Ripley: How long after we’re declared overdue can we expect a rescue?
Hicks: … Seventeen days.
Hudson: Seventeen days? Hey man, I don’t wanna rain on your parade, but we’re not gonna last seventeen hours! Those things are gonna come in here just like they did before. And they’re gonna come in here…
Ripley: Hudson!
Hudson: …and they’re gonna come in here AND THEY’RE GONNA GET US!
Ripley: Hudson! This little girl survived longer than that with no weapons and no training. Right?
[Newt salutes]
Hudson: Why don’t you put her in charge?
Ripley: You better just start dealing with it, Hudson! Listen to me! Hudson, just deal with it, because we need you and I’m sick of your #@&%#$!
Aliens (1986; 20th Century Fox)
At the recent International Marine Conservation Congress, one of the buzzwords was #oceanoptimism (eg see this blog). This hashtag was launched on World’s Ocean’s Day (8th June) this year, and has subsequently gone somewhat viral. But why is “ocean optimism” such a big deal?
There was a concern among many marine conservationists that the situation in the world’s oceans is so dire, and the message given by marine scientists is so bleak, that the constant negativity portrayed by marine scientists will lead to the public turning off, and/or conservation practitioners feeling that they were working against insurmountable odds. There are numerous articles on this topic in the scientific literature (e.g. this). The fact that the media often concentrates on the controversial and disastrous to sell a story can often exacerbate problems (e.g. this and this) especially when worst case scenarios do not happen (often because a conservation intervention occurred) and scientists are portrayed as being over negative Eeyores and crying wolf on environmental issues.
The idea of portraying a more positive marine conservation message was not new – there was program called Beyond the Obituaries: Success Stories in Ocean Conservation at the 1st International Marine Conservation Congress in 2009 (click here for a video of the event).
However, the quest and insistence for more optimism and positive messaging in conservation could lead to problems. For example the upcoming World Parks Congress is specifically looking for positive messages for protected area management. This has led to concerns by many that by filtering out the negative presentations to concentrate on the positive, it may make the situation seem better than it really is. Especially in a venue where agencies and governments are presenting their “success stories”, their inactivity, failures and downright disasters may be overlooked and downplayed.
There is also the danger that filtering out all but the positive messages -and being overly optimistic -could be used by “the bad guys” to argue that the conservationists are just being overly negative. For example, developers who claim that a destroyed ecosystem could easily be “fixed” with a replacement wetland or a protected area, like they found claimed in a scientific paper. Or politicians stating that there are plenty of polar bears left because a local population is doing well (a prime example of this can be found here). So there is as much danger if scientists bias their work with too positive a message, as with biasing with too negative a message.
But why the Aliens quote at the beginning of this article?
Well the whole idea about “ocean optimism” is not to be like Hudson but rather more like Ripley , to help empower marine conservationists and give hope to the public despite – as far as the marine environment is concerned – being faced by many diverse and weighty problems and threats.
However, if one filters out all but the positive success stories, there is the danger of modern conservation being perceived as this with everything being fine and dandy, with governments and agencies doing an excellent job at conservation, when the actual situation is substantively different.
So for promoting conservation optimism and hope we need less of this and more of this, and of this, and of this, and especially this!
Acknowledgements
Many thanks to Brett Favaro for spurring me to write this blog, and for providing suggestions some of the youtube clips. Also for distracting me so much that I didn’t complete any of my to-do-list today and instead spent way too much time looking for video clips of aliens.
Hi Chris,
Loved your blog, especially the video clips, and your film directorial savvy at determining the quality of hope we might be seeking. You’re right – It’s the way we talk about hope and science-based conservation successes that matters. In my experience, talking about hope is framed by two pervasive beliefs: If we speak about hope, we must not know how bad things are. And, if we speak of resilience, people will think they don’t have to change. These beliefs are so deeply ingrained in the ways we talk about the environment, we continue to hammer home the bad news. The trouble is, failure to separate the urgency of environmental issues from the fear-inducing ways we communicate them, has blinded us to the collateral damage of apocalyptic storytelling. There is an ever increasing body of research literature from the social sciences, including this recent study co-authored by your colleagues at George Mason, that hope is a critical motivator for environmental engagement http://grist.org/climate-energy/to-motivate-climate-activists-use-optimism/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Daily%2520June%252027&utm_campaign=daily
For more about the birth of #oceanoptimism check out Ray’s great blog https://medium.com/@rdearborn/hey-environmentalists-lets-stop-being-so-depressing-c0d28bd7cad5