Nancy Knowlton was definitely my favorite speaker of the four presenters. For me, she had the most compelling case for conservation and conservation biologists. There were two points she made that really stuck with me. The first, was that conservation biologists are terrible communicators when it comes to sharing their science with the public. The second, was that conservation biologists are too pessimistic.
The public will do nothing about a conservation issue if they do not understand it, or they believe that there is no hope to solve it. Knowlton explained that while scientists find facts and numbers compelling, the public finds narratives compelling. Therefore, as conservation biologists, we need to change the fundamental way that we…show more content… Inspired by her talk, I attended a breakout session on “Inspiring Positive Action”. One of the speakers presented on the importance of narratives in science. He explained that scientists are so focused on the “AAA” model of storytelling when, in reality, we should be presenting research in the “ABT” format. That is, conservationists often make the case that a is wrong, and b is bad, and c is worse, and d is terrible (AAA: And, And, And). They do not present any kind of hope in their science narrative, and as a consequence they do not inspire action. Therefore, we as a community, need to change our story. We still need to explain that a is wrong, and b is bad, but that c is developing, therefore we may be able to solve the problem (ABT: and, but, therefore). All in all, we must change our tone to galvanize the public to make a change, by showing them that success is within our reach. We need to give them hope. That was the entire point of Knowlton’s presentation, and the Earth Optimism Summit. We need to start sharing stories of hope and success, alongside our conservation issues, so that people feel like they can actually do
