21.11.2024
Sir Peter Gluckman
President of the International Science Council (ISC)
It is 25 years since ICSU (International Council for Science Unions), the predecessor of the ISC and UNESCO, convened the World Conference on Science for the 21st Century in Budapest.
That became the forerunner, with the support of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, of the World Science Forum. It now involves many other scientific organisations. Its purpose seemed clear some 25 years ago in bringing scientists together from across disciplines to think about the broader issues confronting science and society and the issues where science could help. But 1999 was a very different era to now – the forthcoming millennium was bringing a degree of optimism to the table, global tensions were much lower, the multilateral system and the rules-based system appeared stable, the millennium development goals were in the process of being agreed to, and real progress was being made in addressing issues such as poverty and famine.
And social media had not appeared.
But jump ahead to now: the multilateral system is dysfunctional, the sustainability development goals agreed in 2015 are well off target. Indeed, the Summit of the Futures this year, which was intended to reinvigorate them, caused barely a murmur in most capitals. Climate change, biodiversity loss, increasing inequality, more conflicts in the world than at any time since 1945, growing mental health concerns and much more – that is the situation we now find ourselves in.
And we know the world needs science more than ever. There is not an issue where science, both natural and social sciences could not help making real progress – yet science remains largely an optional add-on in policy-making both domestically and internationally.
And that is why we are here. How do we ensure that science is used effectively to progress the issues globally as encapsulated in the sustainability agenda, and how do we ensure science is better used by countries at all stages of development.
I see at least four challenges.
The first is a major focus of this meeting. The changed information environment and the rise of populism have undermined trust in elites and institutions. And one of those institutions is science. While science may be more trusted than many other institutions, there is no doubt trust in science has declined. The challenge is how to stop that trend because if science is not trusted, it will not be used. There are deep issues here of the psychology of trust as well as the obvious issues about how our industry operates – too often with hyperbole, ego and hubris and that undermines trust. It is much more complex than just producing trustworthy knowledge, although we must continue to do better. How do we interact with other knowledge systems which determine how science is received and trusted – whether political knowledge, religion or indigenous knowledge.
Another challenge is an evolutionary one. Our brains are designed for short-term reactive thinking and that is reinforced by the changed information environment and the transactional nature of much modern politics. How do we shift not only policy makers but also citizens to recognize that we must focus on the longer term and accept that tradeoffs that will be needed. And what are those tradeoffs? Have we openly identified and discussed these?
The third challenge is how do we ensure our research is actionable. This is a major focus on both the ISC’s work with the multinational agencies and together with UNESCO in the decade of sciences for sustainability. Science must be better embedded with society, and to do so transdisciplinary approaches need to be developed. Partnerships with industry, policy makers, NGOs and local communities are needed. Without compromising the basic values and principles of science, we need to work with other knowledge systems to ensure our knowledge is translated to action. And we need to find better ways to be at the policy table. The ISC has made enormous strides at doing so in the UN system, but sadly too few countries yet have embedded science properly in the policy processes.
And the fourth challenge is that other changes in the science system are now upon us. Most obviously in the welcomed and overdue growth in the diversity of those who produce knowledge and the significant shift in the geographical axis of science. But beyond that, the emergence of AI fundamentally changes the way science is done and reported, and in turn, this will change the very institutions of science. Here we need to be collective in thinking through how AI and other technologies will influence knowledge production and its use.
We cannot deny the growing intertwining of science, technology, economic growth and security issues. This could increasingly compromise the openness and collective nature of science. We must be pragmatic and here science diplomacy, another theme of this meeting, will be so important. Can we use science not just on the environmental components of the SDGs but perhaps most critically on SDG 16, peace, to reduce tension and thus create the environment for greater progress on the other 16 goals, is collectively more possible.
The forum is an important part of ensuring that science can play a better role in advancing the global commons. Just because it’s hard is not a reason to resile. After all, as the Hungarian diplomat Csaba Kőrösi said to me when he was President of the United Nations General Assembly, science is the only truly global language the people of this planet have. It is a language that needs a stronger voice.
Thank you.
