Author: Nerina Finetto

Gordon McBean

Gordon McBean
Climatologist
Biography:

Canadian climatologist who serves as chairman of the board of trustees of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences. He is a professor at the University of Western Ontario and Chair for Policy in the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction. Previously he was the Assistant Deputy Minister of Meteorological Service of Canada.

In addition to his involvement with the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, McBean is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences partnerships committee and since 2014 president of the International Council for Science (ICSU) (before 2014 member of the environment advisory committee). He also acts as a mentor for the Loran Scholars program.

In 1995, McBean gave a speech to the World Meteorological Organization on global warming.

In 2006, McBean, with Andrew Weaver and Ken Denman, authored an open letter, signed by 90 climate scientists, to Prime Minister Stephen Harper calling for an effective national climate change strategy.

The letter was a response to an earlier open letter to Harper from 60 scientists (19 Canadians) arguing against the Kyoto accord and questioning its scientific basis.

Science and scientists for a better world

Watch our video with a fascinating climatologist from Canada. Gordon McBean is professor emeritus, and since 2014 has been the president of the International Council for Science, chairman of the board of trustees of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Partnerships Committee, and he also acts as a mentor for the Loran Scholars’ programme.

We met him at the annual meeting of the Global Young Academy a couple of months ago. When he was a young boy, he saw a tiny moving spot in the sky. It was the first artificial object in space – the Sputnik – and it was this experience that made him curious about science and discoveries.

In this video, Professor Gordon McBean talks about climate change, collaboration among researchers, and of course, his ultimate dream.

Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Gordon McBean's Video here

Gordon: I’m Gordon McBean and I’m an Environmental Scientist from Canada and I work as President of the International Council for Science and Global Issues of Science and Society.

Nerina: What was the 10-year old Gordon like?

Gordon: When I was 10-years old I’m not sure I was thinking about things because it’s a long time ago I’d have to say. I will not admit how old I really am, but I think when I was 10-years old I was fascinated by issues of history and society and actually Geography of the idea of maps and being able to see things and I was very much encouraged by my parents. My father had always wanted to go to university but he never had the chance to. He grew up on a farm and it was his job to work on the farm, but he wanted his sons to go to university. So we had a family environment that encouraged us.

When I was 10 years old and not quite sure what I was thinking but actually only a few years after I was 10 years old – I think I would have been 13. I watched and looked to the skies. Standing on my front porch with my mom, dad, and my two brothers and we looked at the sky and there was a dot of light going through the sky, up there, way up there. It was Sputnik the first time any society had been able to put in space a satellite. A human instrument going up and around the world and it fascinated me. I will always remember that and rather incidentally the reason why Sputnik went up in 1957 I have discovered years later was because it was the International Council for Science organized the International Geophysical year and basically challenged the science community globally who can be the first one to put it there and the Russians won in a sense. But more importantly inspired a lot of people and I think as I said had a very positive influence on me as an example of how scientific groups working together. I didn’t know quite how it was done back then but they put it up there. That’s going around the world like the moon does. Not quite as far up but nonetheless and that I will always remember.

Nerina: How did you become a scientist?

Gordon: I was not quite sure when I was young what I really wanted to be. I studied history, science, and things but as I went to university the sciences, the physics and the chemistry and mathematics kind of intrigued me and I went into that area. Then evolved into studying and applying that information to issues like climate change, weather and that kind of thing. So my Science background evolved more through let’s say exploring different opportunities, possibilities, the way you could do things. So that’s why I became the scientist that I have become.

Nerina: You gave a speech about global warming in 1995, more than 20 years ago. What do you think has changed in the last 20 years?

Gordon: Global warming is an issue that actually from the science community really goes back many decades. In fact, the first paper written on it was written in 1824 by a French mathematician Fourier. But as a science issue that brought the government’s attention started really in the 1980s with the International Council for Science and other organizations convening groups of scientists to say, “Climate is already changing, we should become concerned about it.”

At that time I chaired the World Climate Research Programs International Scientific Committee. So I got involved in these things and help set up the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and these kinds of things. But in 1995, we put out the first statement in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that said, “The balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on the climate system.” The idea was to say that it’s there but we’re not totally sure of how and which way.

Over the years since then, more than 20 years now there has been an evolution. First of all of our climate system, it is getting warmer. 2014 was the warmest year on record at that time to ’15 beat it out, 2016 beat it out again. So we’ve had three successive warmest years on record from the time of humans measuring these things.

We also have seen a progression in the science to better understand how the physical, chemical, biological and other processes in the climate system are working in a way that we can actually say yes, that kind of change could not have just been happening by chance. It’s happening directly related to the amount of human-caused carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. So the situation has changed dramatically over the last 20 years from a very likely but not it’s a firmly deduced decision to one that where we have to take action.

Nerina: How do you think we can manage it?

Gordon: The climate change situation I think is very, very serious and we need to first of all as scientists explain it better to societies and understand as I said at the presentation I actually made to the Canadian cabinet some years ago. When I was challenged, “Why would we do this?” And I said, “Do you have children and grandchildren? I do because it’s our children and grandchildren which will see the real negative impacts of climate change.”

So, first of all, we have to use the science; the very important and very stable solid base of science that we have to convince the public, convince the policymakers that the issue is something we need to address. By somewhat appealing to them in a more political way that scientists are used to doing and then work with the communities of engineers, the stakeholders, the municipalities, governments at all levels to find the ways of both reducing our emissions so that we don’t have runaway greenhouse gas warming by the end of the century.

But at the same time, we have to recognize that because of the way the climate system works we have to adapt to the fact that over the next 20, 30, 40 years we have already put in place a momentum that will cause the climate to change in ways we need to adapt to it. That means changing the way we build homes, roads, way we use water, worrying about flooding zones and things.

So there’s a number of societal things and that’s where we really also have to deal with the issues of international social issues. Justices as we call them in international and intergenerational equity and ethics that is what I call it. That it’s largely a problem created by the industrialized world. It’s now what we put in last year. It’s what we put in the last hundred years into the atmosphere. That means it’s not just because China did the biggest emissions last year they are the worst. There are not doing well but they are actually addressing the problem much more than certain people seem to think they are and I think we should build with these groups of people to find ways and helping people in developing countries who don’t have the resources, who don’t have the knowledge, the technologies, etc. to give them the assistance to help them adapt, change their ways so they don’t become 40 years from now the developed world of the last 20 years, but instead a different kind of society that is positive and beneficial for all.

Nerina: There are still scientists who deny that climate change is happening or that it is happening because of human impact. How important is the collaboration of the scientific community on this issue? 

Gordon: Yeah. The climate change issue because of its economic importance to certain sectors of our society is one for which there are reasons that certain scientists will speak out in and let’s say cast doubt on that the climate really is changing. I’ve become involved in this much more than I perhaps thought I would’ve decades ago and because I think it’s important. It’s essential that the scientific community work together to communicate the science information we know and occasionally have to be openly critical of certain scientists who claim to be climate scientists. Most of them, in reality, are not highly credential scientists but we have to work together as a community.

One of the things we need to do is learn how to better communicate. We need to learn how to say convey the messages in a way that people can understand it. There’s a rather ironic story. When I was a University of British Columbia Professor in the 80s and 90s I volunteered to a program called the Scientists in the Schools Program. I would go and sit on the floor with kids in grade four, five and six. Whichever the teacher wanted and discuss climate change or ozone depletion or whatever issue, but often climate change, and explain it in a way that they could understand it in their enthusiasm. But give them the kind of things that they could see and understand.

And then later when I became an assistant Deputy Minister I was briefing one of my ministers. And after I briefed the minister the other assistant deputy minister said, “Wow Gordon. How did you learn to brief ministers? You’re just new in the job.” I said, “Whatever you do don’t tell the minister that I did what I did when I taught to kids in grade four, five and six.” You learn to weigh, to explain things in a way that can be understood by… because very few ministers in any government have a science background.

Nerina: You’re are attending the Global Young Academy annual meeting. How important is your collaboration?

Gordon: Well, I think we need to understand as part of this process of learning how to communicate by interacting with scientists of let’s say different backgrounds, different disciplines, different geographies, racial, religion, other backgrounds. Because that’s really important to understand the dimensions of a global issue. In an organization like the Global Young Academy and the International Council for Science in an older general way are organizations that bring together the science community from across the globe that we can learn from each other. We can learn amazing amounts just being here for two or three days now and talking over breakfast and dinner with young scientists. I learned well gosh I didn’t know that.

So organizations like the Global Young Academy can develop that very positive interaction and learning process among younger scientists and they can also because they represent in a sense the next generation. They are part of that, children, grandchildren kind of you sense certainly children and in a way that hopefully will then convey that importance of addressing environmental issues: climate change but others, many others, many others it’s not just climate and also more importantly generally building our governmental policies based on the very best science and the very broad definition of that word. I define science to include psychology, sociology, cultural issues, linguistic issues, as well as maths, physics, and chemistry. Getting those kinds of issues brought together in a way that people in the political world and hopefully the general public overall. Because politicians listen to the public and in most countries, their main objective is to get re-elected and they will get re-elected if they fill they are addressing the issues that the public wants. So we need to work together and the young scientists of GYA, Global Young Academy are very important as part of that process of conveying the importance of these science issues. We have to emphasize the value of evidence-based policy for societies and the fact that there are often are solutions. We just have to find them, work together to implement them, develop them, enhance them as we go along and learn from things.

So I think the Global Young Academy can play a role in clearly helping with doing good science, developing young people to be motivated to do the kind of science we need. Not being motivated by the number of dollars they are going to make but motivated by the societal benefits of the outputs, the outcomes of their programs and research. But if we can then work together Global Young Academy, global old academician can work together in ways that can make a big difference for all.

Nerina: What is the most important lesson that you’ve learned from your research? 

Gordon: Well, I think first of all while I have been studying science for a long time and then I got involved in policy issues quite a while ago. So I’ve learned how to, how we need to as a scientific community work together with the policymakers in a way that doesn’t allow them to overwhelm us, but allows us to understand how they see issues. So we can get the support we need in order to undertake the very best science and we need to work in teams. Some people’s expertise is not in communications. Their expertise is in solving that physics problem and that’s not to be in any way negative, but we need to have them working with teams with those who have communication skills, certain kinds of outreach skills in a way that the team together can make a big difference.

Nerina: What motivates you? 

Gordon: I do have children and grandchildren as I’ve said and I think it’s so important that we as scientists, not just walk away and say, “Okay, I’ve had enough. I’m done for that issue.” I feel motivated and I get a large amount of personal satisfaction out of working with groups of people around the world. I find it very inspiring in a way to meet with people from different countries and learn about them and learn about how their society functions and realize that my background is different, not worse or better, just different. But between us we can bring those things together make us overall better and to me that’s a kind of reward for life.

Nerina: Do you have a dream? 

Nerina: When I look to the future, looking back I think all these things have happened and I look to the future and hope that there will be an evolution in a way that some of the right wing tendencies in society that have been happening recently are not replicated. That they become short-term aberrations, disturbances that happened but let’s look to the future and hope there is a more general sense of a global community working together that people understand that we actually prosper better when we work together than when we counter each other. That we should encourage the interplay or the interaction that working together with different disciplines and more importantly different genders, different groups of racial, religious whatever backgrounds that those shouldn’t be the factors. It should be a common good kind of approach and I’m hoping, I’m relatively optimistic that if we keep working together as the science community and join in with other groups who are also thinking the same way that collectively we can make a very positive difference.

Nerina: Thank you so much, Gordon.

Gordon: Thank you.

Biography:

Canadian climatologist who serves as chairman of the board of trustees of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences. He is a professor at the University of Western Ontario and Chair for Policy in the Institute for Catastrophic Loss Reduction. Previously he was the Assistant Deputy Minister of Meteorological Service of Canada.

In addition to his involvement with the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, McBean is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences partnerships committee and since 2014 president of the International Council for Science (ICSU) (before 2014 member of the environment advisory committee). He also acts as a mentor for the Loran Scholars program.

In 1995, McBean gave a speech to the World Meteorological Organization on global warming.

In 2006, McBean, with Andrew Weaver and Ken Denman, authored an open letter, signed by 90 climate scientists, to Prime Minister Stephen Harper calling for an effective national climate change strategy.

The letter was a response to an earlier open letter to Harper from 60 scientists (19 Canadians) arguing against the Kyoto accord and questioning its scientific basis.

Armando Azua-Bustos

Armando Azua-Bustos
Astrobiologist
Biography:

TED Fellow 2017, Research Scientist at the Centro de Astrobiología, Madrid, Spain, PhD. Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, MSc. Biological Sciences, MSc. Biochemistry.

