Remove the ecologist from the ivory tower

It is clear as day that the Netherlands is facing great challenges in the area of nature conservation and biodiversity. The various dossiers are piling up: the nitrogen dossier, the climate dossier, the controversy about the wolf, and even the domestic cat does not escape investigation and discussions. Again and again, studies conclude that nature’s condition has worsened and that biodiversity is rapidly declining. In addition, the polarization in society is definitely not helping when it comes to tackling these challenges. Problems are often depicted as black or white, while the truth is in the middle.
According to ecologist Chris Smit, it is therefore high time that the scientist steps out of their ivory tower and joins the search for potential solutions, rather than presenting proof of the problems. Smit holds his inaugural lecture on 27 September.

Huge problem

‘When it comes to nature, the Netherlands has a huge problem. Piles of studies by ecologists indicate again and again that biodiversity is declining, that nitrogen depositions are too high, and that this can be considered a major crisis by now. This is nothing new. However, studies are being published and the ecologist holds a talk while wagging a finger, after which they retreat to their ivory tower to focus on another fundamental research question. The problem still remains though, and it has become evident that the research results do not make a lot of difference yet. Apparently, as ecologists, we have to find a different approach and step out of that ivory tower more often, including myself.’

The wolf

‘Next to that, the increasing polarization does not help to come to solutions and bring us closer together. Take the example of the wolf, a huge hornet’s nest of supporters and opponents. Both points of view should be considered with much more empathy. The farmer who sees their sheep lying dead in the meadow needs perspective. And the fear of the wolf is present in society, like it or not. You can’t take that away using statistics. On the other hand, the wolf is here to stay and we will have to learn to co-exist.

It also turns out that most knowledge that we have about wolf behaviour originates from countries where far fewer people live. It goes without saying that you can’t just copy those results to the Netherlands, which is densely populated and has less nature. The research doesn’t align with society’s needs, and that should change, in my opinion.’

Ecologists, governments, nature conservationists and policymakers together could play an overarching role through collectively formulating research and policy, so that every province does not have to come up with their own solutions, as is the case now. We see that the state secretary seems to be making a step in the right direction by setting up a national information desk and a professional wolf fencing team.

Collaborate on the inter- and transdisciplinary level

‘In the Netherlands, ecologists should investigate, together with conservationists and policymakers, how we can find a place for the wolf in the Netherlands and how to act when problems arise. That means involving governments and other stakeholders, such as nature organizations, farmers, and conservation officers, in the research right from the start, to ensure the practical and more policy-oriented questions are included as well. They are then able to directly influence the research questions.

This does not only apply to the case of the wolves but also to the nitrogen approach or, for example, the Wadden region. This area encompasses more than the Dutch part alone. That even requires transnational thinking to prevent every conservation officer, province, or country from pursuing conflicting nature policies in one and the same ecosystem. Are you going to use salt marshes for species conservation or to store CO2? And where and on what scale? A collective approach is important here.’

Hope

‘I remain hopeful that we can turn around the negative trends. Look at the Onlanden, the nature reserve but also water storage area of Groningen and Drenthe. In a short amount of time, a lot of nature has flourished here and many spectacular animal species and plants have returned here. In accordance with a policy, the area was set up for water storage in times of heavy precipitation, but from an ecological standpoint, it has resulted in a beautiful nature reserve. This is how the ecologist together with the policymaker are able to make a difference, not just by presenting proof of the problems through research but also by considering what would benefit both stakeholders and nature.’

Chris Smit holds his inaugural lecture on 27 September

Read more

• Overview of all 'Liekuut' opinion pieces
• Chris Smit