SCIENCE, COMMUNICATION, AND CONTROVERSIES
284 Restarting the conversation: challenges at
the interface between ecology and society 
Peter M Groffman1*, Cathlyn Stylinski2, Matthew C Nisbet3, Carlos M Duarte4, Rebecca Jordan5, Amy Burgin1,
M Andrea Previtali1, and James Coloso6
The exchange of information between researchers, resource managers, decision makers, and the general pub-
lic has long been recognized as a critical need in environmental science. We examine the challenges in using
ecological knowledge to inform society and to change societal actions, and identify a set of options and strate-
gies to enhance this exchange. Our objectives are to provide background information on societal knowledge
and interest in science and environmental issues, to describe how different components of society obtain
information and develop their interests and values, and to present a framework for evaluating and improving
communication between science and society. Our analysis strongly suggests that the interface between science
and society can only be improved with renewed dedication to public outreach and a wholesale reconsidera-
tion of the way that scientists communicate with society. Ecologists need to adopt new models of engagement
with their audiences, frame their results in ways that are more meaningful to these audiences, and use new
communication tools, capable of reaching large and diverse target groups. 
Front Ecol Environ 2010; 8(6): 284–291, doi:10.1890/090160
In contemporary society, scientists hold a considerable industry leaders, elected officials, and/or religious leadersdegree of respect, trust, admiration, and authority. (NSB 2008).
Surveys show that North American and European citi- If scientists have earned this almost unrivaled cultural
zens hold a deep belief in the promise of science to solve authority and public respect, then what explains contin-
problems, as well as to improve quality of life and the ued societal inaction and political gridlock on pressing
economy (Eurobarometer 2008; NSB 2008; Pew problems related to global climate change and environ-
Research Center on People and the Press 2009a). Even mental degradation? Many environmental scientists feel
on controversial topics such as climate change, many that the need for renewed efforts at the interface between
Americans believe scientists have comparatively greater science and society has reached a critical state (Moser and
expertise, are less self interested, and should have greater Dilling 2004). Data on the severity and causes of global
say in policy decisions that affect the environment than environmental problems abound, and the likely future
trajectories related to these problems are remarkably con-
sistent. In most cases, our understanding of what drives
In a nutshell: these changes, albeit incomplete, is sufficient to inform
• Effective communication of science to the public requires societal action to curb or even reverse these trends. Yet,
understanding that most learning occurs outside of the class- the availability of this knowledge does not seem to have
room and is influenced by learners’ interests, prior knowledge, affected the current trajectories projecting continued
social networks, and values/beliefs environmental degradation.
• A “deficit model”, which assumes that public perceptions of
science controversies are rooted in ignorance, is not effective For ecologists, public communication and engagement
for communication; instead, scientists need to “frame” issues in have long been recognized as major priorities and as
ways that resonate with the public mechanisms for catalyzing societal action (Lubchenco
• New communication tools and social science research can help 1998; Jordan et al. 2009). However, many scientists con-
scientists to interact with the public more effectively tinue to base public communication efforts on a set of
false assumptions that limit their effectiveness (Nisbet
and Scheufele 2009). Although several factors contribute
1Cary Institute of Ecosystem Studies, Millbrook, NY *(groffmanp@ to societal inaction in resolving environmental problems,
caryinstitute.org); 2University of Maryland Center for Environmental scientists must recognize that they share part of the
Science, Frostburg, MD; 3School of Communication, American blame. In this paper, we examine the barriers and bottle-
University, Washington, DC; 4Department of Global Change necks in the use of ecological knowledge to change soci-
Research, IMEDEA (CSIC-UIB) Institut Mediterráni d'Estudis etal actions and then identify a set of options and strate-
Avançats, Esporles, Spain; 5Department of Ecology, Evolution, and gies that may help overcome these difficulties. 
Natural Resources, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ; The objectives of the Cary Conference on Effective
6Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia, communication of science in environmental controversies, on
Charlottesville, VA which this Special Issue is based (May 2009 – Cary
www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America
PM Groffman et al. Challenges at the interface between ecology and society
Institute of Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York), 160 000 285
were to (1) evaluate successes and challenges in the use of
information produced by basic ecological research in 140 000
applied environmental science, policy, and management, 120 000
and (2) produce specific recommendations on how indi-
viduals, institutions, and agencies can promote the 100 000
“broader impacts” of their research. The dominant find- 80 000
ing of the conference was that improving the use of eco-
logical information in environmental decision making 60 000
and problem solving requires a rededication to outreach 40 000
and a thorough re-evaluation of our audiences and the
public responsibilities of ecologists. In particular, ecolo- 20 000
gists must make greater efforts to reach non-scientific 0
audiences and need to think more deeply about the social 1994  1996   1998  2000   2002  2004  2006  2008   2010
networks that influence these audiences. Year
The objectives of this paper are to (1) review the state Figure 1. News items on climate change published in English
of societal knowledge and concerns regarding environ- from 1995 to April 2009. Data retrieved from Google News
mental issues, (2) describe how different societal groups using the search term “climate change”.
