Commentary calls for new ‘science of climate diversity’
There is cloud hanging over climate science, but one Cornell University expert on communication and environmental issues says he knows how to help clear the air.
In the December issue of Nature Climate Change, Jonathon Schuldt, assistant professor of communication, argues that only by creating a “science of climate diversity” can climate science and the larger climate change movement overcome a crippling lack of ethnic and racial diversity.
“There is an invisible, but very real barrier to climate engagement,” Schuldt said. “We need to engage with all kinds of diverse folks if we’re going to face this challenge. It will be a problem if the perception, and the reality, is that it’s a bunch of white male scientists at the table.”
The commentary, “Facing the diversity crisis on climate science,” was born when Schuldt and co-author Adam Pearson, an assistant professor of psychology at Pomona College, began talking about University of Michigan Professor Dorceta Taylor report, “The State of Diversity in Environmental Organizations.” In the report, Taylor examined non-profits, government agencies and grant-making foundations and found that non-white minorities comprised no more than 16 percent of staff in these institutions, in spite of constituting 29 percent of the U.S. science and engineering workforce and 38 percent of the American population. The report found that this “white Green Insiders club” narrows research and limits public engagement.
Schuldt agrees, but thinks more than just institutional changes are needed.
“What is missing is science-based solutions that focus on the fundamentally social nature of this problem,” the authors state. “Research from social psychology offers insight into factors that can powerfully influence participation.”
Schuldt and Pearson argue that early successes in diversifying other STEM research fields, and expanding the role women play in the environmental movement, point to three immediate and essential steps for climate research and outreach organizations.
First, boosting racial and ethnic diversity in climate research and outreach leadership can have an instant impact – provided this leadership is represented in how institutions present themselves. Put simply, Schuldt said, climate science “needs to present a more diverse face.”
Next, the authors urge all those who communicate around climate science to confront lingering stereotypes about environmentalism and minority engagement. Schuldt said one of the most pernicious fallacies needs to quickly be dismantled: that concern for climate issues is lacking in America’s non-white population. He notes recent work by social science researchers has shown this “underrepresentation by choice” idea to be false, and said climate leaders need to highlight the reality of deep minority community concern.
Lastly, the authors insist organizational messages can help bridge this gap. Among the most destructive ideas that needs to be abandoned, Schuldt said, is that communication around climate science should be “color blind.”
“Color-blind communications are, paradoxically, ineffective,” Schuldt said. “What it implies to minority individuals is that their unique perspectives and experiences don’t matter.”
Instead, Schuldt suggested, messages that highlight diversity while pointing toward a common goal are key: “We are all different, but we’re all in this together.”
The long-range goal, Schuldt and Pearson state, needs to be the creation of a new science of climate diversity. Climate scientists must collaborate with psychology and the social sciences, and these research partnerships need to be supported by academic, public and private institutions alike. Once that is done and a “new nexus of research” begins to form around how climate science and the climate change movement can increase racial and ethnic diversity, those fact-based findings can be used to guide public climate advocacy and policy reform efforts. That, Schuldt said, is the only way a problem as complex and far-reaching as climate change can effectively, and equitably, be addressed.
“Diverse teams are better at solving complex problems, and there’s every reason to believe this is the same, if not more important, when facing climate change,” Schuldt said.
Cornell University has television, ISDN and dedicated Skype/Google+ Hangout studios available for media interviews.
-30-
I didn’t read the whole article, but…
He may be spot on, he may have found the holy grail of climate communication, and if we work toward his proposed solution then all of our lives may be deeply enhanced … wait … he’s a white guy … I am now bored and I now assume that he is full of crap … I don’t need to read any more.
(I am curious though … how come 93%of his co-workers (faculty and academic staff, & other staff) can be white and still communicate effectively with the 45% of those in his department grad classes that are non-white?)
The UN will decide that a truly correct and integrated climate scientist must have the appearance of a B52-drink.
This is a desperate gasp by a movement that knows it is becoming irrelevant in the average persons life, as it should be. People have real problems in their lives & don’t have the time to spend on a theory. One that has been pushed down their throats for the last 25 years & that has none of it’s predictions to even remotely come true. People really are not that stupid. I just love to watch people like these quack professors come up with outlandish reasons for their FAILURES. This is a great sign my fellow deniers! This could be the beginning of the fall of the global climate change hysteria.
I agree in part. The important point is that they don’t know it, at least not consciously (“it” being their irrelevancy, even, perhaps, their failure). But this article is a response to it. So this seems like an interesting, even extraordinary example of what some people call “dissociation”.
