As Pakistan reels from some of its worst flooding ever, survivors are asking why more wasn’t done to prepare communities long known to be at risk. The vast scale of the disaster – following a record heat wave across South Asia in May – is also adding to pressure on rich nations over reparations ahead […]
A new study from researchers at the University of Southern Denmark has determined what we already knew— cycling is much better for the environment than driving conventional internal combustion vehicles. The study took a look at the bike-loving Dutch, and quantified just how much global carbon emissions would drop if everyone hopped on their bike […]
We are indeed finding ourselves in a geological epoch – aka the Anthropocene – when human activity has become so earth-shaking it is throwing entire ecosystems and the planet’s climate out of balance. As the science behind global warming is becoming ever harder to dismiss, humanity is facing the challenge of shifting climate action into […]
Burger King Austria’s new campaign is boldly challenging the public’s expectation of what “normal” ought to be. In a climate-conscious world, making plant-based the default standard for burgers is quite a statement. The brand’s experiment is simple and straightforward. When customers order a burger, cashiers ask, “normal oder mit fleisch?” Which translates to “normal […]
“A garden is a solution that leads to other solutions. It is part of the limitless pattern of good health and good sense.” – Wendell Berry By Sadie Wilbur Dirty Hands, Happy Heart My love for all things green began when I was a young girl. I grew up alongside a variety of trees and […]
There is tremendous economic potential in the transition to a renewable energy future, but detailed descriptions of what these green jobs will look like aren’t always available. We’ve talked about the job potential for renovating old oil and gas fields, but today we share a guide from Grist on ten jobs that will shape a […]
Citizen science contributes to the work of scientists, by engaging the public in activities that assist with observation and data collection, in many domains of science, including conservation, natural resources, and environmental science. Last week, when I jumped in my car and headed on what I thought was going to be a fun little road trip to see some turtles, I had no idea that I was visiting one of the most globally significant conservation programs for endangered sea turtles, and one of the most successful citizen science conservation efforts in the country. Citizen science programs, when planned and prepared effectively, like at Mon Repos, can also equip people with the information and tools to make significant positive changes to their local area and, most importantly, see direct outcomes of science and conservation efforts; making citizen science a promising tool for environmental protection and biodiversity, informing policymaking, fostering public input and engagement, and promoting direct action.
Citizen science builds scientific knowledge
‘Citizen science’ is when members the public engage in activities that assist scientists in their research— by submitting data, sharing experiences, or spreading valuable information. Scientists who often face resource or time constraints can benefit from having more data available to analyse and a pool of volunteers willing to help. Citizen science programs can vary in type and scope. Some involve simple data collection work at the local level— like bird watchers who give feedback to scientists about the birds they spot, while others are larger-scale projects that might require volunteers to study up and learn protocols before heading into the field.
Citizen science can be a rigorous process of scientific discovery, one that can produce high-quality data and add to our scientific knowledge, and there are many types of projects can benefit from citizen science, provided they are well designed and include the right method of public participation.
Citizen science is a powerful tool for tackling conservation challenges
Citizen science doesn’t just provide a way to collect data; it also engages the general public in scientific issues and can be a powerful way to tackle conservation challenges. In an article about the benefits of citizen science for conservation (1), the authors conclude that “citizen science informs natural resource management, environmental protection, and policymaking and fosters public input and engagement.”
Citizen science programs can also be a tool to inform and educate the public about conservation challenges, and some of the solutions to the problem.
One reason that members of the public aren’t motivated to address climate change and other local or global environmental challenges is that the impacts are relatively distant from their day-to-day life. But engaging people first-hand in these issues, and showing them the consequences that we face, stops it from being such an abstract concept, and motivates them to at a minimum care about the issue, and hopefully to act.
Case Study: Mon Repos Turtle Centre, Queensland
Mon Repos Conservation Park, 14 kilometers east of Bundaberg at the Southern part of the Great Barrier Reef, is a globally significant site for research on and protection of the endangered loggerhead sea turtle, a prehistoric species thought to have emerged around 40 million years ago. The unique ecological conditions at Mon Repos Beach support a key stage in the ancient life cycle of the loggerhead and two other species – flatback and green turtles.
