Abstract
Until about 50 years ago, science communication was non-strategic. Communicating scientists were mainly interested in bringing science into culture and promoting the wider diffusion of scientific knowledge. In the past century, great scientists such as Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, Freeman Dyson, Hubert Reeves and Stephen Jay Gould were celebrated also for their talents of popularisation.
But times have changed. Nowadays, science communication is everywhere (at least in the scientific community). Everyone in the scientific world – researchers, teachers, administrators and the like – relies on science communication in one way or another, although the motivations and objectives of these socio-professional communities may significantly differ.
Hence, providing guidance on how to make science communication more effective – that is, driving behaviour change and making people turn to science when faced with challenges – is more than welcome. There is no doubt that this book is very timely.
Of course, most scientists will tell you that they are (still) mainly interested in sharing knowledge. But this task is complicated by the institutional pressures which stem from the fact that many research organisations have not only scientific priorities but also strategic and even political objectives; new expectations from political and economic stakeholders impose additional ‘missions’ upon universities and research organisations such as education for specialised job markets and accelerated technology transfer.
But because science communication is everywhere and there is a substantial increase of support, it would be a mistake to infer that we are now living in a ‘golden age’ for science communication, which will see public science literacy increasing across the world and lead people to address scientific and technological issues in a more informed and rational way.
Most scientists know how to communicate science but few have deeply analysed their own motivations and objectives or questioned the tactics needed or the behavioural changes induced by these activities.
This is why, Besley and Dudo argue, we have to engage in ‘strategic science communication’. The authors have run a research programme on strategic communication for many years. The book fills a very large gap as to how science and scientists can engage with society and make a difference in the world and is a must-read for the community of researchers and practitioners in science communication.
Relying on extensive review of the scientific literature and numerous case studies, Besley and Dudo regret that the science communication community has operated in near-isolation from the practitioner community. Their key message is crystal clear: it is about defining objectives and choosing appropriate tactics: What we lack is clear and curated evidence about what tactics (i.e. choices about message content, behaviours, tone / style, channel, and sources) can reliably affect specific objectives in various contexts, over time. We also know too little about what behaviours might result from achieving those objectives and the contexts in which these outcomes might be expected (or not expected).
The authors propose 12 communication objectives that any communicator should choose from to achieve his or her goal. They argue, for example, that science communicators should appear as competent, warm, honest and willing to listen. They should also convey a desire to make the world a better place. The authors explain how to achieve each strategic objective. Because all scientific communication is goal-oriented, Besley and Dudo extensively discuss the importance of recognising the right goals. Against this background, one of their central arguments is that sharing knowledge is just one of the many important communication objectives that communicators need to focus on.
As I took it, the central assumption of the authors is that if scientists communicate more effectively citizens are more likely to turn to science when faced with difficult decisions. This may look like a somewhat naïve prejudice. The Eurobarometer surveys have given much evidence that people educated in science and technology can be very critical about some of their uses and applications.
In the end, science communicators may conclude that the adjective strategic in the title of the book is superfluous. For good (science) communication you need to define your objectives, audience, messages and tools. These key principles remain true – always and everywhere. But it is worth making the point.