obtain information and develop their interests and val-
ues, and (3) present recommendations for evaluating and believe that the Earth is getting warmer because of
improving communication between scientists and soci- human activity (Pew Research Center for People and the
ety. In the sections that follow, we briefly summarize Press 2009b). Awareness of, and concerns about, environ-
research on public understanding and concern about the mental quality also vary greatly within the US popula-
environment across the US; review relevant research tion, with poorer, black, and urban residents favoring
from the social sciences on how people acquire informa- environmental protection efforts more than non-
tion, form opinions, and learn about environmental Hispanic white, middle-class, college-educated, and sub-
issues; and describe several possible new public engage- urban residents (Greenberg 2005).
ment initiatives that follow from this research. In Europe, the proportion of surveyed citizens that con-
Subsequent papers in this issue of Frontiers provide analy- sider themselves to be informed on environmental issues
sis and recommendations for how specific groups – ranged from a high of 78% in Denmark to a low of 30% in
including scientists, academic institutions, management Romania (Eurobarometer 2008). Global comparisons show
and policy agencies, interface organizations (eg USDA’s even wider divergence; eg although 99% of Japanese citizens
Cooperative Extension Service, which provides advice to polled report knowledge of climate change, only 15% of
farmers), and advocacy groups – can improve the flow of Beninese citizens who were interviewed and less than 30%
information from science to society. We also direct the of people sampled in most African and many Asian coun-
reader to recent general guides to science communication tries are aware of this issue (Pelham 2009).
(Cox 2009; Olson 2009), as well as recent compilations Temporal variation in concern about environmental
of research from the field of science communication problems is driven by the emergence of other issues, par-
(Bucchi and Trench 2008; Cheng et al. 2008; Holliman et ticularly economics, that become more important to peo-
al. 2008a,b; Kahlor and Stout 2009; Nerlich et al. 2009). ple. A recent poll (Pew Research Center for People and
the Press 2009b) indicates that the proportion of US res-
n Does the public know and care about idents that feel that protection of the environment
environmental issues? should be given priority is at a 30-year low. In a list of 20
priorities, “environment” ranked 16th, and “global warm-
Public understanding of, and concern about, environ- ing” ranked 20th, well below concerns about “jobs”,
mental quality vary markedly in time and space. Between “economy”, “education”, and “health care”. These results
2001 and 2009, the proportion of US residents, surveyed likely reflect the difficult global economic conditions of
in Jones (2009), who rated the overall quality of the envi- 2008 and 2009. In contrast, European Union residents
ronment as “excellent” declined from 46% to 39%, while consider the state of the environment to have as much
those who considered it to be “poor” increased from 6% bearing on their quality of life as economic and social fac-
to 16% over the same time period. These results show tors. Indeed, they rank environmental issues, such as food
that many people in the US are aware of, and concerned and water scarcity and climate change, as the most seri-
about, environmental quality. This may be due in part to ous problems affecting the world, and consider legislation
increased media coverage of environmental issues, espe- and expenditure on environmental protection to be a pri-
cially climate change (Figure 1). However, while 65% of ority (Eurobarometer 2008).
interviewed US residents were able to identify carbon Even though climate change and environmental prob-
dioxide as a gas linked to rising temperatures, only 49% lems continue to be perceived as a lower-tier priority by the
© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org
Number of news items
Challenges at the interface between ecology and society  PM Groffman et al.
286 Proportion of the US adult population in the Six Americas
Proportion represented by area
Alarmed Concerned Cautious Disengaged Doubtful Dismissive
18% 33% 19% 12% 11% 7%
Highest belief in global warming                   n = 2129 Lowest belief in global warming
Most concerned Least concerned
Most motivated Least motivated
Figure 2. Unique audience segments (the Six Americas) on climate change among US adults, 2008. From Maibach et al. (2009).
