Influence Is Power: Strategic Communication for Entomologists

Never before have scientists had access to so many collaborative tools, such robust funding, and so much data as they have today, whether in entomology or other research professions (AAAS 2018). The global rate of discovery and research publication is increasing rapidly; the volume of peer-reviewed publications in science and engineering increased more than 30% from 2006 to 2016 (NSB 2018). However, peer-reviewed scientific publication is only one mechanism of communication. In the past, reaching colleagues within one’s own research field was perhaps enough, but today scientists must increasingly answer the call to share their expertise with a broader audience. As the largest insect science society in the world, the Entomological Society of America (ESA) has committed itself to be a leading public voice for entomology and entomological research. In 2018, the Society’s Science Policy Committee tasked the Subcommittee on Science Communication to draft a statement on this commitment to openness. The result of that effort became this paper. While global scientific output doubles every nine years (Van Noorden 2014), much of the progress remains invisible to citizens outside of the scientific community. The word “scientist” inspires mistrust in a notable proportion of the population (Gauchat 2012, Funk 2017), and much of the public believes science presents great risks (Rutjens et al. 2018, Pew Research Center 2017). The inherent uncertainties associated with scientific research are difficult to explain in popular media sound bites, leading to distrust of science among many citizens who are unaware of the enduring benefits of scientific inquiry. Perhaps the most concerning development is the increasing influence of active anti-scientific voices in public discourse (Pearson 2019). Entomology in particular is at the heart of several controversies, fueled by the marketing of doubt rather than evidence, ranging from fear of biotechnology to denial of invasive species impact. Marketers that profit from the distribution of anti-science messaging will not be swayed by more data. This article aims to familiarize fellow entomologists and other scientists with contemporary communication tools (Fig. 1) and to encourage them to use these tools, whether their goal is to turn research into practice or to increase national science literacy. Five steps to science communication success. Benefits for researchers. Researchers sometimes feel that communication efforts are a great idea, but one that shifts focus and energy away from the research. This is not necessarily true. Evidence suggests that strategically executed communication campaigns are not a waste of resources, but rather can be a fruitful investment that benefits one’s research program. Improved communication can lead to better funding. Researchers who make an effort to make their research transparent and accessible are likely to experience more freedom in pursuing the research topics they want to pursue (Rowe et al 2010). In addition, carefully planning a communication strategy with marketing or education professionals can help improve research proposals. Nearly all public funding sources, including the National Science Foundation (NSF) and National Institutes of Health (NIH), mandate having tangible outcomes of research tied to broader public information dissemination. The reputation of researchers and labs relies on good communication. The most accomplished students or postdocs often secure competing job offers and can choose the most desirable lab at which to work. Effective branding can enable research leaders to attract the brightest people to staff their labs. Making your lab highly visible is no substitute for research productivity, but in today’s world, the more visible labs get more applicants for jobs than the reclusive ones (Topolovec-Vranic and Natarajan 2016). The impact of research can be maximized through effective communication. Scientists active on social media have their research papers cited more often than scientists who rely on the research publication’s own merit (Lamb et al. 2018, Finch et al. 2017). As another example of better public impact, sustained investment into the pairing of scientists with communicators at North Carolina State University (NCSU) yielded predictable dividends, including increased grant-application success. It also delivered surprising results, including improved public perception compared to other universities in the region and increased numbers of collaborators and allies coming from new, unexpected sources (J. Braden, NCSU Dean of the College of Humanities and Social Sciences, pers. comm.). It is important to emphasize that good reputation by no means rests only on social media. Individual scientists can open productive channels of communication with community and government leaders by making personal connections, building trust, and being intentionally transparent. Benefits for ESA. ESA has invested heavily in a number of different communication tools, including social media accounts, the Entomology Today blog, and the employment of communication professionals. As a result, the Entomology Today website has had more than a million views in each recent year, and each of ESA’s social network platforms (Twitter and Facebook) reaches more than 20,000 followers every year. To pursue public appreciation of entomology even further, ESA encourages individual members to become actively involved in science communication with the public at large and provides training to members through the annual Science Policy Fellowship program. Members of ESA and their institutions must significantly increase their investment in the distribution of new knowledge and outreach education. Just as investment