Atacama, astrobiology, and the secret of life

What is life? If we hope to find life on other planets, what should we look for? Armando Azua-Bustos, a research scientist at the Centro de Astrobiología, Madrid, Spain, is researching life in one of the places you would least expect to find it – the Atacama Desert. He hopes to discover forms of life that are far different from those we know: a life that is not dependent on water.
Armando’s findings may help us to develop new forms of agriculture, and hopefully, not only for here on Earth.

Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Armando Azua-Bustos's Video here

Armando: Hello, everyone, my name is Armando Azua Bustos; I am a Chilean scientist working in Spain. I consider myself to be an astrobiologist.

Nerina: What is astrobiology?

Armando: Well, astrobiology is quite a recent field of research. It’s concerned with trying to understand the origin of life on Earth and the possibility of finding life elsewhere in the universe. And in my case, it seems we are looking for water as a proxy for finding life on Mars and in other places in the Solar System and beyond. And we’re trying to understand the close and intimate relationship between water and life in order to understand, not only life on Earth but, the possibility of finding life elsewhere by looking at water.

Nerina: How do you conduct your research?

Armando: Well, I try to understand the possibility of finding life on Mars. And since I don’t have $6.5 billion in order to send my own robot to Mars, what I do is I try to study the environments on Earth that most closely resemble the conditions on Mars. In my case, I’ve been studying the Atacama desert in Chile—since it’s the oldest and driest desert on Earth, and a world-recognised Mars model.

Nerina: How did you get into this topic?

Armando: Well, I have an interesting story behind that because when I got my first academic degree, I went into winemaking—I had a Bachelor of Science in winemaking. So I started working as a winemaker, but after working for a short time in that field, I realised that I liked science much better, so I came back to study and got a C in my academic degree. And I had a unique advantage that I was born and raised in the Atacama Desert. So when, in 2003, NASA proposed that the Atacama was a proper model of Mars, I detected that I had an advantage there because I knew the desert very well.

I was now studying at all the same sites that, by my memory, I do remember seeing interesting facts, and interesting things that I am now going back to, in order to discover them again—but from the point of view of science. And actually, when I left the desert—since I was living in a small mining town, I had to leave that city in order to get to the college—I remember looking out the plane window and thinking, ‘Well, I will never come back here, because there’s nothing to do,’ and years later, I’m thinking exactly the opposite. Every time I can, I come back to the desert because there’s so much to do.

Nerina: How was it growing up in a desert? 

Armando: That’s part of my story because there wasn’t much to do except explore the Atacama because in those times we only had two TV channels. So most weekends my parents would take us roaming in the desert, everything from following Inca trails, to finding fossils, and taking our telescope out at night. So from a young age, I developed this love of exploring. And then when I was able to drive myself, I would go with my friends and do the same thing. In some way, I turned that hobby into a profession. So for others, they call it work, but in my case, I have a lot of fun with it.

Nerina: What is the most fascinating aspect of the Atacama Desert?

Armando: The fact that life is able to endure even the most extreme conditions. You’ll see a picture of this place, and you’d say, ‘How is it possible that anything would be able to live here?’ But if you know what to look for, you will find one or two of these different life forms, and you’ll wonder how it’s possible. It’s the way that life is able to adapt to the most extreme conditions that is fascinating, in the case of the Atacama.

Nerina: The Atacama Desert is also a very important place for research right?

Armando: Well, it’s also fascinating that in the Atacama, you have the biggest telescope on Earth. And by 2030, 70% of the biggest telescopes on Earth will be located in the Atacama because of its clear skies. You have very little water in the atmosphere, so that’s a huge advantage; you have almost no clouds in those types of areas, so that’s a place you want to have your telescope—your very expensive telescope. So it’s incredible that from that same place that people are looking up in order to find the answer to ‘Are we alone?’ I’m doing exactly the same, but looking down to the soil trying to find the same answer.

Nerina: What is life?

Armando: There have been entire conferences trying to define a common definition of what life is, and it has been not achieved. Amazingly, even a small child can recognise what is a living thing and what is not. But we have not been able to come up with a universally accepted definition of what life is.

Nerina: What did you discover?

Armando: What I have found is that life is able to adapt to the most extreme conditions of the Atacama, in terms of UV radiation and desiccation. So I have discovered a number of different, new, microbial species, and also a few plants that are able to live with very little amounts of water. In one of these very dry places, where it was reported that it was as dry as Mars, even in that place we have found a number of different microorganisms. This suggests that, from the point of view of water availability, you shouldn’t have any problems in detecting life on Mars.

Nerina: Why is it this way?

Armando: That we don’t know. We still don’t know how it’s possible that life is able to survive with such little water. Actually, I’m now writing an entire research proposal in order to understand what the molecular mechanisms are that explain why these microbial life forms are able to tolerate such low conditions of water availability, and how they are able to endure in that particular condition.

Nerina: What is the most relevant question you have right now?

Armando: The question that I have now is that since the Atacama is the driest and oldest desert on Earth, it seems interesting from the point of view of evolution life always has the same selective pressures in order to be very efficient in the capture, retention, and use of water in order to survive. So we now think that most life on Earth, when confronted with desiccation, will either die or enter into some mode of waiting, a mode of stasis, waiting for better conditions in order to reassume roles and metabolisms. But in the case of the Atacama—and this is the driest research I’m proposing and doing now—I’m saying, maybe in the Atacama, the life forms that are able to live there already adapted to that, and have adapted to live with very little, if no, water at all. And that would change the definition of life on Earth because all life on Earth depends on water and is related to water. And we have preliminary evidence of microorganisms in the Atacama that some of their biochemical functions are still able to go on without, or with almost no water at all. So the big question that I have now is, ‘Is life able to become, at some point, independent of the presence of water?’ That’s my main question now.

Nerina: And what is the challenge here?

Armando: The challenge here is both intellectual and from the method because of the common paradigm now. The actual paradigm that is from the scientific community is that life either dies or enters into some form of rest in order to wait for better conditions in terms of water availability. So you should not see any metabolic activity in the desiccated state. So first, you have to think really hard about what experiments you’ll have to undertake, in order to prove that you are really seeing some type of life form that is able to grow, and still has some metabolic activity in the desiccated state. To me, it’s like showing you have a dancing mummy! You know, mummies that are able to walk, and talk, and go around. It’s the same intellectual challenge trying to convince a community that’s saying, ‘You should not have any activity in the desiccated state.’ And I’m proposing exactly the opposite.  It seems that here in the Atacama, for the given reasons, I do expect to have active metabolisms, where life is still going on, with almost no water at all.

Nerina: What could this research mean for our future?

Armando: Of course, there’s a basic idea on how to understand the close relationship between water and life, in using these kinds of microorganisms. You may also think about the potential applications of understanding that kind of tolerance. We do know, for example, that some of the genes we have already discovered, that some people have worked with similar genes of other desert species in much wetter deserts. In this case, they have to produce one gene, for example, to make a plant. And now, instead of irrigating that plant every day, you can irrigate it every week, and the plant will be just fine. So, it has a huge implication on developing new crop features that are highly tolerant to desiccation. So having that kind of species, that requires much less water to survive, would be a great advancement for science and for humanity.

Nerina: So, your work could influence agriculture on Earth, but you’re also researching how to grow plants outside our planet, right?

Armando: Well, remember the movie ‘The Martian’, where Matt Damon grows potatoes on Mars? Well, we actually don’t have any experience of that. So we’re trying to send along with NASA a small greenhouse, to Mars, in order to grow the first plant outside of Earth. The idea is to take seeds to Mars in a closed, small greenhouse, in order to see if those seeds will germinate on Mars by adding a little water to that closed container—to see if they will germinate as well as they would on Earth—considering that on Mars, they would have less gravity and much more radiation. So we’re doing those very preliminary experiments thinking about human colonisation on Mars and also on the Moon.

Nerina: Would you like to go to Mars?

Armando: No. Not yet. It’s quite dangerous. I mean, only one-third of whatever you send to Mars arrives there. So it’s quite dangerous. Maybe in 50 years, if you have at least a 50% chance of coming back alive, then I will be interested in going to Mars. But for now, it’s just too dangerous.

Nerina: Where do you see yourself in 10 years?

Armando: I see myself as an expert in my field, and I see myself already having sent a few things outside Earth—to the International Space Station, maybe to Mars, maybe to the Moon.

Nerina: Where do you see humanity in 100 years?

Armando: I see humanity, hopefully, as a wiser species. We are just learning about all the damage that we have done to our planet—I hope that in 100 years that, again, is a lesson already learned.

Nerina: What does it mean to you to be a scientist?

Armando: It is an important role because we are producing new knowledge. Knowledge has no value if you don’t share it. So, from my point of view, scientists should be very humble and always be available to share what they have learned with others.

Nerina: You wrote a children’s book called, ‘Are We Alone’, why did you write it?

Armando: Because I detected that there was no book on Astrobiology for children. Amazingly, since this is a field that has many researchers, no one tried to close that bridge in order to get astrobiology to be a well-known term—as is Biology, Chemistry, and Physics. So that the next generation knows about Astrobiology being a proper field of science, that was my idea.

Nerina: Why is it important to write for children?

Armando: I was inspired by Jacques Cousteau, by Carl Sagan, and others, in the joy of discovery, in the joy of learning new things. So, what I’m trying to actively do is talk with children from very young ages to encourage the students in the joy of learning new things. Because that can only be positive for you—independent of whether you go into science, humanities, or art—that drive, in order to better yourself in order to do things that contribute to humanity, that’s very valuable.

Nerina: Are we alone?

Armando: Well, you must consider that just in the close vicinity of the sun, like in your own neighbourhood, we have now detected almost 4000 different planets—and that’s just in the close vicinity of the sun. And it has been estimated that in our galaxy alone, there are more than 1 billion planets—and from that fraction, there should be at least 100 thousand inhabited planets. So if life has been able to adapt to so many different conditions on Earth, it wouldn’t surprise me that that would be the same case in other solar systems and beyond. So are we alone? I’m positively certain that we are not alone.

Nerina: What more would you like the world to know about the Atacama?

Armando: Well, what I’m trying to do now is change the view that the Atacama is a sterile place. It’s interesting because even the definition of ‘desert’ is that there’s nothing interesting to see. If you go to a party where there’s no one around, or things are very boring, you say, ‘Well, this party looks like a desert.’ Well, I’m trying to change the definition to mean that deserts are as interesting places as jungles—but you have to be more subtle in the way you look, in order to find the interesting things that are happening in deserts.

Nerina: What does it mean to look at the sky in the darkness in the Atacama?

Armando: Well, it’s amazing because in the Atacama the skies are so clear—and there aren’t many places where there’s no light pollution. I can remember walking in the Atacama on a moonless night and seeing my shadow produced by the light of the stars, a star shadow. That is amazing, and I don’t think there are many places in the world you can see that; a star shadow.

Nerina: It sounds incredible. What do you miss when you’re not there?

Armando: I miss the wind. I miss the amazing landscape that reminds you of your lone place in the universe.

Nerina: Why do humans look for other places?

Armando: Well, that is inherited in all of us. Humans explore. Even me, or you, if you see a small hill, you feel compelled to go up that little hill to look around. If you are around a corner, you feel compelled to see what’s on the other side. We are, by nature, explorers. So, now that we have explored almost all of the places we can explore on Earth, we are now looking abroad. It’s inbuilt in ourselves; we want to see what’s on the other side.

Nerina: What kind of society do you dream of?

Armando: A more kind society. Kind—we have to be kinder to each other. I am a scientist, but I’m also a Christian, so the principle that guides Christianity, and all the good religions, is to be better with the people around us. It is very simple. I always tell my students this, try to do something good for anyone at least once a day. If you do that, calculate how many good things you will have done by the end of the week, by the end of a month, by the end of a year, by the end of a decade, and by the end of your life. When you do that, and if you do that, you can go to the other side, whatever that other side is, with pride.

Nerina: What motivates you?

Armando: You know, when you say what motivates you, you have to define that motivation in order for it to drive you forward. But I don’t need such motivation because I have so much fun with what I do—I enjoy what I do so much—that I have no need for motivation. Do you know what I mean?

Nerina: That’s great!

Armando: I do have a lot of fun with what I do, so I don’t need such motivation.

Nerina: Is there something that you would like to change if you had the possibility?

Armando: That’s a very interesting question, I will think about that until tomorrow! I would go back to the point where hominids were evolving, in order to remove the tendency of violence in Homo sapiens. That I would do; that would solve so many things.

Nerina: Do you have a dream?

Armando: A dream? Just to be happier, simple.

Nerina: Thank you, so much Armando.

Armando: Thank you.

