A Prologue:
My Dad was an artist turned chemist and my Mom was an artist (and still is at 95!). They were both great influences on me over the years and have always supported my choices in my life. My brothers and sister were all teachers, whileI turned to science (botany especially) when I graduated from high school. I had the privilege of going to McGill in my CEGEP years and then on to Concordia (Science and Human Affairs) and the Universite de Montreal (history and social – political impacts of science).
Safe to say, I had the science and public policy bug early. In fact, straight out of graduation, I was offered a job as science policy analyst at the Science Council of Canada– a think tank for engaging the policy and public worlds in the wide array of science for society issues (see book of SCC). That was my trigger for advocacy, given the issues we covered in science-society interfaces. There were many, but over the years I started to see how public policy was being made with little input or interest from the knowledge community and civic society at large. Any screams for change from the community were silent ones– and to be clear, they were often debates between the scientifically illiterate and politically clueless.
At this point, I decided I should better understand how policy is really made and so I went on to various government positions, as well as the development agency known as the International Development Research Centre operating in Canada and the Global South. I advised several federal science and research ministers over the years, including the newly appointed National Science Advisor to the Prime Minister in 2004. That was an eye-opener and greatly impacted my future outlook – especially when that position was eliminated by the then Harper administration. I’ve written a lot about this in various articles and blogs, including the paper with journalist Kathryn O”Hara. I also joined up with the Science Integrity project led by UBC’s Sally Otto and others in framing a series of principles for science integrity within the government and beyond.
In also working with the new Chief Scientist of Quebec a decade ago, I learned of an interesting student group,the Science and Policy Exchange at McGill,that was trying to engage students more effectively in the public discourse about research and knowledge support. That experience was key for me as I saw first hand how the next generation can make a powerful impact in affecting public policy. Indeed, the 2012 Death of Evidence March on Parliament Hill proved to be a key turning point in science advocacy for Canadian researchers, leading to the Evidence for Democracy movement.
Moving Forward:
Building on all this, I continue to mentor and advocate with the many institutions now shaping the sciences for our society’s evolution, including the Chief Science Advisor’s dynamic Youth Council. From my years at the Science Council of Canada, I remain a keen student of how to help improve the science education in our schools. Our educators will have a huge influence (if well informed and trained) on the future paths of our emerging talent.
Today, we have witnessed a tipping point with a new generation of tech-savvy and politically conscious researchers and their allies who understand social media and know how to mobilize it for effect. But it will take more to sustain the message. Here are some modest suggestions in building the momentum:
Develop a clear public statement outlining why science matters with specific examples that resonate with the public.
Invite local parliamentarians from all backgrounds to events where the sciences and innovation are on the agenda. Consider annual science and society events in the local community or provincial legislative councils, in addition to orchestrating public science debates with all the political party representatives in lead-ups to the next municipal, provincial or federal election.
Recognize that the sciences are ultimately aimed at shaping the human condition in all respects. Yes, it needs to be framed within a contemporary context, but because the sciences provide sound evidence based on facts, it should not be muzzled or leashed, nor should it offer up what is often labeled as “polluted” or “biased” advice. As Thomas Jefferson once argued: whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government.
Ensure an ongoing dialogue with citizens from all regions of the country through social media and public engagement that is fully representative of an inclusive society.
Challenge senior government officials at all levels on future directions of the sciences and the research enterprise for Canada. Get their attention about the need to renovate dated science, knowledge and innovation strategies, and make them more open and relevant to today’s climate and public needs.
Target key messages to members of the federal government’s research ecosystem, including the forthcoming Council on Science and Innovation. While their advice will be critical along with other key advisory organizations, their mandate will also (hopefully) provide evidence-informed science and technology advice on issues critical to Canada’s economic, social, environmental development and Canadians’ social well-being.
Examine, collaborate and learn from good practices of similar campaigns that have been effective in other countries and regions, including how to engage public outreach groups, private sector associations and political lobby groups more constructively.
Design, communicate and coordinate collective research community briefs or vision statements for federal, provincial, territorial budgets and beyond. Make it clear that researchers (in all sectors including Indigenous knowledge) understand how to operate in a geopolitically charged and fast-evolving arena without jeopardizing first principles of integrity and transparency. Remember that the sciences are a globally connected network that can help shape policy making and diplomacy everywhere.
This is a long-term agenda … make sure the scream is well-DIRECTED and continually heard.
