Slide deck from my November 17 keynote at the Michigan Green Chemistry and Engineering Conference. Thanks to the organizers for inviting me.

1. This material is based upon work supported by the
National Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL
14241214-421723. Any opinions, findings,
conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this
material are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.
Strategic Science
Communication:
Loving Green Chemistry
is Not Enough
John C. Besley
Michigan State University

2. Strategy
Is science literacy the solution to science’s ‘problems’?
Thinking about goals and objectives
Green chemistry communication
1
2
3

3. 3
What do people
know about science?
Views are my own and not
necessarily those the National
Science Foundation
or the National Science Board

4. 4
What do people know about science?

5. 5
What do people know about science?
U.S. still better shape
than most countries

6. 6
An biennial opportunity
to make fun of ‘others’

7. Experts from every area want
more issue specific literacy

8. 8
Frankieleon via flickr creative commons
bradleypjohnson via flickr creative commons
Chris Potter via flickr creative commons
Also true that
nobody knows
much about much

9. 9
What it means:
• Meta-analysis suggests a mall (.08)
relationship between knowledge and attitudes
• Varies a little bit by issue
(e.g., smaller relationship for GM food)
Does science knowledge
lead to science support?

10. Also lots of
‘information
provision’
experiments

11. 1
Released, October 2016

12. 1
1945
Key lesson: You can’t ‘teach
someone’ to like you?
We’ve known this for a
long time …

13. 1
But there’s a war on science?
(i.e., Do people really dislike us?)

14. Perceived benefits of science?

15. And … people have more
confidence in scientists
than anyone else
Confidence science?

16. But there’s
a catch …
You’re seen
as competent
but cold

17. 1
What does this have to do with
strategic science communication?

18. 1
Increase Knowledge
Communicative Act
Policy Preferences
or Behavior
Increase Excitement
Communication Objectives …
Ultimate Goals …Tactics …
STRAGEGIC COMMUNICATION is about picking tactics that help us
achieve communication objectives that help us achieve our real goals
(Note that ‘literacy’ is an
objective, not a goal)

19. 1
Most training focuses on
knowledge/excitement too

20. 2
And most scientists
put knowledge at
their top of their
training priority list

21. 2
Objective Prioritization (for Face-to-Face engagement) …
Type of
society
Inform/
Educate
Interest/
Excite
Defend
science
Show
caring
Show
openness
Frame
issue
Show
values
Hear
others
Show
expert
Chemistry 6.17 5.78 5.8 5.66 5.52 5.30 5.30 5.05 4.76
Biochemistry 6.09 5.94 5.83 5.71 5.56 5.29 5.27 5.11 4.65
General 6.20 5.92 5.79 5.70 5.47 5.30 5.27 5.12 4.77
Microbiology 6.09 5.94 5.83 5.71 5.56 5.29 5.27 5.11 4.65
Geophysical 6.21 5.86 5.60 5.49 5.34 5.25 5.07 4.84 4.72
Geological 6.22 5.92 5.96 5.62 5.44 5.18 5.14 4.92 4.95
Ecological 6.18 5.88 5.55 5.49 5.23 5.33 5.06 4.82 4.49
1.00-
1.49
1.50-
1.99
2.00-
2.49
2.50-
2.99
3.00-
3.49
3.50-
3.99
4.00-
4.49
4.50-
4.99
5.00-
5.49
5.50-
5.99
6.00-
6.49
6.50-
7.00
Typical SE is between .05 and .08
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Inform, defend, and excite
are most common
objectives for scientists
Results of a 2015/2016
survey of ~2,500 scientists
across 7 scientific societies

22. 2
Increase Knowledge
Communicative Act
Policy Preferences
or Behavior
Increase Excitement
Communication Objectives …
Ultimate Goals …Tactics …
Knowledge and excitement will always be
important science communication objectives

23. 2
Change Perceptions
of Honesty/Warmth
Change perceptions of
openness/transparency
Reframe How Person
Thinks about an Issue
Increase Knowledge
Change Perceptions
of Competence
Communicative Act
Policy Preferences
or Behavior
Increase Excitement
Communication Objectives …
Ultimate Goals …Tactics …
These are the ones
that communication
research emphasizes
But they’re not the only things you can
try to achieve through communication …
etc.

