Jan 13, 2021 | Communication, Egypt, Women in Science
By Shorouk Elkobros, IIASA Science Communications Fellow
Shorouk Elkobros shares her love for science communication and why she thinks it is pivotal for humanity.
Early 2020, I saw viral GIFs about social distancing and flattening the curve. I remember how useful and accessible it felt to have science communicated in such a fun and non-jargon way, especially during a global crisis.
In today’s post-truth world, misinformation campaigns travel fast. Hence, science communication’s role becomes pivotal to humanity. Anne Glover, the president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, once said that “research not communicated is effectively research not done.”
What is science communication?
Science communication is the practice of educating and raising awareness of science-related topics. Science communicators, therefore, aspire to bridge the gap between science and the public and to inform decision makers.
But is it that easy?
You guessed it ̶ it is not. However, it is a challenge one would love to take on. Science communication is a constant game of problem solving.
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/Picture2-1-556x500.png)
Meme from the American sitcom television series Parks and Recreation | awwmemes.com
It is never about dumbing down information but rather about making it concise and clear. It requires a decent amount of practice, careful attention to language, and a deep understanding of the audience.
Enticing readers with clickbait information and sensationalized or misleading facts has almost pushed the reputation of science communication under the bus. Examples include the COVID-19 conspiracy theories that emerged amid the pandemic or climate change deniers’ campaigns that share fake scientific news to mislead the public.
Why I love science communication?
I come from a science background and a love for visual storytelling. After earning my master’s degree in climate sciences, I chose to become a science communicator because it brings me joy to make science relatable and fun for the public. For me, science communication is a great way to mainstream climate action.
In 2019, I worked closely with the CLICCS B1 team at the University of Hamburg, Germany, where I investigated how our imaginations of possible and plausible climate futures are socially and culturally constituted and embedded in broader visions of the future and belief systems. One thing I learned was that the mainstream media either tones down the climate crises or spreads alarming and apocalyptic messages. It was an eye-opening experience to investigate how climate change is communicated in the media and to recommend amends. However, I always wanted to practice what I preached. I was lucky to volunteer as an editor on the Climate Matters blog and as a video editor in conferences such as Tropentag 2019. The sense of satisfaction that I felt every time I worked on an article or a video made me realize that I want to pursue a career in science communication.
IIASA Science communication
In 2020 I was looking for opportunities to embark on a science communication learning journey to become a better science writer and a better storyteller. Having the chance to do a Science Communication Fellowship at IIASA was an experience that I hold near and dear to my heart. This program is targeted towards early career science communicators who want to sharpen their science communication skills. It was the perfect opportunity for me to transition from academia to the practical field.
Working closely with researchers to produce content on blogs, videos, and news-in-brief articles in the Options magazine 2020 winter edition gave me an excellent perspective on environmental, economic, technological, and social change all around the globe. Knowing that my work can provide the needed information to policymakers is so rewarding because I know it can make a change in the years to come. Interviewing early career researchers and IIASA Young Scientists Summer Program alumni, and listening to them discussing their work and future aspirations was awe-inspiring. I think my favorite project was producing a video on the biodiversity work done at IIASA because I was able to look beyond the research and highlight the researchers behind it. I figured one way people would relate to the science is if I put a human face to it.
Working as part of the IIASA communications team has been a blast. For this blog, I asked my team members why they love science communication, and here are some of my favorite replies:
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/aa.png)
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/cc.png)
Communicating research addressing issues such as food and water security, biodiversity, or climate change can boost regenerative economies and decentralized renewable energy systems. It then becomes pivotal for humanity to give a voice to young people, grassroots movements, and people of color. Historically, researchers involved in outreach gave science communication its modern shape. Today, I think we live in a golden age of science communication. There are more thought-provoking science stories than ever before. Scientists blogging about science, science communicators using social media to promote recent publications, and storytellers creating science-oriented videos or designs, are all doing magnificent work, and I am lucky to count myself as one of them.
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/Picture1-3-580x308.png)
@ Lennart Wittstock | Pexels.com
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Dec 7, 2020 | Biodiversity, Climate Change, Food & Water, Women in Science, Young Scientists
By Shorouk Elkobros, 2020 IIASA Science Communication Fellow
Being mindful of biodiversity loss and environmental impact can disrupt the beef industry globally, here’s how.