While loggerhead turtles spend decades at sea reaching sexual maturity and forage and breed many hundreds (or thousands) of kilometers away, the beach at Mon Repos where they were born is where the females return to lay their eggs from November to February. In February and March, the final clutches of hatchlings make their way into the ocean and travel via the East Australian Current past New South Wales and New Zealand, before making their way to South America. Only 1 in 1000 of the turtles will reach maturity, at about age 30, when the lucky survivors return to Mon Repos. The others will face threats like plastic waste; by the time the hatchlings have made it from Bundaberg to the Gold Coast, 50% of them will have ingested plastic.
Only 1 in 1000 of the turtles will reach maturity… by the time the hatchlings have made it from Bundaberg to the Gold Coast, 50% of them will have ingested plastic.
Turtle research has been ongoing at Mon Repos since the late 1960s when biologist Colin Limpus began tagging turtles to study them. At the time he was a high school teacher, who would bring his students down to the beach to learn about the turtles. As he became increasingly interested in finding answers to his questions about the turtles— like how far and how long they travelled before returning to Mon Repos— Col took up researching the turtles full time.
From the 1990s onwards, when the waters off the coast were established as a marine park, ecotourism to the region grew, formalised through the design and construction of a visitor centre, and by 2013, the visitor centre at Mon Repos was receiving more than 30,000 people annually to experience night-time turtle nesting and hatching through a ranger-led “turtle encounter.” Each night, from October to March each year, the team at Mon Repos also spend the entire night collecting data for the research centre, protecting the eggs and turtles from predators, tagging hatchlings, and ensuring that the hatchlings make their way safely to sea. In order to do this, Mon Repos relies on volunteer citizen scientists to assist rangers in their data collection and efforts to care for the turtles, making it one of the longest-running citizen science projects in the country.
The inspiration for this article, was my own turtle encounter at Mon Repos. I was inspired by the ways in which decades of citizen science, that began with a curious high-school teacher, has created the world’s most significant loggerhead turtle conservation site, and aided the world’s understanding of the manifold ways that humans impact on species loss, including fishing-related harms, plastic ingestion, ocean contamination and, more recently, climate change.
This project is just one example of how citizen science has made, and will continue to make valuable contributions to our understanding of the natural world. One of the things that has made Mon Repos so successful is that it carefully matches the right type of science project and the right method of public participation.
Project design must carefully combine the needs of science with public involvement
When properly designed, carried out, and evaluated, citizen science can provide sound science, efficiently generate high-quality data, and help solve problems. However, if not carefully planned and prepared, efforts to involve citizens in science can become futile and resource intensive, with little benefits to either party. Citizen science should follow the same rigorous process of scientific discovery and be indistinguishable from conventional science— apart from the participation of volunteers doing fieldwork.
To help science or conservation groups plan an effective citizen science project, the Australian Citizen Science Association has 10 guiding ‘Principles of Citizen Science’ which should inform all citizen science projects:
Citizen science projects actively involve citizens in scientific endeavour that generates new knowledge or understanding. Citizens may act as contributors, collaborators, or as project leader and have a meaningful role in the project.Citizen science projects have a genuine science outcome. For example, answering a research question, informing conservation action, or facilitating policy decisions.Citizen science provides benefits to both science and society. Benefits may include learning opportunities, personal enjoyment, social benefits, the publication of research outputs, contributing to scientific evidence that can influence policy on many scales (locally, nationally, and internationally), and connecting the wider community with science.Citizen scientists may participate in various stages of the scientific process. This may include developing research questions, designing methods, gathering and analysing data, and communicating results.Citizen scientists receive feedback from the project. For example, how their data are being used and the research, policy or societal outcomes.Citizen science, as with all forms of scientific inquiry, has limitations and biases that should be considered and controlled for. However, unlike traditional research approaches, citizen science provides greater opportunity for public engagement and participation, increasing accessibility of science in society.Where possible and suitable, project data and meta-data from citizen science projects are made publicly available and results are published in an open access format. Data sharing may occur during or after the project, unless there are security or privacy concerns that prevent this from occurring.Citizen scientists are suitably acknowledged by projects. This may include acknowledgement in project communications, result reporting and publications.Citizen science programs offer a range of benefits and outcomes which should be acknowledged and considered in project evaluation. Communication and evaluation of projects could include scientific outputs, data quality, participant experience and learning, knowledge sharing, social benefits, capacity building, new ways of science engagement, enhanced stakeholder dialogue, and wider societal or policy impact.The leaders of citizen science projects take into consideration legal and ethical considerations of the project. These considerations include copyright, intellectual property, data sharing agreements, confidentiality, attribution, participant safety and wellbeing, traditional owner consultation, and the environmental impact of any activities.
