Category: Publications

The Science Communication Unit, UWE Bristol contributes to PCST 2025

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

In May 2025 ten members of the Science Communication Unit (SCU) headed to Aberdeen, Scotland for the bi-annual Public Communication of Science and Technology Conference (PCST). PCST is an organisation that promotes discussion on the theory and practice of communicating science, and of public discourses about science and technology and their role in society. Every two years it hosts a conference gathering well over 600 science communication researchers, practitioners, and students from around the globe. Members of the team provided input to over 15 different conference sessions, poster presentations and pre-conference workshops. In this blog post I’ve aimed to capture a small flavour of the work that we presented, as well as share some of our reflections on the conference.

Dr Sarah Behenna stands with her first conference poster

Let’s start with Dr Sarah Behenna. Sarah shared work from the Science Hunters project, conducted with Dr Laura Hobbs, which was supported by a Royal Academy of Engineering Ingenious Award to encourage children from under-represented backgrounds to discover the many facets of engineering involved in sustainable development, and provide them with opportunities to apply their newfound knowledge by creating their own model sustainable solutions and communities in Minecraft. For Sarah, PCST was an opportunity not only to present her first conference poster, but to learn more about the history of science communication as a field and to understand how challenges can be shared across countries, and how we can learn both from the past and each other. You can read more about Sarah and Laura’s work in this recent blog.

The Inspire Sustainability team showcased research from their public engagement work at PCST 2025. Two posters were presented from the team, featuring work from Dr Louisa Cockbill, Sophie Laggan and Dr Laura Fogg Rogers about their Inspire Green Futures project, and also on the MAKERS project by Dr Laura Fogg Rogers, Kat Corbett, and Dr Joe Butchers. PCST showcased similar themes to these projects, including around citizen engagement for sustainability, with keynotes discussing how science communicators can empower action in partnerships with universities. This was timely with the publication of a new article from Laura’s team, which explores science communication’s role as a knowledge broker between scientists, policymakers, and citizens to co-develop public decisions for sustainability. Evaluation is a strong component of this work and Karen Collins, who has recently started a PhD in the SCU was also in attendance at the conference. With a focus on exploring science communication evaluation in her work, Karen was able to join a number of relevant sessions and further develop her networks.

A conference keynote photo from Guidiana Landivar Paz

Dr David Judge’s presentation asked how a science centre became the heart of one of the largest urban regeneration projects in Europe. David has traced the development of one Millennium Project, Bristol 2000, which regenerated an area of long-derelict docklands in the heart of Bristol, UK, and included the science centre later known as At-Bristol (now We The Curious). David shared how this aimed to create a new city centre which brought together science, nature and the arts. As well as considering historical developments, my inputs to PCST aimed to provoke some ethical reflection in a workshop exploring tensions and transitions in ethics surrounding science communication and public engagement.. This drew on work undertaken and recently published as part of the INSIGHT project, kindly funded by the Leverhulme Trust. I also contributed to a session exploring citizen science, sharing thoughts from a recent project focused on citizen science in the context of death and dying, which was featured in an open access collection published by the journal Frontiers in Environmental Science.

Dr Andy Ridgway featured throughout the conference programme. Andy contributed to a pre-conference workshop organised by the PCST Teaching Forum. The Teaching Forum is an international network of science communication lecturers who teach students at undergraduate, graduate and PhD level and the workshop considered use of AI in teaching contexts. During the conference Andy also facilitated a session drawing together work occurring on the European Competence Centre for Science Communication/COALESCE project for which the SCU is the UK Hub. This session posed the question ‘will we ever overcome the misinformation crisis in science communication?’ and explored national differences in problems generated by misinformation, as well as differences in approaches to tackling it. Andy said “for me the big take-away from PCST is the sense of connection it gives with the community and the positivity there is in any interactions. We’re lucky that in the SCU there are many of us who teach and research science communication. But many of those working in the field are working on their own in a similar role in their own institution. But even with the connections we have within the SCU, PCST really does help us feel part of a bigger community – and it’s always refreshing to not have to try to explain what you do when you start a conversation!”. The European Competence Centre for Science Communication featured in many events across the programme, and Dr Achintya Rao also joined the event, supporting communications and other activities associated to this project over the conference period.