American public, a recent analysis of US public opinion awareness, interest, motivation, social competencies (ie
on climate change shows that roughly half of a sample of the ability to succeed as a member of society), civic partic-
interviewed US residents (51%) accept the reality of the ipation and expression, and consumer or individual
problem, are concerned, and are motivated to take action choices (Maibach et al. 2008; NRC 2009).
(Maibach et al. 2009; Figure 2). An additional 19% of the In the US, the primary source of news and information
US public who were polled believe that climate change is a about science and technology is television, primarily
problem, but are not sure whether it is a personal threat or local television news broadcasts (NSB 2008; Pew
what can be done about it. This analysis showed that Research Center on People and the Press 2008; Figure 3).
nearly 70% of US residents surveyed accept that climate The internet is second to television for general news and
change is a problem. However, it also suggests that differ- is the source that members of the American public say
ent segments of American society need to connect the they are most likely to turn to for more information about
complexity of climate change to their personal lives and a specific, science-related topic, such as climate change
values, and are looking for direct advice on how they can (Pew Research Center on People and the Press 2008). 
address the problem. Ecologists need to effectively join As a two-way avenue, the internet has led to an explo-
with other societal groups to enable and empower these sion of blogs, “citizen-science” journalism, and other web-
members of the public to participate in policy debates and based vehicles that are competing with traditional infor-
to make personal and consumer choices. mation providers, including professional journalists and
traditional news organizations (Brumfiel 2009). It also
n How does the public learn about environmental offers a potentially effective means for scientists to
issues? develop relationships and connections with engaged
members of the public and to directly respond to erro-
If environmental scientists are going to motivate, enable, neous information and false claims (eg the RealClimate
and sustain public action on climate change and other blog maintained by professional climate scientists;
environmental issues, they will need to apply insights from www.realclimate.org). There are, of course, limits and
social science research on how people learn about science, tradeoffs to these digital media initiatives; the chief limi-
the sources of this knowledge, and the conditions under tation is that because of the selective interests of audi-
which learning can be enhanced. Science experiences in ences, the availability of high-quality scientific informa-
classroom settings certainly affect students’ knowledge, tion online does not mean that the public will be aware of,
interest, and attitudes towards science, both as children have access to, and use it (Nisbet and Scheufele 2009).
and as adults. However, it may come as a surprise to many Increases in science awareness and knowledge can also
scientists that most people learn about science not through derive from entertainment media, such as primetime tele-
formal schooling, but through informal sources, such as the vision series, popular films, and new genres of documen-
media, science centers or museums, and interpersonal con- taries (eg Flagg 2005; Houck 2006), as well as from
tacts (Falk and Dierking 2000; Nisbet and Kotcher 2009). emerging interactive media like educational video games
This informal learning is individually motivated, volun- and participation in virtual worlds (online communities
tary, collaborative, occurs at irregular intervals, and is through which users can interact with one another and
open-ended (Falk and Dierking 2000; NRC 2009). It use and create objects; Neulight et al. 2007). Indeed,
occurs throughout one’s life and encompasses a range of modern society has transitioned from offering relatively
outcomes, including different dimensions of knowledge, few media providers to enveloping the public in a “media
www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America
PM Groffman et al. Challenges at the interface between ecology and society
Where do you get most of your ence or environment-related media that do not align with 287
national and international news? their beliefs, values, and attitudes (Falk 2005; Ho et al.
2008). Finally, a reporter’s description of an issue will also
82 80 influence how it is received. For example, audiences will
74 74 73 74 74 likely question the certainty of climate change when stories
70 Television lack context and inflate controversy (Corbett and Durfee
2004), giving equal weight to viewpoints that lack merit or
represent a minority opinion (Boykoff and Boykoff 2004;
50
45 46 Nisbet 2009). This type of distortion typically occurs when42
40 Internet coverage of an issue shifts from the traditional science jour-
36 37 34 nalism beat to broader coverage by political reporters and
35 Newspaper through opinion-driven outlets, such as cable news, the edi-
torial page, blogs, and political talk radio (Nisbet and Huge
24 24 2006). Overall, reporting of environmental issues often
20 20 21 lacks depth and context and is framed by conflict and con-
13 14 troversy, while scientific consensus receives less attention
(Zehr 2000; Boykoff and Boykoff 2004).
