So can we all give our panelists a virtual applause?
[clapping] You can unmute your mics, applaud them.
Put a gif in the chat box. Thank you so much, Jennifer.
I loved your talk so much, particularly that you make Protective Action Decision
Model actually understandable through graphics, which is always a challenge
with that particular model. So I think Lindell owes you
a big thank you for that one. This panel was super exciting for me
because, having worked in Puerto Rico during the earthquakes, it has been
really important to reflect on the wider science communication ecosystem
for myself and how it works on an individual level with comments
from Leila, which I thought were so important, to macro levels
with Elizabeth and Lorna and Pablo, and then Jennifer being able to
really capture so much of this dynamic going on.
So we are pushing close to noon, but I do want to leave us open
for some questions for the panelists.
If everybody feels like they can stay a little bit longer?
Great.
The first one comes from Kate Scharer. Kate asked a question for Lorna,
but I think this is applicable to most of the people on the phone call,
which is the challenge of a conversation often feeling like it’s one-sided,
particularly with media on news and radio. There’s a limited
back-and-forth to determine if your info was received correctly.
So not being able to get a lot of feedback, necessarily, from the media.
Do you have any suggestions from this from the panel?
Is there a way to go back and forth to refine the message with those groups
before it goes out to the public? Thank you very much
for that question, Kate.
- Thank you, Katherine, for the question.
I got time to organize my idea, so I made some notes.
One of the first things that I would like to say is – and it’s not probably
in order of logistics, but one of the most important things that I found out
just recently, trying to find and identify others that can give you
the chance to talk about this phenomenon, this event,
but in a very different perspective.
For example, I am working on a proposal right now in which
I submitted to – or, I will submit to the local endowment for the humanities,
which is – imagine, a geologist submitting a project to a humanities
endowment. But the topic is about how the seismic sequence is altered
or affected the cultural heritage in the island.
Historical buildings, museums, collections.
And the good thing about being one of the few geologists in Río Piedras
is that everybody wants to hear what you have to say because,
you know, you are one of those rock stars.
You know, it’s not very often that you get to be a rock star.
But I get to be a rock star every now and then when we talk about
geologists in Río Piedras. And one of the things that –
for example, I can put as an example, when talking about retrofit.
And everybody knows this picture that – this photograph that Jennifer had in her
presentation, and I don’t recall if any – somebody else had it about this
Catholic church that was destroyed. Just talking about this example and
the problem that bricks are, and then you get to talk about
the cultural heritage, but also the physics of why this is a problem
and how you can fix it. So you have different audiences
talking about this merge of two fields, and it makes it more interesting.
Of course, we get very excited about the science, but, you know, people are
diverse, and interests are diverse too. So just keep that in mind.
The other – the other point is that going to TV shows and radio is
very difficult because it – yes, it is a one-sided communication.
TV is the worst because it’s very brief. You don’t have much time.
You are interviewed. They have the questions.
But that’s why you have to think and plan.
I know this takes a lot of time, but I spend hours reading people’s
comments on the newspaper. Every time there was news about
the sequence, I didn’t read anything. I went down to the comments.
And, even when there was a lot of nonsense, that’s what you want to know.
You want to know those ideas – the misconceptions.
And that is your matrix in order to build your presentation – your answers.
Go back to that, and you will see there is repetition.
And also invest time in small groups.
I know this is – and it’s true. We cannot do this alone.
But I have experienced how beneficial it is for me as a science
communicator to stop and listen to people and listen to their stories.
Let me give you just one example, and I will finish with this.
I went to Utuado for a workshop with a community, and there was this
guy that said, I remember my grandfather telling me that there
was this earthquake in Utuado – the 1918.
And it – the fault – the plates cracked. And he described – and he told me,
I can tell you where the fault goes, or maybe it was just a crack result
of the activity. And he says, it’s over – you know, it’s – the buildings are
here and here are over that crack – over that fault.
I was, like, if I have a [inaudible] and just scan the thing.
And even – maybe for science, it’s not something that would
advance too much, but let’s say that we got a representation of that.
We got some region material. Put it in Utuado.