Both Andy and Professor Emma Weitkamp also shared findings from research conducted in India and the UK, funded by the British Council, investigating science journalists’ working practices. These presentations examined data gathered from approximately 120 science journalists, including professionals from Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) and Non BRIC countries exploring how science journalism is changing and evolving with emerging technologies like AI, and considering training and ethical recommendations for the future. For Emma, PCST offered an opportunity to catch up with old friends, as well as meeting new colleagues and she shared that “the opportunity to discuss research with people from around the globe, helps shape ideas, new research and funding applications that will emerge from the connections made and strengthened”.

On the theme of science journalism, Ria Griffith had a poster included in the conference on her PhD research, which is investigating the perceived disconnect between academic research and practice in science journalism, contributing to discourses of professionalisation of the field. Henry Bennie also participated in his first PCST conference, allowing him to connect with researchers and projects that relate to his ESRC funded PhD research examining media representations of Quantum Computing. Henry said, “the session that keeps rumbling around my head is the parallel session, ‘Tensions in communicating discovery science – changes over time’. So much of science communication is focused on relevance to audiences and society so naturally applied science is heavily communicated, and it is the focus of much (if not all) of science communication research. This discussion has helped broaden my thinking about how we can talk about emerging technologies that often have unclear applications and delivery timeframes, and how research can help identify new modes to communicate discovery science”.

Dr Amanda Webber presented research undertaken at UWE Bristol with our MSc students. Amanda’s talk, ‘”Lecturers chose such weird papers”: supporting scicomm students’ learning transitions’, shared findings from a recent article we co-authored that demonstrated students develop critical awareness of science communication models and the need to recognise and engage with multiple publics through our teaching. Amanda also shared how our MSc empowers students by supporting the development of their own identity as a science communicator. For Amanda the highlight of PCST was also “the people” and having a chance to meet and engage with others working in and/or researching science communication. Amanda said, “PCST also reminded me what a privilege it is to be part of the UWE Science Communication Unit – the unit is very well known internationally and part of so many networks and projects, it is great to be part of that.”

Ana Vasconcelos, Dr Amanda Webber, Guidiana Landivar Paz, Beatriz Vieite, Dr David Judge and Henry Bennie at PCST 2025

On that note, we were delighted to be joined at PCST this year by three PhD students who have stayed at the SCU for sabbaticals in 2024/25. Beatriz Vieite (Universidade de Aveiro) presented her study on mapping Portuguese biological collections, where she is aiming to characterise collections in terms of science communication, the strategies that are currently being used by their staff (curators and coordinators) and the difficulties they face in these contexts. Ana Vasconcelos (Universidade D Coimbra) shared her PhD project, which is seeking to explore how to design information to promote effective communication, health literacy, and patient understanding of Autoimmune Encephalitis (AE), a relatively rare but treatable group of immune brain disorders.

Ana shared that what stood out to her during this PCST was how the field of science communication is becoming increasingly aware, not only of the importance of co-creation and participation, but also of the value of being more open to other knowledge systems. “There was a strong emphasis on creating opportunities for mutual learning between academic knowledge and lived, embodied knowledge, highlighting that this is what true participation should be. I think this message came through particularly strongly in the keynote sessions, and I found it particularly valuable for my PhD research”, said Ana. Guidiana Landívar Paz (Universidad Complutense de Madrid) used PCST as an opportunity to reconnect with colleagues she’d previously met in Rotterdam at PCST 2023, and sessions on policy and science communication, science journalism in the Global South, generative AI, as well as the closing keynote, proved particularly valuable to Guidiana’s research on science communication before and after the COVID-19 Crisis in Spain and Bolivia.

The University of Aberdeen captured by Dr Achintya Rao

I was delighted to not only see so many members of the team representing their work at PCST (also acknowledging our colleagues contributions that were not able to make it to the event), but to reunite with many of the graduates we have taught and former members of the SCU, who are now advancing their careers in a wide variety of different locations and organisations. Amongst the hard work, the team also fitted in some wildlife spotting, local history, ceilidh dancing and an infamous karaoke night! Thank you to the PCST conference organising team for hosting us in Aberdeen, next stop Shanghai in 2027.

Professor Clare Wilkinson, Director of the Science Communication Unit, UWE Bristol

Driving policy around the COVID-19 pandemic

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on
Policy briefs exploring the impact of COVID-19 on people and the planet have been published by researchers from UWE Bristol’s Science Communication Unit.

During the global pandemic, children’s lives were changed by both the presence of the virus and measures put in place to control it e.g., closure of schools and play spaces, move to online learning, and social distancing. The Voices in a Pandemic project (VIP-CLEAR) highlighted the importance of capturing children’s voices, which are often missed, about the impacts of these mitigations on their lives.