Changemaker chat with a conservationist
While visiting Mon Repos, I met Elisha, who I’d previously only connected with online, for a changemaker chat for the podcast. Elisha is not only a ranger at Mon Repos turtle centre, but also combined her love for travel with her passion for conservation, to create her very own eco-travel company, Chasin Clean Coasts, and a podcast, Chasin Travels.
I got to chat with Elisha and hear all about her story, travel tips, and of course, what it was like starting her very own travel company… right before the coronavirus pandemic. With the world opening up for travel post-covid, I know that I’m super keen to get back out there and experience the world— and I definitely recommend Mon Repos if you’re ever on the QLD coast!
It was also great to be reminded that if you want to start your own business or passion project, you don’t need to have the whole path mapped out, you just need to take the first step, and figure out the next step as you go…
By Loughlin Shannon
Now entering its third year, Australia has seen many highs and lows during the global pandemic. Covid’s impact stretched beyond just our health system, with Australia’s economy reaching record highs as businesses adapted to the changing times, but also record lows amid Covid case surges.
Few expected these economic highs and lows to occur so close together, but in true Roaring 20s style, 2022 brought us just that. After a $21 billion Christmas cash splash, ANZ data shows Australia’s retail spend has now fallen to Covid lockdown levels. And Sydney’s spending is at its lowest point since the pandemic began.
With many Aussies tightening their purse strings once again, changemakers may be wondering how to make a difference on a budget. So, with Australian international and interstate borders (mostly) open, let’s start with an airline add-on most change-making travellers won’t think twice about.
Your Carbon Footprint: Polluter Propaganda?
Since British Petroleum popularised the idea of one’s own ‘carbon footprint’ in a 2003 advertising blitz, awareness of consumption-driven pollution has risen substantially. And every step of the way, big businesses have been eager to encourage consumers to take personal responsibility for their environmental impact.
Carbon footprint calculators became widespread online, and although methodology varies between services, it’s now never been easier for one to seek out an estimate of their own environmental impact. But the rise of e-commerce, spurred on by the pandemic, began the trend of bringing one’s footprint to them before they even asked.
Insert Graphic One
Buy-now-pay-later service Klarna’s app shows customers the emissions created from delivering their online shopping — a journey I covered extensively last year. And the major Australian airlines go one step further, selling carbon offsets to their passengers when they check out online.
Those airline offsets may seem like a good deal for changemakers. I took advantage of an offer to offset 149kg of carbon last year for just $1.70, and 100 per cent of my contribution was passed on to carbon offset projects around the country. My donation was even matched dollar-for-dollar by the Qantas Group.
But a 2017 report from consumer advocacy group CHOICE found that while the airlines’ carbon offset programs were Australian Government accredited, none of them were certified by Gold Standard — an international standards body established by the World Wildlife Fund in 2003.
And ‘accredited’ programs don’t necessarily offset the exact amount of carbon you’re paying for. A 2021 Guardian/Greenpeace investigation found 10 forest protection schemes made predictions that “were often inconsistent with previous levels of deforestation” and “overstated” the threat to the trees they allegedly protected.