In his new polemical Netflix documentary, A life on our planet, Sir David Attenborough argues that, “We live on a finely tuned life support machine, one that relies on its biodiversity to run smoothly.”
The decline in biodiversity challenges the world’s capacity to produce food for a growing population. That is ironic when global food production itself is a contributing factor to biodiversity loss, especially beef production.
What’s wrong with the beef industry?
Here are a couple of the current challenges facing the beef industry: Cows are major culprits in climate change because they emit methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Beef production is the number one driver of deforestation and habitat loss in tropical forests. Grazing cattle also require a large amount of grass that requires using harsh nitrogen fertilizers. Hence, the beef production industry contributes heavily to biodiversity loss, which has dire consequences for the planet.
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/dreamstime_m_419104411-580x290.jpg)
©Jonathan Casey | Dreamstime.com
There is no silver bullet to solve the challenges beef production poses to the environment. Research is going above and beyond to find diverse and integrated solutions that can go hand in hand to combat this challenge. Whether through ways to reduce methane emissions, such as creating an anti-burp vaccine for cows, designing lab-grown meat, or shifting diets to plant-based alternatives.
Katie Lee, an alumna of the 2020 IIASA Young Scientists Summer Program (YSSP) and PhD student at the University of Queensland in Brisbane, Australia, is part of a broader project that focuses on redistributing where we produce beef to minimize its impact on greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity, as well as on the cost of production.
“I am particularly interested in ways to enhance the types of beef production systems. With the challenges of its water use, greenhouse gas emissions, and the large areas of land it requires compared to any other food source, any small changes we propose can have a big impact,” she explains.
For Lee, solutions to global food security are crucial, and looking at the status of production systems is both a need and a must. The world population is expected to reach 9.7 billion people by 2050. So, when thinking about ways to feed 10 Billion people by 2050, it becomes clear that it is not enough to simply look at beef alternatives without enhancing its current demand and supply chains. Lee thinks it is more efficient to pragmatically alter and improve the environmental impact of beef production than to convince people to stop eating beef.
It is understood that reducing beef consumption has health benefits. However, with a growing interest in alternative meat options, the question remains of which markets this appeals to, and how environmentally friendly and energy- and water intensive these alternatives are.
“While demand reduction on meat is important, sometimes it is not feasible in countries that do not have economic security or are still growing in terms of affluence, which leads to an increase in beef consumption. That is why we need to look at the producer side and the consumer side, as well as everything in between to have the biggest impact. I was particularly interested to conduct this research in cooperation with IIASA, mainly because the institute has a good history of looking at the impact of beef, particularly in terms of greenhouse gas emissions,” says Lee.
A win-win all-round solution
Using the IIASA Global Biosphere Management Model (GLOBIOM), Lee is assessing the impact on greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity when shifting both the production and demand of beef. Preliminary results from her ongoing study show a reduction in impact on biodiversity and greenhouse gas emissions, as well as a reduction of the producer price when switching away from extensive grazing systems ̶ a win-win situation all-round.
“Few studies explicitly address biodiversity loss compared to investigating ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I want to show stakeholders that beef production can be more efficient in terms of reducing its impact on greenhouse gas emissions and biodiversity. I am hopeful that this study can help beef producers to be mindful of this when making choices. That will be a win for the environment if it goes together with a proactive reduction of meat consumption,” concludes Lee.
Similar to Lee’s study and using a set of large-scale economic models including GLOBIOM, the IIASA AnimalChange research project aims to assess the global scale adaptation and mitigation options of the livestock sector to ensure a sustainable livestock production sector by 2050.
Limiting global warming and protecting biodiversity should be a priority when designing food systems able to feed an increasing population. As a food producer, whether you raise cattle or design cell cultured meat, it is important to be conscious about livestock hoof prints on biodiversity. As a food consumer, it is necessary to be mindful of having a healthy and sustainable diet that does not put the planet in jeopardy. Sustainable beef production might not be the panacea to future biodiversity loss or food scarcity, yet it can offer a significant change.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Nov 13, 2020 | IIASA Network
By Shorouk Elkobros, IIASA Science Communications Fellow
Shorouk Elkobros interviewed Lindsay Radakovits-Smith, Deputy Head of the IIASA Human Resources (HR) Department and HR Operations Officer to discuss the institute’s new shared values.
