Search

The world's understanding of the climate and ecological crises rests on science. However, scientists' conventional methods of engagement, such as producing ever more data and findings, writing papers and giving advice to governments, have not been sufficiently effective at persuading politicians to act on the climate and ecological emergency. To date, governments’ decisions (such as continuing with vast subsidies for fossil fuels) clearly show that powerful vested interests have been much more influential than the amassed scientific knowledge and advice. We argue that in the face of this inaction, scientists can have the maximum amount of influence by lending their support to social movements pressing for action, joining as active participants and considering civil disobedience. Scientists seeking to halt continued environmental destruction also need to work through our institutions. Too many scientific organizations, from national academies of science to learned societies and universities, have not taken practical action on climate; for example, many still partner with fossil fuel and other compromised interests. We therefore also outline a vision for how scientists can reform our scientific institutions to become powerful agents for change.

Our current economic and political structures have an increasingly devastating impact on the Earth’s climate and ecosystems: we are facing a biospheric emergency, with catastrophic consequences for both humans and the natural world on which we depend. Life scientists – including biologists, medical scientists, psychologists and public health experts – have had a crucial role in documenting the impacts of this emergency, but they have failed to drive governments to take action in order to prevent the situation from getting worse. Here we, as members of the movement Scientist Rebellion, call on life scientists to re-embrace advocacy and activism – which were once hallmarks of academia – in order to highlight the urgency and necessity of systemic change across our societies. We particularly emphasise the need for scientists to engage in nonviolent civil resistance, a form of public engagement which has proven to be highly effective in social struggles throughout history., Our current economic and political structures have an increasingly devastating impact on the Earth’s climate and ecosystems: we are facing a biospheric emergency, with catastrophic consequences for both humans and the natural world on which we depend. Life scientists – including biologists, medical scientists, psychologists and public health experts – have had a crucial role in documenting the impacts of this emergency, but they have failed to drive governments to take action in order to prevent the situation from getting worse. Here we, as members of the movement Scientist Rebellion, call on life scientists to re-embrace advocacy and activism – which were once hallmarks of academia – in order to highlight the urgency and necessity of systemic change across our societies. We particularly emphasise the need for scientists to engage in nonviolent civil resistance, a form of public engagement which has proven to be highly effective in social struggles throughout history.

Madagascar is a biodiversity hotspot, yet its wildlife is under immense threat from habitat loss and other anthropogenic pressures. To tackle this, Madagascar has implemented new environmental legislation, including rapid expansion of the protected area network. Many new protected areas permit sustainable extraction of natural resources by local communities, but little is known about how and why local people use biodiversity, particularly animal wildlife. We conducted a rapid appraisal of animal use by 236 households across Madagascar's rural Moramanga district to explore which wild faunal species are used by local people and for what purpose. Our results document a wide range of uses attributed to familiar wildlife groups, including lemurs, tenrecs, birds, geckos, chameleons, frogs and invertebrates. Uses include food, trade, medicine, and pest control among others. We conclude that conservation decisions concerning sustainable use in relation to livelihoods require an understanding of both the diversity of species used and the diversity of uses of species by local communities.

Our current economic and political structures have an increasingly devastating impact on the Earth’s climate and ecosystems: we are facing a biospheric emergency, with catastrophic consequences for both humans and the natural world on which we depend. Life scientists – including biologists, medical scientists, psychologists and public health experts – have had a crucial role in documenting the impacts of this emergency, but they have failed to drive governments to take action in order to prevent the situation from getting worse. Here we, as members of the movement Scientist Rebellion, call on life scientists to re-embrace advocacy and activism – which were once hallmarks of academia – in order to highlight the urgency and necessity of systemic change across our societies. We particularly emphasise the need for scientists to engage in nonviolent civil resistance, a form of public engagement which has proven to be highly effective in social struggles throughout history.

Human activities have transformed Planet Earth to the extent that the functioning of its climate has been altered and a quarter of species face extinction (IPBES, 2019). These climate and biodiversity crises, which are interrelated and mutually reinforcing (Gardner et al. 2020), in turn have serious repercussions for humans, weakening the provision of ecosystem services and ultimately jeopardizing human civilization (Gowdy, 2020).

Protected areas (PA) are the most common approach to conservation globally; however, their effectiveness is unclear when neighbouring human communities are highly natural resource dependent. While forest-based livelihoods provide important income for rural communities, destructive livelihoods such as charcoal production can also threaten the sustainability of PAs. We aimed to understand drivers of livelihood choices in communities surrounding a proposed PA threatened by charcoal production in northern Madagascar, to inform management strategies that promote forest conservation without negatively impacting local communities. We used semi-structured interviews and focus groups to understand local livelihood dynamics using the Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF). Our findings showed charcoal production to be an important livelihood used to deal with annual food insecurity. Agricultural yields were limited by a lack of assets for clearing land and building protective fences. Households were also hesitant to invest in agriculture due to the perceived risks associated with unpredictable rainfall and cattle grazing. Furthermore, while fishing was an important livelihood for filling income gaps, declining catches due to overexploitation across the study region appeared to be increasing the need for charcoal production. While improvements to agriculture were perceived to be promising strategies for reducing forest-dependence, a landscape approach to conservation in the region will be necessary in order to promote sustainability of all livelihoods and to reduce overall pressures on forest resources.