Everybody will read it. What you want is for people to read,
and that it’s culturally and locally significant. And that’s what you want.
- Yeah. I just want to jump in and second – and second that entirely.
Particularly the idea of going to the comment sections.
Whether it’s the newspaper, posts that you have put up about the –
about whatever the event happens to be, posts by other people
about the event. Go through the comments.
More than likely, people have the same sort of questions, right?
- You’ll see the same – the same, you know, three or four major
misconceptions or the same three or four questions that people
just continually have. And they’re not –
like, they’re putting these things in the comments because they’re
not getting answers elsewhere. [laughs]
They’re probably listening to all kinds of people, right?
But they haven’t heard the thing that they’re looking for.
Or they haven’t heard the thing that really makes it click for them,
that this is what’s going on, that brings all that information together.
And it does take a lot – it does take a lot of time.
I’m not going to – I’m not going to pretend that it doesn’t.
But it is such – like, that’s really, to me, the way to continue that conversation.
And I think particularly if you know that there are going to be multiple
appearances – right, so after whatever your appearance is, or whatever
your post is, go through and check. See what people didn’t quite get.
See what things that they still have. And then, the next time you are posting,
or the next time you are doing something, say, like, okay,
so last time, this seemed to be – this didn’t seem to get through
all the way, so here’s the explanation for this now.
That really – like, that’s how you keep that conversation.
And I would say that you can also do that with other people, right?
So, if – you know, if you don’t know when your next appearance is,
but someone you know who does science communication, you know
that they have something, you know, tomorrow, next week, whatever,
you might just shoot them an email and say, like,
hey, I didn’t get to this yesterday. You might want to mention it
while you’re – in the rest of your talk.
- If I may, I would like to add something to what Leila and Lorna have shared.
This is – this is directed to our professional and academic colleagues,
mainly. And take this from my context of a science education researcher that
has had conversations with people in the education side and
the natural sciences side. There is a lot – we have
a lot of opportunities to reconfigure our scholarship.
And what Lorna mentioned, what is important to a local community,
that’s part of the local knowledge, traditional ecological knowledge,
indigenous knowledge – however you want to call it,
that’s important for the people. And we, as scholars and as researchers,
can actually bring that information to academia, to the professional level.
And, if we have the proper training, or if we are really interested,
we can turn that into social media, newspaper articles, book essays,
radio appearances. I mean, that’s a full aspect
of scholarship that we need – in my opinion, we should be
considering as well. We already have the content knowledge,
and that’s really important. It is a matter of [inaudible] ourselves
to those issues that are impacting our communities and finding help –
finding the people that could help you reconfigure your scholarship
and bringing those problems to the mainstream.
- I have a comment, if I may. [laughs]
Yeah. I think that it’s also important, the fact that there’s a missing link
in this conversation, and it’s emergency management.
And, if we think about the professionalization of emergency
management, we’re really talking about interagency coordination.
And the fact of bringing in all – bringing us all together and also
connecting with communities. You know, one of the things that we
see very often is that we have a friend, or we read this, or we go there.
But we are not really doing social science.
We are doing – basing our science on anecdotes. [laughs]
So we really have to be a bit more critical about how we do that and
about how we support emergency managers so that they can fulfill their
role throughout the disaster cycle and that we are not being so reactive.
So those are my two things – two cents in terms of listening.
There’s someone who needs support, to be able to listen when there’s
nothing going on so that he can be more effective, or she can be
more effective, when an emergency or a disaster happens.
- That was great, Jennifer. We have a lot of raised hands
at the moment, and we’ve only gotten to the first question.
So [laughs] we have, like, four more to go.
So could we possibly go on to the next question, and then braid in the rest of it?
Because we do want to get done before 1:00 if possible.
So the question is from Andy Michael. So Andy Michael asks, what can
the USGS do to better support local scientists and communicators in
future sequences around the country? How do we connect with local scientists
who are communicating during these sequences?
Is it enough to work with the ANSS and the regional seismic networks, such as
the – such as Red Sísmica, and are there other ways we should reach out?
And I want to start first with Liz because I think – I think, Elizabeth, you have
a lot of really critical and important thoughts on this particular question.