The interdisciplinary research team from UWE Bristol (which included 3 members of the Science Communication Unit) used arts-based methods to capture the experiences of children in six schools in socially disadvantaged areas of Bristol.  The first of these activities asked them to ‘map their world’ as the country emerged from the third national lockdown. This process gave children the time and space to reflect on this period of their lives. Their drawings showed how diverse their experiences were; some children enjoyed spending time with their family, but others found it difficult being separated from key support networks, and friends and family members. It was particularly hard for those who were dealing with existing challenges around space, food, money and resources. It is likely that children will experience further social shocks (e.g., pandemics, climate change) and the mapping policy brief outlines ways in which schools, community services, local government and public health teams can support children to cope with these intangible threats.  A primary book and teacher’s notes have also been co-created by the project artist in collaboration with the academic researcher team.   ‘Learning to Live with Fog Monsters’ is available digitally and in hardcopy, and aims to engage children with these complex topics.

The Future Brief COVID-19 and the environment: links, impacts and lessons learned, meanwhile, brings together research that highlights how the risk of zoonotic disease and pandemics is increased through human activities such as industrialised agriculture and land-use change. The policy brief, produced by Science for Environment Policy (based in the Science Communication Unit) for the EU Directorate-General of the Environment, also highlights how climate change and the wildlife trade are increasing the risk of emerging infectious diseases that may jump from animals to humans.

The brief emphasises the importance of the One Health Approach, which recognises that environment, wildlife and human health are interdependent. Since the risk of zoonotic disease increases where humans encroach on wildlife habitat, global hotspots of high risk have been identified by researchers working in this field. Minimising the risk is another task; this will rely on actions that improve the sustainability of farming, land use and our interactions with wildlife.

The brief also offers an overview of findings on the environmental impacts of the pandemic – from changing air quality as the world locked down, to increased volumes of single-use plastic and PPE littering beaches. Mass action can change behaviour to be kinder to the environment – can we harness the shock wave of COVID to inspire a green recovery? The brief was produced before the war in Ukraine, which has of course had huge effects on the energy landscape in the EU, but the message stands that addressing climate change and environmental degradation should not be overshadowed by economics but be integral to a sustainable future.

Although national and world events in 2022 have turned our attention away from the pandemic and its effects, the VIP-CLEAR project and the Future Brief show that it is crucial we reflect on the events of the last three years, to learn lessons, to understand and support those affected, and look to a resilient future.

Amanda D Webber and Caroline Weaver

New publication – Transforming tradition: how the iconic Christmas Lectures series is perceived by its audiences

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

Photo credit: Paul Wilkinson Photography

Margarida Sardo, Hannah Little and Laura Fogg Rogers conducted research to explore strengths and opportunities for improving the series and modernising the Christmas Lectures. The SCU team has recently published a full paper on the findings: A.M. Sardo, H. Little & L. Fogg-Rogers (2021) Transforming tradition: how the iconic Christmas Lectures series is perceived by its audiences, International Journal of Science Education, Part B, 11:4, 378-393.

The Royal Institution Christmas Lectures are a landmark in the history of science communication. Started in 1825 by Faraday, they continue to be broadcast in the UK every year.

In this paper we explore the characteristics of the audiences for the current Christmas Lecture offerings and investigate how these engagements are perceived by their audiences. This is significant and timely since viewing habits are shifting away from traditional television and even iconic landmarks such as the Christmas Lectures have to adapt to remain relevant to old and new audiences. With today’s changing media landscape, it is important to know who is currently watching, how they are watching, and how they are perceiving the content. This cross-sectional study evaluated perceptions of live audiences, people watching at home via Twitter, and awareness of the Lectures by science-interested audiences. The Lectures play a key role as a traditional cultural event for science enthusiasts and are valued by these audiences for performative identity sharing and valued tradition. However, younger generations are shifting away from traditional television to online videos, and the Lectures must adapt to remain relevant to new audiences.

Photo credit: Paul Wilkinson Photography

While the Lectures themselves may not need changing, the broadcast Lectures as a vehicle to reach young people, or to enhance science capital for non-science enthusiasts, may have to be further thought through. Younger audiences are spending less time viewing traditional television and more time viewing online content, which tends to be shorter and enable interactive online con- versations. If the Ri wishes to extend the reach of its audience for the Lectures, the broadcast format may need to change to feature on channels or media which younger non-science enthusiasts are more likely to watch.

Margarida Sardo, Senior Research Fellow in Science Communication, Science Communication Unit, UWE Bristol.