01     02     03      04     05      06    07    08
Year
n New models for how scientists can engage with
Figure 3. Changes in sources of national and international society 
news for US residents from 2001–2008. From Pew Research
Center on People and the Press (2008). Given the variation in societal knowledge and concern
about environmental issues, and the complex ways that
haze” that includes numerous television and radio chan- people learn about these issues, scientists need to recon-
nels, print and online news publications, and online sider the means by which they transmit scientific infor-
social networking opportunities. Research shows that, mation and recommendations for action. A still-domi-
above and beyond any demographic background factors, nant assumption among many scientists and policy
each of these outlets serves as an important information makers is that, when controversies over science occur,
context that can alter and/or reinforce the views of their ignorance is at the root of public inaction. In this “deficit
respective audiences (Besley and Shanahan 2005). model”, science communication initiatives are directed at
Several studies suggest the media can affect public filling in the “knowledge deficit”, in the hope that if
understanding of science, although the most common uninformed members of the public only understood the
impacts are increased awareness of, interest in, and atten- scientific facts, they would be more likely to see the
tion to a science-related issue (Brothers et al. 1991; Miller issue(s) as experts do (Bauer et al. 2007; Nisbet and
et al. 2006). Indeed, simply increasing public awareness of Scheufele 2009; Table 1). 
an environmental issue can enhance its perceived impor- The narrow emphasis of the deficit approach does not
tance, with an issue such as climate change becoming recognize that knowledge is only one factor among many
part of the criteria by which the public may judge the per- that guide how individuals reach judgments; as noted
formance of elected officials, corporations, and other above, ideology, social identity, and trust often have
institutions (Scheufele and Tewksbury 2007). stronger impacts. The public and decision makers need
Of course, audiences do not receive science information more than information and technical knowledge – they
in a vacuum. Interpretations of what they see, hear, and/or need mental frameworks, or models, for “connecting the
read are often contingent upon demographic variables (eg dots” between otherwise apparently isolated events,
gender, age, socioeconomic status), psychographic variables trends, and policy solutions. These linkages make it easier
(eg sense of self, beliefs, values, interest, motivation), and for them to recognize the connection between their every-
mental models (prior knowledge and an understanding of day lives, specific values, and various environmental prob-
the way the world works; eg Chan et al. 1999; Brossard et al. lems (Maibach et al. 2008; Nisbet 2009). In this regard,
2009). The influence of beliefs and values is particularly rel- past research and theory in the specialty of framing can be
evant for environmental issues, which often touch on especially useful to public engagement initiatives.
morality, questions of right and wrong, and potential “Framing” is a conceptual term, taken from the social
changes in individual, collective, or even institutional sciences, that describes interpretative storylines that
behavior. Furthermore, individuals are not likely to assimi- communicate what is at stake in a societal debate and
late information reported in a news story if it is not consis- why the issue matters (Nisbet 2009; Table 2). At a theo-
tent with their existing knowledge and values, or they may retical and descriptive level, framing research offers a
do so in a way that strengthens rather than dispels miscon- thorough explanation for how various actors in society
ceptions (Miller et al. 2006; Storksdieck 2006; NRC 2009). define complex policy debates in politically strategic
As “free-choice learners”, audiences may simply avoid sci- ways, how journalists from various beats selectively cover
© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org
Challenges at the interface between ecology and society  PM Groffman et al.
288 these issues, and how members of a diverse public differ- n New tools, media, and approaches for scientific
entially perceive, understand, and participate in these engagement with society
controversies (Scheufele 1999). Frames help to simplify As scientists consider new approaches for engaging society,
complex issues by placing greater weight on some consid- they also need to consider new research approaches and
erations and arguments rather than others, showing why communication tools (WebPanel 1). Although specific
an issue might be a problem, who or what might be examples are described elsewhere in this Special Issue, here
responsible, and what should be done. In this manner, we focus on general approaches that will help scientists
frames provide common points of reference and meaning understand how a public engagement model can be put
between experts, the media, and the public. into practice and to consider how they might incorporate
In one prominent example of reframing the debate over new principles into their research and outreach activities.
climate change, strategists suggested that climate change
should not be defined as a “pollution problem” that requires Involvement of scientists in research-based
additional regulation but rather as an “energy problem” that communication initiatives
provides an opportunity for economic growth and job cre-
ation in the field of “clean” technology (Nordhaus and The challenges reviewed in this article suggest the need
Schellenberger 2007). Similarly, a public health frame can for large-scale social science research on the nature of
be used to emphasize the possibility that climate-change audiences, the influence of the media, and the effective-
effects may increase the incidence of infectious diseases, ness of specific types of public engagement activities.
heat stroke, and other familiar health problems, especially Efforts at public communication need to be truly inter-
among low-income or high-risk groups (eg the elderly and disciplinary, bringing environmental scientists into col-
children). A more general strategy was offered by scientists laborations with social scientists, communication
such as EO Wilson (Wilson 2006) and evangelical experts, and media professionals who can conduct forma-
Christian leaders such as Richard Cizik, who frame envi- tive and evaluative research, produce state-of-the-art
ronmental stewardship in terms of morality and ethics, media presentations, and design effective public engage-
engaging an audience that might not pay attention to ment initiatives (Maibach et al. 2008; Nisbet and
appeals regarding climate change made on a scientific basis. Scheufele 2009). 
