As a part of an on-going efforts to raise climate awareness, the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, CA hosted a FREEZE Flash Mob on May 25, 2011. One hundred and twenty participants froze in place for 3 minutes to represent how we can work together to "freeze" the production of CO2 to help the planet for ourselves and future generations. Aquarium of the Pacific is looking forward to continuing to educate the public in dynamic, engaging ways; please share this link and feel free to comment.
This summer a collaborative group of aquarium interpreters from six different aquariums will be putting the finishing touches on a climate change interpretative training program three years in the making. Sponsored by a grant from IMLS, the “Ocean Change” project group is comprised of interpreters from the Vancouver Aquarium, the Monterey Bay Aquarium, the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, the Birch Aquarium at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the National Aquarium, and the New England Aquarium. The training program will be both hosted online (here) and presented at a series of regional trainings beginning this summer. (Are you interested in training?)
All of the materials and activities included in the training were taken from the group’s collective experience interpreting climate change to visitors at aquariums. The lessons are applicable beyond aquaria though. Training focus areas include better understanding the Earth's climate system and how it interacts with other Earth systems, especially the ocean, as well as the causes and effects associated with climate change. This understanding, commonly referred to as climate change literacy, is essential to developing the confidence necessary to discuss the issue within an interpretative setting.
There is also a thorough exploration of interpretative and communication strategies that help make addressing climate change a more empowering experience for interpreters. The group brought unique experience and perspective to this area in particular, offering helpful insights on how to engender a thoughtful interaction and learning experience with an individual, audience, as well as with colleagues and peers.
Collaboration as a Solutions Model
Most inspiring, however, is the empowerment that the individuals who have worked on the project have received from it. Working together across institutional boundaries has been a powerful process and experience for everyone involved, and an exciting impetus for future collaboration focused on similar climate change related topics. It is both a timely and strategic effort – climate change requires a collective response, and collaboration is a fundamental building block toward producing solutions by and for groups. It comes as little surprise then that the group’s participants describe the process of working together as “inspiring” and “extremely rewarding.”
“It was the first time I felt I was with a group of like-minded peers interpreting about climate change. Everyone in the project is as dedicated (to the climate change message) as I am,” says Sarah Mae Nelson, a Climate Change Interpretative Specialist at the Monterey Bay Aquarium. “It was like walking into a group of old friends who spoke my language.”
Billy Spitzer, Vice President of Programs, Exhibits & Planning at the New England Aquarium, would agree. “I've been very impressed by everyone's willingness to take on something difficult and approach it with open minds, a collaborative spirit, and a willingness to share both failures and successes. We have definitely achieved way more than any one of our institutions could have achieved by itself, and built a powerful support network in the process.”
That support network will only grow, as more interpreters are trained and feel comfortable with their understanding of climate change and the tools they need to address the topic with an audience. That is a primary goal of this project, to support and expand a growing community of climate change interpreters across the country, and beyond. In the meantime the group’s work continues, so stay tuned for updates and more information about how you can receive training and get involved.
After much delay and some technical barriers, we are able to provide the audio for our most recent webinar featuring Anthony Leiserowitz, Director, Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, and Jim Covel, Senior Manager of Guest Experience, Monterey Bay Aquarium.
We are still working on the post-production video presentation of this webinar. Unfortunately, our webinar service's video file output is not the most compatible or flexible multimedia format, and has been a stubborn and unwilling participant in the post-production process. We hope you understand. As soon as the video recording is available, it will be posted here on Aquariums and Climate.
In the meantime, you can listen to the audio recording of the event by clicking the podcast link below.
More great material from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. This particular research is valuable for informal educators at museums, zoos, aquariums and other science and technology centers across the country.
Knowledge of Climate Change Among Science & Technology Museum Visitors reports results from a national study of what the American public understands about how the climate system works, and the causes, impacts and potential solutions to global warming. This report describes how knowledge of climate change varies across Science and Technology Museum visitors. Using a straight grading scale, 38% of both occasional and frequent museum visitors received a passing grade (A, B, or C), compared to 19% of non-visitors. While knowledge levels vary across the groups, these results also indicate that relatively few museum visitors have an in-depth understanding of climate change.
You can read the full report here.
Candid Conversations
Friday March 4, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. (PST)
Panelists: Dr. Anthony Leiserowitz, Director, Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, and Jim Covel, Senior Manager of Guest Experience, Monterey Bay Aquarium.