Biography:

TED Fellow 2017, Research Scientist at the Centro de Astrobiología, Madrid, Spain, PhD. Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, MSc. Biological Sciences, MSc. Biochemistry.

Lucia Mokrà

Lucia Mokrà
Dean for International Relations & Legislation
Biography:

Junior Professor of European Law in the Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Institute of European Studies and International Relations. Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University Bratislava.

A passion for human rights

We all heard the expression: “Human Rights”. In general human rights are fundamental freedoms common to all people, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems. But what rights are we talking about? The right for freedom, or maybe the right to life? The definitions of what we call the “Human Rights” is changing. And it’s important to have the clear understanding of what Human Rights are and how to implement this understanding to new policies.

Lucia Mokrá (PhD) from the Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences at Comenius University in Bratislava will share her views and ideas on this fascinating topic.

Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Lucia Mokrà's Video here

Lucia: Hello, my name is Lucia Mokrá, I’m from Comenius University in Bratislava in the faculty of social and economic sciences where I’ve been serving since 2014 as Dean. Originally I’m from the Institute of European Studies and International Relations where I’m teaching and doing research in the area of International and European law with a special focus on human rights protection.

Nerina: What are you passionate about?

Lucia: My passion is human rights; teaching and understanding it. It’s a living mechanism, we understand the concrete rights differently- for example, in 1950 the understanding of the right to life or family life is totally different to today’s understanding. When the UN Charter of Human Rights and the declaration was adopted we weren’t thinking about the rights of environmental protection or right to peace or development, so it means that I’m looking forward at how our world and societies will develop and how we can understand that the rights are there to be implemented and exercised for the benefit of all of us.

Nerina: Could you tell me more about your studies?

Lucia: My research is always connected with the human rights protection. Since 2004 when we became members of the European Union I’ve been dealing with the issues of EU citizenship and the European agenda in the area of human rights and the adoption of the EU charter on fundamental rights. Right now I’m dealing mainly with the protection of migrants rights or the humanitarian management of the European Union, so it means that I’ve moved from the institutional point of human rights protection to the protection of human rights in the EU foreign policy.

Nerina: How did you get into this topic?

Lucia: I was always interested in human rights, and since my Ph.D., I’ve been dealing with the protection of human rights.

Nerina: What was the result of your Ph.D.?

Lucia: At the beginning, it was mainly connected with the electoral rights and first-time voters; I learned that young people have a really great power to contribute to and influence decisions about the government for the following period of time. They also have the enthusiasm to ask many questions and require a lot of explanations before making decisions about their potential future. Of course, young people have to be educated about the principles which govern the current society, this means that education, public awareness, and information on human rights are really important for them, but also for the rest of society.

Nerina: What are you busy with at the moment?

Lucia: For the last 2 years I’ve been working with the rights of migrants and asylum seekers, I have worked with the Slovak Foreign Policy Association project connected with the Schengen border between Slovakia and Ukraine, and the implementation of the Schengen agreement. I worked on this and analysed the national legislation on human rights protection, as well as training the foreign policy officers on the necessity of always considering the principals of human rights protection in their field of work, which is really important not only for those people but for the following administrative procedures, their asylum proceeding and so on.

Nerina: What have you learned during the last 2 years?

Lucia: There were many examples and many cases the foreign policy officers dealt with on the Schengen border. The lesson learned was about the individual approach and the principal of the human rights protection that every case is individual, and how although we have guidelines and legal regulations we have to approximate it to the current situation. Of course, human dignity and protection of people didn’t finish by filing the asylum application; there are many connected issues like the behavior and conduct in refugee camps, the necessity to provide them legal advice, the protection, and education of minors while they are waiting for the decision of their asylum application. Of course from the other side, society should be aware of the position of the asylum seekers and should consider that they are not coming because they have voluntarily left their country but they are forced to move because their lives have been threatened.

Nerina: How do you find a balance between the claims of the people coming to the country and the people living in the country?

Lucia: It’s quite hard but there are two points of view; the first one is that every individual and every state that signed the UN Convention on refugees are obliged to provide the necessary help, so we have the responsibility of the human rights and dignity of those people who are looking for the protection. On the other side, because they are coming and they are probably coming temporarily it means that we always have to consider the human rights of the people who are permanently living in the territory – citizens or inhabitants of the country. When we are talking about human rights protection it’s always about looking for the balance between the rights of individuals and of the community, between the rights of migrants and rights of permanent residents. It means that it’s about how we think, how we are educated, and the promotion of human rights. It’s not only about protection of the human rights because those regulations can be enforced in practice, but it’s also about the promotion of the rights and understanding that people have to be aware of the situation in the migrants home country until it is settled.

Nerina: What is needed now, in your opinion?

Lucia: It depends, some of the countries have already implemented many policies and changes. Generally, there are several policies that have to be changed; the first one is, of course, that the migration policy should not only set the unified standard but the enforcement and implementation should also be efficient. It’s connected with another policy which is education – we are missing experts that have enough experience in the area of migration policy, psychologists who can help people who have had to leave their homes, and medical staff able to deal with different foreign illnesses which are not common to the European continent. Furthering on this point is the education about the history and understanding international relations in the different continents- in Africa, in the Middle East- from which the flows are coming. It means that many times the small changes in our education and social policy, medical policy, healthcare policy, can help to the overall understanding of the complexity of the migration. It is, of course, an individual policy but it is still connected with the other areas. What I see as the biggest problem is not only some kind of missing political will or a problems and obstacles on the European Union level or the financial issues connected with this, but that we are missing people who are able to be experts and help build capacities and train the staff in the congruent countries to understand and deal with the people who are coming from  a different historical regions with a different culture, a different language, and total different understandings of a society as we have in continental Europe.

Nerina: What can we do?

Lucia: I suppose that some guidelines from the European level; not forced legislation but guidelines which can be shared and elaborate on good practice or good examples can help, and of course amendment of the educational policy to get back more information about world development and more about international relations which are normally taught at universities but not at high schools or primary schools where students are aware of just the basics of the existence of the continents and some key dates and years of historical and human development but are not aware of the complexity of the developmental influences of some concrete historical occasions connected to the present and so on. It means that this kind of awareness, critical thinking and understanding that each situation has to be considered from both sides, the existence of different perspectives and that we are all living in one world which means this awareness is important to be implemented to the policies and education, also to people in state administration in the public administration who are dealing with the implementation of these policies.

Nerina: This means that the education and awareness are key, but what have you personally learned?

Lucia: I personally learned that we are different but we can live together, there was a quote – I’m not sure whether it was originally by the UN – but, “diversified within the unity”, which means that we can still live peacefully while we respect each other, it means that we will not try to implement and exercise our rights in a way that will interfere with the rights of others. We should help if we are able to and have capacities for other people who are in need. Our university is contributing to settlement of the situation;  we have students who came to the country as refugees- it took a long time to find documents from their high school which entitled them to study at the university- but now some of them have already graduated and become an integral part of the labour market, however there are very few of them, a tiny percentage, but their destiny was changed and they can be used as a positive example that it is possible if they are interested to change their lives and we are able to help them to do so.

Nerina: What is it like to be a researcher?

Lucia: I’m really happy where I am, I do research in an area I really like and I am not only able to formulate the legislation and paragraphs, but also to concrete policies and projects with my students and colleagues which are another way of implementing the legislation into practice.

Nerina: Why is it relevant?

Lucia: It’s always something nice when I can do something to not only find circumstances to understand the current situation, but also to formulate the recommendations and influence daily life. For me as a researcher, it means that every new situation is a new challenge as we don’t have any identical situations- we cannot compare flows from Africa to flows from the Middle East if we are talking about migration we cannot somehow compare the rights of women to the rights of children. It means that the situation is always developing and the society has to reflect it, not only in daily life but in the elaboration of practices, policies, and legislation. Society needs the researchers to give them data and justification of their future steps.

Nerina: Do you have a dream?

Lucia: I have several of them! Some are personal and some are from the point of research. I would like to help our country become efficient from the point of human rights protection, with a proper settlement of the many crises which we are facing right now that are connected with societal development, and that we can contribute to saving the world in which we are living together for our children.

Nerina: If possible, what would you change tomorrow?

Lucia: I would like to change how European people understand refugees because the negative experiences have resulted in a negative experience for those looking for protection. They are first pushed from their home country and then by the society which they are fleeing to for protection.

Nerina: Thank you so much for this conversation.

Biography:

Junior Professor of European Law in the Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Institute of European Studies and International Relations. Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University Bratislava.

Monir Uddin Ahmed

Monir Uddin Ahmed
Microbiologist
Biography:

Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Primeasia University. Executive Editor at Scientific Bangladesh & Member of the Global Young Academy.

Research and leadership for a developed Bangladesh

There is a tiny world around us. The world we can’t see or touch. However, it has a huge influence on us, both negative and positive. Small bacteria protect us and attack us all the time.

Dr. Monir Uddin Ahmed from Primeasia University, Bangladesh, researches these tiny living organisms in order to make better food, and make our lives better and healthier. To make life better is his real passion, and he believes that more research and more effective leaders can improve society, and help Bangladesh to become a more developed country.

Watch our interview with Dr. Monir on microbiology, research, and leadership.

Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Monir Uddin Ahmed's Video here

Monir: Hi, this is Monir Uddin Ahmed, talking from Bangladesh from the capital of Dhaka city. I have a bachelor’s and master’s degree in microbiology, a master’s degree in biotechnology, and I did my Ph.D. in microbiology in Australia.

Nerina: What is so interesting about microbiology?

Monir: Microbiology is very interesting because we are dealing with organisms that are not visible to the naked eye—we need a microscope to see them. But these very tiny organisms are very smart and very powerful and mostly have benefits to humans and other animals and plants. Very few cause diseases, but still, we are more concerned about their harmful effects—that is the interesting part.

Nerina: What kind of positive effects do these microorganisms have?

Monir: Microorganisms have a positive role in every sphere of our lives, they live in our body, and we call them normal flora. They prevent pathogenic microorganisms from colonising in our body; they prevent them from attacking our body under normal conditions by occupying a space, fighting for food, and many other things. Some even provide us with vitamins.

Nerina: What was the topic of your dissertation?

Monir: My Ph.D. was on an organism called Campylobacter jejuni which is one of the most frequently encountered microvillus bacterial pathogen in the food industry; especially in milk, water, and meat. Globally, it causes a very large number of infections every year.

Nerina: So, you wrote that you want to make life better by making food better? 

Monir: Yes, because we cannot live without food, so if foods are safer, then our lives become safer. We have to make food safe from microorganisms, especially bacterial pathogens which can easily get into foods—this is a global public health problem in both developing and developed countries. For example, Australia and New Zealand had the highest number of Campylobacter infections in the world; both of them are developed countries, but in our country, we have a slightly different problem. In developed countries, infection comes from meat mostly, but in developing countries like ours, it is from water and milk. My research interest was India—finding the source of infection—if we can find the source of infection, we can find ideas of how to prevent the bacteria from entering foods.

Nerina: You also initiated a science magazine? 

Monir: Yes, I have started a science magazine which is online only and bilingual. I would say that it is the only serious science magazine in Bangladesh. We want to talk more about the policy level and review how our research organisations are performing. Since 2011 we have been publishing a review of science publications in Bangladesh; how many articles are published, which organisation is at the top, and also, which scientist is at the top.

Nerina: What is the purpose of this magazine? 

Monir: I’m dreaming about developed Bangladesh. The theme of our scientific Bangladesh magazine is a science review for developed Bangladesh. Actually, our mission is a science review for developing Bangladesh. We want to see Bangladesh as a developed country; and we believe that in reviewing its scientific performance, and government and non-government associations, we can contribute a lot to that field.

Nerina: How relevant is research for a developing country, like Bangladesh, in your opinion? 

Monir: As far as we can say, research is relevant because research means finding a solution to a problem. In a country, especially a developing one like Bangladesh which is highly populated and overcrowded, we have more problems in comparison to other countries. We have different problems, so we have to find our own solution to those problems—be it social, microbiological, physical science, whatever it is—to reduce the problems and make our lives better, healthier, and prosperous—we don’t have any way other than research.

Nerina: How relevant is research from a developing country, like Bangladesh? 

Monir: Scientists have the same role in both developed and developing countries—they have to play a dual role; one is working in the laboratory finding the solution of the national and global problem, and communicate the solution to the public, to other scientists, and to the policy makers. By playing this dual role, I think scientists can really bring changes. If they don’t emphasise both types of roles, it’s very difficult to bring any changes to the society or the country because there are lots of solutions and findings sitting in the laboratory that are not commercialised or communicated to the people or the policy makers.

Nerina: What are the main challenges that researchers are facing in Bangladesh? 