Table 1. A comparison of selected aspects of the deficit and public engagement models
Aspect Deficit model Public engagement model
Major influence(s) on public beliefs Science literacy or the lack thereof Values, trust, identity, and social networks
and decisions
Proposed solution to societal inaction To improve science literacy (ie to fill in the To connect an environmental problem to
“deficit” in the public’s technical understand- public values while building trust and 
ing of an environmental problem) empowering public participation
Communication is a process of… …transmission, which means “popularizing” …dialogue and the two-way exchange of 
and “simplifying” technical information that perspectives; both the public and experts
flows from experts to the public learn from this process
The definition of “reaching the public” Increasing the amount and technical accuracy Reframing a complex issue around relevant 
of science news coverage, focusing on and familiar dimensions; engaging in local
traditional outlets such as the newspaper community forums and dialogue; partnering 
science beat, popular science magazines and with opinion leaders and other societal 
books, or public television programming groups; and complementing traditional 
science coverage with novel entertainment
genres and social-media initiatives
Scientists and their organizations… …are under attack in society; any communi- …hold almost unrivaled trust, authority, and
cation failures are blamed on public respect in society; scientists need to use this 
ignorance, the media, or “politicization” communication capital effectively and wisely,
and “anti-science” otherwise scientists share some of the 
blame for communication failures
The ultimate goal To improve science literacy – once the public To motivate, enable, and empower the public  
is brought up to speed on the science, they to make decisions about environmental 
will view issues and decisions as scientists problems – yet, no matter how accurately
do, controversies will go away, and progress communicated and understood the science,
will occur in dealing with environmental public decisions cannot be separated from
problems values, political context, and necessary
tradeoffs between costs, benefits, and risks
www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America
PM Groffman et al. Challenges at the interface between ecology and society
Table 2. Example “frames”, or models, that make it easier for individuals to recognize the relevance of various envi- 289
ronmental problems to their everyday lives and specific values
Frame Defines science-related issue as…
Social progress …improving quality of life, or as a solution to problems; focus on harmony with 
nature instead of mastery, “sustainability”
Economic development/competitiveness …economic investment, market benefits or risks; local, national, or global 
competitiveness
Morality/ethics …right or wrong; respecting or crossing limits, thresholds, or boundaries
Scientific/technical uncertainty …expert understanding; what is known versus unknown; either invoking or 
undermining expert consensus, calling on the authority of  “sound science”, 
falsifiability, or peer review
Pandora’s box/Frankenstein’s monster/runaway …a call for precautions in the face of possible impacts or catastrophes; out-of-control
science technology, or fatalism, ie action is futile, path is chosen, no turning back
Public accountability/governance …research in the public good or serving private interests; a matter of ownership, 
control, and/or patenting of research, or responsible use or abuse of science in 
decision making, “politicization” 
Middle way/alternative path …finding a possible compromise position, or a third way between conflicting/
polarized views or options
Conflict/strategy …as a game among elites; who’s ahead or behind in winning a debate; battle of 
personalities or groups; (usually journalist-driven interpretation)
Communication and public engagement training for Thus, previous forum participants may be more likely to
young scientists take part in related future discussions and to accept and
As discussed by Whitmer et al. (2010), courses and train- be satisfied with an eventual policy outcome, even if the
ing in communication skills should be made available to decision is contrary to their original preference (Besley
both undergraduate and graduate students majoring in and McComas 2005; Powell and Kleinmann 2008). 
