Author Archives: Steve

Interference in science: scientists’ perspectives on their ability to communicate and conduct environmental research in Canada

Interference in science: scientists’ perspectives on their ability to communicate and conduct environmental research in Canada

Interference in science: scientists’ perspectives on their ability to communicate and conduct environmental research in Canada

Ran across an article today, with the above title. It’s a little dry, so I didn’t read it all. However, I was interrested in seeing if we were getting accurate reports on climate change, and the environment.

We’re all aware that there are media sources that don’t have all the facts about the issues they are reporting on. In fact, sometimes scientists and reporters experience interference that prevents them from publishing the truth.

Being a concerned father, and grandfather, I’m mostly worrried about the world, that’s going to be left to them to deal with it. This article didn’t help relieve my fears. It seems like it could be worse than what they are telling us.

Abstract
When researchers are sufficiently resourced to conduct research and communicate their findings, the knowledge produced can benefit the environment and society through policy. However, interference with the research process and its subsequent knowledge mobilization (“interference in science”) has been observed in several countries, particularly for environmental researchers. Using a mixed-methods approach, we surveyed environmental researchers in Canada (n = 741) to investigate the perceived prevalence, source, and effects of interference and considered whether these perceptions differ by region, career stage, research area, and membership in any scientific society. Although over half of researchers were not restricted from speaking to the media (54%), and most had never been asked to make “undue modifications” to their work (84%), the vast majority (92%) reported at least some degree of interference in their work during their careers. Consequences of interference were more prevalent among early-career researchers and included negative impacts on job satisfaction, mental health, and undue modification to work leading to inaccurate or incomplete science communication. Although environmental researchers in Canada deem themselves overall better able to conduct and communicate their work than under previous federal governments, reports of ongoing political interference remain concerning. We recommend increased support for researchers and further investigations into interference.

In the first chart we see that climate change and pollution, top the list.