into federal and state research after World War II spurred unprecedented technological and economic growth (Stern 2004), so should improvement in national science literacy advance the well-being of individuals, businesses that employ them, and the society they comprise (NRC 2009). ESA also engages with government audiences. Dialogue with federal policymakers is an important component of an effective science communication strategy. Lawmakers and their staff deal with a constant parade of burning issues, budget items, and demands from constituents. Because most politicians have limited training in the life sciences, it is incumbent on ESA to advocate for the discipline and to help lawmakers understand the important role that entomology and entomological research plays in everyone’s lives. As an international scientific authority, ESA is uniquely positioned to speak on behalf of entomology. All of these investments and activities intended to enhance communication about entomology with the public and those who serve them benefit ESA both directly and indirectly. Commitment to these efforts may attract more entomologists to join ESA and should alert the public that ESA is an authoritative source about all issues associated with insects. Benefits for public institutions and elected officials. For anyone familiar with the land-grant and extension systems, the societal benefit of communicating scientific innovation is nothing new. The first paragraph of the Smith-Lever Act of 1914 tasks professionals to “aid in diffusing among the people of the United States useful and practical information.” Extension entomologists have used science communication tools for decades, as they define well-researched, factual information and then disseminate it to stakeholders in various ways (workshops, flyers, websites, etc.). There is a danger that depressed federal and state budgets for institutional science communication will have a negative impact on the capacity of universities to communicate and distribute their science. Relying on marketing strategies left over from a bygone era, public institutions risk the likelihood that evidence-based information will no longer reach most of the public, who ultimately pay the bills. Among most entomologists, outlets such as cooperative extension are sometimes taken for granted, and it’s increasingly common to run into members of the public who are entirely unaware of extension programs. Clearly, we must devote increased effort into bridging this gap between scientists in the lab and stakeholders in the community. On behalf of ESA, the authors call on legislators and leaders of institutions—such as NSF, NIH, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture—to increase national investment into science communication, with ever greater emphasis on its modernization and strategic nature. Succeeding in this regard should increase the level of respect and (we hope) funding directed to public institutions, which would also reflect well on the elected officials who help make that happen. Benefits for American society. The flow of insect-related research from the lab bench and the field to the public has driven the success and competitiveness of many segments of our economy, including agriculture, medicine, and natural resource management. ESA will continue to use science communication as a tool to build a thriving, resilient, and competitive nation of well-informed citizens. Robust communication of science to the consumer helps citizens make informed choices, and also empowers legislators to make evidence-based decisions to ensure sustainable management of resources. Modern businesses spend on average 11% of their revenue on marketing, and the proportion is steadily growing (Gartner for Marketers 2018; Fig. 2). Imagine the combined impact that our research could have if we were to adopt a new formula: invest 89% of everyone’s next grant into staff and research expenses, and put the remaining 11% into communicating findings to the audiences that can benefit from them. The percentage of organizations’ total budgets spent on marketing. Data from August 2018 CMO survey of 2,895 U.S. for-profit companies. Art by Cara Gibson. Get strategic about public communication. The most important part of any communications campaign is neither the technology nor the budget, but the strategy. To design an effective communication strategy, start from the end (Christiano and Neimand, 2018): ask yourself what you want to accomplish, and determine a specific goal that is useful and realistic. That goal then defines the audience you want to target, and, in turn, your tools are defined by what your audience typically consumes. For example, if your desired outcome is a healthy population of pollinators, the output of your project might be a change in policy or in the attitudes of local real estate developers, and you would want to work with these audiences directly through professional relationships, rather than trying to generate public awareness using social media. In academic settings and for complex projects or campaigns, it is useful to develop a logic model to define and align inputs, outputs, and outcomes (Knowlton and Phillips 2012). On behalf of ESA, the authors call on legislators and leaders of institutions—such as NSF, NIH, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture—to increase national investment into science communication, with ever greater emphasis on its modernization and strategic nature. Although dissemination of knowledge to the broader society is laudable, the general public is not a strategically defined audience. Vaguely directed outreach efforts will provide limited return on your investment. Most successful information-delivery institutions, such as cooperative extension, spend a lot of effort on building