the sciences. These efforts should focus on the relation-
ships between science, the media, and society, and “Going deep” through local/regional digital news
improve students’ ability to communicate effectively with communities
public groups and the media. A more comprehensive
option would be the creation of new interdisciplinary As discussed earlier, most learning about climate change
degree programs that include course work in communica- and other environmental problems occurs via the news
tion, the sciences, policy, law, sociology, and other fields media. Local media outlets, in particular, serve as the
(Nisbet and Scheufele 2009). “connective tissue” that enables communities to identify,
coordinate, plan, and respond to challenges. Unfor-
Greater participation of scientists in local public forums tunately, in recent years, many newspapers have cut their
coverage of science and environment-related topics sub-
Community-based forums that bring motivated members stantially (Brumfiel 2009). Government agencies (at all
of the lay public and stakeholders into a two-way levels), in collaboration with research universities, can
exchange of information and perspectives are perhaps the step in and fill this news gap, through the formation of
major innovation in science communication over the innovative digital news communities that focus on the
past decade. At these meetings, subject-matter experts local and regional implications of climate change and
are joined on stage by a variety of local stakeholders and other environmental problems. These digital news com-
leaders (Einsiedel 2008). Studies have shown that partic- munities would involve collaborations between scientists,
ipants gain a better understanding of technical and social journalists, community organizers, lay people, museums,
aspects of the topic or problem and feel more confident and libraries. Local university scientists and other experts
about their ability to get involved in science-related deci- would contribute content in the form of blog posts, web-
sion making. Participants also often perceive relevant based articles, digital video stories, and other non-tradi-
institutions as more responsive to their concerns, and sci- tional media (WebPanel 1). This type of contribution
entists, policy makers, and other experts as being more presents considerable challenges; both scientists and their
receptive to feedback and respectful of public concerns. institutions will need to expand their perspective beyond
© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org
Challenges at the interface between ecology and society  PM Groffman et al.
290 the narrow view that their communication to society pri- lic. To do this, we must engage with our audiences in new
marily occurs through publications in scientific journals ways, frame our results in ways that resonate with these
(Ashlin and Ladle 2006; Wilkins 2008). audiences, and use new communication tools that can
reach a wide range of target groups. Fortunately, there are
Public participation in ecological research new conceptual and practical tools and approaches avail-
able to help with this transition. The effectiveness of
In addition to participating in local science forums and these tools and approaches will depend on the willingness
contributing to digital news communities about local of individual scientists (with the support of their institu-
environmental problems, engaged lay citizens can also tions) to use them to establish new partnerships and
become involved in citizen-science initiatives (Bonney et reach out to broader audiences. This transition may not
al. 2009). Engaging the general public in ecological be easy and will require hard work and persistence, but
research provides an excellent opportunity to share basic this step is clearly necessary to promote and inspire action
ecology with citizens and to educate and inform them to counteract the environmental problems currently fac-
about natural resource management and policy ing the world.
(Overdevest et al. 2004). Studies have shown that indi-
viduals involved in citizen-science projects – like those n Acknowledgements
attending public forums – gain not just technical knowl-
edge of ecological science but also an understanding of This paper is based on oral presentations by PG, CMD,
how this knowledge is generated and verified (Trumbull CS, and MCN at the 2009 Cary Conference. At that
et al. 2000; Overdevest et al. 2004; Jordan et al. in review). conference, a series of discussion groups with RJ, AB,
MAP, and JC refined the ideas and helped to bring out
Recruiting opinion leaders on environmental issues the major conclusions presented in this paper. The Cary
Conference was supported by grants from the National
Many of the most active lay participants in community Science Foundation (grants #DEB-0840224 and #0949
forums, digital news sites, and citizen-science initiatives 558), the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest
are likely to have strong “opinion-leading” attributes. For Service (grant #09-DG-11132650-083), the US Environ-
more than 60 years, communication researchers have mental Protection Agency (grant #EP09H000638), and the
traced the influence of news and advertising messages in USDA Agriculture and Food Research Initiative Program
local communities, identifying a small group of “opinion (awards #2009-65107-05772 and #2010-85101-20517).
leaders” and “influentials” who pay close attention to The authors thank P Firth and G Woodwell for useful con-
public affairs and advertising, discuss what they learn tributions to the discussions that led to this paper.
from the media with diverse stakeholders, and appear to
be more persuasive in convincing others to adopt an n References 
opinion or course of action (Nisbet and Kotcher 2009). Ashlin A and Ladle RJ. 2006. Science communication: environ-
These opinion leaders do not necessarily hold formal mental science adrift in the blogosphere. Science 312: 201.
positions of power or prestige, but rather serve as the Bauer M, Allum N, and Miller S. 2007. What can we learn from 25
communication go-betweens and information hubs who years of PUS research? Liberating and expanding the agenda.Public Underst Sci 16: 79–95.
alert their peers to what matters among political events, Besley JC and McComas KA. 2005. Framing justice: using the con-
social issues, and consumer choices. Scientists and their cept of procedural justice to advance political communication
organizations have traditionally overlooked this impor- research. Commun Theor 15: 414–36.
tant dimension of public engagement. However, tech- Besley JC and Shanahan J. 2005. Media attention and exposure inrelation to support for agricultural biotechnology. Sci Commun
niques for identifying individuals with opinion-leader- 26: 347–67.
like qualities exist and could be readily applied to Bonney R, Cooper CB, Dickinson J, et al. 2009. Citizen science: a
environmental science issues (Nisbet and Kotcher 2009). developing tool for expanding science knowledge and scientific
literacy. BioScience 59: 977–84.