- Yeah. I think one thing is to start with the ANSS network.
Because, especially with an earthquake, the regional network, we are going to
be somewhat possessive of it. It’s kind of natural. It’s our backyard.
It’s our network. It’s our data.
So I think you start with the network, and then you branch out from there.
If you look at what happened in the Puerto Rico seismic sequence,
what happened, you start – we started with the network.
I mean, I think I was on the phone with Paul as I was
walking into the network after the 6.4.
But that – it started there, but then we brought in our geology department.
The connections with the Strong Motion Program and civil engineering –
because we can’t forget the civil engineers in this, who also have
a very important role, especially in the remediation and prevention.
So you start there, and then you kind of can branch out because the network’s
already linked in with the groups. They’re linked in with emergency
management. They’re linked in with the local scientists.
And then branch out from there. I think it’s a matter of finding that hub.
But I think the one thing that’s important with, like, the ANSS is –
maybe it’s something that people on this panel can help with –
is people don’t understand what ANSS is.
I’ve started including a slide on this on, like, every single public talk I give.
What is ANSS? So people understand.
So, when you see an earthquake in Puerto Rico, that that work’s been done
by the Puerto Rico Seismic Network. Because they think that’s being done
by the USGS. So one of the comments I always have to deal with is, why are
we funding a local seismic network when the USGS can do the job for us?
So I think that that is probably where we need more clarity that – make it –
understand that the regional network is the provider of information.
And I don’t know how to best explain it, but it’s something to think about, how –
the approach explaining the ANSS to the public.
- Thanks, Liz. That’s fantastic.
Jennifer, you had your hand raised.
- No. That was before. Let me unraise my hand.
[laughter]
- So, does anyone else want to – this is often a question that Andy and I and other
scientists have talked about is that, how can we, as the USGS, be more
supportive of you during response? How can this relationship work better?
I think it worked pretty well in Puerto Rico.
We had – you know, Lindsay Davis worked tirelessly on the USGS side.
So I just want to give absolutely a shout-out to Lindsay and her
phenomenal work there for the USGS. But obviously, we can always improve.
And Lindsay actually asked a question that was related to this,
to strengthen this question. And, again, it might be a great question
for Liz, around – given the incredible demands on everyone’s time, how can
we do this and not distract you from what you’re trying to do or make
you give us more resources than we – you know, that you just don’t have
during that time. And, Pablo and Lorna, I think you guys can also speak
to this as well. How can you work with a federal agency?
How can we support you without distracting too much from what you’re –
what you’re doing and taking away the precious resources you have?
- Well, if I may, I work for a federal agency, and I am definitely really
well aware of those – of the – of the – let’s say of the lack of time that
we have to do something else besides the work that we do regularly.
I have an idea. I think that – and I have an observation.
In my opinion, we have many experts in Puerto Rico in many different fields.
But the communication is not coming to us directly.
I mean, let’s be honest. I participated in these activities in the
southwest because a group of friends called me, and we decided to go.
But I never received a single call or a single communication from
any of the authorities in the island. So what about helping us, if the USGS
can help us, do a survey of those of us that are in the island or in the diaspora
that are willing to do this work, that have the expertise, or to categorize
the expertise that we have, and from there, we can start.
I put in the chat that, for example, Ciencia Puerto Rico – and, disclaimer,
I’m part of Ciencia Puerto Rico – but I think it’s a great organization
with a well-established networking process in Puerto Rico, in the diaspora,
elsewhere – internationally – not just in the U.S.
I mean, we can go to organizations like those, to NGOs that have that
ability and that have the capacity to help us. So I agree with Liz.
I mean, we need to have a central point of contact. That’s perfect.
But, I mean, the only experts are not in one institution or in one agency.
We have experts everywhere in Puerto Rico and in the diaspora
that we are more than willing to help.
But we need to get those communications as well.
That’s my only – that’s my comment at this point.
- I’m going to jump in here really quickly just to say thank you.
I do have to leave, unfortunately. And I know there might be some others
on the call that have to leave as well. But thank you, again, all,
for coming and joining on this. And I hope that many of you are able
to stay and many of the audience are able to stay and continue this
discussion and learn from each other. Because I think this is a very
beneficial conversation to have. And I look forward to seeing the
recording and – about what you guys continue to talk about.