UWE Repository link

Seeing people in the data

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

By Dr Laura Fogg-Rogers

We’re living through a Climate and Ecological Emergency and we urgently need to reduce carbon emissions. And yet society seems frozen into inaction. Could a new modelling and communication approach help to gather momentum?

The ClairCity project was led by UWE Bristol and brought together the Air Quality Monitoring Resource Centre and the Science Communication Unit. The project reached over 818,000 citizens through innovative public engagement methods including an online game, extensive workshops and surveys, and schools activities.

In a journal paper recently released, the research team detailed their innovative method to bring these results together, through citizen-centred source apportionment. Traditional methods for monitoring air pollution and carbon emissions look at what is creating the emissions (vehicles, heating etc), and where the emissions end up (pollution hot spots).

Focus on Who and Why

This new approach focusses on who is burning fossil fuels and why they are doing so. This means we can understand the human dimension of emissions to improve policymaking, accounting for demographics (gender or age groups), socio-economic factors (income/car ownership) and motives for specific behaviours (e.g., commuting to work, leisure, shopping, etc.).

The modelling produced some surprises when applied to traffic in Bristol – as leisure travel accounted for the most km travelled, and therefore the most emissions per year.  Local councils usually focus on school traffic or commuting, but this provides a new way to approach emissions reduction. Policymakers plan to look at ways to reduce car use for leisure travel, for instance locating leisure venues near to public transport or cycling paths, or even considering plans for 15 minute cities, where any necessary city amenities are within a 15 minute walk from homes.

Figure 1. (a) This infographic presents the relative contribution of each motive to total kilometres travelled by car in Bristol in 2015. It was designed to highlight recognisable social practices and activities.
Figure 1. (b) This social card links to the data and was designed to resonate with activities that people do every day that contribute to carbon emissions and air pollution.

For science communicators, there is also much to think through as well. The modelling showed that emissions are not evenly produced; certain types of people produce more emissions than others, and some feel the effects of pollution more than others. For instance, men travel by car more than women, and people who earn over £50,000 per year tend to own more cars, and therefore drive far more often.

Figure 2. Infographic (top) and social card (bottom) showing differences in air pollution produced through men’s and women’s different travel habits.

Perceptions of ‘sensible’ climate action vary between groups

We therefore need a far more nuanced approach to communicating about climate action. Climate Outreach have done some excellent work on this topic, with their work on seven segments of British society and their attitudes to climate action. Science communicators need to focus on the segments polluting the most, and tailor communications showing the benefits of each relevant action they can take.

The UWE team’s new journal paper take this further using social psychology theories, explaining how the social contexts of the groups to which we belong influence what we perceive to be ‘normal’ in society. This means that cultural realities can change between social groups, cities, regions and countries. This ‘Overton Window of Political Possibility’ can shift over time so that an idea moves from unthinkable to radical, to acceptable, to sensible, to popular and finally into policy. For example, a climate change policy which is considered quite sensible in one city, such as an extensive network of segregated bike lanes allowing for cars to be curtailed in the city centre (Amsterdam in the Netherlands), may be considered to be quite radical in another city (such as Bristol, U.K.).

Science communications needs to focus on group lived experience of this ‘normality’, in order to understand more about why our day-to-day behaviours happen, and how we can change if we see others doing the same. Politicians will generally only pursue policies that are widely accepted throughout society as legitimate policy options, or otherwise, they may risk losing popular support and become unelectable. In order to introduce new policies, we therefore need to show how an idea can be communicated so that it resonates with what is deemed ‘acceptable’ or ‘sensible’ to the majority of citizens.

People like me create emissions, and people like me can take action

The UWE team showed how social cognitive theory can be used to help improve individual and collective self-efficacy for climate action. Using an example of more women cycling to activities, we need to focus on:

  1. Vicarious experiences (i.e., comparisons of capability to others, modelling and observing)—a woman deciding whether to cycle will be influenced by whether other women cycle; if this is considered a ’normal’ thing for women to do, then other women will likely join in.
  2. Mastery or performance accomplishments (i.e., experiences of relevant success)—a beginner female cyclist will be more likely to continue cycling if they have a positive experience cycling on main roads; they will then have a memory to recall about their ability to cycle alongside cars.
  3. Verbal persuasions (positive feedback from peers and supervisors, coaching)—to continue cycling, the female cyclist would need to receive direct positive feedback on this activity.
  4. Emotional arousal – both vicarious (indirect) and mastery (direct) experiences can influence our emotional states. To improve self-efficacy for an activity, we need to experience positive emotional responses. Therefore, the woman would need to feel that she is capable and confident at cycling and that other people approve or admire her behaviour.

