have grown spending. Keeping the importance of R&D front of mind is vital in supporting funding.
There’s a broader lesson here for both science and industry. As The Wall Street Journal recently reported, there is a current vogue for companies looking to recruit ‘storytellers’ to explain what they do – and why it matters.
Scientific R&D needs to make a similar effort, to connect that scientific discovery to economic and societal benefit – something to which SCI has been dedicated to for well over a century.
For foundational industries like the chemical industry this sort of story-telling is increasingly important.
The chemical industry recognised some time ago that its licence to operate very much depends upon public opinion. Indeed, there is a parallel to work that was carried out by the chemical industry some years ago, culminating in the ‘Responsible Care’ programmes that began in Canada but have now spread around the world. The issue of becoming more local is something that the chemical industry addressed by inviting the public to visit facilities through open days. While this may not be practical for some research-based activities, scientists and industry may be surprised by just how much curiosity about their work there is from the public.
And right now, with the industry facing painful change, particularly in Europe being able to tell stories about why it matters to everyone is going to be key to its future.
For R&D and for science in general, practitioners must also recognise this simple fact – not only is its licence to operate at risk if the public doesn’t see the point, but so also is the supply of public funding in all its forms, whether through universities or directly through individual companies.
Visit Blog