So thank you, again, for coming. And please stay and continue to talk.
- Thanks, Tamara, for setting this up. Really appreciate all your work …
- Thank you. - … and the seminar chairs.
Thank you so much. - Thanks for [inaudible] mentor –
in monitor – moderating – there we go. All right, bye.
- [laughs] Bye. I mean, I’m happy to stay and continue moderating
if you guys want me to. Or I can just, you know, go,
if I’m being annoying to everybody. [laughs]
And, Pablo, I think you have such an interesting perspective, right,
because you are obviously working for a federal agency, but you were responding
on a – very much a local level as well. And so understanding that tension
between that federal service as well as doing something that is in your
backyard that you have to respond to and that your family and friends are
being impacted – and your community. And so I think you just have such a
unique perspective in all of this, as everyone does on this phone call.
So I’ve got Liz and Lorna raising your hands.
Did you want to comment, Lorna? - Okay. Yeah, I wanted to summarize
and react to several of the ideas and suggestions and – one of the things
that I think that several of my peers will clearly understand is that the
practicing of geology in Puerto Rico have lost so much through the years.
That we have lost many positions of geologists in the government.
The seismic network is what it is because it’s part of the UPR system.
And I think that, if it’s a very specific strength, that it wouldn’t
work otherwise. And I’m so thankful they are with the UPR system.
Even with all the shortcomings that that could mean, too, but if it had been
another agency apart from the UPR system, this could be another story.
Now, about Jennifer’s comment – which, let me tell you something.
One of the things that I like about this dynamic that we just had is that we are
sitting at the table – two different fields. We are talking about emergency
management and sociology and sciences.
And that doesn’t happen very often. And with all the respect that I have
for Jennifer’s work, even when our experiences and our efforts in support
during the emergency are absolutely based on what we lived, if we wouldn’t
do it, there would be no geologists doing this on the island.
We are the geologists. It’s like when I started looking at
this book that I wrote. There was – completely an accident.
I took – I gave a class. My students have no clue
about the 1918 earthquake. They had no idea of the history.
And it took me a year to realize that I can write a history of this earthquake.
And I was hesitant because I’m not a historian.
And, after much thought, I said, if I don’t do it, probably 10, 20 years
is going to pass, and nobody’s going to write this book.
So sometimes you have to, you know, take and do what you think
is a contribution. But we definitely have – we have to
improve the emergency management. And this is something that,
if you ask me, in this context, what could be our – your support,
it’s just keep this communication growing.
Let’s keep talking. Let’s keep engaging.
Let’s see – you know, I was thinking, when I was listening to all these talks,
what about we start thinking about what we learned, what we need to fix,
and just conceptualize a project that involves everybody in this –
you know, here. And how we can really take the best of the talents and capacity
of the people in order to work for the improvement of the – of the island.
You know, and I can – I can relate with what Jennifer said about the
need in order to improve the emergency management in the island.
You know, we have an experience that we can learn from this.
So where we go from here is what I would like to, you know,
keep on discussing.
- I think it’s a really important point. Jennifer, you put yourself off mute.
Did you have something you wanted to say?
- Yes. Yeah, I was just – wanted to follow up a little bit on what Lorna
was saying and highlight, you know, also what we were – what I was arguing
or pretty much trying to move forward with our discussion.
And it’s that, you know, in many ways, we’ve been very focused on events
and not on how we respond to disasters, to emergencies, overall.
And we have to understand that context in which that takes place.
Because so far, what we’ve been doing is very much focused on events …
- Exactly. - … not just locally,
but as researchers in general. And, you know, we’re really
challenging the core of the field of disaster research when we talk about
pretty much these processes that extend beyond what we define as events.
But it’s a must because it’s really what climate change is forcing us to do.
We’re really talking about the stability of our systems and the
capacity of our system of absorb increasing demands,
and we’re really not, you know, focused on events, per se.
- That is such an important point around these concurrent disasters
that are going on. And, as you say, we’re intermixing these cycles.