Monir: First of all, the lack of sufficient funding. Secondly, we have issues with leadership in the scientific area. Thirdly, we are lacking in infrastructure (the technological side) — we have issues with lab facilities, instruments for laboratories, and consumables for laboratories. These are three areas where we have to make improvements.

Nerina: What should or could be done in order to improve the situation? 

Monir: I think we have to focus both on improving the technical facilities in the laboratory and leadership skills of the scientists equally. Because we might have technical facilities, but if we don’t have the leadership to run the laboratories properly, we will not utilise the funds and technical facilities properly. The limited facilities that we have, I’d say we are not utilising with more than 50% efficiency because we have poor leadership everywhere, especially in the scientific area. So if we can improve leadership, we can make better use of our money and human resources—our intelligence and merits. Without focusing on that area, we cannot improve. Actually with whatever area we are talking about, be it politics or science, improvement or progress is proportional to the quality of leadership.

Nerina: What does leadership mean to you?

Monir: In one word; leadership is influence. I have my own definition of leadership; because that’s my area of interest, and I’m writing a book about leadership in Bangladesh. So my definition is leadership is influencing people to act to achieve goals. Whenever a scientist is working they have a goal; to achieve that goal they have to influence other scientists to work because research cannot be done alone. Actually, hardly anything can be done alone.

Nerina: In your opinion, what does a researcher need in order to become a good leader? 

Monir: The first point is communication skills. The second point is specific goal setting—what I want to do and by when. If we don’t have any goals, then things will not actually go anywhere. The third point that’s important is that we want to contribute to our community and the world. If we can find a solution to a problem, it will be used throughout the world. It will not be limited to any specific area or country, though we might try to distribute technology, it’s very difficult, so scientific discovery by anyone of any race, colour, and nationality, that is the asset of the community and the world. We have to think about that one; that we are making a contribution to the community and it has a long lasting impact.

Nerina: If you had all the money and the power you could imagine and you could change something, what would you change?

Monir: I would like to do something that will have impact generation after generation. I’ll increase the investment in research and education as it is said that investment in self-development is the best investment; for individuals and as a nation. I’ll invest that money in the development of people; that is their psychological and intellectual development. In other words, I can say I’ll invest in leadership development in every single person in the country and the whole world.

Nerina: What motivates you?

Monir: Actually, motivation is that… As a Muslim, we believe that we have life after death, and there are two options—either we go to heaven or hell. It depends on our activities. There are two types; one is worshipping God, or Allah—that will be finished when I die—but also if I do anything for humanity that is affecting the lives of humans, I’ll get benefit from that. So people may not be aware of what I’m doing or how my work is affecting their lives, but it will continue. That is called, in my religious language, “Sadqa e Jariah”, which means your charity will continue even after you are dead. So I see it this way, this is the driving force behind trying to bring changes or influencing lives of people.

Nerina: What kind of society do you dream of? 

Monir: I have a dream of a just society where everyone will be treated with justice because without justice we cannot have peace and prosperity.

Nerina: What would you tell a teenager in Bangladesh who would like to become a researcher?

Monir: I would say try to know your field of interest, find your interest, be it social, political or natural science, and then focus on solving problems in people’s lives. There is no greater contentment than solving problems for people, so if you really want to enjoy that contentment, then you can be a researcher.

Nerina: Thank you so much, Monir. 

Monir: Thank you Nerina for calling from Sweden and giving me the opportunity to share my ideas and experiences, and convey my message to people, politicians, and teenagers in my country. Thank you very much.

Nerina: Thank you, Monir.

Biography:

Assistant Professor, Department of Microbiology, Primeasia University. Executive Editor at Scientific Bangladesh & Member of the Global Young Academy.

Alexander Kagansky

Alexander Kagansky
Molecular biologist
Biography:

Working for Global Young Academy, Bio2Bio consortium, the University of Edinburgh, and Far Eastern Federal University.

Cancer research, biodiversity, and the future of medicine

Cancer is still a deadly disease. Sasha Kagansky is trying to understand how cancer cells are different from normal cells on the molecular level, and how they react to natural compounds. How important are natural substances, plants, and mushrooms for the future of medicine?

Find out more from Sasha Kagansky on the importance of biodiversity, ancient traditions, and listen to his personal story.

Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Alexander Kagansky's Video here

Alexander: My name is Sasha Kagansky, and I work at the university of Edinburgh in research. I am also a member of Global Young Academy.

Nerina: What is your main research topic? 

Alexander: The main research topic is cancer mechanisms. I try to see how- on a molecular level- cancer cells are different from normal cells. Specifically, we try to see what small molecules are different, and then present different small molecules from natural extracts to the cells to see if pathways in the cells can change enough for it to be useful in medicine.

Nerina: Is this a new approach?

Alexander: I think this is quite a traditional approach. The ways to use this approach have changed a little bit and I think we now have the great benefit of being able to take a tumor from the patient and quickly grow a lot of the cells, then test them while they are still like tumor cells. In the model organisms or cell cultures that were traditionally used, there was too much time passage after the tumor and it was only from a particular patient. Because we have miniaturization of everything, and robotization, there are now ways to test many samples at the same time. In the same way, we can try and collect many different medicinal species and make extracts and try them on many different patients derived cell samples and see if they affect a particular cellular activity. It is looking interesting and we are trying to produce some data that could be useful for medical doctors.

Nerina: Do I understand correctly that you use herbs in your research?

Alexander: Some, but it is not limited to herbs. We have used endemic plants of Mauritius which is a small country that has very unique plants and other species some of which were used in medicine in the past. The number of plants remaining from each of these species is dwindling, so it’s high time to try and understand what they could be used for. We have very exciting data and have already published a couple of papers- I hope there will be a couple more on just a few of the plants that we took from there.

There are also other places – for example, in the far east on the Pacific coast of Russia and neighboring China – that have a long tradition in using mushroom extracts. Specifically, there are mushrooms that grow in the trees- a lot of which were used in Chinese traditional medicine and for treating cancer. In Russia there’s a traditional mushroom called Chaga – it’s Latin name is Inonotus obliquus. It doesn’t look very pretty on the birch trees as it creates a black mask- we were joking as kids that it was an ancient mask left by a knight- but it was used by poor people instead of tea because the taste of the extract is a bit like that of tea. There is some anecdotal evidence- and I don’t see why it cannot be true- that there were fewer cases of cancer in this poorer population than in nobles which had tea. Now, modern science also agrees that it is anti-cancerous; there are publications connecting it to the treatment of cancer, and it’s not toxic so I think it should be one of the researched anti-cancer therapies because I’m an advocator of changing cellular mechanisms in a gentle way.

Nerina: You also collaborate with other researchers in order to raise awareness about the necessity of preserving biodiversity?

Alexander: From the looks of things the majority of medicinal plants have not been studied yet in the very exact terms of today’s technological advances. Yet, we are facing a massive extinction of traditionally used medicines around the world. I think that for the future we definitely would like to keep the forests and the sea going, and to try and make a depository of natural extracts. I think that the more we think and talk about it, and the more we agree as scientists from very different disciplines that it’s good to have wildlife, even though we cannot completely understand what it is doing. I think that is what we would like to try and contribute, that’s why art is necessary in order to be able to feel what the data suggests; and, without humanities, there is no way to understand the common language and the culture of the olden days which may be critical for today’s knowledge. Shamanic knowledge was very heavily restricted and punished in some cases, but now I think it’s in everyone’s best interest to try and increase our knowledge. Maybe we are only at the beginning of the road, but I think it’s a very good moment- if not a very late one- to engage with it to find out together. It’s enough of an issue for everyone to be involved in, there’s no time for competition in this.

Nerina: What does the future of cancer treatment look like in your opinion? 

Alexander: I am an advocate of changing cellular mechanisms in a gentle way because a lot of cancer therapies are so invasive. Some of them destroy DNA very intensively- I have to admit the cure will allow prolonged survival of incurable patients, but I think cancer treatment will be complex in the future. I see how fast immunotherapy of cancer is developing, and I also see a lot of future in genomic and epigenomic therapy. I think there is still  a very long way to go in finding molecules that are regulatory- that are changing the fate of the cells- because in a particular metabolic context, if a person has a particular diet and lifestyle, especially an adult, I think that the tissues in the organism-to a varying extent- are experiencing some particular stress. I think we could correct this stress by adding natural molecules. Sometimes it’s almost indistinguishable from food. I think if we understand the mechanism inside us that the molecules from the food and drink undergo, the more we can actually make food our medicine. This is a bit of an idealistic concept proposed very long ago by the Greeks, but I think it isn’t far from where people would like with their own treatment. I think now the crisis with herbal medicine is exaggerated by some members of the public that don’t see the difference between homeopathy and herbal medicine. I’ve heard a lot of people saying ‘Ah, this doesn’t work!’- a lot of educated people- but it’s very important, and it looks like we need help from humanities here as well to try and separate understandings.

Nerina: What motivated you to enter this field of study?

Alexander: It’s difficult to say, but part of it was the trauma of losing people due to deadly diseases. Every time you are in the hospital it tunes your mind into thinking about these things, and somehow trying to think about it and deal with it helps to suppress anxiety and the uneasy feeling that all of life is associated with losing people. Almost everyone is under the constant stress of losing people or expecting to lose a person or expecting personal decline or death. Of course, it is unavoidable and is deeply part of our culture, but I think that it doesn’t allow us to breathe freely, and at times it’s so strong that if people don’t see solutions and feel like they can do competing, it really paralyzes them. I felt paralyzed and sometimes I still do, but my aspiration that through working on this through the related fields trying to connect bits of the puzzle- what are the molecules that can be put inside to try and talk your cells out of becoming cancer cells.

The reason why I’ve chosen the natural compounds is because I associate the death of my father from cancer with the dose of radiation he got while he was cleaning radium at his work. With my mum, she was complaining that she had a chlorine gas leakage at times because of the sophisticated equipment that she was operating at work, and therefore I don’t want to research radiation and its effects. It’s like a burn. Despite a lot of people lacking trust in natural compounds, I think there is a big future in it, and if we pay attention to the different compounds in plants, marine organisms, mushrooms, bacteria, and yeast, there is a chance that we won’t lose them and be left alone as a species. I don’t want a future where my ancestors live in a human-only world, therefore I think we should find reasons for humans to research nature and to be careful with it. Even species that may seem insignificant, like a shrub, may be discovered to be essential for a particular purpose. We should not let the diversity go, we should try to cooperate and share the knowledge and molecules, and we may have a chance.

Nerina: What keeps you going? 

Alexander: It’s very interesting, I just feel that this area really is personal and I’m happy to do it. I’m happy to try and do it. Many people would say that I’m not successful and I can agree that we could be much faster and my mind could be much clearer, but I think it’s such a great opportunity to try and discuss these things with people who have had a different education, and it turns out that some of what I know can be useful or interesting and therefore I think interaction is one of the things that keeps me going; interaction with people, but also nature. I was going for a walk and you already see birds, grass, so many different colors and you feel great that you actually still have forests. It may surprise people in the future to see that there was so much forest, but I hope not- I hope there will still be plenty of forests.

Nerina: To you, what would it mean to be successful?

Alexander: If we are looking for success we may not know what we want, and in what we do we keep going with the information that we have, just trying to produce more of the good thing that you already uncovered. Being able to see different things and to be able to look at the same thing at different angles is what is also very important. I think trying new things is good- of course, you have to spend time and sometimes you feel the time has been wasted, but I think it happens even when you think you know very well what you are doing. We are all experimenting in life, there is no clarity in tomorrow.

Nerina: What makes life meaningful?

Alexander: I find talking about this very difficult because it is different from moment to moment. I think that meaning can change, and the way we look at the same thing can change. Therefore, I think hope is one of the meanings- being hopeful despite knowing how dreadful things are, and how much more dreadful they may be. I think the feeling that things can go in an unexpected way and you may surprise yourself even with the way you think about things and what you do that this feeling of hope becomes like a driving force if not a meaning. Some would say that hope is hollow, that it is only substantiated by the things that may or may not happen, but in my opinion, it is a very nice thing.

Also, of course, there are very fundamental things like friends, family, and I don’t want to be banal and say that love is the meaning, but I think that in a sense this unexplainable feeling of aspiration towards other people and elements of nature and some things that you cannot explain, even some things in your dreams or in impressions that you cannot put in words. They also substantiate life as a meaning I think.

Nerina: What kind of society do you dream of?

