Climate emergency | Should scientists choose civil disobedience?

Climate strikes will be held Friday in many cities around the world, including Montreal. Should scientists take part or take the path of civil disobedience in the face of the climate emergency? This is the delicate question posed in an analysis published in the journal Nature. The Press asked Quebec experts what they think.

Eric-Pierre Champagne
The Press

fundamental question

In an analysis titled “Scientists’ civil disobedience helps push for urgent climate action,” six scientists “are pushed into difficult territory regarding a fundamental question: Are our traditional ways of research and communication failing in the face of the crisis? climate? And if so, what can we do about it? Published on August 29 in the journal Naturethe article recalls that “the inaction of governments, industry and civil society” is currently leading us towards a warming of 3.2°C by the end of the century.

Advocate for the public interest

Around 40% of scientists contributing to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports have already signed petitions or letters calling for stronger action and a quarter of them have taken part in protests peaceful, they add. According to them, the climate emergency justifies civil disobedience “under certain specific conditions”. These actions may challenge specific policies or practices, but not the legitimacy of the state. They must be peaceful. The authors point out that several studies have shown that the credibility of scientists is not affected by more vigorous advocacy about the climate emergency. “On the contrary, we find that many citizens expect scientists to use their knowledge to advocate for the public interest,” they point out.

What do the scientists think?

Daniel Kneeshaw, professor in the department of biological sciences at UQAM and specialist in the effects of climate change on forest dynamics

“Surely we need a multitude of different actions and civil disobedience, instead of being the only option, should be one of the many courses of action. That said, I agree that we should not remain neutral, but take a stand. […] I think the authors are right to suggest that scientists should act on their knowledge and take a stand. This position can take several forms. There are researchers within government institutions who work hard internally to be listened to. Their moderate voices will be heard more if others take more radical positions. »

Jérôme Dupras, professor in the Department of Natural Sciences at the University of Quebec in Outaouais and researcher at the Institute of Temperate Forest Sciences

Jérôme Dupras says he sees a certain “laziness” among many scientists who are content to publish the results of their work. According to him, it is part of their responsibilities not to remain confined “in ivory towers” and “to return to the public”, especially since the majority of research is financed with public funds. The idea is not to play partisan politics, but to contribute to society, he argues. “The vast majority of scientists would like to do more, but do not know how to intervene,” he adds.

Alain Létourneau, professor at the Faculty of Letters and Human Sciences at the University of Sherbrooke and specialist in governance and environmental ethics

“It is an interesting text. It is well argued,” says Alain Létourneau. The question that arises, according to him, is how political actors take into account scientific expertise in their decision-making. He gives the example of the COVID-19 pandemic, where Public Health was very present and supported politicians in their decisions. “Are the climate specialists at the table with the decision-makers? “, he asks. That scientists consider civil disobedience, it testifies to a certain inability to be heard, he believes.

Alain Branchaud, biologist and general manager of the Society for Nature and Parks in Quebec (SNAP Quebec)

According to Alain Branchaud, this article in Nature is “a call for a more emotional involvement of scientists”. He points out that it is emotion that is more often a driver of action than simple facts. “A scientist can very well appeal to emotion without losing credibility,” he says. It is still necessary that he can have a certain freedom to do so. This is one of the reasons that led this former civil servant specializing in the recovery of species at risk at Environment Canada to make the leap to SNAP Quebec in 2015. He then found greater freedom to express himself in the public square. . “Between staying in our ivory tower and doing civil disobedience, there is also a whole continuum of actions that scientists can do to contribute to the debate,” he says.

The example of James Hansen

This climatology expert has spent most of his career at NASA. In 1988, he gave powerful testimony to the United States Congress to get politicians to take the climate emergency seriously. He was also arrested by police while participating in protests in 2009 and 2010.

Tweets by Peter Kalmus

NASA researcher Peter Kalmus is a climate scientist who is not afraid of civil disobedience. He was also arrested on April 11 while participating in a demonstration in Los Angeles. His Twitter posts regularly decry the inaction of governments, corporations and civil society. He is also one of the founders of the Climate Ad Project, which specializes in advertisements addressing climate change.