It’ll never fail as long as they have access to more and more money.
It’s all about the money.
I should have known … academia is so often seen as liberal (like most of the media), so it’s not really surprising to see that they’re so racist too.
I have never seen a bunch of people so involved in racial identity.
In simple terms, most sensible people will look at an idea and wonder if it will work … will it make money … and so on; skin color is irrelevant.
But put the same notion before a liberal, media talking head, academic, etc., and the first concern is about the race or ethnicity of the person presenting the idea. It’s a pity they don’t see people, just skin.
They’ve got more serious problems than communication.
Climate science doesn’t have a diversity problem, it has a truth problem.
Be careful. Communication is indeed a social science. Its not climate science, of course, but it is real. Like any science and technology, it can be used for good or for ill. Ask the Nazis and Saul Alinksy. It is indeed true that if you want your message to be absorbed more effectively by a particular demographic, people need to see themselves in the message, i.e., recognize that people delivering the message are “ike” them. This is related to something called the “recognition heuristic.” Although I’m an engineering PhD, i’ve come to realize that the social sciences might be spooky, but they are often on to something. This guy’s ideas won’t fix the flaws in climate science, but it might build support for fear-mongering in some demographics.
Yes, these people take advantage of scientific observations of communication, persuasion, etc. to serve their political goals – all the while acting as if they are carrying out the most selfless act they could figure out.
You mean John Cook, Climate Communication Fellow at U of Q is NOT a scientist? Damn
It’s the Looanddonkey brigade searching for climate change funding. Classic cràp.
This strategy is possibly informed by the results of the survey in the US that found that educated, white, professional males comprised the largest group of people unconvinced by the climate statistics, emotional marketing and crowd pressure of climate alarmism. Better therefore converting those that are most likely to respond and label those that doubt as sexist, racist or elitist. The means always justify the ends in the minds of such people.
Or should I have said the ends justify the means? Not sure with these grant grubbers.
That’s Grubers not grubbers
You all missed the point. This is about tapping into the billions being spend on climate change research. Our communications and social scientist are feeling left out in the cold with no grant money. They need more diversity on how the billions of climate change grant money should be distributed. Follow the money!
Bingo.
This is what happens when you let racialists run your universities.
We all know that more melanin in your skin makes you think differently than those of us who are melanin challenged.
Is Obama going to tell 5 million new immigrants they have to lower their standard of living.
He’s gonna make them live like they were in Mexico.
He’s already doing it. They haven’t realized it yet.
Watch out! Now that we know climate science is yet another white racist effort Eric Holder will open civil rights investigations if your conclusions don’t match what he wants.
Here is a suggestion for further research. Examine and model the deleterious effects of the publish-or-perish syndrome in the context of academic unions with absolute immunity from reality. Gruber is the latest inspiration.
Every month Nature Climate Change gives us another cracker.
But this isn’t as daft as it sounds. White middle class academics from the Developed World may well be uniform in their assessment of the priorities in fighting climate change.
For example a subsistence farmer from Mali may look at adaptation and poverty reduction with a different perspective.
Or maybe women might want to promote female education as a means of spreading localised knowledge.
Not sure how the LGBTQ thing fits in ye. Perhaps that shows I lack insight through my lack of diversity?
Please, we all know what happens when an academic wanders off the reservation.
Most couldn’t do research if without a wink and a nod to CAGW and CO2.
Basically what the rascist said is this, that all those non-white/non-anglo people out there don’t understand global warming is because they can’t follow the white/anglo science because they don’t understand the white/anglo culture and can’t identify with it and its message, including the message that comes from the white/anglo scientific community.
So here is another excuse to that long list of excues for the warming pause: Non-western based anglo cultures are too stupid to understand advanced western anglo science (aka RACISM).
Give Me A Break!
I thought Donna LaFramboise covered all this in her “Delinquent Teenager” book. The UN implemented diversity quotas producing their IPCC reports. One result was that some of the key work there was done by students in third world countries who happened to have the quota credentials, rather than by seasoned workers with good tools. See the book for names and details.
From one POV, those workers are ideal, because they aren’t experienced enough to question when drek is marching past them, let alone push back. It’s just such an incredible opportunity . . . quite incredible, actually.
Science, apparently, is just another field of human endeavor, all of which are merely “social constructions of reality” (as they say on the Left). Hence there is nothing objective about either the Social or Physical Sciences. In the case of “Climate Science” (unfortunately) they are right for once, in terms of how it is practiced today by the IPCC and team.
97% of climate scientists are middle age white males? We should have thought of this sooner.
Not merely “middle age white males”, but phalocentric, linear-thinking, European descent, middle age, white males.