Alexander: I wish there would be such a level of trust and mutual understanding between people in different cultures, and so much kindness and hopefulness that the understanding of the disaster of the loss of someone and of death in general, and the understanding of the value of having good health and loving people independently of connection to you by blood. I wish for a future where people could informally meet- like us- and discuss big things that they are anxious about or excited about, and where the sex, race, or discipline of academic knowledge would not matter as much as what it is that we can achieve or aspire to do, and how shall we treat people, how shall we commonly learn from different people? Adults learn from kids, kids learn from adults in different countries, and agreement from everyone on very basic things like that everyone shares the same desire to survive even if you are not human. This sounds like an acceptable future.

Nerina: Do you have a personal dream?

Alexander: Before I die I would like to think that there is something that I knew that was worth knowing- that something that I contributed is helping people. Having the ability to invest energy into something that is very personal and fundamental for my own aspiration of the future- what I mean is, if I put my time, money, effort and attention to finding some drugs or remedies for conditions that not only me or people that I know can suffer from, but that far away in the future or in another culture, there always will be people who may also be helped by this. Chemically we are related in more than just that we share common DNA, on the material level – apart from very nice spiritual feelings of this – we also share metabolism with certain people. I think that the more we can do that, the more energy I put into it and the more I think about it, and the more I exchange knowledge with people who use completely different tools and scientific language, the more we are empowering ourselves for the future, for friendship, for peace building, and we can also share good food and drink together!

Nerina: If you could, what would you tell your younger self?

Alexander: Try to focus on what people around you tell you, especially the ones that you love. Pay attention to what other things that happen around you, especially try to spend more time in nature, and look at birds and animals and learn from them. And also; don’t worry- just do your best.

Biography:

Working for Global Young Academy, Bio2Bio consortium, the University of Edinburgh, and Far Eastern Federal University.

Lysanne Snijders

Lysanne Snijders
Postdoctoral researcher in animal behavior
Biography:

Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Germany

Do birds have a personality?

Observing animal behaviour can tell us a lot about evolutional behaviour. It can also be an invaluable practical knowledge if you are working with farm animals. But, there is more to it than just raw data. Lysanne Snijders, from the Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, has discovered something much more interesting. She’s found, that not only do birds have personalities, but that there are whole social networks between these animals. They love, they hate, they cheat, and they take care of each other.

Find out more about Lysanne’s search for the personality of animals in our new video.

Watch the trailer:
Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Lysanne Snijders's Video here

Lysanne: My name is Lysanne Snijders. I’m an academic researcher interested in Animal behavior. I’m very interested in animal social behavior and animal spatial behavior. I’ve been studying migration in geese and I just did my Ph.D. on the social networks of Great Tits or small song birds.

Nerina: Why are you so passionate about animal behavior?

Lysanne: Well, actually, I don’t really know. I’ve always been passionate about animal behavior. I really like observing animals. I think it broadens your world if you are aware of all the animals that always are around you and how they behave and why they behave the way they do. That’s why I also became a biologist because I was observing animals anyway, so I might as well make a profession out of it.

Nerina: Why is it relevant to know about animal behavior, in your opinion?

Lysanne: Well, there are several reasons. They can tell us more about the evolution of behavior in general, but also it can be very practical if you’re working with farm animals, to know what causes stress, what is the ideal social situation. It can be very relevant if you are working with threatened populations to know what are the risks, what is their behavior, how do they respond to stressors. But for me, it is relevant because I think we live with a lot of animals on this world and we’re often not even aware of them. And the  more you learn about them, themore you learn about their behavior, the more you realize that they’re actually not so different from us and that maybe in some cases, we should also treat them a bit different than we do now. That’s why for me, personally, studying animal behavior is very relevant.

Nerina: You work on birds, more specifically on Great Tits. How do you research them?

Lysanne: There are actually two main methods with Great Tits. For my Ph.D., I worked with captive Great Tits. We brought them in captivity and we keep them in aviaries so we can do behavioral experiments with them, but we also work with wild birds. We have a number of nest box populations. In the forest, we hang up a lot of nest boxes, like 200 of them. Great Tits really like to breed in nest boxes and also to sleep in nest boxes in the winter, so you can easily check on them. They put collar rings and aluminum rings on them so we can identify and we can keep track of the individuals. This way, we can study the behavior, spatial behavior and breeding behavior of these individuals in the wild also.

Nerina: This is also my question. Do birds have a personality?

Lysanne: Yes. Yeah, that has actually been a topic of my latest studies. A lot of animals, almost all species actually, has been discovered in recent years, that you really see differences between individuals of the same species. Individuals react differently to the same situation as other individuals do. If you put them in the same situation again, you will the same differences. For Great Tits, for instance, we use a number of environments tests. We place them in a new room, which is a bit of a stressful  situation and we study how they react to this stressful situation. We see that some individuals, will just go out and explore the whole room, being a bit adventurous, while others actually are quite a bit stressed and scared and they will just stay in one place and wait for the test to be over. That makes it very fascinating for me because you see these differences that you will also see with people if you put them in a stressful situation. Some are quite comfortable with stress and others just get sort of paralyzed by it.

Nerina: Your Ph.D. was about social networks of birds. Could you tell me more about it?

Lysanne: The interesting thing with looking at social networks, is that you’ll realize that a lot of these individuals, these birds, are connected to each other directly because they are just close to each other or indirectly because they’re singing to each other from far away. These Great Tits, for instance, they form monogamous pairs, so they form social pairs, that usually stay together for their life. It doesn’t mean that they don’t cheat… If you look at offspring, you will sometimes find that there are also some offsprings, some chicks that are not from the partner of the female. These are also interesting relationships going on. You don’t really see it.

Then with Great Tits, what’s also interesting is that in the spring and in the summer, they have these territories. They defend the territories also by singing. Both the male and the female defend it. They use this territory to raise their family. When the kids fledge, they will move around the territory and also further away exploring the area, but as soon as it gets cold, and it really gets really cold, they all go into flocks. Not only the Great Tits, also the Blue Tits will move in. They form one big group of birds and they will move around the forest and also in the gardens of people looking for food. They change their social behavior also depending on the time of the year.

Nerina: Why do birds sing?

Lysanne: That’s actually a very crucial question in animal behavior. There are two main answers that can both be true. One is to keep competitors at a distance. Especially in Great Tits it has been proven that if you remove the Great Tit from its territory but you keep playing the song of this Great Tits, it will take a long time before another bird takes over the territory. But if you do not do that, if you just keep silence, then really quickly, another bird will move in. They use the use to say, “Hey, I’m here. Keep away.” But also song is very important to attract females. There’s a lot of information in how birds sing. Sings that you can tell something about how the body condition of this bird is, how the quality is, how big the bird is and how much more energy it has, how much more vigorously it can sing, and females can use this information also to learn something about this potential partner and base their choice for mates also on this song.

Nerina: Can you recognize a bird from its personality?

Lysanne: Yes, for some you can really recognize from the behavior. For instance, in a nest box population with Great Tits, every year we do nest box checks to see how far they are with breeding, and then you will notice that for some birds, even if you’re just approaching the nest box, they cannot see you but they hear you, and you’ll already hear like a hissing sound and a lot of noise coming from the box, and then it’s a female trying to scare you away by… That was a different hypothesis, but maybe they’re pretending to be a snake, chasing away predators. Not all females do this. At some point, you’ll get to notice this box with this female again.

Nerina: What do we know about the relationship with each other?

Still a lot of research is being done. Until now, it has been very difficult to really track these bird every day or every minute of the day. Now we get new technology, really small little transmitters, and we can really track these birds and with whom they stay together. With Great Tits, it seems that they already, in their first winter – they get born at the end of spring – in the winter, they mate up so they don’t mate, but they get a partner in this winter flocks. They stay together and they try and raise their first broods. You will see, if it doesn’t work, then sometimes they will try and find a new partner, but if they succeed, they usually stay together. They will stay together throughout winter and throughout the summer. Just the whole year around.

Nerina: What does it mean that it doesn’t work? For people, I know what it means when it doesn’t work but what does it mean for two birds?

Lysanne: Colleagues of mine are really looking into that, like what is the value of compatibility, how important is that in birds. The problem is a bit when a male and a female are taking care of a nest, both individuals have an interest when the other would do more. If you can just do less and the other one does all the work, that’s good for you because you lose less energy and so your chicks will survive, but both individuals have this motivation for the other maybe to do less. At some point, if one of the individuals for instance really says, “Okay, you do all the work,” then at some point maybe the partner will say, “Okay, now I’ve had enough,” and goes away and tries to find a new partner. These kinds of mechanisms can cause that these birds just don’t work together. They cannot find a good balance in how much they both take care of the chicks. Then it can go wrong and they try to find a partner that matches better.

Nerina: Are we affecting their habitat?

Lysanne: Great Tits are a bit of an exception because they, until now, have been very well in adapting to the human environments. You see them a lot in your backyards, but a lot of studies also show that the birds breeding in the cities actually do worse than the birds in the forest. If you look at the long-term, it’s probably not a good thing. But then you also have that most birds, most animals, they cannot adapt or not so quickly as we are increasing our infrastructure in our cities. They are pushed more and more into little areas, especially if you look at the Meadow-Birds for instance. The smaller the areas, the more risks there will be because it will be much easier for predators to find them. They will not only have a reduced area to find food but also increased the likelihood of being caught, being killed. There’s this extra stress so you see for many animals, that their populations are declining. Especially what we build and what we consume is an important factor. For a lot of people who live in the cities, it feels so far away what is happening in the rain forest for instance, but everything you buy, all the ingredients that are in your products come from somewhere. It’s important to, even if you’re not living in the rain forest, that your behavior, your choices, have an important impact on the habitats of these animals.

Nerina: What was the most unexpected experience you have had, watching birds?

Lysanne: The most unexpected one and that was not so nice actually, was when we were doing the nest box checks. I was doing them for one of the first times. I came to a nest box and I opened it and there was a dead Blue Tits in there. Then I went to the next nest box and again, there was a dead Blue Tits in there. Then I learned that these nice Great Tits, my study species, can actually be quite mean, killing machines also. When they chose a nest box and then they find that another bird is inspecting this nest box, because a lot of birds are looking for a nesting place, I guess it turns red for their eyes and they just attack these birds in the nest box. Great Tits are quite strong. They are bigger and stronger than Blue Tits. These Blue Tits, they’ll lose and they will kill the birds. It’s not only that they’re really cute little social birds. They also have a little bit of a mean side.

Nerina: What is the most important lesson that you have learned from your Ph.D.?

Lysanne: Of course, before I started with my Ph.D., I didn’t know so much about animal personality yet. I actually found it a bit of a difficult topic. It sounded very subjective. In biology, they use the term anthropomorphism. Attributing human characteristics to animals. I felt a bit critical about it, but them working with these birds, doing these personality tests and following these birds year round, I really also just saw and was convinced that they are very different. This personality thing is really something real. I think that was the most important thing, what I learned from my Ph.D., that you really have distinct individual animals.

Nerina: What is next? What would you like to work on?

I think bats are one of these creatures that they are so many of them. One fifth of all the mammal species is actually a bat, and we know almost nothing about them. Especially compared to birds. From birds, we’ve learned quite a lot about their migration strategies and their ecology, and bats, we know very little. I want to investigate their migration strategy. Some bats, they stay in one place the whole year, while others make this really long distance flight with all these risks. So why do they do this? Then I’ll look at do they differ in their personalities also, do they differ in their social behavior, to learn more about these animals we know so little about, and to also share this information so we can better protect them in the future.

Nerina: What is the question nobody ever asked you but you wish they would?

Lysanne: About how we, as people, can take better care of our animals. How can we take their behavior into account, to improve their well-being? Yeah. How can we make people aware that we are not the only important species on this planet? I think that, for me, is a very important question. I think in science, we know a lot. Especially if you now look at this climate change debates, there’s at least 97% of scientists that say that this is really happening, this is really a problem, and still, there are people that just seem to think that it’s still up for debate. That it might not be happening. For me, it’s important to know how can scientists communicate better to the general audience and make our research clear. Not that it’s just another opinion, but it’s objective measurements about how the world is very likely to work. I think that’s not only for me but for many scientists, that’s a very important topic and important question. How can we bring our knowledge across and how can we have people really trust our findings and our results? What do we need? What does research need in order to be able to communicate better?

Nerina: What do we need? What does research need in order to be able to communicate better?

Lysanne: I think there needs to be, also for scientists, more opportunities and more positive reinforcement of them communicating with the public. At the moment, especially academic scientists, are mostly valued for the scientific publications they make and the grants they bring in, but not so much about how they communicate their knowledge to the general public, which is a bit weird for me because, in the end, it’s all about impact. We tend to measure impact by where you published your research, in which journal and how much it gets cited, just because it’s easy to measure; it’s quantitative. But this is not the only impact and certainly not the only important impact we can make. I think there should be much more positive reinforcement for scientists to tell their story and to bring this knowledge across. More stimulation, more positive reinforcements from higher up, the people who distribute the money, I think would be very valuable.

