One of the great things about being a grad student in a lab or research group is the dialogue you have with other grad students. Ingrid (one of the original planktoneers), has been away at Lakehead University this semester planning her PhD project and taking an environmental ethics course. She has provided some initial insights here. I enjoyed reading this post and thought I'd write a response or perhaps more of a continuation.
I think that another aspect that we have to consider in science is really how we do it and what we do with it once it has been done. I agree with Ingrid that we need to think carefully about what we are studying and why, because ultimately our science is going to have to stand for itself in the world and it is true that breaking down natural systems into measurable units may indeed detract from their instrinsic value.
However, I too feel that scientists have a role to play in environmental decision making and I think part of that lies not only with the ecology and the thinking behind it but also in the methods and application. The world is complicated. There are a lot of problems. We can discuss that forever and not get closer to solutions (we could probably also debate the meaning of the word "solution" for an infinite amount of time as well...), but there comes a point in time where we make a decision to study a problem and maybe even make recommendations. Regardless about where you stand on the second point, I think many of us can agree that all science has an impact. By impact I don't necessarily mean the impact that we want our research to have (ex. curing cancer, protecting an endangered species etc etc). I mean, obviously that is an end goal, but along the way our research will have other impacts: social, economic, environmental...impacts that we haven't even thought of.
I have been fortunate enough to work in the north for my MSc. I think the system I work on (aquatic rock pools) is important and that the problem I am interested in is equally applicable. But I also know that for every small bit of research I do, for every spreadsheet I have compiled and for every p-value I have gained through R there has been a train or plane that I took to Churchill and some soft tundra that I have repetitively compressed with my truck. This is why I think it is important for scientists to think more broadly about their research and ask important questions, not just research questions, but questions about how they are going to do research with the least amount of negative impact possible, and how they will ensure that their research reaches the audience it needs to after the fact (or during).
Alas, not sure if I have a picture that goes with this posting...
No comments:
Post a Comment