And then disaster researchers, you know we like these clean, you know, event –
you know, recover, response, early – you know, early recovery,
mitigation cycle, and then preparedness, and then back.
You know, we like that nice, little circle, right, Jennifer?
And, unfortunately, in Puerto Rico, it’s just not [laughs] – it’s just
challenging that theoretical framework so much that I think, you know,
we need to look at a different theoretical framework that can
incorporate all of that. So thank you so much.
Liz, you’ve got your hand raised and unmuted.
- Yep. Yeah. I guess I wanted to hop in. And this kind of goes back to what
Pablo was saying as well as Lorna and Jennifer.
I think, yes, we do need to have that centralized, but one thing we don’t have
here on the island – and maybe I should be – we should include
the Virgin Islands as well. Because they are our neighbors.
And the Dominican Republic. Is what we really should be having
on the local level is having, like, some kind of database,
either at UPR or somewhere here that we say, okay, if we have –
need someone that’s a landslide expert, here’s somebody to call.
And so we have that database, and they have that all as colleagues,
and then we can all support each other much more easily.
And, to my knowledge, that currently does not exist.
And I think, from the theme from this, I think it does need to exist,
especially after – with what’s happening in Soufriere.
Thankfully, I know I could call Lizzette, who is our department head
and volcanologist, to explain what’s going on.
But I think we need to have that database ready for future events.
And I think the other issue is with our emergency management.
Because it’s very political. Every election cycle,
we have new people in office. And so we have to start training them
with basic, what are earthquakes, what are tsunamis, why should
we care about this. And people will remember
the event from this 6.4, but then they say the largest,
but it wasn’t the largest. We had a 6.4 in 2014.
Nobody cared about it because it didn’t impact people.
So it’s the largest impactful event since 1918.
And I think that’s our issue is that we have events that, if it doesn’t impact us
directly, people will forget about them, even a few years later.
And so I think that’s something we have to keep in mind of not only the public,
but our government, especially given current budget issues. [laughs]
- Absolutely.
Leila, you have your hand raised. Did you want to unmute?
- Yeah. Yeah. So two things.
So number one, I love this idea of having – of having kind of a database,
right, of people you can contact. And I think it would be phenomenal
to have a – sort of a – as a separate, but potentially attached, sort of a thing
to have lists of people and groups who do science communication, right,
but that are not official government entities – that sort of thing, right?
And so not just so that they can be contacted to then start farming out
information, but so that there is that contact between groups and so that
the information that’s going out to the public is not, you know,
completely uniform, but at least we’re all on the same page about
what it is that we’re doing and that that includes people who are doing this
in a more casual sort of way, right, whether that is geology students at the
undergrad or graduate level who are talking to their friends and family,
whether that is entities like the Geology Project, who are talking to
their friends and family, and then the larger public also
within our – within our following. I personally don’t think we need to
be part of anything super official because that’s not who we are, right?
But I think it is important to have that – to also have that separate sort of list
of people to go to to know that this is kind of the informal way
of continuing to get information out there.
And then, kind of tied in with that, and tied in with what Lorna was saying,
we have had a lot of conversations in the last year or so about
this aggregate effort. So thinking particularly about the
GSA session last fall, a lot of us who were – who were talking about science
communication and science education were talking about this aggregate effort
and the fact that we can’t do it by ourselves, that, especially outside
of that – like, that crisis moment, right, where you go back to –
you can’t always be all-hands-on-deck. There’s just no way to do that –
not sustainably. And so we’ve so many conversations
about this aggregate effort, and I would love to see that formalized in some way,
right – some discussion or some meeting or something about what it is
that we all – that we sort of learned out of these things, right?
Because there are some very common themes that I keep seeing in our work,
in the work that other people have done, the other things that people
have realized. And we’re all talking about them, and we’re all sort of
aware of them, but we’re not sharing that information with one another,
necessarily, and having real conversations about it.
Like, okay, here is what absolutely worked.
And here is something we can try next time.
So I would love to see us formalize that aggregate effort.
- I think that’s a really important point, Leila. Thank you so, so much.
We’re going to have one more question. It’s from Gavin Hayes.