Nerina: Do you have a dream or a wish for the future?

Lysanne: My wish for the future would be what we already talked about a bit also, is that people really start recognizing that all these animals have individual personalities, and especially also regarding production animals like the chickens and the pigs and the cows, to really realize that these are all individuals with feelings, with stress, with emotions, especially with pigs, which are also very intelligent animals. They are equal or even more intelligent than dogs. That we just should not turn away because it’s easier not to think about it, but that we should really realize how we are treating them.

Nerina: Thank you so much for this conversation.

Lysanne: Yeah. Very nice. Thank you for these interesting questions.

Biography:

Leibniz Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries, Germany

Anindita Bhadra

Anindita Bhadra
Behavioral biologist
Biography:

Assistant Professor, Animal Behaviour and Ecology, Indian Institute of Science, Education and Research, Kolkata, India.

Researching street dogs, doing theater, and dreaming of changing the world

A dog is a man’s best friend. But 80% of all of the dogs in the world are not actually domesticated. What do we know about this large population of stray animals? In our interview, Anindita Bhadra tells us what she found in her 5-years study of stray dogs in India.

How dogs change people, how people change dogs, and how dogs can understand and socialize with humans.

Watch the trailer:
Watch another trailer:
Watch the trailer with Kreyol subtitles:
Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Anindita Bhadra's Video here

Anindita: I’m Anindita Bhadra, from India. I’m a behavioural biologist, working on street dogs.

Nerina: How did this topic get your attention?

Anindita: Well, I had already done my Ph.D. on animal behaviour, and at the end of my Ph.D. I was thinking of what to now start working on and wanted a very Indian model system. So, the dogs seemed to be the perfect model system because you have dogs everywhere, in every street in India, they are easy to work with. You don’t have to haggle for permissions with the forest officials and nobody has really extensively studied dogs in a natural habitat until now. There’s a lot of work on pet dogs and people work with wolves to try and understand dog evolution, but I felt that dogs which have been surviving in natural populations for centuries on our streets, are a very good model system for understanding dog evolution, and also for doing many other things which address basic questions in animal behaviour, ecology, and evolution.

Nerina: What are the biggest challenges?

Anindita: One of the main problems is that they’re all there and are completely mingled with people, so we have to do all of our work on the streets. Firstly, not every student is comfortable working in that way, and, while we are doing this, we have a lot of trouble keeping people away and stopping them from disturbing our experiments. There are too many inquisitive people asking questions, some actually saying “we will not let you work with the dogs in our neighbourhood” and “what are you doing?” and “we’ll call the police”. So, that is one problem that we have all of the time.

Another problem which is a very peculiar problem in my case is; because it’s dogs, there are some people who love dogs and some people who hate dogs. It’s very difficult to be neutral about dogs. I often get students who come to me because they are already interested in dogs; they have pets in the house and they really are in love with dogs. I’m very scared of taking up such students for a Ph.D. because they can actually bias the data through their love for dogs. They start interacting with the dogs they are working with so it is very difficult to tease out what is real data and what is biased data. So, this is a peculiar problem that I face; dog lovers are not really good people for me. Also, I cannot use people that are scared of dogs, or hate dogs. It’s very difficult to find that neutral population who are still interested in doing my kind of work.

Nerina: What did you find out, that surprised you? 

Anindita: One of the surprising results that we found was that- in the literature there was this notion that dogs don’t have stable family groups, unlike wolves. So even when they are in groups, these are random groups. But, we are seeing more and more that that’s not true. There are family groups, and we actually saw that there is a lot of cooperation between members of the groups, even in raising the pups. So, two females would have puppies at the same time, and often they’ll help each other in raising each other’s pups. There are also males which hang around with the females and take care of the pups; they play with the pups, they give them food, and protect them. These are probably the fathers- but we don’t know as we have not done any genetic analysis- as not every male does, only some do. I like saying this is like the typically Indian giant family system. It’s not like the wolf system, where only one dominant male mates and everybody else just has to help. Here, everybody is mating and all of them are having puppies, but then they are helping each other out just like in a large family; cousins, nieces, nephews and grandparents- they are all hanging around together in the vicinity. That’s a very interesting and surprising result.

Another result- which, of course, we were not very happy about- is from when we did a 5-year long study to understand growth rates and death rates in the population. We saw that nearly 81% of the pups born in the year don’t reach adulthood. By 7 months 81% of the pups are dead, and nearly 60% of the mortalities are actually caused by humans. Of course, there are some cases where there are accidents which are not in our control, but then there are also active killings. So, that was a result which we didn’t expect, and it was also not a very happy result.

Nerina: How is the situation of stray dogs worldwide?

Anindita: It’s very interesting because there have been studies to estimate the populations of street dogs across the world, and it seems that nearly 80% of all the dogs present in the world are strays. Street dogs are still the majority, but, of course, they are more common in the developing worlds, than in the developing nation, because of the way the laws are.

Here, in our country, on the one hand, there are the municipalities trying to cull dog populations but then they don’t have very extensive dog control programs, so there’s still a problem. You get reports of some dogs chasing or biting somebody, and this creates a lot of uproar. But then there is also a lot of dog loving people in the population; they put out food for the dogs regularly, and they care for the pups when they are around. So, there is a very mixed kind of feeling.

In the Indian culture, in particular, it’s very interesting because dogs are considered to be lowly animals. Look at Indian literature from 2,00 years or 3,000 years back, then you have literature which talks about dogs on streets, and these dogs are very similar to the dogs of today. They’re just like outcasts. But then, a good householder is expected to feed these creatures at the end of the day, after the meal- the leftovers are not supposed to be thrown away, they are supposed to be fed to the dogs. So, that makes a very interesting kind of ecosystem where the dogs are not part of our households but they are part of the community.

Nerina: You are also working on dog’s cognition, could you tell me more about this? 

Anindita: So, we are doing these experiments on dog cognition. People working with pet dogs have shown that the pets are very good at following human gestures, but wolves are not. Of course, there’s a problem, as pet dogs are brought up with humans, and there is intensive training. So, we are doing these experiments with stray dogs to find out what really innate dog ability is, and what comes by interactions with humans.

What we saw is that really small puppies that are still dependant on and suckling from their mothers, are not really interacting so much with humans in the streets, but those which are 4-6 weeks old are excellent at following human gestures. If you put a bowl down and point towards it, the pup will go towards the bowl. Then we tested the juvenile’s cognition, which is at around 4-5 months, when the maximum mortality due to humans occurs. They are weaned from their mothers and more-or-less independent; they have started forging, and are also a bit of a nuisance for humans because they are very active. At this stage, the dogs are very reluctant to follow human gestures- they do not follow pointing, they do not even respond to the task. However, when you don’t give the gesture and just put down the bowl, they respond. So, they are still eager for the food, but they are very reluctant to rely on humans.

What is surprising is that with puppies, we found an innate ability to understand humans and a tendency to socialise with humans. However, with negative experiences with humans, they probably learned quickly not to rely on them. What we are thinking could have happened in the past is that with this innate ability to socialise with humans, puppies who come to humans and get a positive response gradually become more and more friendly, and turn into pets. But, if they get a negative response from people they move away, and probably just remain as strays. This could have been the early stage when domestication was happening; some dogs became domesticated and some didn’t. So, this is a very interesting scenario that we have just found.

Nerina: Did dogs change humans, or did humans change dogs?

Anindita: That is a completely open question that everybody working with dogs is trying to answer, and frankly I don’t think we have an answer to it. I think the most optimum answer would be that it’s a bit of both. They changed us a bit, and we changed them a bit. From the current understanding, dog domestication probably happened around 20,000 years ago. At that time, humans were still hunting animals, and all other domestication events happened after that. Since we don’t really understand exactly what happened during the domestication of dogs, this is still an open question. We don’t really know.

Nerina: Is there something you would like people who have pets to know about dogs? 

Anindita: One thing is that pet dogs have been bred artificially for so many generations that I think they are inherently very different from dogs on the streets. But, a feeling that I have always had, and with my studies is becoming more and more relevant, is that dogs aren’t very social creatures. When we have pets we like to think that they are part of the family and that we are their group, but it’s not really so right. The interaction you have with another human is not really the same as the interaction you have with your dog. Of course, the dog can interact with you, but it cannot speak its own language with you. So, I think if you want to have a pet, the minimum you can do is give it another dog partner because they need to socialise. They have a lot of interesting interactions and communications with dogs, and are such social creatures that it’s probably not fair to have just one dog as a pet.

Nerina: What does it mean to be a woman, a scientist, and a mother in India? 

Anindita: It means that my days are pretty tough, to begin with. There are, of course, problems, because we have a lot of people with prejudices who think women should be taking care of children and the family. Even in Indian science, there are people who think like that, but I have been brought up in a very liberal-minded family. My grandparents always wanted me to study and become a teacher, and my parents let me do what I wanted to do, so I have never been used to this kind of social system where being a woman is different from being a man.

I haven’t faced too many hurdles, until I came to the professional world of actually competing for a job. There I realised that yes, there are problems; men and woman are not always treated at par when appearing for a job interview, and as my husband and I are in the same field and at the same institute, it often feels like we are treated as a unit and not always as individuals. But, in general, I think the majority of people in India respect woman scientists. There is a lot of understanding from the Indian government, which insists on having day-cares in the institutes. So, now there is a lot of understanding of the woman scientists needs; you need to have a school on the campus, and you need to have day-care so that you can be a mother and have a career at the same time. So, personally, I haven’t really faced too many issues being a woman. However, there is discrimination, there is sexual harassment, and often there is bias. No one will say it to our face but, when somebody says “oh you have done this, being a woman” I feel very bad. Why can’t you just say “you have done this, this is good”. That’s good enough, you don’t have to say it’s even better because I am a woman. I don’t think in those terms when I do my science, I just do my science. Whether it’s good or bad, it should be judged on an objective scale, not based on my gender.

Nerina: What do you like doing, when you are not working or researching?

Anindita:  Cooking, reading books, listening to music, and I do a bit of painting. My weekends are mostly taken up as my husband and I have a theater group so we often have rehearsals. If I’m not doing research, I’m doing theater. My free time is mostly for my kids now.

Nerina: You are a scientist and an artist. What has science to do with art?

Anindita: I firmly believe that if you are a good scientist, you need to be creative. You cannot say that science is science, and the arts are the arts. Whenever you have crossed between disciplines, you have more creative thinking. I have always had a creative kind of mind, I used to dance when I was 4 years old, and I haven’t stopped. But, when I trained to be a scientist I never felt the need to stop indulging in the arts. I actually think every student who is doing science should have some other interest outside science because you cannot just live within the small sphere of your science. Science is becoming more specialised day by day, if you are only doing your bit then you do not know anything about the world; you cannot have lateral thinking, you cannot have different ways of applying your knowledge. You need to have an understanding of literature, social science, and history, to be more creative in your science.

Nerina: Is there a project, or an idea, which you are really passionate about at the moment? 

Anindita: A lot of things, actually. Other than my research, I’m currently extremely actively involved in the Indian National Youth Academy of Science and this is in a way my baby as I helped in founding it. This is not just an Academy, it is almost like a new movement in which we are trying to start getting young people actively involved outside of their research, in taking science to young children, getting involved in science promotions, science diplomacy- something that Indian scientists rarely do now. Everybody thinks that the older scientists should do this, and the younger scientists should just do their research- including the young people themselves. But I am trying to tell them no, this is your social responsibility. You are doing your science, fantastic, but what are you doing for society? This is my way of telling people to come and join us, this is a platform to do something for the society which is giving you the funding for your research, to begin with, right?

Nerina: What is the role of science in your opinion?

Anindita: Science helps you to think, reason, and analyse. Especially in the Indian context; we keep telling Indians that one of the things we would like to do is help people believe in science and practise it as a way of life, not just as a profession. When students are reading science they are normally reading it because they either want to become an engineer or a doctor, or a scientist, but beyond that I think the responsibility of the scientist is to come out of his or her own sphere, step out into the real world, and make science easy to understand for the common people, and for children, so that people get interested in science. So they don’t say that “I’m doing my science, and only I understand my science.  You are dumb, you do not understand” that is not the way we should do our science. We should do science, good science, and then break it down to the language of a child. I should be able to explain my science to a 5-year-old, to a 10-year-old, to a 50-year-old, who have not done science. I think that is a very big responsibility that scientists have because science is so important and you need to bring in the methods of science to solve the world’s problems. You need to bring in the methods of science to address basic questions. In India, we have so many superstitions, and this is very ingrained. People have fear, religious beliefs, and superstitions. There are these stupid class divisions, there are still people who practise very rigorous rituals which are completely based in superstitions, and completely baseless. But, you cannot tell them “you are doing this, this is dumb”, you need them to realise “this is dumb and so I should not do this”, and the only way they can realise this is if they start understanding logical reasoning, and start asking questions. This is, I think, the most important job for scientists; to help people ask questions and find an answer. You don’t just give them an answer; you help people to find the answer.