What attracted you to IIASA?
I grew up internationally – I went to school in Austria, studied in England, and worked in Germany. In 2017, I joined IIASA because I felt I could use my international background as well as my academic qualifications in Austrian employment law and my specialization in Human Resources to the benefit of the organization.
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/International-scaled-e1605088013748-580x255.jpg)
Poster from IIASA mini core values guerilla campaign February 2019
What do you like the most about IIASA?
IIASA has an international workforce that is enthusiastic about cutting-edge research. I have never felt as valued a part of an organization as here. I am proud to be part of an organization where scientists research real life-affecting issues such as the spread of COVID-19 or wildfires around the world. From models and scenarios featured in the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports to their participation in UN General Assemblies. That is what I enjoy about my job, being able to support them in their endeavors to make the world a better place.
Can you tell us about the new IIASA core values (ASPIRE)?
When Albert van Jaarsveld became our Director General and CEO in 2018, he quickly realized that we did not have an articulated values set, so in the process of establishing a new HR strategy that will come into play in 2021, ASPIRE fulfills that role. It was not only the core values that we needed to identify but also what they mean. For example, what does it mean to be accountable, or why is having good integrity in your scientific work valuable?
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/Integrity-scaled-e1605088628944-580x303.jpg)
Posters from IIASA mini core values guerilla campaign February 2019
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/accountability-scaled-e1605088701112-580x261.jpg)
Posters from IIASA mini core values guerilla campaign February 2019
Why is it necessary to have a shared set of values?
A set of values can be a conversation starter, and thus can be useful to promote a culture of belonging. It is useful because when we have core values to stand behind, they are easily reflected in the IIASA strategy.
How did you formulate the IIASA core values?
We said, let’s see what people think. We wanted this to be a bottom-up process rather than top-down from the executive team. We did a mini guerrilla campaign, put up posters with examples of values, and a potential definition to get everyone thinking and talking about it. It got the staff talking, and they came up with hilarious suggestions, which is how we knew that we were getting through to people. We did the campaign without prior notification on purpose because we wanted to get honest reactions to it, and we had positive as well as negative feedback. We then sent out a questionnaire to all staff to give their input on what IIASA values mean to them. All the core values are designed based on this questionnaire’s results, and the clusters of values our staff said resonated with them.
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/have-your-say.jpg)
“Have your say” poster from IIASA mini core values guerilla campaign February 2019
Do you think IIASA embodies its core values?
There is always room for improvement, which does not mean that we are not living the values. It just means we could be doing it a little bit more proactively. We could also take a little bit more time to make sure that we stick to the core values or find out what they mean for us on individual levels.
I think it is vital for us to step back, have a look at what the values we are living in the workplace are, how we are behaving, how the institute is progressing, and ask whether we are living up to our values as well as we should be.
How do you foresee IIASA staff adopting these core values?
Values are intrinsic to any human being. For me, the people-centered value is what I try to achieve working in the HR Department. I aspire to help staff members understand the rationale behind all executive decisions. I hope that in the next two years, IIASA core values will be something that everyone knows and that they will be able to say they are proud to work at an institute where integrity, accountability, and respect are part of our identity.
With the new Chief Operations Officer (COO) responsible for operative functions at the organization, we are also working to introduce assessment frameworks in the new performance and development review process. In addition, we are introducing training for our managers and leaders in the organization so they can live by example and thus translate values into behaviors.
Note: This article gives the views of the author, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Oct 22, 2020 | Climate Change, Energy & Climate, Science and Policy
By Shorouk Elkobros, IIASA Science Communication Fellow
Assessing energy-related choices and the behaviors of households can help us transition to a low-carbon economy. How can research provide more effective decision-making tools to policymakers for better climate change mitigation policies?