Verra, the agency which accredited those projects, strongly disputes that investigation’s findings. In a statement, they wrote “the Guardian article exhibits clear bias,” and “is riddled with substantive errors that betray ignorance about how carbon offset credits work”.
Price Match Carbon Credits From the Comfort of Your Couch…
So your mileage with carbon credits may vary, but let’s say you’ve been travelling over Christmas and you want to buy some anyway. Where can you get the best deal, and how can you be sure every kilo of carbon you pay for is really offset?
The answer: airline offers aren’t the place to look. While the airline I flew with charged me $11.41 per tonne of carbon, you can get a far better deal by shopping around. And the United Nations operates an online marketplace where you can do just that.
The UN Carbon Offset Platform allows anyone to purchase carbon credits directly from Clean Development Mechanism projects around the world. After you make a purchase, you get sent a certificate you can personalise, showing how much carbon you’ve cancelled and why you cancelled it.
So how does the UN’s platform stack up? Right now, two-thirds of the CDM projects listed beat Jetstar’s offer on carbon price. And the UN says all CDM projects “meet strict technological standards and are rigorously scrutinised through an international monitoring, reporting and verification process”.
The cheapest project on the platform right now — a rice husk based cogeneration plant with 2.5MW of generation capacity for the Indian electricity grid — will sell you a tonne of carbon for just $4.88. That’s a whopping 57 per cent saving compared to Jetstar’s checkout offer.
SAVE SOME MONEY: Shop around for carbon credits to get the best deal!
You may be getting a raw deal buying carbon offsets with your plane ticket, but that’s not the airlines’ fault. The ABC reported in December that 2021 was a “bull market” for domestic carbon credits, driving up prices for everyone. But airlines do have control over another part of the carbon credit story.
…Or Leave the Airlines to it
Of course, you could save even more money on carbon credits by just letting your airline pick up the tab. A 2016 agreement made by the member states of the UN International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) requires airlines — including those in Australia — to buy a certain number of carbon credits every year themselves.
The agreement is called the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), and it initially required airlines to have net-zero emissions growth beyond an average of 2019 and 2020 levels. This would mean if an airline emitted more carbon in 2021 than the 2019/20 average, they would have to offset the difference.
But, just like everything else, Covid changed this plan for the worse. 2020 saw a halving of flight activity compared to 2019, which reduced CORSIA’s predicted emissions average by 25 to 30 per cent according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).
This would have substantially increased emissions reduction requirements, so the International Air Transport Association asked the ICAO to remove 2020 from the average. ICAO agreed, increasing allowed emissions, which reduced carbon offsetting requirements by between 25 and 75 per cent.
The IEA says a combination of this change and a slow post-Covid recovery for the aviation industry will eliminate carbon reduction requirements for airlines entirely. “If flight activity rebound takes as long as most industry projections expect, this decision will nullify any offset obligations during CORSIA’s pilot phase.”
So, don’t feel too guilty about skipping out on carbon credits when flying, the airlines sure didn’t.
SAVE EVEN MORE: Leave cancelling carbon to the big polluters — they’ll be required to.
Save money and the planet this January with the Humanitarian Changemakers Network! We’ve got tips for getting the best deals on reducing your carbon footprint, shopping mindfully, and the most effective charities to support. Just go to humanitarianchangemakers.net/news or search ‘Changemaker Q&A’ on your preferred podcast platform.
This week: are high flying changemakers getting a raw deal on carbon credits? We’ve found the best deal for travellers to reduce their emissions — and it’s not from airlines. Search Changemakers Q&A on your preferred podcast platform to listen now!
Now entering its third year, Australia has seen many highs and lows during the global pandemic. Covid’s impact stretched beyond just our health system, with Australia’s economy reaching record highs as businesses adapted to the changing times, but also record lows amid Covid case surges. With many Aussies tightening their purse strings once again, changemakers […]
The sixth assessment report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) does not make for a particularly uplifting reading— You have probably seen headlines about “code red”, “unequivocal human influence” and 1.5C of warming by 2030. As Changemakers it’s up to us and the rest of civil society to turn the dread and horror from the report into determination, effort, unprecedented cooperation, and visionary commitment.