Nerina: What makes life meaningful?

Anindita: For me, it’s very important to put human beings first. I like to do things for people whenever I can. I really cannot say I will go and solve all the problems in the world, but in my capacity, I like to do my bit and since I like working with children and I’m interested in education, I like teaching. The way I want to solve some of the world’s problems is by engaging young children in discourses, in getting them fascinated about nature and science and helping them to ask why. Especially in our culture, you are always told to obey your elders, respect your elders, do what you’re told, and don’t ask questions. So, if I can motivate even a small part of the population to say “no, I will ask questions; at every step, I need to know why” then I think I have made a good contribution to the society of the future. For me, life is good if I think at the end of the day I have done something positive, that could be a very small thing or it could be a big thing. For me, my life is meaningful if I’m able to do something which is outside the small sphere of my family, or my set of students. So, if I have been able to contribute to society at large, even in a small portion- maybe I have made a student get interested in science and do science, or persuaded a family not to get their daughter married off when she is 15 and instead allow her to have an education and a life of her own, I think that is a contribution I have made to society.

Nerina: Thank you so much Anindita.

Anindita: My pleasure.

Probing into dog-human interactions on streets | #follow-up with Anindita Bhadra

Watch this follow-up conversation with Anindita about some new research results. She is working on dog-human interactions on streets.

Watch the video:
Biography:

Assistant Professor, Animal Behaviour and Ecology, Indian Institute of Science, Education and Research, Kolkata, India.

Wenderson de Lima

Wenderson de Lima
Doctoral researcher in economics
Biography:

Stockholm Business School, Sweden

What NGOs can do. A story between Brazil and Sweden

Modern age brought with it innovations into every aspect of our lives. We use technology to connect, to learn, and of course, to help other people. The problem is, we usually ask the people who help, not the people who receive help, just what is needed. Wenderson De Lima, from the Stockholm business school, wants to understand the real needs of ordinary people. His aim is to create spaces in which the people who are being “helped,” can feel they are able to talk openly about their problems.

Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Wenderson de Lima's Video here

Wenderson: My name is Wenderson de Lima. I am a doctoral researcher at the business school in Stockholm.

Nerina: What is the topic of your dissertation?

Wenderson: The topic of my dissertation is humanitarian innovations and entrepreneurship in developing countries and I am accessing a little bit of the innovations that are being developed in Europe, Stockholm and I’m following them from development to implementation in developing countries.

Nerina: What are the most relevant questions you would like to address? 

Wenderson: There is a growth of technologies for helping people and we want to know how these technologies are perceived by those who develop them and those who receive them. I mean usually in the media what you hear is the interpretation of those who develop, the interpretation of the entrepreneurs but we want to hear as well the accounts coming from people who are at the receiving end of those technologies. That’s what my research is dealing with.

Nerina: What is peculiar about this sector?

Wenderson: In our markets, I mean in the societies where the markets is the main provider as consumer you have a vote and you have a voice. Every time you buy a product you have your vote and your voice heard when you purchase that product and many are dealing with that people receiving humanitarian innovations. You know, that we relation between consumer and a business it’s kind of fragmented by people who fund those products having in mind that many of the consumers cannot really out of their pockets pay for those products then you have a part actually paying for those products. And then this is a relationship that is more complicated than actually consumer and then business relation.

Nerina: What do you think we should change in this relationship?

Wenderson: I think it’s easier said than done but I think that we should… I mean when I say we I talk about the people who are coming from this part of the world we should question our taking for granted assumptions about what people need. You should try to create new links to try to understand the people you’re trying to help. I think that we should give a lot more attention to what’s going on in local context because there’s a big risk that we are losing that. We are losing the connection to what people on the ground in the local context are really trying to do with their lives.

Nerina: How can we do it?

Wenderson: I think first of all is that we could create spaces where people that are being “helped” they can feel they can openly talk about what they need. Because if you do not create that space where people can actually tell you what they want, what they need then you from the beginning you may create a product that is useless for them. I in the quality of an ex-slum dweller I understand how difficult it may feel to actually openly talk about your needs to people coming from outside and that is a big, big obstacle to helping people because people like me who live in these areas favelas usually tend to assume that no one will ever understand us so, therefore, you kind of do not share much of your reality to people who do not face the same problems. So that’s also a big issue.

Now I’m generalizing but a lot of people face the problem of not feeling safe to tell what they want, they do not feel not only hurt but they feel like I will tell what but who is going to care about that. That’s something I think is a consequence of a structural discrimination of the people living in these areas.

Nerina: What should we pay more attention to, in your opinion? 

Wenderson: I think what we should pay attention to is what exactly people in these areas, people living in areas where poverty is extreme what they say about their own solutions, what is that they want. Because I mean it’s not new. In the aid industry everybody knows that because these people they do not finance their own products, they tend to lose voice when NGOs design the help they give for people in that situation. I think the biggest challenge is actually getting access to the stories of the people who are to some extent receiving help in these countries, in developing countries. You have to be able to see your attempt to help other people as a learning process, not as a one size fits all, but also we should be careful to not exaggerate the ability of innovations to help people because there are a lot of political issues that have to be addressed as well. We should not forget why people are in need, we should not actually forget about the political aspects of each and every problem we are trying to address and they are all around them. You see that with the refugees now, all kinds of slum people, living in the slums as well. I mean how are we supposed to address these issues without touching upon political issues?

Nerina: How was your personal experience? What do you remember from your childhood? 

Wenderson: I think that what I saw during my time as a child  I don’t know if you remember what was going in the 80’s and 90’s in Brazil. The 80’s probably here in Europe you’ve seen in the news how Brazilian kids living in the streets were being shot by death squads and so on. We had those types of problems going on in Brazil and for me we had a single but big NGO around close to where I lived, close to the favela where I lived and I remember that one of the biggest things during that time was the notion of our cultural identity. It was very important to be exotic Brazilian at the time. I mean I am very thankful because the NGO was the reason why I was fed, I could find food for a while. The NGO does not exist anymore but I remember that my brothers and I went to their office many times because they had courses about Brazilian music, all of that afro Brazilian identity and it was the only agenda at the moment. I remember that I had both me and my brothers we had loads of fun playing Brazilian instruments, playing Brazilian music but at the end of the day we were there because of the food they served. It wasn’t really because of the so called the Brazilian award of the Afro-Brazilian identity. I understand that it may sound a little bit provocative for many people who think that they have the right to be authentic and so on but I always saw that as something secondary. You have your basic needs. When you live in poverty you pay attention to your basic needs more than your identity. You think of your identity when you… I mean in the state I am now I have food in the fridge so now I have the time and resources to think about my Afro-Brazilian identity.

Nerina: How did you get away from a slum in Brazil to a university in Sweden? 

Wenderson: That’s a big question and the first thing is that I received help as I say for a long time. It wasn’t something I received once and then I have built a huge empire of wealth around it and that’s what I am trying to. I usually tell people that I received help from the Catholic church specifically from a nun in the Catholic church close to where I lived. She was well educated and she helped me a lot with school and stuff and that help was absolutely crucial. I can tell you I devote a lot of what I have done so far to the people who helped me. Not only because they helped me but because they gave me a voice and that’s something not a lot of people did.

Nerina: What is the society you dream of? 

Wenderson: I think that equality should be on the table all the time when we talk about the way a society should look like and I still did not know where to look when I talk about the equality. I actually hope that there will be more and more collective thinking. Thank you.

Biography:

Stockholm Business School, Sweden

Connie Nshemereirwe

Connie Nshemereirwe
Researcher in educational measurement
Biography:

Director of Quality Assurance, Cavendish University, Kampala, Uganda.

  • Member, Global Young Academy
  • Inaugural Fellow, Africa Science Leaders Programme, 2015
  • Mentor Africa Science Leaders Programme, 2016
  • Vice President Doctoral Network of Uganda
  • Vice President for Education Bukoto Toastmasters Club, Kampala
  • Founder and Counselor Nkozi Gavel Club
Teachers, books, leaders. One Ugandan's Dream

Education is essential for our future and for the future of our children. However, research shows that our education is far from perfect. So, how can we make it better? Connie Nshemereirwe measures the literacy and numeracy skills of students, with the aim of making sure that every child in Uganda has the opportunity to become liberated through education. She dreams that one day, all people will be able to decide who theyr are, and be proud of the path they have chosen.

Watch the trailer:
Watch another trailer:
Watch the trailer with Kreyol subtitles:
Watch the video:
Read the transcript of Connie Nshemereirwe's Video here

Connie: My name is Connie Nshemereirwe, and I teach at the Uganda Martyrs University in Nkozi. I work in the Faculty of the Built Environment and in the Faculty of Education as a dual appointment. My main research area is in Educational Measurement.

Nerina: What are you working on right now?

Connie: I am measuring the literacy and numeracy skills of university students; both those that are entering the university and those that are in their third year of university. So it’s a cross-sectional study and I’m trying to see if being at the university has an impact on the development of these skills.

Nerina: What is the purpose of your research?

Connie: The reason that I decided to specialize in educational research mainly is because I feel that the quality of our education is not often – we say it’s poor but we don’t really know what are the specifics of this quality are. So we just think oh we need more teachers, we need buildings or we need more of these but I find that it’s really critical to measure the skills that this education of ours gives us and to think about the skills that we want and see where the gap is. So Educational Measurement allows one to really measure the performance of their own system so that they can have a more targeted input rather than just guessing we need more of this or more of that. So that’s why I do educational measurement.

Nerina: What did you find out?

Connie: The main research that I have done in measurement of late has been at the university level and I’ve been measuring the skills of university students in their first and final year of university. Basically in literacy and numeracy using items from the PISA Survey, which is the Programme for International Student Assessment and the thing which surprised me in my findings, was that the university students in some items performed worse than the average 15-year old in the PISA Survey. Worse still that the items on which they performed worse these are the items that require higher order skills. On the other hand though, it confirms what other researchers have found that if the foundational skills are not well developed then high-level skills are going to be difficult to develop.

So the university students can do very well in items in numeracy and literacy that require lower order skills but really struggle with items that require higher order skills. Which is really surprising because the students who are at the university are the best students in the country. They are the ones who can get to university. So what does that tell us about all the other students that drop out or that don’t go that far? That’s rather worrying I think.

Nerina: But the problem starts actually at school. There is a UNESCO report from 2015 that says that there are children who have been in school for three years who are not able to write and read. Why? 

Connie: It’s quite true. I’ve actually been at a school where I have met children who have been in school for three years and they cannot read a word like “ball” or you know really simple words and I think the problems are several. One is that the children who are enrolled in the first few years of school are a lot, the classes are really large and to teach such foundational skills, on literacy and numeracy, to a class of 90 or 100 is nearly impossible for one teacher. And further, a lot of these children are in rural areas where they may not have ever come across English. Some do not have any books at home, some have never even written the letter A or B, some do not go to preprimary school, they don’t go to kindergarten and they don’t have access to these kinds of schools. So when they arrive in the first year of primary school it’s a lot to learn and the teacher cannot really give each student enough attention. Yeah, it’s possible for them to come to school all these years and never learn how to read and the problem really continues through the education system because the emphasis on learning how to read and on counting and so on actually stops as they go to the fourth year of primary school and fifth year of primary school. They end up just sort of learning somehow and not learning properly. So yes that’s part of the problem.

Nerina: If you had the possibility what would you change tomorrow?

Connie: If money was not a problem and if time was not a problem, if everything could happen in an instant I would have much better trained teachers, at least graduate teachers in every primary school, that’s one. Two, I would have new books produced that depict the normal situation of children in Uganda. I find that a lot of books that are available for children to learn how to read depict situations that are foreign to them. So they show children bouncing a ball and a lot of rural children have never seen a ball bouncing or they depict children riding a pony or whatever it is. I mean they are really inappropriate. So straight away I would want to have books that teach how to read, that depict the daily situations of the children especially in the rural areas because that’s where the majority of children are. Immediately, I would also have teachers of a quality of at least a university graduate in every primary school. I think for me this would be the biggest improvement at this moment.

Nerina: What motivates you? 

Connie: The thing that motivates me is that I really believe that education liberates. Education can liberate someone. For me a good education or the purpose of education is to create a liberated person. To create a person who thinks about things themselves, who is critical, who feels able to transform their own reality and to choose their reality. So education plays a very big role.

