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

It's On You - Nick Chater and George Loewenstein *****

Going on the cover you might think this was a political polemic - and admittedly there's an element of that - but the reason it's so good is quite different. It shows how behavioural economics and social psychology have led us astray by putting the focus way too much on individuals. A particular target is the concept of nudges which (as described in Brainjacking ) have been hugely over-rated. But overall the key problem ties to another psychological concept: framing. Huge kudos to both Nick Chater and George Loewenstein - a behavioural scientist and an economics and psychology professor - for having the guts to take on the flaws in their own earlier work and that of colleagues, because they make clear just how limited and potentially dangerous is the belief that individuals changing their behaviour can solve large-scale problems. The main thesis of the book is that there are two ways to approach the major problems we face - an 'i-frame' where we focus on the individual ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Introducing Artificial Intelligence – Henry Brighton & Howard Selina ****

It is almost impossible to rate these relentlessly hip books – they are pure marmite*. The huge  Introducing  … series (a vast range of books covering everything from Quantum Theory to Islam), previously known as …  for Beginners , puts across the message in a style that owes as much to Terry Gilliam and pop art as it does to popular science. Pretty well every page features large graphics with speech bubbles that are supposed to emphasise the point. Funnily,  Introducing Artificial Intelligence  is both a good and bad example of the series. Let’s get the bad bits out of the way first. The illustrators of these books are very variable, and I didn’t particularly like the pictures here. They did add something – the illustrations in these books always have a lot of information content, rather than being window dressing – but they seemed more detached from the text and rather lacking in the oomph the best versions have. The other real problem is that...
Post a Comment
Read more

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