24. 2
Objective Prioritization (for Face-to-Face engagement) …
Type of
society
Inform/
Educate
Interest/
Excite
Defend
science
Show
caring
Show
openness
Frame
issue
Show
values
Hear
others
Show
expert
Chemistry 6.17 5.78 5.8 5.66 5.52 5.30 5.30 5.05 4.76
Biochemistry 6.09 5.94 5.83 5.71 5.56 5.29 5.27 5.11 4.65
General 6.20 5.92 5.79 5.70 5.47 5.30 5.27 5.12 4.77
Microbiology 6.09 5.94 5.83 5.71 5.56 5.29 5.27 5.11 4.65
Geophysical 6.21 5.86 5.60 5.49 5.34 5.25 5.07 4.84 4.72
Geological 6.22 5.92 5.96 5.62 5.44 5.18 5.14 4.92 4.95
Ecological 6.18 5.88 5.55 5.49 5.23 5.33 5.06 4.82 4.49
1.00-
1.49
1.50-
1.99
2.00-
2.49
2.50-
2.99
3.00-
3.49
3.50-
3.99
4.00-
4.49
4.50-
4.99
5.00-
5.49
5.50-
5.99
6.00-
6.49
6.50-
7.00
Typical SE is between .05 and .08
Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree
Results of a 2015/2016
survey of ~2,500 scientists
across 7 scientific societies

25. Communication
channels are …
Face-to-face
Direct w/policy-makers
Online
Mediated

26. What do you say/do
to communicate
willingness to listen?
What do you say/do
to communicate
warmth?What do you say/do
to communicate
competence?
Communication tactics are
about message delivery…

27. What does it mean to
know your “audience”?
Question 1: What actors can help me achieve my goals?
Question 2: What actor-specific objectives would I need
to meet to make progress toward my goal?
Question 3: Do I have the skills/resources/patience
needed to achieve these objectives through
my available tactics and audiences?
Question 4: Is this the best use of my resources or are
there better ways to achieve my goals?
(Other communicators? Fewer risks?)

28. Green chemistry goals, objectives, and tactics
Maybe you the benefits and logic of
green chemistry are so clear that
everyone will demand change as
soon as you share your wisdom?

29. Green chemistry goals, objectives, and tactics
Goal: Make
the world a
better place
through more
use of green
chemistry
ideas
Sub-Goal:
Regulations
Sub-Goal:
Industry adoption
Sub-Goal: Student
course demand
Sub-Goal:
Citizen Pressure
Audience:
Attentive Public
Audience:
Policy makers
Audience:
Industry leaders
Audience:
Future leaders
• Would it help if
they knew more
(about what)?
• Would a better
relationship help
(warmth/competence/
perceived listening/
shared identity?)
• Do they feel
“efficacious”
• Do they feel
“normative” pressure?
• Are we framing the
issue in the best way?
(Where can I find
these people?)

30. Green chemistry goals, objectives, and tactics
A few words
about framing …
Frame 1? Frame 2?
Half full vs. Half empty
Used vs. Pre-owned
Estate tax vs. Death tax
Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
“A few bad apples” vs. “Systemic rot”
Green chemistry vs. ______ chemistry

31. Green chemistry goals, objectives, and tactics
A few words
about framing …
If you frame something as
a “fight” or “war” then
someone has to lose

32. Green chemistry goals, objectives, and tactics
Are you threatening the identity of people
who you need to have relationships?
Are asking people to choose sides?

33. Funny and/or cathartic
Equal effective communication
I have questions about
the impact of these …

34. Final thoughts I …
There are no
silver bullets
Not everyone
is reachable
It takes
time
Communication
is not just
education

35. Final thoughts II …
It might be okay to
have a friend
photograph your
wedding … This material is based upon work supported by the National
Science Foundation (NSF, Grant AISL 14241214-421723. Any
opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations
expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the NSF.
But sometimes
help is … helpful.