Maya Halevy of Bloomfield Science Centre in Israel spoke first, describing her science centre’s location at the political and the cultural centre of Jerusalem, ten kilometres from Palestine. The science centre promotes a culture of science while at the same time uses science culture to promote dialogue between groups and break down barriers, providing a safe place for difficult conversations and tough questions. “We use the language of science to promote community and discuss issues - opening up a platform to ask questions and establish a society based on tolerance and knowledge.”
Ana Noronha, of the Ciencia Viva, Portugal spoke of how social responsibility can provide a path to science culture. At their centre, social responsibility was mandated through addressing controversial issues in science and moderating interactions between the public and scientists. Internally, they addressed social responsibility through the employment of handicapped citizens and setting up volunteer programs for seniors.
Both illustrated the role that science centres can play in bringing people together, and the resulting responsibility of centres as trusted organizations. “Being inclusive of all people enables them to become part of the process of social change.” Elizabeth Hoyos from Maloka in Colombia agreed, saying science centres “have to respect different cultures, connect different regions, bring forward the idea that we’re all in this together facing some difficult challenges in a great, interconnected world.”
“We live in a time when scientific literacy is an essential tool of the future” commented Eric Jolly of the Science Museum of Minnesota. “Social responsibility occurs at the personal and institutional levels. Education is a liberating force in human development.” He expressed concern with the increase in the literacy gap between socio-economic groups in the US, citing that 98% of Americans don’t know that it takes the Earth one year to revolve around the sun.
Guenther Scholz, CEO of Siemens Canada expressed the need for businesses and the scientific community to work together. He offered Siemens as an example of an ‘industrial’ science centre, with initiatives including Generation 21 – a series of educational initiatives for future scientists and engineers.
Scholz warned that deep thinking and lots of money are not necessarily the only way to solve problems. He illustrated this anecdotally by comparing the million dollar “space pen” developed by NASA engineers for microgravity-bound astronauts, with the pencils provided to Russian cosmonauts. “We need to listen to our elders, to people who have a natural understanding of the issues instead of spending a lot of money.”
Shifting the focus, the moderator then raised the question of which areas of science institutions should concentrate their efforts: “faced with issues such as climate change, equity and disease versus basic sciences, should we be funding research into string theory and particle physics?”
Both Scholz and Jolly spoke of the need for balance - investing in research which would offer immediate, intermediate and long term benefits. Jolly added, “Science is the story of humankind – we cannot stop the quest to understand. We need to help the public understand that investing in things like space science or basic sciences benefits our everyday lives.”
Ana Noronha cautioned that the scientific community would not exist without the fundamental sciences, “Young people are driven by questions about the universe. This can be used to get them to learn math, physics and engineering. Later, these can be applied to practical problems.”
In his final question, the moderator raised the issue of teaching evolution in the US, asking panelists “With widely diverging spiritual beliefs across the planet, do science centres have an obligation to ignore or embrace communities of faith?”
Eric Jolly suggested “We provide good science, in a context such that they want to use it. We also need to ask, how do communities of faith embrace us? We have a responsibility to break barriers around who we are, who has access to science, and who can participate in science.”