Moderated by Tom Bowman
Please Register for the Event by Clicking Here.
Effective communicators know their audience(s). Understanding where others are coming from is an important part of helping them connect to ideas in a new or different way. For climate communicators the process of identifying different audience segments matters that much more. Mentioning climate change or global warming can set off a plethora of audience responses, sometimes emotional, politically charged, and overwhelming to both the person experiencing them AND whoever is trying to interpret the issue for them. So how do we know what to say, and more importantly, who we are talking to?
In 2009, the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication published Global Warming’s Six Americas: An Audience Segmentation Analysis, its first report on how Americans perceive the topic of climate change. This analysis identified six distinct audience segments – the Alarmed, the Concerned, the Cautious, the Disengaged, the Doubtful and the Dismissive. Using these different persona types has helped prepare a growing number of climate change interpreters to improve their ability to confidently communicate climate change and better engage their audiences. You can read the report and the latest research coming from the study by clicking on the images, or by visiting the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication's website, where you can watch a video interview with Dr. Leiserowitz.
This next installment of the Candid Conversations series will feature both theory and practice. It will discuss research from the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication with the program's director, Dr. Anthony Leiserowitz. It will also offer examples of how informal educators are using this research in everyday interactions communicating climate change with visitors, a perspective provided by the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Jim Covel, who has helped guide the Monterey Bay Aquarium's climate change interpretation efforts on the floor.
Registration is not capped, but only the first 100 online attendees will be able to log into the event, so please plan to share a screen with your colleagues to make space for as many people as possible.
Communicating with climate change skeptics is one of the more challenging tasks that climate change communicators face. Though skeptics represent a minority of what the population as a whole thinks about the topic, loaded feelings about global warming and climate change can be an intimidating obstacle to more meaningful discussions. Navigating those dicey waters, and the talking points skeptics bring to them, can be a source of much anxiety and reservation for an interpreter.
While science is inherently skeptical, that skepticism is driven by a need for more complete understanding, not uninformed denial. A good number of climate change skeptics may fit more in the latter than the former, but their talking points can still be readily responded to, and done so in a manner that keeps the discussion firmly about science -- a topic area that is less emotional than murkier (and at times volatile) political back-and-forth.
A new report from Skeptical Science helps climate change communicators navigate these waters. John Cook's "The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism" offers an accessible and quick review of the primary arguments and evidence supporting humanity's indelible footprint on global climate change. The guide lays out the principal ways we know and understand (and have observed through countless independent observations) the relationship between humans, greenhouse gas emissions, and climate change.
Candid Conversations
If you were not able to attend the live event, you can watch and listen now to the 75-minute panel discussion and Q&A about lowering the carbon footprint of your organization. This next installment in the Candid Conversations features perspectives from Chicago's Shedd Aquarium, Metro Parks Tacoma in Washington, and the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, California.
Aquariums and Climate contributor Tom Bowman, who moderates our Candid Conversations webinar series, is spreading the word about another important initiative he is taking part in: ClimateEngage.org.
Tom helped launch the ClimateEngage.org website in order to re-post a letter from today's edition of Science that he co-authored with some of the nation's leading climate scientists, social and decision scientists, ethicists, economists, and communication professionals. They are calling on the science and funding establishment to support a new initiative to bring the public up to speed quickly on climate change.
Aquariums and Climate was created to contribute to increasing our effectiveness as climate change communicators and educators, and we support Tom in this task and encourage you to do so as well. Please visit ClimateEngage.org, where you can read the letter, e-sign the petition, and help draw attention to this important effort.
Have a listen to this radio story from KQED featuring both the Monterey Bay Aquarium and the California Academy of Sciences, and their experiences with the tricky business of an effective exhibit on climate change.
You can also find more cool programming by visiting the KQED Quest website.
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
9:30 am PST - 10:45 am PST
Please join us for a 75-minute panel discussion and Q&A about lowering the carbon footprint of your organization. This next installment in the Candid Conversations series will feature perspectives from Chicago's Shedd Aquarium, Metro Parks Tacoma in Washington, and the Aquarium of the Pacific in Long Beach, California.
In the meantime, the Aquariums and Climate Team wants to know what you're doing to "green" your facilities, your operations, and even your guest experience. Please send us some photos of the steps you're taking at your institution, and we'll feature them during the event!