So climate action needs positive (and relevant) role models, alongside positive press or communications (in relevant media) in order to help change our behaviours.

The ClairCity project showed how new thinking about the role of people in relation to air pollution and carbon emissions can widen options for action, leading to more acceptable and effective policies. Climate communications should draw on social learning in order to tailor communication efforts towards relevant groups. Ultimately, we need to become more aware that ’people like me’ create emissions and, equally, ‘people like me’ can take action to reduce emissions.

Fogg-Rogers, L.; Hayes, E.; Vanherle, K.; Pápics, P.I..; Chatterton, T.; Barnes, J.; Slingerland, S.; Boushel, C.; Laggan, S.; Longhurst, J.. Applying Social Learning to Climate Communications—Visualising ‘People Like Me’ in Air Pollution and Climate Change Data. Sustainability 2021, 13(6) 3406 doi.org/10.3390/su13063406

COVID-19 opportunities to shift artificial intelligence towards serving the common good

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

Contact tracing apps are just one measure governments have been using in their attempts to contain the current coronavirus outbreak. Such apps have also raised concerns about privacy and data security. COVID-19 – and the current calls for AI-led healthcare solutions – highlight the pressing need to consider wider ethical issues raised by artificial intelligence (AI). This blog discusses some of the ethical issues raised in a recent report and brief on moral issues and dilemmas linked to AI, written by the Science Communication Unit for the European Parliament . 

AI means, broadly, machines that mimic human cognitive functions, such as learning, problem-solving, speech recognition and visual perception. One of the key benefits touted for AI is to reduce healthcare inefficiencies; indeed, AI is already widespread in healthcare settings in developed economies, and its use is set to increase. 

There are clear benefits for strained healthcare systems. In some fundamental areas of medicine, such as medical image diagnostics, machine learning has been shown to match or even surpass human ability to detect illnesses. New technologies, such as health monitoring devices, may free up medical staff time for more direct interactions with patients, and so potentially increase the overall quality of care. Intelligent robots may also work as companions or carers, remind you to take your medications, help you with your mobility or cleaning tasks, or help you stay in contact with your family, friends and healthcare providers via video link.

AI technologies have been an important tool in tracking and tracing contacts during the COVID-19 outbreak in countries such as South Korea. There are clear benefits to such life-saving AI, but widespread use of a contact-tracing app also raises ethical questions. South Korea has tried to flatten its curve using intense scraping of personal data, and other countries have been using digital surveillance and AI-supported drones to monitor the population in attempts to stem the spread. The curtailing of individual privacy may be a price we have to pay, but it is a tricky ethical balance to strike – for example, the National Human Rights Commission of Korea has expressed its concern about excessive disclosure of private information of COVID-19 patients.  

The case of the missing AI laws

As adoption of AI continues to grow apace – in healthcare, as well as in other sectors such as transportation, energy, defence, services, entertainment, finance, cybersecurity –legislation has lagged behind. There remains a significant time lag between the pace of AI development and the pace of AI lawmaking. The World Economic Forum calls for much-needed ‘governance architectures’ to build public trust in AI to ensure that the technology can be used for health crises such as COVID in future.There exist several laws and regulations dealing with aspects relevant to AI (such as the EU’s GDPR on data, or several country laws on autonomous vehicles) but no countries yet have specific laws on ethical and responsible AI. Several countries are discussing restrictions on the use of lethal autonomous weapons systems (LAWS).[1] However, governments in general have been reluctant to create restrictive laws.

A new report commissioned by the European Parliament will feed into the work of their Scientific Foresight Unit, STOA. The report, written by the Science Communication Unit, was led by Professor of Robot Ethics, Alan Winfield.

Broad ethical questions

Reviewing the scientific literature and existing frameworks around the world, we found there are diverse, complex ethical concerns arising from the development of artificial intelligence.

 In relation to healthcare, for diseases like COVID-19, where disease is spread via social contact, care robots  could provide necessary, protective, socially distanced support for vulnerable people. However, if this technology becomes more pervasive, it could be used in more routine settings as well. Questions then arise over whether a care robot or a companion robot can really substitute for human interaction – particularly pertinent in the long-term caring of vulnerable and often lonely people, who derive basic companionship from caregivers.

As with many areas of AI technology, the privacy and dignity of users’ needs to be carefully considered when designing healthcare service and companion robots. Robots do not have the capacity for ethical reflection or a moral basis for decision-making, and so humans must hold ultimate control over any decision-making in healthcare and other contexts.

