Scientists should commit acts of civil disobedience to show the public how seriously they take the threat posed by the climate crisis, a group of leading scientists has argued.
“Civil disobedience by scientists has the potential to cut through the myriad complexities and confusion surrounding the climate crisis,” the researchers wrote in a paper published Monday in the scientific journal Nature Climate Change.
“When those with experience and knowledge are willing to convey their concerns in a more uncompromising way… this gives them a particular effectiveness as a communicative act. This is Greta Thunberg’s idea when she asks us to ‘act as you would in a crisis”.
In recent months, scientists have become increasingly willing to engage in direct action to draw attention to the climate crisis. A “rebellion of scientists” mobilized more than 1,000 scientists in 25 countries in April, while in the UK several scientists were arrested for sticking scientific papers – and their hands – to the glass facade of the Department of ‘Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy. .
The paper was co-authored by five climate scientists: Stuart Capstick, Aaron Thierry, Emily Cox, Steve Westlake and Julia K. Steinberger. Oscar Berglund, a political scientist at the University of Bristol who studies civil disobedience and social movements, took a sixth line.
A note attached to the article revealed that all authors “have participated in and offered support to groups that engage in civil disobedience to press for climate action.”
Berglund said: “What we say in the article is that getting involved in this kind of thing can add weight to the message that this is a crisis; that these are decent people who know more than anyone about how deep we are in shit, and they’re taking that kind of action: nonviolent direct action, civil disobedience.
“We have a kind of what we call epistemic authority here: people listen to what we’re saying, as scientists, and it becomes a way of showing how serious the situation is, that we’re forced to reach these limits.”
The article recognized that by taking political action, scientists will invite criticism that they have abandoned their impartiality. However, he added that readers should ask whether “traditional modes of research and communication” in science are prompting a response from decision-makers that responds to the enormity of the crisis.
Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertisements and content funded by third parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
He said: “The widespread notion that the sober presentation of evidence by an ‘honest agent’ to those in power will achieve the best interests of populations is not in itself a neutral worldview; instead, it is conveniently unthreatening to the status quo and often quite naïve.
“In addition to documenting the climate crisis in ever greater detail, we are compelled to consider how we might act in new ways to help bring about a necessary and urgent transformation.
“Meanwhile, we have long since reached the point where scientists’ civil disobedience has been justified.”