Please register for the event here.
Registration is not capped, but only the first 100 online attendees will be able to log into the event, so please plan to share a screen with your colleagues to make space for as many people as possible.
The Arctic is entering a new climate state as it becomes increasingly warmer and difficult to rebuild the seasonal sea ice covers that have been seen in previous decades. The impact on ecosystems and the animals that depend upon them are likely to have severe, long term consequences. You can see the report in its entirety here, and another video animation detailing ice loss in Arctic here.
Check out this 22 minute documentary on Ocean Acidification created by the Natural Resources Defense Council and narrated by Sigourney Weaver.
Dr. Jon Krosnick, a Senior Fellow at Stanford University's Woods Institute for the Environment, is a social psychologist who studies how the American public's beliefs and attitudes regarding environmental policy issues form, change over time, and influence peoples's behavior. His most recent work offers some important clarity to what has become a confusing public discourse, how Americans feel about global warming and climate change, and what they feel should be done about it.
Making sense of the noise
The last couple years have seemed full of claims that the science behind global warming and climate change is rife with "sloppy" and "half-baked" research, conniving scientists trying to shut out dissenting voices, and "cap-and-tax" schemes that will only empty your pockets and hurt the economy. You may have heard that "The science just isn't there yet," or that "there are still considerable doubts about whether the observed changes are man-made." You may have even heard that the percentage of the population that believe global warming is real and happening is significantly declining.
If you suspect that the noise being generated by those who are skeptical of climate change has grown louder and louder, that would be an accurate observation. But are assertions that a majority of Americans do not believe global warming and climate change are indeed happening actually true?
A clearer look at public opinion
If you are performing the surveys correctly, and being precise with your language to eliminate ambiguity, you'll more than likely find what Dr. Jon Krosnick has been telling us for several years: a substantially large majority of Americans DO believe climate change is occurring AND they think both government and businesses should be doing something about it.
In his most recent work published this last August, Dr. Krosnick conducted surveys to assess public attitudes about global warming and climate change in three states: Maine, Massachusets, and Florida. He then compared the results of those findings to prior surveys conducted in the same states during the last 5 years, as well with a national survey conducted in June of this year (2010).
He found that the three states closely resembled each other and the nation in that large majorities of the population believe global warming is happening, is human caused, will be problematic for the United States and the world, and should be addressed by both government and business.
The results also show that while Americans are unsure of gas and utility tax schemes as a means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, large majorities supported tax incentives and rebates for investments in renewable energy as well as carbon capture and storage. They also doubt that taking action will have a negative impact on the economy, and expect both government and business to tackle the issue.
So, why all the confusion?
According to Dr. Krosnick's national survey in June 2010, the cooler seasonal variations of the last two years increased doubts among skeptics and people with low-trust in climate scientists, making that minority more vocal. "Our surveys reveal a small decline in the proportion of people who believe global warming has been happening, from 84 percent in 2007 to 74 percent today," Krosnick says on the Woods Institute website. "Statistical analysis of our data revealed that this decline is attributable to perceptions of recent weather changes by the minority of Americans who have been skeptical about climate scientists."
Dr. Krosnick also points out that this finding is significant since it is tied to weather patterns over the last two years, and is likely to be temporary as temperatures go back up again (as they have this year) and some of the skeptical voices "rejoin the large majority who still think warming is real."
Another consideration is the role of featuring skeptics (and deniers) in the news media, and their increasing vocality across multiple media platforms and outlets. Although some media outlets have presented side by side perspectives to present both sides of an issue and increase objectivity and fairness, in the case of climate change, the majority attitude among scientists is overwhelmingly accepting of the view that climate change is occurring. By presenting scientists who accept that climate change is occurring and skeptics side by side, viewers' perception of a disagreement within the scientific community increases, even though that is a false representation of the broader consensus.
It is a safe bet that Dr. Krosnick is not the only one who is aware of that finding.
The important take-away
Global warming and climate change is not as taboo as you may think, nor is it as controversial as some might want you to believe. Indeed, large majorities believe it is occurring, think we should be doing something about it, and don't think we will adversely impact the economy or jobs by doing so. It is our role to offer clarity to the public discourse surrounding the issue, drown out the disproportional "noise" created by skeptics, and interpret the specifics with sound science, clear language, and consistently firm but respectful messaging.
In other words: "This is real, we know you care about it and want to do something, so lets do it."