Boykoff MT and Boykoff JM. 2004. Balance as bias: global warming
n Conclusions and the US prestige press. Global Environ Chang 14: 125–36.
Brossard D, Scheufele DA, Kim E, and Lewenstein BV. 2009.
This is an exciting but difficult time in environmental Religiosity as a perceptual filter: examining processes of opinion
science. Societal interest in environmental issues is high formation about nanotechnology. Public Underst Sci 18: 546–58.
and participation in international efforts to address these Brothers CC. 1991. The impact of television news on public envi-ronmental knowledge. J Environ Educ 22: 22–29.
issues has increased. However, it is difficult to provide rel- Brumfiel G. 2009. Science journalism: supplanting the old media?
evant scientific information in a coherent way that res- Nature 458: 274–77.
onates with the general public, environmental managers, Bucchi M and Trench B (Eds). 2008. Handbook of public commu-
and policy makers. We suggest that scientists need to re- nication on science and technology. London, UK: Routledge.
Chan KKW. 1999. Mass media and environmental knowledge of
evaluate the way that they interact with society. As scien- secondary school students in Hong Kong. Environmentalist 19:
tists, ecologists need to become active, rather than 85–97.
remaining passive, in their communication with the pub- Cheng D, Claessens M, Gascoigne T, et al. (Eds). 2008.
www.frontiersinecology.org © The Ecological Society of America
PM Groffman et al. Challenges at the interface between ecology and society
Communicating science in social contexts: new models, new Nerlich B, Elliott R, and Larson B (Eds). 2009. Communicating
practices. New York, NY: Springer. biological sciences: ethical and metaphorical dimensions. 291
Corbett JB and Durfee JL. 2004. Testing public (un)certainty of sci- London, UK: Ashgate.
ence: media representations of global warming. Sci Commun Neulight N, Kafai YB, Kao L, et al. 2007. Children’s participation
26: 129–51. in a virtual epidemic in the science classroom: making connec-
Cox R. 2009. Environmental communication and the public tions to natural infectious disease. J Sci Educ Technol 16: 47–58.
sphere. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Nisbet MC. 2009. Communicating climate change: why frames
Einsiedel E. 2008. Public engagement and dialogue. In: Bucchi M matter for public engagement. Environment 51: 12–23.
and Trench B (Eds). Handbook of public communication on Nisbet MC and Huge M. 2006. Attention cycles and frames in the
science and technology. London, UK: Routledge. plant biotechnology debate: managing power and participation
Eurobarometer. 2008. Eurobarometer 69: public opinion in the through the press/policy connection. Harv Int J Press-Pol 11:
European Union, spring 2008. European Commission. 3–40.
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb/eb69/eb_69_fir Nisbet MC and Kotcher JE. 2009. A two-step flow of influence?
st_en.pdf. Viewed 17 Jun 2009. Opinion leader campaigns on climate change. Sci Commun 30:
Falk JH. 2005. Free-choice environmental learning: framing the 328–54.
discussion. Environ Educ Res 11: 265–80. Nisbet MC and Scheufele DA. 2009. What’s next for science com-
Falk JH and Dierking LD. 2000. Learning from museums: visitor munication? Promising directions and lingering distractions.
experiences and the making of meaning. Walnut Creek, CA: Am J Bot 96: 1–12. 
AltaMira Press. Nordhaus T and Schellenberger M. 2007. Break through: from the
Flagg N. 2005. Can 90 seconds of science make a difference? death of environmentalism to the politics of possibility. New
Informal Learning Rev 75: 2–22. York, NY: Houghton Mifflin. 
Greenberg M. 2005. Environmental protection as a US national NRC (National Research Council). 2009. Learning science in
government priority: analysis of six annual public opinion sur- informal environments: people, places, and pursuits.
veys, 1999–2004. J Environ Plann Man 48: 733–46. Washington, DC: The National Academies.
