Skip to Content

14 March 2024

Making science less sciency: the importance of communicating science effectively to the public

SANParks scientists need and want to communicate more of their science to the public in a suitable way. This requires building capacity and collaborating with communication experts

For some, doing our jobs in support of SANParks’ mandate can lead to hefty criticism from members of the public on social media and other forums. Some colleagues have testified in court because of differing public opinion on conservation interventions. However, SANParks scientists also have a wide diversity of exciting research stories to share with the wider public. Thus, SANParks scientists gathered during February 2023 at Scientific Services’ Rondevlei offices in the Garden Route to learn more about and share experiences of effective science communication.

SANParks’ has a complex mandate, with a core business to protect biodiversity in national parks and also to provide a range of benefits from these. Communities next to or near parks are not the only people with an interest or affected by how parks are managed. A range of stakeholders may be directly or indirectly affected by management decisions, including the general South African public and other interested groups, including a range of national and international stakeholders and visitors. As a result, biodiversity management may at times be at odds with the needs and expectations of different groups and individuals.

“Tailor-make your message and know your audience, do not just throw your message over the wall”

Dr Marina Joubert, science communication expert from Stellenbosch University, enlightened us on the ‘science of science communication’ with the key message that scientists must be involved in communicating conservation messages to the public. Marina cautioned against blind broadcasting of information by “throwing it over the wall”, without knowing the target audience. Rather, a communication strategy is more useful as it enables tailoring messages to specific audiences, using appropriate modes of communication and means of engagement. The complexity of science communication lies in the fact that information is ‘heard’ differently by people depending on their beliefs, value systems, confirmation bias, intuition and emotions.

Science communication research has shown that knowledge alone is not important in shaping attitudes toward science. Rather, people respond to information based on how it makes them feel, and people are more likely to respond to emotional connections. Thus, for example, the success of the film ‘My Octopus Teacher’ and its ability to increase awareness about marine environments and conservation was enabled by the emotions evoked in viewers by the relationship portrayed between man and octopus. Research has shown that emotions influence people’s attitudes towards conserving animals, and that people experience more positive emotions when they think that animals are looking at and connecting with them.

We also learned that sharing scientific information requires building trust with the audience, which requires building connections. A balance is needed between facts and engaging the audience through a relatable story. Marina quoted an article by Maggie Ryan Sandford called “You can’t fight feelings with facts: start with a chat”. Relationship building is key, and the importance of relationships was a theme that resounded through many of the sessions, including in engaging in conflict negotiation and influencing policy. We live in an information age where information can be created and shared by almost anyone and large volumes of information on the internet and social media is based on perceptions and disinformation. So, not only do we have an obligation to communicate about our work, but we require a strong voice to build trust, engage with and gain support from the public, and combat misinformation. As many factors drive decision-making, including different ideologies, it is crucially important to provide scientific facts and insights while building relationships to gain support and understanding for conservation approaches.

“You can’t fight feelings with facts: start with a chat.”

Some tourists and residents neighbouring national parks have emotional attachments to particular species and disagree with some management decisions, but they often don’t have the whole picture. Instead of focussing on the species being removed or controlled, more information should be made available on the other species that benefit from the management action. For example, when alien species are removed, and natural systems restored, areas can accommodate more indigenous species and ecosystems can provide more services, such as flood attenuation and erosion control. Likewise, enabling natural fire regimes enables ecosystems to function optimally to better support the multitude of plants and animals that live in them. The challenge is to make these messages into relatable stories that resonate with and move people so that we can build a common understanding and sense of care to work together towards conserving biodiversity.

Although some of us have worked with the SANParks communications team, many haven’t, and we realised that more collaboration is needed between the two groups to harness each other’s skills and communicate science around conservation issues in better ways. One initiative that we discussed at the workshop was working with the communications department to communicate stories from our annual research report to the public through blog and social media posts.

This article was written by Dian Spear, Corli Coetsee, Izak Smit and Jessica Hayes and originally published in the 2022/2023 Research Report.