What role should a scientific society play in communicating information to policy makers?

The aim of the Royal Society of South Australia (RSSA) is the promotion and diffusion of scientific knowledge, principally to scientists. Further we aim through our monthly meetings, continued publication of this journal (the Transactions of the RSSA), small research grants scheme and occasional natural history publications. Both the Transactions and grants scheme cater to the scientific community. And although our monthly meetings and library are open to the public, they too cater mostly to the scientific community. Our natural history publications have a wide audience amongst the general public and we offer some support to the highly successful Science in the Pub Adelaide (http://scienceinthepubadelaide.org.au/index.html), which attracts large general public audiences. Other groups, such as RIAus (http://riaus.org.au/), have the mission of communicating science to the general public. So although the RSSA leaves the task of broad public science communication engagement to others, do we have a role to play in engaging with government to inform policy?

As the peak professional body for natural history scientists in South Australia our members constitute a large, experienced and diverse group of researchers. This expertise is a largely untapped pool that could be used, under the auspices of the society, to provide independent input and scientifically sound advice to affect evidence-based problem solving in our state. Furthermore, by presenting scientific information in a way that is free from political bias, and informed by rigorous peer review, we can serve any group or individual seeking to inform policy and practice by government. Over the past few years we have made tentative steps towards providing such information.

Two of the largest issues faced by South Australia are the management of our chief source of fresh water, the River Murray, and the effects of, and adaptation to, future climate change. In response to the Draft Murray-Darling Basin Plan, we provided an evidence-based submission as “senior elected follows of the Royal Society of South Australia”, and published the submission in the Transactions (Souter, Williams, Jennings, & Fitzpatrick, 2013). More recently, in the interests of communicating locally relevant climate science we disseminated information about the Climate Change in South Australia special edition of the Transactions (Vol. 139 part 1) to all 63 of the South Australia’s Commonwealth and State politicians, as well as the Prime Minister of Australia and Federal Minister of the Environment. On 4 December 2015, which coincided with the first week of the Paris COP 21 conference  (21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change), at a time when we believed interest in climate change should be at its highest, we sent an email with which was attached the special issue editorial (Williams & Souter, 2015) and climate change symposium synthesis report (Souter & Williams, 2015).

Of the 63 members who received the email one State Greens Senator responded directly to our email and showed an interest in the material. We received a few confirmatory emails acknowledging receipt of our correspondence but they did not reference the content. Whilst none of the elected politicians felt the need to contact us with further queries, a number of state politicians from the Liberal, Labor and Green parties did mention having received the information (Faith Coleman, pers. comm.). It would seem that simply providing information, whilst a fairly simple undertaking through publishing peer-reviewed science and then informing people about it, may not necessarily gain the attention of policymakers. Furthermore, we lack a mechanism for understanding the impact of such communications.

Nonetheless, these activities are a first step in providing independent scientific advice on matters of importance to South Australia. As we do not have a mechanism to present a society-endorsed position we presented ourselves as senior elected fellows. Developing a mechanism to present an RSSA position is an important step if we are to continue to try and disseminate information to South Australia’s decision makers. Additional strategies to gain their attention and interest are also required. The range of activities we could undertake includes critically reviewing relevant government policy, developing position papers and providing scientific briefings. How far we as a scientific society take this nascent initiative is ultimately up to the members.

As an independent non-government organisation, the RSSA has the ability to present a unique view point, indeed as former President Prof. W.D. (Bill) Williams stated, a special responsibility – “to provide an opportunity for views to be aired which may not necessarily conform to the party line, current ideology or generally accepted scientific views” (Williams, 1994). Since that time it is easy to argue, especially when one considers the science of climate change, that ideological arguments have grown stronger and more dangerous to the future of our planet. Furthermore, we appear to be entering a period of fact-free policymaking, fake news and alternative truth. Perhaps it is time to extend on the special responsibility advocated by Professor Williams over 20 years ago; for the RSSA to provide independent and consolidated evidence-based positions on matters of scientific importance to South Australia.