Hilgartner S and Bosk CL. 1988. The rise and fall of social prob- NSB (National Science Board). 2008. Science and engineering
lems: a public arenas model. Am J Sociol 94: 53–78. indicators. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. 
Ho SS, Brossard D, and Scheufele DA. 2008. Effects of value pre- Olson R. 2009. Don’t be such a scientist: talking substance in an
dispositions, mass media use, and knowledge on public atti- age of style. Washington, DC: Island Press.
tudes toward embryonic stem cell research. Int J Public Opin R Overdevest C, Huyck Orr C, and Stepenuck K. 2004. Volunteer
20: 171–92. stream monitoring and local participation in natural resource
Holliman R, Whitelegg E, Scanlon E, et al. (Eds). 2008a. Investi- issues. Res Human Ecol 11: 177–85.
gating science communication in the information age: implica- Pelham B. 2009. Awareness, opinions about global warming vary
tions for public engagement and popular media. London, UK: worldwide: many unaware, do not necessarily blame human
Oxford University Press. activities. www.gallup.com/poll/117772/Awareness-Opinions-
Holliman R, Thomas J, Smidt M, et al. (Eds). 2008b. Practicing sci- Global-Warming-Vary-Worldwide.aspx. Viewed 17 Jun 2009.
ence communication in the information age: theorising profes- Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 2008. Internet
sional practices. London, UK: Oxford University Press. overtakes newspapers as news outlet. http://people-press.
Houck MM. 2006. CSI: reality. Sci Am 295: 84–89. org/reports/pdf/479.pdf. Viewed 17 Jun 2009.
Jones JM. 2009. In US, outlook for environmental quality improv- Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 2009a.
ing: forty-one percent say it is getting better, up from 26% last Scientific achievements less prominent than a decade ago.
year. www.gallup.com/poll/117769/Outlook-Environmental- http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/528.pdf. Viewed 15 Jul 2009.
Quality-Improving.aspx. Viewed 17 Jun 2009. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press. 2009b.
Jordan RC, Singer F, Vaughan J, and Berkowitz A. 2009. What Environment, immigration, health care slip down the list.
should every citizen know about ecology? Front Ecol Environ 7: http://people-press.org/reports/pdf/485.pdf. Viewed 15 Jul 2009.
495–500. Powell M and Kleinman D. 2008. Building citizen capacities for
Jordan RC, Howe D, Gray S, and Ehrenfeld J. Developing conser- participation in nanotechnology decision-making. Public
vation knowledge through citizen science: supporting claims. Underst Sci 17: 329–48.
In review. Scheufele DA. 1999. Framing as a theory of media effects. J
Kahlor L and Stout P (Eds). 2009. Communicating science: new Commun 49: 103–22.
agendas in communication. New York, NY: Routledge. Scheufele DA and Tewksbury D. 2007. Framing, agenda setting,
Lubchenco J. 1998. Entering the century of the environment: a and priming: the evolution of three media effects models. J
new social contract for science. Science 279: 491–97. Commun 57: 9–20.
Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, and Leiserowitz A. 2008. Storksdieck M. 2006. Field trips in environmental education.
Communication and marketing as climate change interven- Berlin, Germany: Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag.
tion assets: a public health perspective. Am J Prev Med 35: Trumbull DJ, Bonney R, Bascom D, and Cabral A. 2000. Thinking
488–500. scientifically during participation in a citizen-science project.
Maibach, EW, Roser-Renouf C, and Leiserowitz A. 2009. Global Sci Educ 84: 265–75
warming’s Six Americas 2009. An audience segmentation Whitmer A, Ogden L, Lawton J, et al. 2010.The engaged univer-
analysis. http://environment.yale.edu/uploads/6Americas2009. sity: providing a platform for research that transforms society.
pdf. Viewed 10 Sep 2009. Front Ecol Environ 8: 314–21.
Miller JD, Augenbraun E, Schulhof J, and Kimmel LG. 2006. Wilkins JS. 2008. The roles, reasons and restrictions of science
Adult science learning from local television newscasts. Sci blogs. Trends Ecol Evol 23: 411–13.
Commun 28: 216–42. Wilson EO. 2006. Creation. New York, NY: WW Norton.
Moser SC and Dilling L. 2004. Communicating the urgency and Zehr SC. 2000. Public representations of scientific uncertainty
challenge of global change. Environment 46: 32–47. about global climate change. Public Underst Sci 9: 85–103.
© The Ecological Society of America www.frontiersinecology.org