It would mean making profound changes in our societies, economies, our ways of doing things. But it is possible to do. And we know how to do it. Scientists, policymakers, and experts of all kinds know what the solutions are to reducing our global greenhouse gas emissions.
Perhaps the biggest obstacles that stand in the way of adopting these solutions are actually interconnected personal or political challenges. There’s a lot of money that goes into the fossil fuel industry, which is why there is so much resistance from leaders to changing the status quo. And without significant public interest and pressure in transitioning to a more sustainable future, there is little incentive for government or big business to do so.
So what needs to change?
The solution to getting governments and big businesses here In Australia to start taking action, is to use direct action, strategic campaigning, and community organising and mobilisation tactics to shift the current power imbalance that exists— we want to shit the power to the people, and if enough people, put enough pressure on governments and corporations to act— they inevitably will… history has shown us this. From women’s suffrage to the contemporary feminist movement, From the civil rights to the BLM movement, and other ongoing social movements advocating and campaigning for the realisation of human rights by demanding action… they’ve shown us that we can only get decision-makers to start taking action to change what is considered to be “business as usual,” When there is enough political pressure on them to do so.
The thing that I actually wanted to focus on in this episode is less about the need for activism to demand climate action, and more about how we can bring more people into the movement— because we need to have more people taking direct action, pushing these campaigns forward to shift the power from these big corporations and government leaders, to the citizens, so that decision-makers will be forced to act. More people = more power = more pressure = more likely to act.
When you consider the magnitude of the issue of climate change, and how it will affect or already is affecting every single human and non-human animal on the planet, as well as the natural world, it seems counterintuitive that not every single person is willing to take action and demand change. The reason not everyone is willing to do so is that not everyone cares enough about climate change— not necessarily because they are bad people, but because for whatever reason they haven’t formed strong enough opinions about the issue that will compel them to act. So the challenge is, how do we actually get more people to form a strong enough opinion about climate change that they feel compelled to act?
Now there isn’t much to debate when it comes to climate change— the science is clear, and there is consensus from the overwhelming majority of at least 97% of climate scientists about the science behind climate change, so it’s not an issue of convincing people to believe in climate change— if people don’t believe the world’s leading thinkers on this topic, we have little chance as activists of getting them to believe the science.
What we need to convince people of, is the need to care about climate change enough to take action. Public opinion plays a significant role in how the government and other actors respond to demands for climate action. So, shifting public opinion is key.
Components of public opinion: attitudes and values
How individuals form opinions and the types of opinions they form depend on their immediate situation, more general social and environmental factors, and also their pre-existing knowledge, attitudes and values. Public opinion is shaped by 3 stratified factors held by individuals; opinions, attitudes, and values.
Most famously characterised in public opinion research by Robert Worcester; opinions are “the ripples on the surface of the public’s consciousness—shallow and easily changed,” attitudes are “the currents below the surface, deeper and stronger,” and values are “the deep tides of public mood, slow to change, but powerful.” According to Worcester, the most important concept in public opinion research is values, which determine whether and how people will form opinions on a particular topic; people are generally more inclined to form an opinion when they perceive that it aligns with their personal values. Values are adopted early in life, shaped by an individual’s upbringing, family and friends, and cultural context, and are not likely to change, but rather strengthen as people grow older.
Once an issue is identified, some people will form attitudes towards it, and as these attitudes are expressed to others by sufficient numbers of people, a public opinion on the topic begins to emerge. Not all individuals will develop a their own attitude about an issue, if they don’t care about it or know enough to develop an attitude.
Therefore, a seemingly homogeneous body of public opinion may therefore be composed of individual opinions that are rooted in very different interests and values. If an attitude does not serve a function such as one of the above, it is unlikely to be formed: an attitude must be useful in some way to the person who holds it.