For more information
See The Ocean Projects FAQ on American public opinions surrounding climate change and the ocean, and some case studies regarding how aquariums are using the research.
For more information about Dr. Krosnick's research, visit his research page at the Woods Institute website.
Have you had a chance to review this Climate Literacy Guide? It is the result of a collaborative effort between scientists, informal educators, and U.S. Agency representatives to improve the public's understanding of climate science.
The document lays out "guiding principles for informed climate decisions", most notably:
- The Sun is the primary source of energy for Earth's climate system.
- Climate is regulated by complex interactions among components of the Earth system.
- Life on Earth depends on, is shaped by, and affects climate.
- Climate varies over space and time through both natural and man-made processes.
- Our understanding of the climate system is improved through observations, theoretical studies, and modeling.
- Human activities are impacting the climate system.
- Climate change will have consequences for the Earth system and human lives.
You can download the full report here.
Sylvia Earle at the Tennessee Aquarium from Nature Films Network on Vimeo.
Sylvia Earle gives a presentation about the oceans and her new book, The World is Blue: How Our Fate and the Ocean's Are One. The event was sponsored by NOAA, The Tennessee Aquarium and Nature Films Network.
Billy Spitzer wraps up our panelist responses to this round of "Candid Conversations", and offers some insights into how the Gulf oil spill has led to changes at his own institution, the New England Aquarium.
Closing Thoughts from Billy Spitzer
With the Gulf oil spill, we worked hard to build on public desire for up to date information, their concern about the effects of the oil spill on animals such as sea turtles, their interest in the Aquarium’s response to the disaster, and their willingness to find ways they can help. Meanwhile, we tried to make sure that people understood the oil spill in the larger context of how it relates to our dependence on fossil fuels.
Our overall approach is based on what we’ve been calling “mission-based interpretation,” our attempt over the last several years to integrate what we know about the major issues affecting the ocean, visitor research, communication theory, how to promote environmental stewardship, and thematic interpretation.
The essential elements are:
- Start with an animal focus but transition to the “big picture” and the larger issues involved.
- Make consistent use of a theme to make the problem meaningful and relevant.
- Appeal to a commonly shared value (e.g., stewardship, responsible management, innovation, or interconnectedness).
- Use analogies, metaphors, and images to clearly and simply explain cause and effect.
- Show how we are all responsible to help, illustrating how the Aquarium is involved, what visitors can do, and the importance of collective and community action.
The oil spill pushed us to develop a more timely approach to responding to current events, much faster than our typical approach in developing exhibit or even web content. Our process included:
- A meeting of key internal staff, in order to determine whether and how to respond, including senior management, education, communication, visitor experience, education, conservation, and research.
- Agreement on key themes and messages. We focused on effects on charismatic animals (such as sea turtles) but also less obvious effects on habitats and ecosystems; effects on people living in the Gulf; the Aquarium’s role in responding; what people can do to help in the short-term and to address the overall issue of fossil fuel dependency.
- Initial research and development of content for our website, which was then adapted for other uses such as resources for interpreters, communication to staff, information for members, development of exhibit graphics, etc.
- A rapid content and editorial review process (approximately 10 days from initial draft to final version).
- Use of blogs for communicating about rapidly changing events, Aquarium staff involvement, and responding to public questions and comments.
- Use of a powerpoint slideshow format and video monitors to transform content from the web to use on the exhibit path.
We are continuing to look for ways to build on the interests of our visitors to make connections with climate change and other big ocean issues, and experiment and learn along the way.
Debbi Stone responds to the unanswered question: "What role do environmental educators play in providing information to educate the public on fragile marine environments and the impacts of climate change? .... What can we do to support economies that support habitat conservation?"
Thoughts from Debbi Stone
Environmental educators are often in the unique position of having amazing visuals and compelling exhibits at our disposal to illustrate concepts and ideas. We can present messages in a dynamic manner, reaching people in an inspiring and motivating way. However, we can also be perceived as having a one-sided view of the issues. It’s not uncommon to hear something like, “Well, of course you feel that way! You represent the environmental viewpoint.” While perceptions vary region by region, there’s no doubt that the public can and will recognize that an environmental educator usually has a bias, just as a successful businessman or businesswoman is often pre-judged to represent “big business,” which is not always a fair assumption.
