Roland Jackson, Chief Executive of the British Science Association , and a member of the Steering Group for the project, offers a perspective on science and culture.
I have always been interested in what the Public Attitude Surveys tell us, and not least to use the results to challenge those who still persist in claiming that the UK public is ‘anti-science’ when it is clearly nothing of the sort.
This time round I developed a particular interest in the concept of science and culture, leading out of the work we did on the Science for All Group (http://interactive.bis.gov.uk/scienceandsociety/site/all/). In our Report and Action Plan we identified a number of actions to encourage UK cultural institutions to take a strategic approach to the sciences in culture, and we recommended that public perceptions of science and culture should be explored in this upcoming Survey.
It has always irked me that the arts community in the UK seems to have purloined the words ‘culture’ and ‘creativity’ as if they are synonymous with the ‘arts’. For example, the European Capital of Culture bidding process, and that of the UK City of Culture, have no requirement for a science-based cultural programme (though the use of digital technologies is graciously and instrumentally encouraged in the latter to ‘maximise participation and access’). Not that I have anything against the arts, but my concept of culture and of creativity certainly includes the sciences, and they are implicitly excluded in the way these bidding documents are written and interpreted.
So, it is good to see the Public Attitudes Survey 2011 seeking to test out how the public views science and culture. The first indications are that the term ‘culture’ lacks a clear definition for people, but that they do see science enriching and extending our culture. They see economic benefits, informed public debate, leisure opportunities through e.g. science centres and museums, popular books and television, and enhancement, because of the science content, in entertainment programmes like Grand Designs.
It is time to recapture culture and creativity from the exclusive grip of the artists, and to claim them squarely for the sciences too.
On a lighter note, I’ve been pleased that the British Science Association has been able to work closely with Ipsos MORI on this project. We sourced the scientists who appeared at the deliberative workshops held last year, and so it was interesting and inspiring to read of the experiences of Sarah and Kate in two of the previous posts. I hope it’s been a useful learning experience for them, as well as adding a different dimension to BIS’s research. It’s apt then that BIS are planning to launch the results of the study during National Science and Engineering Week in March which this year has a theme of communication.
Follow new comments on this item by RSS
Will the Public Attitudes Survey include any survey results about trust in scientists? A survey in late 2009 showed that trust in climate scientists had been very severely damaged by the controversy surrounding the hacking of e-mails from the University of East Anglia, but nobody has followed up that issue since – is the damage still being felt, and has it affected trust in scientists as a whole? I notice that MORI appears to have abandoned its annual survey of trust in professions, in which scientists used to rate relatively highly.
Hello Bob
The survey does have a few questions related to Trust. Like you, I’ll be interested to see whether Climategate etc has had any impact on the results there as, in the past, scientists from universies have fared much better in terms of public perceptions of “trustworthiness” than their counterparts in business and Government for example.
I asked Ipsos MORI about the Trust in Professions series. They have advised that this was not carried out in 2010, but noted they may conduct it again in the future to update trends going back to 1983.
Best wishes
Marilyn
BIS, Science and Society
Since involved very much in debates about cultural policy both at European level and within the context of European Capitals of Culture, I am very interested in your comments. Two possible observations could extend your remark. First of all, when last December in the region of Sonderborg which is competing against Aarhus for the title of ECoC in 2017, it was noticable that the major company Danfoss was interested in attracting young people towards technical studies. There has been a decline. For this purpose they built even a technical-science type of museum designed to show how much fun it is to enter research and science. At another level, culture is a factor to attract highly qualified people to a region short of these people in its labor force and what local universities seem unable to bring about.
Aside from looking at culture as attracting people into science or of science, there is another relationship between science and culture. I was just now in Wroclaw, Poland. The city is also applying to become European Capital of Culture for 2016. Its university formerly of Breslau had such famous scientists as Niels Bohr so that a part of the concept for European Capital of Culture will be to tap into that rich cultural heritage. It is also of interest what relationships universities have to the institution of European Capitals of Culture. There is the University Network. Moreover, I would add one special aspect which is always discussed amongst writers and artists, namely when do they pick up scientific problems and continue them in their own way of experimentation. Already Duerer was most interested in listening to scientific debates in the wake of Galileo and there is no denying that science shapes our lives, hence artists have to deal with it. Thus it can be an interesting way to trace scientific discoveries as did Thomas Kuhn through what gives shape to a different meaning alone of the word ‘energy’. So I think your suggestion is well taken not to exclude science when referring to both culture and creativity, but then the universal scientist was as well an artist and vice versa artists cannot do without clear scientific knowledge and research as all eco artists dealing with water and climate change have to be competent in both fields. Creativity is like Arthur Koestler a matter of discovering the stepping stones and then taking the risk to leap over to the next one. With warmest regards from Athens, Hatto Fischer
Pingback: Sciences are creative too « FrogHeart
The BBC Four programme, “Beautiful Equations” (first shown before Christmas) was repeated last night and is currently available on the iPlayer (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00wltbm). It gives an interesting take on the relationship between science and the arts.
That sounds like an interesting programme, Jayesh. Thanks for pointing it out.
Pingback: Public attitudes to science in the UK – the blog : Vetenskap & Allmänhet