Factors influencing public opinion
There are a number of factors that can influence and shape public opinion. Environmental factors play a critical role, and are key for the development of both opinions and attitudes— including their family, friends, workplace, religious community, or school. Individuals will often adjust their attitudes to conform to the most prevalent groups that they belong to.
Mass media and social media also play a role in affirming latent attitudes and ‘activate’ them, prompting people to take action.
Interest groups, such as NGOs, religious groups, or unions also cultivate the formation and spread of public opinion that might be of concern to their constituency. This can be done through mass media and social media, words of mouth, or through an organised advocacy or PR campaign.
Finally, opinion leaders can play a major role in influencing individual opinions— such as political or religious leaders.
Changing public opinion
The greater a person’s level of cognitive engagement with an issue, the more likely he or she is to be exposed to and comprehend political messages concerning that issue. People tend to resist arguments that are inconsistent with their political predispositions, but they do so only to the extent that they posses the contextual information necessary to perceive a relationship between the message and their predispositions. Given that these existing predispositions cannot be easily changed, any effort to influence opinions must be done in a way that aligns with and engages their deeply-held values to motivate concern and action— through values-based messaging. Values-based messaging uses clear, compelling short narratives that connect a person’s existing values to an issue.
The 6 principles of persuasion, which were first put forward by Robert B. Cialdini in his 1984 book “Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion,” are 6 principles that have been used for decades by businesses, politicians, and marketers alike, to influence people to do or care about something. The first principle is similarity, which is about trying to connect with people (as authentically as possible) in a way that they can relate to and identify with— this principle is all about safety in numbers, because people feel validated and are more influenced by something or someone they observe to be relatable or similar to them. The second principle is consistency: people want to commit to things that are aligned with their values, and people have a deep need to be seen as consistent. Once we have publicly committed to something or someone, we are so much more likely to go through and deliver on that commitment… and do it again. This can be explained, from a psychological perspective, by the fact that people establish a commitment as being in line with their self-image. Third, is authority: people really do have a tendency to believe someone they trust, or people who have authority. Whether it’s their mum, a local hero, a celebrity, or a politician, the average person will accept what a trusted figure of authority says without really questioning it. The fourth principle is consensus: put simply, people want to be part of the majority, not the minority. When we are surrounded by people who are all doing something, we want to reflect that. This is how trends spread so rapidly, especially in the age of modern technology and social media. Principle 5 is reciprocity; human beings are wired to basically want to return favours and pay back our debts and treat others as they’ve treated us. Finally, the 6th principle is scarcity: when people believe something is in short supply, or that they must act urgently, they want it more.
Storytelling is also a powerful tool to influence people’s opinions. Facts and figures are a great way to let people know about pressing global issues, and to help quantify the scope or depth of a humanitarian problem. But when you are trying to motivate people to care about an issue or take a specific action, telling a single story will have a far greater impact than any statistic. Evolution has wired our brains to be more receptive to storytelling. It has been one of our most fundamental methods of communication since the first cave paintings were discovered over 27,000 years ago. The science behind storytelling is pretty simple. Stories are, in their simplest form, a connection of cause and effect, and this is how humans think. When people make a decision about donating money or funding a project, most people do not rationally calculate the benefit they can expect from their contribution, they make intuitive decisions based on affective reactions. There are various studies that have explored what makes people act most generously, and the research has all confirmed that feelings, not analytical thinking, drive people’s generosity and compassion.
Mother Teresa once said, “if I look at the mass, I will never act. If I look at the one, I will.’’ When a story is told with an identifiable victim, it is much more likely to generate voluntary action than a number of unnamed “statistical victims.” This is referred to as the Identifiable Victim Effect. People pay greater attention and have stronger emotional reactions if they are presented with a case of an identifiable victim. People by nature are far less inclined to engage with a cause when they are presented with statistical data about multiple similar victims that are caught up in the same system of need.