Comment pubs.acs.org/est
Crossing The Imaginary Line
M
petty jealousy they might feel about the media spotlight shining on a colleague, community members have legitimate concerns about the implications of environmental activism in the research world because it undermines the standing of academics as objective seekers of truth. If we move from being educators and researchers to allies of a particular cause, no matter how just, we jeopardize the social contract that underpins the tradition of financial support for basic research. At a time when environmental research is highlighting an urgent need to implement policies that are costly or unpopular, this contract is too precious to lose. Entering the fray also exposes the community to potential retaliation from vindictive politicians: I hesitate to imagine what Governor Scott Walker would have done to the already reduced budget of the state’s university if his office had been implicated in a negligent response to lead poisoning exposed by a University of Wisconsin researcher. From everything that I have been able to learn, the four researchers listed above crossed the imaginary line because they felt that they had run out of alternatives. I do not know all of the details of their stories, but I have the sense that it is often a lonely road that one follows at both personal and professional cost. In my opinion, the act of crossing over should be viewed as a final alternative that is only exercised when all else fails. To reduce the likelihood that any more members of our community will need to take this potentially damaging step, we need to make some changes. First, we must increase our active support of efforts to rebuild State and Federal agencies that have been diminished by budget cuts and political meddling. We must do a better job teaching our studentsthe people who eventually have the power to prevent these problems from happeningabout their professional responsibilities, emphasizing their obligation to push back when faced with injustice. When we encounter failures that resist resolution through the normal channels, we should protect ourselves and our institutions by seeking out nongovernmental organizations that employ full-time activists to translate research findings into action. By supporting the work of these groups we provide expertise that they might not otherwise be able to afford, without risking our standing as researchers. But there still may be times when this does not work. Although the media narrative demands a lone hero, that community member will be more powerful if their peers assist them. The next time that a researcher has exhausted all other avenues, I hope that he or she will cross the imaginary line with the full support of their community.
any of us who currently publish in ES&T were attracted to this field for reasons other than the long hours and opportunities to spend more time with the people who were also chosen last when forming teams in gym class. We became environmental researchers as part of a larger social movement that promised to make the world a better place. For some, this youthful idealism receded as the pressures of independent research and the act of balancing career and personal life increased. For others, the desire to protect human health and the environment became the touchstone guiding decisions about research and career development. When research on environmental problems seems like it is not having enough of an impact, mature idealists turn to outreach. This is convenient from the standpoint of career advancement because academics are expected to engage the community. Advising the local chapter of Engineers Without Borders, giving a talk at a local science museum, and serving on a government advisory panel are all counted by promotion committees. More often than not, the combination of meaningful research, mentorship and a few hours per week of outreach fulfills the need of the researcher to improve the planet. But encouraging forays into the real world comes with unintended consequences as researchers are exposed to situations where the system designed to protect public health and the environment has failed. Facing injustice, an idealistic researcher might just step over the imaginary line that separates the dispassionate researcher from the environmental activist. Marc Edwards’ actions in Flint are probably the most visible recent example of this phenomenon, but he is hardly the only researcher who has been in the media spotlight. Dan Carder of West Virginia University gained the world’s attention by exposing irregularities in the Volkswagen’s emissions systems. James Hansen crossed the imaginary line eight years ago to draw attention to the continued growth in greenhouse gas emissions and has been in the news ever since. And Tyrone Hayes has engaged in a very public battle with the pesticide industry about the effects of atrazine on the endocrine systems of frogs. These high-profile cases represent only a small subset of the researchers engaged in activism. Scores of other environmental researchers have crossed the imaginary line without being noticed by the international media. The act of speaking out against a corrupt or incompetent system may be the product of a culture where idealism, personal responsibility, and Hollywood’s dramatic sensibilities conspire to create a narrative about the noble individual fighting injustice. Outside of the United States, researchers still care about the environment, but they rarely pursue their solutions in the public eye. That does not mean that they lack commitment. In countries with weaker traditions of independent media, the seemingly innocent act of studying a polluted river or raising questions about health effects of an industrial practice can derail a career and expose a researcher to reprisals from powerful political interests. When a peer becomes enmeshed in an American-style media controversy, researchers quickly become uneasy. Aside from the © 2016 American Chemical Society
David Sedlak, Editor-in-Chief Published: September 2, 2016 9803
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b04432 Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 9803−9804
Environmental Science & Technology
■
Comment
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Notes
Views expressed in this editorial are those of the author and not necessarily the views of the ACS. The author declares no competing financial interest.
9804
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.6b04432 Environ. Sci. Technol. 2016, 50, 9803−9804