And probably running dog lackey war mongers of the Wall Street capitalists, as well!
This is hardly the first time it has been noticed. I have noticed a preponderance of English Crown colonialists in the mix, Australians in particular. How many Russians or Saudis are in the short list? The Saudis benefit from oil and the Russians benefit from global warming. Both already have strong state governments and don’t need to exaggerate an emergency as a way to consolidate party power.
What a complete moron. “Diverse teams better at solving problems.” I think, if anything, she refers to people with diverse SKILLS, not diverse skin color or sexual apparatus. I believe this is the most racist statement ever made – skin color determines ability to see clearly.
Well definitely candidate for top ten list.
I guess the knuckleheads never entertained the idea of diversity of thought either.
Diverse sexual apparatus? What exactly is that 😉
Don’t ask. Don’t tell………………………… and don’t look.
H.R. December 8, 2014 at 5:15 pm
Don’t ask. Don’t tell………………………… and don’t look.
Splutter, coffee up nose, keyboard ruined.
Is it cos I is white? h/t Ali G
The key insight needed to understand what Jonathon Schuldt, assistant professor of communication is pushing here.
Imagine if Michael Mann was not a white male.
Were Mann a woman, with the daily jabs we take at his blatant mendacity, the Progressives could label attacks on her as misogynist skeptics.
Were Mann African-American, (like the US President), we would be labeled racists.
Since the Climate Change Alarmists community has a very predominant white male affliction (lack of diversity), the Liberals (or Progressives, or whatever the hell the want to be called) can’t label outside group attacks on it.
My suggestion then would be for Mann to get a gender change operation and change her name to Michelle Womann.
Yikes… that would be one scary looking woman.
Ya know, now that I think about it, Miriam O’Brien looks an awful like Dustin HoffmanN in Tootsie.
http://imabeautygeek.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Dustin-Hoffman_Tootsie.jpg
http://moreonmiriamobrien.files.wordpress.com/2014/12/cropped-header41.png
joel, I don’t think so. Dustin Hoffman actually looked like a woman for that movie.
Codetech,
I never said Tootsie looked like a woman. I just made a comment on some comparison if Mann went transgender, i.e. add some “diversity” to climate alarmists’ camp. Anyone bashing him-her then would be labeled a “hater” by the Progressives in an attempt to silence climate skeptics or any criticisms of Mann’s climate science deceptions.
The focus on minority input says that the fundamental issue is not about facts, which are colour-blind, but about opinions. Opinions are partially determined by culture and personal experience. These authors are saying that “truth” is either non-determinable or relative.
White, green insiders: I would agree that there is a problem here, but not because the people invovled are white, green or insiders. The problem is that the socio-political-economic agenda is front and center for this WGI group. It wouldn’t matter if the Narrative were written by purple-skinned, anti-environmental fringe nuts if facts and not agenda were driving their conclusions and decisions.
The psychologically oriented have lost track of there being “truths” that we need to find before we make decisions. For them, it is all about a social group weaving about in a search for harmony of spirit. If we are all happy with human sacrifices to the Gods, including (but maybe less so) those sacrificed, and our society weathers troubles through the mechanisms of human sacrifice, then they would say we have achieved perfection. The presence of Gods and the impact sacrifices have on the problems we face, are irrelevant if we all feel good about what we are doing and the future ahead of us.
Really, this is sad. The anti-science establishment is at the top of the heap, except they call themselves the humanists.
Real:
http://polar.ncep.noaa.gov/global/nc/images/large/rtofs_global_temperature_n048_000.png
Yes, seems to be right.
Well at least with this study, the list of things old white guys haven’t been accused of yet gets shorter.
Nothing says science better than racial politics.
Real:
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/stratosphere/strat-trop/gif_files/time_pres_TEMP_MEAN_OND_NH_2014.gif
Congratulations, you found the missing hot spot. Oh, wait…
So er, its only 60% consensus. And Shultz sees salvation in roping the others in, and to make it really effective, make sure the research includes the broken and corrupted social sciences. Communications have been lousy if he’s not aware that psychologists, sociologists, communications experts have been weighing in heavily already. I guess the fact that climate worries come in 39th in a list of woes in a 6 million strong international poll conducted by the IPPC itself. Adding clowns like this has already got a full head of steam and, come to think of it, the start of this was the start of the decline of concern about climate change.
I foresee when the truth is finally out the creation of new, serious, universities that don’t have all this chaff. The social sciences (except economics because it is a difficult subject) have been where students aspiring to something more challenging went to when they failed at the real sciences.