Other applications raise further concerns, ranging from large-scale and well-known issues such job losses from automation, to more personal, moral quandaries such as how AI will affect our sense of trust, our ability to judge what is real, and our personal relationships.

Perhaps unexpectedly, we also found that AI has a significant energy cost and furthers social inequalities – and that, crucially, these aspects are not being covered by existing frameworks.

Our Policy Options Brief highlights four key gaps in current frameworks, which don’t currently cover:

  • ensuring benefits from AI are shared fairly;
  • ensuring workers are not exploited;
  • reducing energy demands in the context of environmental and climate change;
  • and reducing the risk of AI-assisted financial crime.

It is also clear that, while AI has global applications and potential benefits, there are enormous disparities in access and benefits between global regions. It is incumbent upon today’s policy- and law-makers to ensure that AI does not widen global inequalities further. Progressive steps could include data-sharing and collaborative approaches (such as India’s promise to share its AI solutions with other developing economies), and efforts to make teaching around computational approaches a fundamental part of education, available to all.

Is AI developed for the common good?

Calls have been issued for contributions from AI experts and contributors worldwide to help find further solutions to the COVID-19 crisis – for example, the AI-ROBOTICS vs COVID-19 initiative of the European AI Alliance is compiling a ‘solutions repository’. At the time of writing, there were 248 organisations and individuals offering COVID-related solutions via AI development. These include a deep-learning hand-washing coach AI, which gives you immediate feedback on how to handwash better. 

Other solutions include gathering and screening knowledge; software enabling a robot to disinfect areas, or to screen people’s body temperature; robots that deliver objects to people in quarantine; automated detection of early breathing difficulties; and FAQ chatbots or even psychological support chatbots.

Government calls for AI-supported COVID-19 solutions are producing an interesting ethical interface between sectors that have previously kept each other at arm’s length. In the hyper-competitive world of AI companies, co-operation (or even information sharing) towards a common goal is unchartered territory. These developments crystallise one of the ethical questions at the core of AI debates – should AI be developed and used for private or public ends? In this time of COVID-19, increased attention by governments (and the increased media attention on some of the privacy-related costs of AI) provide an opportunity to open up and move forward this debate. Moreover, the IEEE urges that the sense of ‘emerging solidarity’ and ‘common global destiny’ accompanying the COVID-19 crisis are perfect levers to make the sustainability and wellbeing changes required.

One barrier to debate is in the difficulty of understanding some of the most advanced AI technologies, which is why good science communication is crucial. It is vitally important that the public are able to formulate and voice informed opinions on potentially society-changing developments. Governments need better information too – and up-to-date, independent and evidence-based forms of technology assessment. Organisations such as the Science, Technology Assessment and Analytics team in the US Government Accountability Office or the European Foresight platform are examples that are trying to enable governments and lawmakers to understand such technologies deeply while they can still be shaped.

In order to enjoy the benefits of AI, good governance frameworks are urgently needed to balance the ethical considerations and manage the risks. It is yet to be seen if the COVID-19-prompted developments in AI will herald a new era of public-private cooperation for the common good, but if there was ever a time to amplify this conversation, it is now.

Ruth Larbey, Science Communication Unit, UWE Bristol.

[1] Belgium has already passed legislation to prevent the use or development of LAWS. 

How to write a research synthesis report (or how I conquered my batteries mountain!)

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

The words on the screen are drifting in and out of focus… lithium-ion and sodium-ion, redox flow and redox couples… and, errrrrm, what does ‘roundtrip efficiency’ mean?

It’s April 2018.  I have just returned to work after a sleepless year on maternity leave and been tasked with writing a report on battery technologies and their environmental impacts.

It’s an honour to write about such an important topic – batteries are critical to renewable energy systems and e-mobility – and I am excited about the job ahead.

However, faced with this seemingly insurmountable, not to mention impenetrable, pile of scientific papers upon which to base the report, it’s also easy to feel a little daunted.

I pull myself together. I know that I can do this because I’ve been here before, having successfully delivered reports on a diverse set of topics, from green finance to fish farming – as baffling as some of these topics may have seemed at first.

And sure enough, six months later, Towards the Battery of the Future (as the finished report is now titled) is being handed out to warm approval at high-level international conferences and EU meetings, deemed worthy of attention by top-tier policymakers and captains of industry.

With a glow of satisfaction, I pat myself on the back for having mastered a topic that, initially, I knew very little about. I’m also chuffed to have played a role in sharing the science with wider society.

