We are a sensitive and conflict-avoiding lot, aren’t we? Most scientists I know absolutely dread reprisals of any form, whether they are from a colleague commenting on their work, a sensationalism-seeking journalist posing nasty questions, or a half-wit troll commenting on a blog feed. For all our swagger and intellectual superiority complexes, most of us would rather lock ourselves in a room and do our work without anyone bothering us.
Fortunately for the taxpayer, we should not and cannot be this way. As I’ve stated before, we have at the very least a moral obligation to divulge our results to as many people as possible because for the most part, they pay us. If you work in any applied form of science (most of us do) – such as conservation, for example – then your moral obligation to make your work public extends to the entirety of humanity and the planet. That’s a staggering responsibility, and one of the reasons I’ve embraced many other forms of communication beyond the bog-standard scientific publication outlets.
There are many great examples of impressive science advocates out there – a few that come to mind are people like inter alia Lesley Hughes, James Hansen, Michael Mann, Paul Ehrlich, Bill Laurance, Barry Brook, Ove Hoegh-Guldberg, Tony Barnosky, Gretchen Daily, Emma Johnston, Stuart Pimm, and Hugh Possingham. There are even others willing to go to extraordinary lengths to make an evidence-based protest against society’s more inane actions. I’ve said it before, but it bears repeating – evidence-based advocacy can work.
To the topic at hand – I’ve been a little disappointed – to say the least – with the near-total silence emanating from my colleagues about the fossil-fuel divestment wave sweeping the world. While gaining traction worldwide, it wasn’t until The Australian National University took the bold move to divest (at least partially) from many of its fossil-fuel financial interests that it became a reality in Australia. Let’s face it – of all the types of institutions in our world, universities should be at the forefront of good, morally grounded and socially responsible investment strategies. They are, after all, meant to be filled with the most erudite, informed and cutting-edge people in the world, most of whom should have the best information at their fingertips regarding the precarious state of our environment.
There were, of course, the entirely expected squawks emanating from our current crop of plutocratic politicians who receive large cash incentives from the fossil-fuel industry to maintain the status quo. Indeed, our own Abbott-oir infamously stated recently that ‘coal is good for humanity‘ – how much more evidence do you need that the current leader of our nation is merely a stringed marionette manipulated by coal, oil and mining barons? Spending even a micro-second contemplating their perspective is therefore a waste of time.
Let’s ignore for a moment that divestment makes good long-term financial sense and this is the economically responsible thing to do, and instead focus on the global implications of the move. Climate change is perhaps one of the biggest threats to life on the planet as we know it. Coupled with our already depleted ecosphere, we need to embrace every possible tactic to mitigate its deleterious outcomes for society.
So why then have academics been largely silent on the divestment issue? While I’ve recently heard around the corridors of various institutions that people generally support university divestment, there has been a disappointing reluctance among academics to speak out. I’d bet a substantial portion of my meagre annual salary that if universities in Australia commissioned surveys on the issue, most university employees would support divestment.
Instead of being the bastion of minority student protests, let’s get out there and petition our university (and other institution) administrators that we want a cleaner investment policy for the institutions in which we work. At the very least, e-mail your Vice-Chancellor our Council representative that you support divestment. A little intra-institutional niggling might be all it takes to start the flood of divesting academic institutions.
CJA Bradshaw
