Skip to main content

Anne Toomey - Five Way Interview

Anne Toomey is an Associate Professor of Environmental Studies and Science at Pace University in New York City. Her research explores how science can be applied to solve real-world environmental and policy challenges and she is the author of the award-winning 2024 book Science with Impact: How to Engage People, Change Practice, and Influence Policy. Anne holds a Ph.D. in Human Geography from Lancaster University, a dual M.A. in Natural Resources and Sustainable Development from American University and the University for Peace, and a B.A. in Communications and Political Science from the University of Rhode Island. She is also co-founder and executive director of Participatory Science Solutions LLC, which supports collaborative, science-based decision-making in communities, organizations, and governments. Her new book is Science with Impact.

Why science?

Science is such a powerful tool, but it’s also one that’s often misunderstood. What excites me about science isn’t really the discoveries - it’s the process. The fact that we have a systematic way to ask better questions about the world and get to a closer understanding of the answers. But it also means we need to be thoughtful about how science is done, who it’s for, and how it connects to the big issues we care about as a society. 

Why this book?

So many researchers really care about making a difference, but there’s still a lot of confusion around how research actually leads to impact. People often imagine a neat pipeline: basic science that leads to applied research that leads to dissemination that leads to impact. But social change isn’t linear, and hearing about new facts doesn’t automatically lead to changed minds or better policies. So how does impact emerge from research? This book begins with that question and explores the answer through real-life examples shared by researchers, science communicators, and policymakers from around the world.

Do you think hype in university press releases is part of the problem? (And if so, how could it be done better?)

Definitely, and not just press releases, but a lot of popular science media that tends to focus on the 'breakthroughs' and leave out the most interesting part: how science actually happens and the stories of the people involved. A growing body of scholarship is showing that what builds trust in science is seeing the human side and acknowledging the uncertainty inherent in the process. If we could share more of the real journeys (and the struggles) that researchers go through, I think it would make science feel more relatable, honest, and inspiring.

What’s next?

Right now I’m working on open access curricula for students that grow out of the book, to train the next generation of researchers to think (and act) differently. One project is a new course called 'Research Methods with Impact' to help undergraduate and graduate students design and conduct research that engages more directly with real world issues. Please email me if you’re interested in these free materials!

What’s exciting you at the moment?

Together with an interdisciplinary team of researchers at Michigan State University, I’ve been doing a series of interviews with scientists, asking them why they do what they do and how their research is related to their personal values. We’re currently in the analysis phase (my favorite part of the research process), so I’m spending my days thinking about what we’re learning from the interviews. It’s helping me understand more about what makes research impactful, which I think will be a lifelong question for me!

These articles will always be free - but if you'd like to support my online work, consider buying a virtual coffee or taking out a membership:


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Infinity Machine - Sebastian Mallaby ****

It's very quickly clear that Sebastian Mallaby is a huge Demis Hassabis fan - writing about the only child prodigy and teen genius ever who was also a nice, rounded personality. After a few chapters, though, things settle down (I'm reminded of Douglas Adams' description of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy ) and we get a good, solid trip through the journey that gave us DeepMind, their AlphaGo and AlphaFold programs, the sudden explosion of competition on the AI front and thoughts on artificial general intelligence. Although Mallaby does occasionally still go into fan mode - reading this you would think that AlphaFold had successfully perfectly predicted the structure of every protein, where it is usually not sufficiently accurate for its results to have direct practical application - we get a real feel for the way this relatively unusual company was swiftly and successfully developed away from Silicon Valley. It's readable and gives an important understanding of...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...
Post a Comment
Read more