relationships and trust with specific stakeholders. After the connection is built, message delivery takes comparatively little effort. Your communication efforts should not be driven by technology; rather, choose your medium by determining what is most appropriate for the audience of a specific campaign (NRC 2009). In short, know your audience! Engage with government and other civic institutions. The impact of policies informed by entomological expertise has been tremendous. This is how public health agencies eradicated malaria and screwworm from the U.S., and how we continue defending against the Zika virus and invasive fruit flies, just to name a few examples. To continue to develop effective policies like these, entomologists must increase engagement with policy makers. One of ESA’s signature efforts, the Science Policy Fellows program, connects entomologists with policy makers at the highest levels. Individual entomologists do not need to wait to be selected for such a program. Instead, they can get involved at a local or regional level right now. Developing active communication with government and the public is one of the most powerful tools we can use to make a difference. You don’t have to do it alone. From banks to hospitals, businesses take marketing seriously, but bankers and doctors are not trained to do the marketing. Modern public communication is a highly specialized and technologically demanding endeavor. To be successful, communication campaigns require experts. Likewise, scientists and scientific entities will undoubtedly benefit from partnering with communication specialists. Entomological messages are delivered in a world rich with media and marketing; if we want to be heard, we need to communicate our science in a way that is accessible, strategic, and professional. Easily accessed tools such as smartphone cameras, YouTube, and Twitter have put broadband communication in the hands of most modern scientists. These low-budget approaches to science communication are a major stride forward. However, for science communication to achieve its highest potential, it is advisable to employ professional media personnel whenever possible (Haustein et al. 2015). Science communication is a critical university investment. In addition to scientists taking science communication seriously, a corresponding change is needed on the level of university leadership. In the 21st century, research and educational institutions should include a substantial budget for investment in science communication. Although some academic administrators may consider communications expenses to be frivolous, such dollars, when invested well, routinely reap benefits for the investing research entity as well as for society in general (Rowe et al. 2010). ESA encourages its academic members to discuss the benefits of strategic science communication with their department chairs, deans, and other university leaders. Reliable internal support for science communication is an investment in self-marketing for the university. It contributes to the visibility of individual researchers and ultimately strengthens the university’s brand. A shift from a model in which researchers’ productivity is measured only by publications and grant funding to one that integrates measurements of public impact will increase an institution’s overall accountability, transparency, and adaptability in a world where these values are becoming expected. When universities are seen once again as institutions that produce research rather than hide it, the public will have a greater appreciation of, and support for, higher education (Heimans and Timms 2018). Measuring impacts. Campaigns should have a long-term plan, while also being managed adaptively. Assess what works and what doesn’t, adjust your strategy, repeat. Seek external feedback on your campaign; the farther the feedback source is from your professional comfort zone, the better. Communication professionals among your target audience can help you evaluate the design of a campaign, monitor the live campaign as it is developing, and assess the campaign’s outcomes (NASEM 2016). Funding bodies expect an evaluation of the impact of the projects they fund, so it is best for researchers to get into the habit of thinking about evaluation as a regular part of their process (Friedman 2008). With new tools, discoveries, and research opportunities available to us, this is an unprecedented time to be a scientist. Complacency about how discoveries are communicated is not only a disservice to the public that funds and benefits from this research, but also a path to irrelevance for our entire field. ESA recommends that its members and their institutions increase and emphasize our collective attention to: Strategic communication with well-defined audiences and measurable goals; Collaboration with communication and marketing specialists, including the appropriate level of investment; Communication with government entities and community leaders now, to build trust for times when it is needed. Together, scientists and communication specialists can provide transparency within our fields of research, and over time, we can gain the trust of the audiences needed to advance the field. We will increasingly need the support of people outside the field to influence funding decisions, gain acceptance of technologies, and support the future of our science. The ESA Committee on Science Communication, represented by the authors of this publication, thanks the following individuals for invaluable feedback: Chris Stelzig, ESA; Joe Rominiecki, ESA; May Berenbaum, University of Illinois; Jackson Landers, University of Florida; Erin Cadwalader, Lewis-Burke Associates LLC; and Susan Weller, University of Nebraska.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.