Welcome to Econnect Communication’s May 2004 newsletter.

Jenni and Michelle are presenting papers at the Public Communication of Science and Technology conference (www.pcst2004.org) in Barcelona this week - extracts of their papers are included in this month’s newsletter.

Following the conference they will spend the rest of June cycling around northern Spain and will include some insights from their adventures in the next edition of the newsletter.

If you have any feedback or ideas you’d like to add to our newsletter, we’d love to hear from you – especially if you have inspiring things to contribute to our next month’s edition.

Regards,

Econnect Communication

Jenni Metcalfe, Michelle Riedlinger, Terri Telford

This month – May 2004

1. The Science Communication Professional in Australia – by Jenni Metcalfe and Toss Gascoigne

2. Identity and Communication: Who Collaborates in Collaborative Research? – by Michelle Riedlinger, Susan McKay and Cindy Gallois

3. Changing Lives and Landscapes in the Philippines – by Jenni Metcalfe, Gerado Boy, Aurora Laotoco, Eldon Ruiz

4. Subscribe to our free monthly e-newsletter

5. Contact Us

1. The Science Communication Professional in Australia

By Jenni Metcalfe and Toss Gascoigne

Abstract:

The Australian Science Communicators (ASC) was formed in February 1994 in response to a demand by professionals working around Australia for an organisation that would help them to network and share ideas. Since this time science communication has become a recognised profession in Australia. This paper reports the results of a survey of science communicators and explores the questions: who are science communicators, what do they do, what influences them, and how do they see their career path.

Extract:

What do science communicators do?

The five most common tasks reported by survey respondents were:

• Writing (94%)

• Editing (80%)

• Web development (70%)

• Partner/client/stakeholder liaison (61%)

• Event management (56%)

The least common tasks reported were:

• Political liaison/lobbying (20%)

• Communication research (23%)

• Audio-visual production (30%)

• Scientific research (30%)

• Exhibition design and management (41%)

Science communicators are most likely to interact with scientists (96%), the general community (88%), research managers (71%) and journalists (70%). They are least likely to interact with politicians (36%).

When asked to define science communication, almost all survey respondents defined it in terms of making science more meaningful to the public, whether this was through translating complex concepts or by creating a dialogue.

What influences science communicators?

The biggest influence for getting people involved in science communication is an interest in science (92% said consistently or sometimes) and/or a background in science (83% said consistently or sometimes). However, training in science communication also appears to be important (49% said consistently or sometimes).

The most common occupations prior to becoming a science communicator were students (31%) followed by scientists (23%).

When science communicators were asked about what they enjoyed most about science communication, the most common responses were about:

• Translating science into laymen’s language for the general public

• Meeting interesting people, including interacting with researchers

• Finding out about stimulating ideas and new scientific advances

• The varied nature of the job of a science communicator, which often involved a great deal of creativity

• Seeing the general public, including children, gain enjoyment from science

When communicators were asked what they found most frustrating about working as a science communicator, they highlighted the lack:

• of willingness by scientists to communicate

• resources, especially funding

• value put on science communication, especially by organisational managers

• appreciation by media representatives for the needs of science (for accuracy

etc)

• recognition for science communication

The full paper can be viewed at www.econnect.com.au/news_papers.htm.

2. Identity and Communication: Who Collaborates in Collaborative Research?

By Michelle Riedlinger, Susan McKay and Cindy Gallois

Abstract:

Research collaborations involving stakeholder communities outside the research area are believed to produce more innovative and useable outcomes, and increase the support of industry and community groups for research. Yet social researchers also report that members of diverse research teams have a genuine inability to collaborate due to poor communication. Using concepts gathered from social identity theory (SIT), this paper examines the identity processes that enhance or inhibit communication between researchers and external stakeholder communities in areas of collaborative research. Participants highlighted communication activities associated five goals. All goals were associated with the management of social identity.

Extract:

Support for industry and end-user-relevant research is on the increase internationally and the Australian government offers many incentive programs encouraging research-industry partnerships and rewarding organisations that promote the uptake of technology.

A number of studies have found, however, that diverse research groups often fail to collaborate due to poor intergroup communication. Social identity theory (SIT) has already demonstrated its usefulness in examining group processes in organisational contexts including the role of stakeholders and is the theoretical approach adopted for investigating communication between research groups and external stakeholders in this study.

The communication activities with external stakeholders discussed by communication

professionals centred around five goals. These goals were:

(1) developing source credibility for the CRC;

(2) facilitating constructive contact between the CRC, CRC researchers and external stakeholders;

(3) using boundary spanners in intergroup communication;

(4) accommodating to the needs and values of stakeholder groups, with a focus on group differences between the CRC and external stakeholder groups; and

(5) raising awareness among stakeholders about CRC needs and values, including actively engaging in agenda setting.

The full paper can be viewed at www.econnect.com.au/news_papers.htm.

3. Changing Lives and Landscapes in the Philippines

By Jenni Metcalfe, Gerado Boy, Aurora Laotoco, Eldon Ruiz

Abstract:

This paper discusses the participation of farmers and scientists in landcare in the Philippines. Landcare in the Philippines started as a grass roots movement from local small-holder farmers engaging with scientists from the World Agroforestry Centre (ICRAF) in northern Mindanao in the early 1990s. In the last decade, landcare has spread throughout Mindanao and to the Visayas through the involvement of international research organisations and aid agencies from Australia, Spain and South East Asia. Its success at dramatically increasing the uptake by farmers of conservation technologies and methods can be at least partly explained by the communication methods and approaches used to gain local and widespread interest in and demand for Landcare practices. This paper will explore this case study using a social change model to identify communication practices for successful engagement between researchers and local people in developing countries.

Extract:

There are now many active and dynamic landcare groups that have formed amongst the more than 400 groups that have started since the inception of the Landcare Program in the Philippines. These groups are carrying out a wide range of activities and providing a variety of services to their local communities at the sitio, barangay and municipal levels.

Active and successful Landcare associations have formed in Claveria, Lantapan and Ned.

The landcare approach has been effective at creating social change in parts of Mindanao by:

1. identifying people’s aspirations for protecting and sustaining their livelihoods

2. assisting understanding about soil conservation issues and technologies

3. developing the skills of farmers and their communities in implementing

conservation technologies and organising groups

4. promoting simple conservation technologies and providing a critical mass to

access funding and support – convenient systems for people

5. developing trust within partnerships and promoting and supporting farmers to

train each other

6. providing opportunities for people to visit sites and farms where they can see

conservation farming and landcare in action – change moments

7. reinforcing people’s progress and success

The full paper can be viewed at www.econnect.com.au/news_papers.htm.

5. Subscribe to our free monthly e-newsletter

Subscribe/unsubscribe: send email to admin@econnect.com.au with “subscribe” or “unsubscribe” in subject line.

View past newsletters: http://www.econnect.com.au/news_newsletter.htm

6. Contact Us

Econnect Communication works with science, environment, ecotourism and natural resource management agencies to:

evaluate and develop communication strategies
write and design products that meet audience needs
run workshops that train staff and management in communication skills

Contact us: phone 07 3846 7111; email admin@econnect.com.au

Website: http://www.econnect.com.au

New tips: http://www.econnect.com.au/news_qt.htm

Articles in this newsletter can be reproduced if Econnect Communication Pty Ltd

is acknowledged as the source