Why rhetoric matters for ecology

Abstract

Increasingly, scientists and funding agencies such as the US National Science Foundation are recognizing the need for better science communication and more effective broader impacts activities. Compelled to make research more relevant to public stakeholders and policy makers, researchers look for ways to gain the necessary skillset to move their science from the field and laboratory into public forums. We suggest that the ancient discipline of rhetoric provides a useful – and underutilized – path forward. Building from the fundamental connections between ecology and rhetoric and drawing from practical examples at the intersection of these two fields, we demonstrate how rhetoric can inform training in science communication for better academic writing and broader impacts, and can promote interdisciplinary and cross‐institutional collaborations that support sustainability science. Integrating rhetoric and ecology helps to address complex and pressing sustainability problems through improved understanding, cooperation, and science and policy actions.

Genomic Contextualism: Shifting the Rhetoric of Genetic Exceptionalism

“…In order to assess genetic exceptionalism as an idiom for debate, we turn to rhetoric, the classical art of argument and persuasion first codified by Aristotle about 2,500 years ago (Aristotle 1991). Contemporary application of this rhetorical tradition to scientific and medical communication emphasizes the ways in which language shapes how we talk about policy and practice (Druschke and McGreavy 2016). Rhetoric encourages a focus on the means of persuasion: how one argues for competing claims; what argumentative or emotional impact the names or descriptions used might contain; what evidence must be provided; what ancillary claims must be made in developing the case for one’s position; and so on.…”

Twenty actions for a “good Anthropocene”—perspectives from early-career conservation professionals

“…Public education and scientific communication in the Anthropocene should utilize positive and relatable language to describe the natural world and the Anthropocene to promote a connection between individuals and the natural world around them. Utilizing terms and phrases such as "nature's contribution to people" instead of "ecosystem services" (Díaz et al 2018), or "wildlife" instead of "taxa", can help forge a connection between audiences and nature, leading to positive shifts in behaviour (Druschke and McGreavy 2016). Conservation scientists should look to partner with artists, social media influencers, and most notably media, to produce novel and aspirational communication strategies to convey a better Anthropocene to the greater public.…”

A longing for the natural past: unexplored benefits and impacts of a nostalgic approach toward restoration in ecology

“…Nostalgia, when paired with knowledge of the historical ecology from the area, may also successfully be used as a past‐oriented approach that can improve rhetorical arguments, communication, and understanding with stakeholders that uniquely interpret their surrounding landscape (Druschke & Hychka ; Druschke & McGreavy ). Baldwin and Lammers () indicated that people that identify with conservative ideology in the U.S. have more past‐oriented perspectives that, when framed in the proper context, caused them to adopt more pro‐environmental attitudes toward addressing climate change.…”