Research syntheses

Towards the Battery of the Future is one of a number of reports I have worked on for Science for Environment Policy over the past 8 years. It is an example of a research synthesis – a publication which weaves together research, often from multiple disciplines, to support or influence policy.

In Science for Environment Policy’s case, we distill research to help policymakers protect and enhance our environment.

I can tell you from my time on these reports that producing a research synthesis is a tricky business. I am just starting work on a new report which explores the wonders of pollinators, and it feels a good time to reflect upon how best to go about a research synthesis.

An increasing body of scholarly work is assessing the role and impact of research syntheses, and various techniques for creating them1. This has yielded some interesting principles and frameworks, which provide valuable food for thought and guidelines for action.

This blog post is my nuts-and-bolts contribution to the discussion and, below, we have a handful of pointers, drawn from personal experience. These helped me take the batteries report, and those before it, on the journey from a mystifying blur of pixels to a bona fide publication, and one which may just make the world a better place.

1. Talk to real people

A chat with a well-selected expert can clarify more about a topic than days of scouring through research papers (and certainly more than could ever be gleaned from Wikipedia).

Work on the batteries report really got going after some enlightening conversations with the commissioning policy officer in Brussels and my trusty scientific advisor in Germany. Both helped define what we really need to focus on.

Where does the weight of evidence sit? What are the big debates and unknowns? And, seriously, what does roundtrip efficiency actually mean?

Thanks these chats, the words on my screen start to snap into focus, and, armed with a list of useful keywords, I feel ready to take on the research databases and build this report.

(And, turns out roundtrip efficiency is really a very simple concept. Need to know: you don’t want your batteries to leak too much energy when recharging).

2. And talk to lots of different types of people

I lost count of how many people contributed to and reviewed the batteries report. These helpful souls not only offered useful details, but also balance with their diverse backgrounds, from transport to chemicals.

And it’s not just scientists and policymakers who can help. Businesses, consultants and community groups, for example, are all a treasure trove of information and perspective.

I have been transported from my desk in a grey suburb of Bristol to tropical forests of Central America and windswept fish farms of the Baltic Sea, courtesy of telephone conversations with astonishingly obliging contributors.

With my tabula rasa outset for each report, I do often feel a little ignorant during these chats.  I’ve not quite forgiven the guy who actually shouted at me for asking the wrong questions (owing to my ignorance on the particular topic of the report at the time), but I did come out of that conversation much more knowledgeable than when I went in.

A caveat: the more people involved in a report, the longer it takes – and the risk of missing publication in time for key policy events increases, diminishing the report’s potential impact. In practice, synthesis writers are often faced with the challenge of finding the best way to produce robust content within short timeframes (see also: limited budgets).

3. Your reference manager is your best friend

I’ve seen many a writer get in a twist attempting to manually manage the reams of references that make up a report. Problems often arise as a report continually shifts in form throughout its development; citations get lost, bibliographies get muddled.

I’ve adopted Mendeley to overcome these issues, and do all the awkward formatting for me. It’s not perfect, and I’m always keen to know how others deal with their references, but it sure makes life a lot easier.

4. Keep on truckin’

It is the research that goes into developing a report, and not the actual writing, that drains the most time and energy. A day spent filtering and reading papers can amount to just two or three short paragraphs of text. Producing a research synthesis report is, at times, frustratingly arduous.

However, as Towards the Battery of the Future gradually morphed into a rounded product, I was reminded of why I went into science communication in the first place: it’s the perfect excuse to learn new things. The process of translating between the languages of science and the ‘lay person’ is also something I find undeniably satisfying.

Indeed, as I submit the final draft, I’m wishing I could make my own efficient roundtrip – to go back and do it all again.

Michelle Kilfoyle, Science Writer, Science for Environment Policy

  1. Some recent examples:

The Royal Society & the Academy of Medical Sciences (2018) Evidence synthesis for policy: a statement of principles. https://royalsociety.org/~/media/policy/projects/evidence-synthesis/evidence-synthesis-statement-principles.pdf

Wyborn et al. (2018) Understanding the Impacts of Research Synthesis. Environmental Science & Policy. 86: 72–84. DOI:10.1016/J.ENVSCI.2018.04.013

New and notable – selected publications from the Science Communication Unit

Author Science Communication Unit | Posted on

The last 6 months have been a busy time for the Unit, we are now fully in the swing of the 2016/17 teaching programme for our MSc Science Communication and PgCert Practical Science Communication students, we’ve been working on a number of exciting research projects and if that wasn’t enough to keep us busy, we’ve also produced a number of exciting publications.