Knowing this, environmental educators can take on the role of meeting audiences where audiences are ready to be met so that we aren’t viewed as taking a heavy-handed approach. Our role is one of interpretation, defined by NAI as “a mission-based communication process that forges emotional and intellectual connections between the interests of the audience and meanings inherent in the resource.” Rather than listing facts and figures, and citing all of the things that responsible citizens should be doing, the environmental educator is often most successful when he/she determines what will resonate most with the audience… and building from that point.
That makes the issue of what we “should” be teaching a challenging one, as there isn’t a “one size fits all” model that could be used by everyone for everyone. However, we can provide stepping stones that move from the status quo toward a greater environmental ethic. For some people, that does mean hard facts and strong science, and for others it may mean an easy-going dialogue about fond childhood memories of spending time outside. If we can engage our audience in a meaningful manner, we can then move to sharing information about personal decisions and behavior changes that have a positive effect on the environment.
Environmental educators can also share the process of how decisions are made, who makes decisions, and how we effect change. All too often, we hear from our visitors that “scientists make decisions about the environment,” when in fact voters make decisions, consumers make decisions, and personal actions are therefore critical.
"Have any of the panelists heard that visitors are seeing this oil spill as good reason to move away from oil, perhaps seeing this as a wake-up call?"
In general, visitors at The Florida Aquarium ask questions about how the animals may be affected by the oil spill, as well as whether our critical mangrove habitats and tourist-attracting beaches will be able to rebound “if the oil comes.” Fortunately, as time has passed, conversations are starting to move toward a larger picture. From what we have gleaned from visitor interactions, the connection between drilling for oil and our need for fuel is solid, but the understanding of other oil uses is weaker.
There are conversations about how our need for fuel for our vehicles has impacted the environment, but there seems to be less conversation about plastics, health and beauty products, detergents, and the litany of products that include petroleum. A greater understanding of reducing our use of so much “stuff” altogether, or choosing alternatives to oil-based products, would be a great step in the process of moving away from our reliance on oil.
Tara Treiber responds to the unanswered question: "What role do environmental educators play in providing information that educate the public on fragile marine environments and the impacts of climate change? .... What can we do to support economies that support habitat conservation?"
Thoughts from Tara Treiber
While some visitors are making the connection between our oil addiction, oil spills and climate change, it is not common. This is where we can step in.
Environmental and marine educators can play a huge role in providing accurate and science-based information about the impact of climate change on the ocean and our planet, and its connection to our oil usage. This education can be done both directly or indirectly.
To educate directly, one really needs to be comfortable with the science of climate change, which is where I think some educators are less confident, leading them to avoid the issue. National Geographic and the EPA, as well as many others, have easy to understand resources explaining the science of global warming, global climate change, and their predicted impacts and repercussions. One of the easiest to grasp books that I’ve read about the subject is "We Are the Weather Makers: The History of Climate Change", Sally M. Walker’s adaptation of Tim Flannery’s book.
To educate indirectly, one can take a variety of approaches, such as addressing the issue of plastic pollution, protecting air quality, or even basic resource conservation, to name a few. When we work to reduce our plastic pollution and move to reusable bags, mugs, lunch materials, and other options, we use less oil, thereby affecting climate change. Everyone needs air to breathe! Most of the industrial processes and individual behaviors that increase carbon dioxide production also decrease our air quality in other ways. Recycled materials usually produce less air pollution than those from virgin sources. Carpooling, using public transportation, riding a bike or walking all reduce air pollution and decrease one’s carbon dioxide footprint. If someone is uncomfortable with addressing climate change head-on, there are still many ways to educate about behaviors that will make a positive difference.
As to the issue of economics:
- All of the behaviors just outlined save money in the long run, though they may require a small investment to begin with – my $5 investment in a very cute reusable mug (that never fails to get complements), has saved me 5¢ every time I get a cup of coffee, tea or hot cocoa this year. Assuming two cups per week (which is conservative), I’ve already saved enough to pay for the mug!
- Every major oil company has a renewable energy division, so they must think there’s the possibility of profit there someplace or their shareholders would not have supported it. The economic argument is an old one; however, anyone who pays an electric or water bill knows that conserving our resources saves us money.
Finally, we can support and create economies that support habitat conservation through our daily behaviors and spending choices. There are so many guides to buying/living green available, many of them customized to our local areas. A little research can help you find the most sustainable choices that are relevant to your lifestyle and location.