Life science

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Advocating the chemical sciences as essential in addressing the global challenges of the future, the Royal Society of Chemistry's Dr Richard Pike considers the modern role of the learned society

The Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC) is Europe's and one of the world's largest learned societies for promoting chemical sciences, and can trace its origins back to 1841, a time when many scientific bodies were being established in the UK and continental Europe. But what is the modern role of the organisation, and others like it, particularly at a time when charitable bodies – which, indeed, the RSC is – have increasing obligations to demonstrate their contribution to society as a whole, rather than just their members, or solely the scientific community?

Central to its activities are publishing and the promotion of science, education and the wider role of chemistry and related subjects in the world today. Underpinning these is the theme of disseminating verifiable, evidence-based information, expanding the knowledge base, training and developing skills, and influencing decision-makers in government, industry, academia and other sectors. This has to be set against the backdrop of an increasingly complex environment driven by politics, commercial interests, diversity in education and career opportunities, globalisation, and the major international challenges of climate change, population growth, and resource and waste management.

In a world with almost unlimited access to information, covering the whole spectrum of reliability and bias, if the time was right for the independent, balanced view, then it is now. And surveys show that such views are highly regarded by the public, in contrast to those coming directly from other sources with overtly vested interests, which are often treated with suspicion, or considered merely as 'spin'. Not only that, somewhat perversely, the world is becoming more compartmentalised. Even within chemistry, a specialist in nanotechnology may find the language of atmospheric photochemistry perplexing. Physics and chemistry can sometimes seem poles apart, and engagement between the science and non-science communities is typically fraught with misunderstandings. That was not always the case, as Richard Holmes' excellent recent book, 'The Age of Wonder', reveals of the period from Captain James Cook to Charles Darwin.

In today's confusion of information, the learned society can provide the bigger picture and its implied priorities, and set a framework for leadership. This often involves challenging the status quo, which carries both risks and rewards. Getting the balance right, though, has enormous benefits to the wider community, and helps bridge that gap between the two cultures first identified by CP Snow. The RSC has risen to this challenge, painting the picture of the real issues of energy and climate change, initiating the debate on the true state of education in the UK and reaffirming that creationism should not feature in school science lessons. At the other extreme of dissemination, the organisation published over 7,000 specialist scientific articles last year in its peer-reviewed journals, contributed by authors from around the world, which added to the formal international knowledge base of the chemical sciences.

But an indication of the way ahead for science, and particularly chemistry, is linked to the examples above. Somewhat surprisingly, a survey of hits on the RSC website showed that it was not climate change or education that attracted most attention, but the debate on science and creationism. What insight does this reveal? It is surely that we do not live in a world where science answers all questions for everyone, and nor could that ever be. Those accessing the website probably covered the entire range from adherents to Richard Dawkins to followers of creationism or 'intelligent design', but, more importantly, those in the middle interested in seeing how this controversial issue was being addressed.

It tells us that many people, even scientists, have, as part of their make-up, value, faith or behavioural systems that cannot always be swayed necessarily by the rigour of scientific argument. And this gives us a clue that in addressing key scientific issues underpinned by a strong ethical or behavioural element, such as the mitigation of climate change, science alone cannot provide the solution. The challenge will be to see how, most effectively, we can harness that almost intangible of attributes within the human psyche to motivate entire populations to work collaboratively for the common good, and with people they will never meet and never talk to, nor celebrate with, when the goal is reached.

That could characterise many of the priority areas for the future. Besides energy and climate change, there is water and the air, food and human health, all dominated by a global rather than nation-centric outlook. There is the way future cities will develop, as populations migrate from the land to urban centres, and implications for lifestyle and recreation. And beyond energy, we need to consider how the future is to be provided for within the constraints of finite raw materials and feedstocks.

It is a demanding agenda, and yet with the right education, research and development, and commitment by governments, much can be done. In the supply chain from primary to tertiary education, there can be no substitute for teaching the fundamentals of science and, later, the separate disciplines of chemistry, physics and biology, supported by mathematics. Without this, no amount of discussion on 'context' will leave durable skills, and we will continue to have the many teenagers finishing secondary school being able to talk eloquently about energy, but not knowing what it is (the equivalent of work, or force times distance), or being unable to do a single science-related calculation. They will continue to believe that smoke comes out of a cooling tower (rather than water vapour), and will not know what a cooling tower is for. And they will be convinced that biofuels are the way ahead, not knowing that, given a plot of land, solar devices could produce 50-100 times more energy in the course of a year.

They will not have the facts about nuclear energy because this features hardly at all in school syllabuses, despite the nuclear route being the priority in addressing the UK energy gap over the next 20 years. And, extraordinarily, they will believe that oil and gas, formed from plants thousands of years ago – as one textbook had it – rather than marine micro-organisms hundreds of millions of years ago, will be running out soon, instead of potentially lasting well into the next century. Getting the right, relevant information will be crucial in identifying and addressing key issues, and participating in the debate. In the UK, the diversity of qualifications in science coupled with, nevertheless, constraints on availability (such as with GCSEs and International GCSEs) are actually widening the gap in the opportunities being presented for learning, and this must be addressed. This has to be accompanied by a radical increase in the number of chemistry, physics and mathematics graduates going into teaching, and markedly improved laboratory facilities. Not only must the brightest students be stretched, but the bar for the remaining majority must be raised.

But, it is the way science fits into the wider society that must also be conveyed more effectively, to complement this fundamental grounding in the subject, and also how the enthusiastic scientist should engage constructively with his or her more sceptical colleagues. All teenagers should be more exposed to the scientific, industrial and other business communities, and also recognition made that the key projects of the future may fail, not because of the science, but as a result of other factors, often summed up as the 'softer skills'. It will mean understanding what these factors are, with the same rigour as the science (as they will, indeed, become more sophisticated), not in a woolly mix of a superficial learning that will be forgotten when those teenagers become adults. The RSC has educational partnerships with industry and other international bodies to help provide this framework.

It is these messages that learned societies are ideally placed to convey, and to support with expertise through the valuable network of their members, from specialists to generalists, and links with many other sectors of the international community. The RSC is passionate in promoting the chemical sciences as essential in addressing the global challenges of the future. Importantly, it is not only careers in chemistry that are its focus, but the way in which a grounding in chemistry, whether at GCSE or with a PhD, provides a valuable ticket to a host of careers within and outside the scientific field. More generally, the spread of scientifically-literate youngsters throughout the population can only enhance the effectiveness of engagement, and constructive challenge, to solve our global problems and turn them into business opportunities.