If we can have an education that is purposeful in liberating people, in giving them the skills to be who they are and to participate in society. I think this has a very big role to play in creating a society that is proud, that choses who to become and is proud of who they are. So the thing that really motivates me to continue doing educational research and to make sure that every child has the opportunity to really become educated is so they can be liberated, so they can be free, so they can do what they feel like, when they feel like.

Nerina: What drives you in life?

Connie: The thing that drives me in life generally is something that has been driving me for the last 15 years or so and that is the possibility to become what I can become or who I should become. Along the way I’ve really been very careful always to look inside and think who are you? What are your skills, what are your capabilities, how do you feel about things in the world and how do you change the world or your life to become more of who you are? At some point it actually was a bit difficult to embrace this because I felt that I could be really excellent, I could be really be a leader for instance, but then I felt like on the other hand why should I be the person in front saying things that are not popular for instance or being the first person to point out this or the other. But I thought no. I should really be who I am and do what I should do and this is the thing that drives me really to become who I am or who I should be.

Nerina: Who is Connie?

Connie: Who is Connie? Of late I have begun to identify as a leader, as a person who stands up for what is right, as a person who speaks without fear about something that is not going right or a person who goes… Because sometimes you are in a situation where everyone is afraid to say what’s going on or be the first to point out something that’s wrong and these days I’ve decided as a leader I should always be the first to do it and it’s always in very small ways. I mean if the room is too warm if we’re in a conference I’m the one who will go and say, “Hey, the room too warm. Cool it down a little bit.” Small things like those, but also if something is not going right in the government or the country I will write to the newspaper and says something or if at the university they bring up a policy that I think is not very well thought out I will send an email about it. Of late I’ve really begun to identify as a leader.

Nerina: What does a leader do?

Connie: That’s a very good question. I used to think that a leader is the person who has the power or the influence. A leader can have influence but then it’s not an issue of power it’s an issue of relationship. If you can persuade another person to see things a certain way or to think about things and make up their mind about it I think that’s what a leader does. You spread the truth around you, you build relationships, and you participate in society actively. I think that’s what a leader does and that’s what I try to do.

Nerina: Do you have a dream or is there something that you dream of for the future?

Connie: Yes. I do have a dream for the future. I really dream of Ugandans specifically but Africans generally as a people that can come to decide who they are, be proud of who they are and chose to become. Rather than I feel that we don’t have a very clear vision of what we should be or we don’t feel very comfortable in the world. We feel a little bit behind, a little bit inferior, we don’t appreciate ourselves, we don’t appreciate our culture, and we don’t appreciate our skills. For me the dream is to see Ugandans and African in general as people who are proud, who know who they are and are proud of it and chose to become who they are. So for me that… I don’t know if it’s a very clear dream or sought of a very… [signals with hands vagueness].

Nerina: It’s a beautiful dream.

Connie: Okay that’s the dream.

Nerina: What kind of society do you dream of? 

Connie: Yes, what kind of society do I dream of? I’ve recently been reading the work of a philosopher called Paulo Freire who is a Brazilian and he says that the vocation of humans is to become and that any system that prevents a human being from becoming who they are is an oppressive system. So the society that I really dream of is a society where everyone has the opportunity to become who they are: to be a gymnast if they want to be a gymnast, to be a musician if they want to be a musician, to be an artist if they want to be an artist, and to be a mother if they want to be a mother. So a society that creates the environment where everyone can become who they are for me would be the ideal society.

Nerina: Thank you so much, Connie. 

Connie: You’re welcome.

Biography:

Director of Quality Assurance, Cavendish University, Kampala, Uganda.

  • Member, Global Young Academy
  • Inaugural Fellow, Africa Science Leaders Programme, 2015
  • Mentor Africa Science Leaders Programme, 2016
  • Vice President Doctoral Network of Uganda
  • Vice President for Education Bukoto Toastmasters Club, Kampala
  • Founder and Counselor Nkozi Gavel Club

Almas Taj Awan

Almas Taj Awan
Professor of Chemistry
Biography:

Researcher, ThoMSon Mass Spectrometry Lab, Campinas, Sao Paulo, Brazil

From Pakistan to Brazil, linking science and community

Everyday, we throw away tons of waste. But where does it all go? Can we turn waste into something usable and economically valuable? Can recycling be profitable? From extracting value-added products from oranges, to purifying water, Almas Taj Awan’s aim is to make our world a cleaner and better place for everybody.

Watch the trailer:
Watch the video:
Listen to the Audiofile here:
Read the transcript of Almas Taj Awan's Video here

Almas: My name is Almas. I am based in Brazil. Originally I’m from Pakistan and I am postdoc researcher in Uni Camp, Brazil.

Nerina: What are your main research topics?

Almas: I am working with recycling technologies. In my Ph.D. I worked with recycling citrus industrial waste and we extracted some value added products from that. After that, I entered in a research area that was linked to recycling technologies that were used for water reclamation. We were studying how we can purify the waste water in the waste water treatment plants and currently I am working with mass spectrometric techniques and we are using these techniques for analysis of different kinds of substances.

Nerina: Why are you so passionate about recycling?

Almas: Well, I am passionate about recycling because I think that our world needs this. We have lots and lots of problems linked with the waste generation and when the companies and the industry generate waste they actually don’t know what to do with that and normally. Let’s say if I talk about citrus industrial waste every year as Brazil is the largest orange producer, so millions of tons of oranges they are treated in the citrus industry and as a result, millions of tons of waste are incinerated. Because when you treat orange around 50% of that is left as a waste and that is normally dumped at some far place. So what we did, I mean me with my Ph.D. advisor and some other students as well, we tried to use that so called waste and tried to convert that into something really usable and something really economically viable.

Also if I talk about the water recycling technologies, I think that the next problem that the world is going to face is a water shortage problem and we really need to think about it. How we can reduce water consumption and what kind of technologies we can utilize to re-use the water? Like, let’s say for the toilet flushing or for the washing purposes, the house cleaning I think we can use reclaimed water for that purpose instead of using the drinking water for that purpose.

Nerina: What kind of results did you get from your dissertation?

Almas: Okay well, from the orange waste four main products that we extracted were first of all I would like to say pectin. Pectin is kind of a jelling agent and it can be used in the jams, jellies, marmalades or the juice industry for thickening purpose. Then the second one that we obtained was hesperidin that is an antioxidant, it’s an antidepressant as well. It’s a natural product and it can be used as a remedy. Next product that we obtained was nanocellulose and nanocellulose is nowadays a very active research area and it can be used for the – ah how can I say it – as the protective sheets on the cellphones or on the cars and they’re many other uses as well that are under research study and then it was bioethanol. Bioethanol is something that you can use for running the cars.

Brazil is a country that has made an example for the whole world because it’s the world largest producer of bioethanol but that bioethanol is actually the first generation bioethanol. But in our case, we are working from the bio waste and that is a second generation biofuel and that is the next technology that’s efficient technology because taking out bioethanol from the food products is something that has many challenges. Probably these food crops they could be used for providing food because the world has a lot of problems with food scarcity, food shortage. So probably we can use that for the other purposes as food items, but the waste that is left; the agricultural waste that is left, that waste can be converted into a biofuel.

So, here in Brazil, there are many laboratories that are doing research. Actually, there are many ways to convert that into biofuel but the only problem is that the economic viability of that process on the industrial level. But in our case when we tried to… when we were exploring this process we had this objective in mind that we need to reduce the waste. I mean we need to use the waste, but also we need to make a process that should be economically viable that could be applied on the industrial scale. So, when you work on the industrial scale you need to think about the money. The input and the output should be in balance or it should generate some revenue as well. So in our case, we tried different enzymes because right now the main problem that the industry is facing they are the high cost of enzymes. So we used Xac enzymes that are the lowest known in cost. So we think that the process is economically viable.

Nerina: The approach that you used was a new one?

Almas: Yes, it was a new approach in the sense that in Brazil ours was the first one. We tried to work with this and we were really successful and our approach was to extract as many products as we can.

Nerina: What are the possible real world applications of your results?

Almas: I think this product is marvelous and all the products that we extracted we can extract them on the industrial scale. Right now we are working with some companies to make some contract with us or with our lab and we’re trying to share the patent with them.

Nerina: What does it mean for you to be a scientist?

Almas: For me to be a scientist is, you know, I feel it’s a really big responsibility. It’s a really, really a big responsibility because every new disease that the world is facing, the population is facing or any environmental problem or any real life problem that the world is facing I think that scientists they try their best to solve that problem at the research level, at the very basic level. Well, there are two types of researchers: one is a basic research, the other one is the applied research and I think both of them are really, really important. Because the basic research it gives us fundamentals of future concepts related to science. While the applied research it is something that deals with the current problems that the population is facing. So I think both of them are equally important and I’m really passionate about them.

Nerina: Why did you become a researcher?

Almas: Well, I became a researcher because I think that I’m quite ambitious and I want to solve certain problems faced by the society. If I talk about my childhood I never thought about this that I would be a researcher, I would be a future scientist. I belong to a village from Pakistan where I think I am the first one who came out of that village and my parents they sent me abroad to have a scientific career. Because when a child I never thought that I would be a scientist. I never thought because I was like I can be a doctor or I can be an engineer or any other thing but not a scientist. How can a woman be a scientist? I had never seen scientists around me. That was something I never even thought about.

But when I started my master’s I always tried to think about science and how it works. I was in Pakistan and at that time there was a lack of resources, but then I got to know about the fellowship that is offered by The World Academy of Science (TWAS). I applied for that and eventually, I started my research career in Brazil.

Nerina: What kind of challenges did you encounter on your way?

Almas: Well, I think that there were many challenges like I was coming from Pakistan a society from where we don’t have that much of female scientists and then, my family, they were really supportive: my father, my mother, my siblings but of course society they imposed a lot of things on you and then they’re like… I mean even there it’s not common for the girls to travel alone abroad and then working with science away from the family something it’s a bit scary not seeing them that much good situation. But the thing is that like in the beginning it was like a little bit difficult but with the passage of time when I started showing that yes I’m a girl but I can do anything and I can do work as a scientist just like the men in my country can do and I can be extraordinary as well and I can be independent as well. So it is something that now makes me feel really proud and not just me even my family and I think that I can probably be an example maybe for some girls who want to proceed with their dreams, who want to do whatever they want.

Nerina: What kind of advice would you give to another young woman who would like to become a researcher?

Almas: I would like to say that the doors are open for you. I mean the doors are open for you. You just need to have the courage to enter that door because all over the world what I see is that academic and scientific councils are really encouraging women. I mean wherever you would like to apply for higher studies research grants they really encourage women. We need more and more women so that the gender gap that exists between science and women it should be overcome and secondly, there are many issues that are linked in the underdeveloped countries. I think that women from the underdeveloped countries I would really, really encourage them not to have fear about anything, just be bold, take the practical steps, look forward and work hard. You can do it.

Nerina: What motivates you?

Almas: Well this is a really personal question. I think my motivation is my parents because I see they have struggled throughout their lives to make their children independent. So when I feel that or whenever I have some difficult times in my life I just think about them, they’re my motivation and I just try to make myself better and just try to make and have more and more achievements so that they can be more and more proud with me.

Nerina: Where do you see yourself in 5 or 10 years? What would you like to change?

Almas: Well, in the long term I would like to be part of the policy making bodies at the regional or the government or the global level. So what I would like to change is that I would like to make a bridge and I would like to reduce the gap that exists between the scientific community and the policymakers.

Nerina: What kind of society do you dream of?

Almas: Well, I dream of a society that is peaceful because currently I think that the world… I mean the only thing the world needs currently right now, the first priority is peace and then on the second level I feel that there should be… I dream of a society where every individual knows about its responsibility not just on a local level but on the global level as a global citizen.

Nerina: Do you have a dream or a wish for the future?

Almas: Yes, my dream for the future is that our government officials and the policymakers start thinking on the global level or I should say glocally. It means they should consider their local interests as well but the global interest as well because at the end of the day all human beings are the ones who share this planet. So probably our one wrong policy can not only influence our local community but also the global one. I think I really wish that our politicians around the world start thinking about the planet earth, about all of us, they think about the global citizens not just their local citizens.

Nerina: Thank you Almas so much for this conversation.

Almas: Thanks to you for inviting me, for sharing my thoughts.

Biography:

Researcher, ThoMSon Mass Spectrometry Lab, Campinas, Sao Paulo, Brazil

Traces&Dreams AB

c/o Impact Hub
Jakobsbergsgatan 22
111 44 Stockholm Sweden
Org. nr: 559336-2196

Join the community

Subscribe here to our newsletters and learn more about narratives, futures, and positive change.

Copyright © Traces&Dreams AB 2023

Privacy Policy