But, before we do, I just also wanted to acknowledge Christa von Hillebrandt-
Andrade, who is making some fantastic comments in the chat.
For those of you who don’t know Christa, and I don’t know how
you cannot, because she is such a powerhouse in this field,
Christa is the tsunami program manager for the Caribbean.
And I just do want to say a large part of the communication effort came from
Christa, as well, during this response. And we owe Christa an absolute debt
of gratitude for her work in – her constant work in Puerto Rico
and in the islands in these topics. So, thank you so much, Christa.
So I’m going to give Gavin Hayes the last comment.
It is for Liz, but I think it’s something that maybe all of us could address,
particularly Pablo for, you know, working for an agency as well.
And that’s, Elizabeth, or Liz, did you have – did Red Sísmica
have an employee specifically devoted to social media outreach?
- I can tell you that answer right now, is no. And we still don’t.
We don’t have the budget. To put things in perspective,
for 3 million people on the island, we have three education outreach
people, one of which is based on the NTHMP project,
which is for tsunami hazard mitigation.
And that’s two people, not only to do in-person talks, to do – make all
the social media posts, make all the videos. They also make content.
They’re making a earthquake and tsunami curriculum
for the island right now.
So that and some students. So, when it comes to social media,
I’ll do it. Gisela will do it. Our technical – our IT people will do it.
Basically whoever is around at that time to do it will do it.
And it’s something that we know is an issue, but it’s not something
we can address without a budget for it, unfortunately. [laughs]
- And that’s a critical point, right, is the resources and people able to do this.
Pablo, did you have any thoughts on this particular issue around
social media and resourcing? - My only thought is related to
my previous comment, and this is going to be quick.
I actually propose that we keep meeting somehow.
That we – yes, seriously, in the near future.
And I just put down a name in Spanish that I just figured it could be something
that we can work with and improve it. It’s to develop a coalition of specialists
in geoscience and emergency management or something like that.
I think that that is incredibly needed. And it would make the life
of journalists, politicians, and the general public – I mean, especially,
a lot easier, hopefully, if we know who is doing what and where that person is.
As a federal government employee, I do have some leeway, and I do have
a great support from my agency in terms of outreach, but that is
related to my position. I’m a – I’m a specialist in education.
My colleagues that are not doing education or outreach,
or even research, I am doing some. They may not have the time to commit
to this as a – as an employee, but probably as a – at a personal level.
And that’s how I was involved in the projects in the southwest part of the
island, at the personal level, essentially, with some support from the agency.
So, having that database, like Liz says, or if the USGS can help us
doing a survey of specialists in the island, I think that that
would be a great beginning, in my opinion.
- Thank you. And Andy Michael put a challenge for us in the chat,
which is to – he said that he would love to see this group publish a paper
in SRL about this experience and the need for combined efforts.
So whoever wants to be first author, it’s on the table for you to take. [laughs]
It’s not going to be me. - Well, I was going to say,
maybe the BSSA. Because there is the special issue
on August 1st – or, August 15th that … - Yes.
So that’s a challenge for whoever wants to step up and write a paper
about – Andy says, go for it. Does that mean Andy also wants to
do it, too, is that – [laughs] Andy, are you also putting yourself on there?
- You have a task, Sara. - [laughs] It is 12:30.
We’re now two hours into our seminar. And usually we do – we do wrap it up
way before this, but I have enjoyed so much listening to all of your
incredible insights and the work that you have done on behalf of the
people of Puerto Rico. Exceptional, exceptional work, everybody.
So I think I’m going to end it here unless anyone has any objections.
No? All right. Hey, thank you, everyone. And one last clap for a marathon effort
from our panelists and the Q-and-A. [clapping]
Thank you so much for being here today, all of our –
all of our guests and visitors. Thanks, everybody.
- I just wanted to come on and say thank you. I learned so much at the
GSA session. I quizzed a bunch of you last week at SSA and learned more.
And really just appreciate having this extended time just to focus on this topic.
Just really appreciate the effort you put into it.
And, I mean, until very recently, had over 30 or 40 people still listening.
So this was – I mean, people really stuck with it. It was great.
- Thanks for having us. [laughs] - Thank you. Thanks for having us.