This activity will help you:

  • Realize how the issues we face are incredibly complex
  • Better understand the diversity of voices – stakeholders – involved in an issue that is the focus of a scientific study
  • Gain empathy for different viewpoints
  • Understand the value of focus when making hard decisions
  • Find ways to work with those you disagree with
  • Weigh the pros and cons of science studies that focus on local issues versus national issues

Ready?

Part One

  1. Divide your class in half. One half of the class selects a national biodiversity hotspot (ex boreal forest) and the other half picks a local biodiversity hotspot (ex location in your city or community).
  2. Select an issue facing both the national and local biodiversity hotspots you’ve chosen (ex a species that is endangered in both your community and at the national level). Hint: get ideas from the themes being discussed in your Inquiry Media.
  3. Within each group, answer the following questions:
    1. What science studies have focused on this issue? What does the science say? What gaps exist in the research?
    2. What levels of government are involved in your issue?
    3. If land is involved, who owns it?
    4. What industries and businesses are impacted by or have impact on the issue?
    5. What advocacy groups are involved in the issue? Remember, there are often advocates on all sides of an issue.
    6. What communities need to be considered when discussing this issue?
    7. What treaties exist?
    8. What’s the history and prevailing perspective of the region? Look at public opinion polls and historical electoral trends.
  4. Each member of the group will select one viewpoint or stakeholder and quickly research their position (ex the issue is an endangered frog and you’re representing a developer; understand why the frog is endangered and why a housing project in the frog’s habitat can proceed safely).
  5. Once you’ve done the research, you will argue your stakeholder’s case to the rest of your group.
  6. After everyone has made their case, the group will work to find a solution to the issue that each ‘stakeholder’ can agree with. If you can’t come to an agreement, that’s still a result.

Part Two

  1. Have a representative from each group present the decision to the class, outlining the issue, the viewpoints that were argued and the agreed upon solution (or non-agreement).
  2. After each group has presented, as a class, discuss the pros and cons of local-versus-national focus. Which group had an easier time reaching an agreement? Which solution, local or national, would have more impact? Would a national solution trickle down to solve the local issue as well? Would a local solution move the needle on the nation issue? How do your answers relate to science? Are scientific questions that focus on local or micro issues easier than those that focus on national or macro issues? Is one more impactful than the other? Is one approach better than the other?
  • Moral of the story: Decision-making is hard and so too is creating meaningful impact. Understand and weigh this reality when proposing a scientific study that seeks to inform or solve a particular issue.