We live at a defining moment for climate change, where today’s actions affect tomorrow’s reality. Every little climate-friendly decision counts. Whether we decide to insulate our houses, put solar panels on our rooftops, or invest in energy-efficient appliances. However, our personal and energy-related decisions vary based on our awareness, age, education, income, energy provider services, social norms, culture, and many other factors. Researchers are starting to pay attention to how this diversity is not well represented in the economic models that politicians use to plan climate change policies.
![](https://blog.iiasa.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/dreamstime_s_193263324-580x304.jpg)
@ VectorMine | Dreamstime.com
Designing policies inspired by people
Households contribute an average of 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Limiting global emissions requires holistic policy approaches that take households’ behaviors and lifestyle decisions into account. Adding such a dimension can potentially upscale low carbon behavioral and social changes to national and global levels, which is fundamental to tackling climate change.
Worried about the future of the planet and motivated to support policymakers in designing better climate change mitigation policies, the authors of a recent study published in the journal Environmental Modeling & Software aspired to build bridges through interdisciplinary research. The study presented a novel interdisciplinary method that aims to integrate households’ energy behavior and social dynamics in climate-energy-economy models and thus help politicians design policies inspired by people.
“I have always been interested in the science-policy-society aspect of mitigating climate change. Climate change is a collective challenge that we need to address together to come up with better solutions for future generations,” notes study lead author Leila Niamir, a researcher jointly associated with the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change, Berlin and the IIASA Transitions to New Technologies Program.
Better models for a better future
Climate change mitigation policies play a pivotal role in achieving ambitious environmental targets like the Paris Agreement or the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). To be able to formulate appropriate mitigation policies, decision makers need assessment tools to measure complex systems quantitatively. In the past decade, a variety of assessment tools have emerged, which have since been predominantly used to support climate change policy debates. In the study, Niamir argues that current assessment models are missing bottom-up and grassroots dynamics, they cannot project realistic variables of what households’ lifestyles and social movement are, and they therefore may not be sufficient to provide reliable information for policymakers.
There is a gap between what policymakers’ current assessment tools can offer and what social scientists and behavioral economists highlight as pro-environmental behavior and climate change mitigation movements. By adding this complex behavior and social perspective to the models, the researchers make it easier for policymakers to design future policies to accommodate different societal behaviors and lifestyles.
Niamir and her team presented a novel method for systematically upscaling grassroots dynamics by linking the best of both “top-down” macroeconomic computable general equilibrium (CGE) models and “bottom-up” empirical agent-based models (ABM). Their approach demonstrates that with computational ABM directly linked to survey data and macroeconomic CGE models, individual behavioral diversity and social influences can be considered when designing implementable and politically feasible policy options.
“We need better assessment tools to quantitatively explore the complex climate-energy-economy system, and reveal the potential of demand-side mitigation strategies. To see substantial changes, we need a mix of external interventions, from soft information policies aimed at raising awareness bottom-up, to financial incentives altering the macro landscape of energy markets and technological transitions. Only modular and integrated models can help policymakers quantitatively explore this complex system and plan for changes in the coming decades,” says Niamir.
Towards a low-carbon economy
We cannot tackle what we do not know. Pathways to a low-carbon economy future entail diminishing the growing discrepancy between mitigation policies and individual and collective behaviors. When redesigning our socio-environmental systems to mitigate climate change, we need to start looking at people as case studies rather than numbers. To transition to a low-carbon economy and accelerate decarbonization, policymakers must adopt novel models that integrate energy consumption, individual behavior, heterogeneity, and social influence into current assessment tools.
In 2019, IIASA and the Research Institute of Innovative Technology for the Earth (RITE), Japan co-organized an international workshop towards improved understanding, concepts, policies, and models of energy demand, where Niamir presented her research and received the young scientist award to continue and extend her research.
“Mitigating climate change indeed requires a massive effort from individual and social movements to advance national and international collaboration. Each individual small step towards shrinking our carbon footprint creates cascading changes in social behavior and consequently mitigates climate change,” Niamir concludes.
Reference:
Niamir L, Ivanova O, & Filatova T (2020). Economy-wide impacts of behavioral climate change mitigation: linking agent-based and computable general equilibrium models. Environmental Modelling & Software 134: e104839. [pure.iiasa.ac.at/16671]
Note: This article gives the views of the authors, and not the position of the Nexus blog, nor of the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
You must be logged in to post a comment.