We wanted to share some of these recent publications to provide an insight into the work that we are involved in as the Science Communication Unit.

Science for Environment Policy

Science for Environment Policy

Science for Environment Policy is a free news and information service published by Directorate-General Environment, European Commission. It is designed to help the busy policymaker keep up-to-date with the latest environmental research findings needed to design, implement and regulate effective policies. In addition to a weekly news alert we publish a number of longer reports on specific topics of interest to the environmental policy sector.

Recent reports focus on:

Ship recycling: The ship-recycling industry — which dismantles old and decommissioned ships, enabling the re-use of valuable materials — is a major supplier of steel and an important part of the economy in many countries, such as Bangladesh, India, Pakistan and Turkey. However, mounting evidence of negative impacts undermines the industry’s contribution to sustainable development. This Thematic Issue presents a selection of recent research on the environmental and human impacts of shipbreaking.

Environmental compliance assurance and combatting environmental crime: How does the law protect the environment? The responsibility for the legal protection of the environment rests largely with public authorities such as the police, local authorities or specialised regulatory agencies. However, more recently, attention has been focused on the enforcement of environmental law — how it should most effectively be implemented, how best to ensure compliance, and how best to deal with breaches of environmental law where they occur. This Thematic Issue presents recent research into the value of emerging networks of enforcement bodies, the need to exploit new technologies and strategies, the use of appropriate sanctions and the added value of a compliance assurance conceptual framework.

Synthetic biology and biodiversity: Synthetic biology is an emerging field and industry, with a growing number of applications in the pharmaceutical, chemical, agricultural and energy sectors. While it may propose solutions to some of the greatest challenges facing the environment, such as climate change and scarcity of clean water, the introduction of novel, synthetic organisms may also pose a high risk for natural ecosystems. This future brief outlines the benefits, risks and techniques of these new technologies, and examines some of the ethical and safety issues.

Socioeconomic status and noise and air pollution: Lower socioeconomic status is generally associated with poorer health, and both air and noise pollution contribute to a wide range of other factors influencing human health. But do these health inequalities arise because of increased exposure to pollution, increased sensitivity to exposure, increased vulnerabilities, or some combination? This In-depth Report presents evidence on whether people in deprived areas are more affected by air and noise pollution — and suffer greater consequences — than wealthier populations.

Educational outreach

We’ve published several research papers exploring the role and impact of science outreach. Education outreach usually aims to work with children to influence their attitudes or knowledge about STEM – but there are only so many scientists and engineers to go around. So what if instead we influenced the influencers? In this publication, Laura Fogg-Rogers describes her ‘Children as Engineers’ project, which paired student engineers with pre-service (student) teachers.

Fogg-Rogers, L. A., Edmonds, J. and Lewis, F. (2016) Paired peer learning through engineering education outreach. European Journal of Engineering Education. ISSN 0304-3797 Available from: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/29111

Teachers have been shown in numerous research studies to be critical for shaping children’s attitudes to STEM subjects, and yet only 5% of primary school teachers have a STEM higher qualification. So improving teacher’s science teaching self-efficacy, or the perception of their ability to do this job, is therefore critical if we want to influence young minds in science.

The student engineers and teachers worked together to perform outreach projects in primary schools and the project proved very successful. The engineers improved their public engagement skills, and the teachers showed significant improvements to their science teaching self-efficacy and subject knowledge confidence. The project has now been extended with a £50,000 funding grant from HEFCE and will be run again in 2017.

And finally, Dr Emma Weitkamp considers how university outreach activities can be designed to encourage young people to think about the relationships between science and society. In this example, Emma worked with Professor Dawn Arnold to devise an outreach project on plant genetics and consider how this type of project could meet the needs of both teachers, researchers and science communicators all seeking (slightly) different aims.emma-book

A Cross Disciplinary Embodiment: Exploring the Impacts of Embedding Science Communication Principles in a Collaborative Learning Space. Emma Weitkamp and Dawn Arnold in Science and Technology Education and Communication, Seeking Synergy. Maarten C. A. van der Sanden, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands and Marc J. de Vries (Eds.) Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands. 

We hope that you find our work interesting and insightful, keep an eye on this blog – next week we will highlight our publications around robots, robot ethics, ‘fun’ in science communication and theatre.

Details of all our publications to date can be found on the Science Communication Unit webpages.

 

Back to top

Follow this blog

Get every new post delivered right to your inbox.