MaintenancePolitical science researcher Antoine Hardy analyzes the Labos 1point5 initiative, which aims to decarbonize scientific activity, and its repercussions in the world of research.
Antoine Hardy is a doctoral student in political science at the Center Emile Durkheim in Bordeaux. For nearly two years, he has been interested in the links between science and politics in scientific mobilizations and, in particular, in the Labos 1point5 collective, which wants to “better understand and reduce the impact of scientific research activities on the environment”. Speaker at the colloquium of this collective organized on 1is June, he delivers here preliminary analyzes on the nature of the movement.
How would you describe the Labs 1point5 initiative?
We must be careful not to freeze this movement with immutable labels. It would be tempting to ask whether the quantification of research activity, by carrying out assessments of greenhouse gas emissions, aims to politicize or technicize the social problem created by the consequences of climate change. However, far from a binary alternative, I observed actors driven by different motivations. Some want to defend science against critics who accuse it of hypocrisy if it did not apply what its findings call for. Others insist on the credibility of the research or its responsibility, since it is financed with public money, and that it cannot therefore participate in degrading living conditions in the name of science. Others consider that these estimates are simply a first means of acting in the face of the complexity of the climate problem… There is therefore a rich array of motivations.
Do these commitments not place these members in the category of activists or militants?
We must pay attention to the way in which they themselves describe their action: a specificity of Labos1point5 is the desire to be part of science through the production of new knowledge. Moreover, the term militancy can also be used to disqualify an attempt to think about the conditions of scientific work, on the pretext that science is neutral in terms of values. However, historians have shown that neutrality is used for different reasons over time. In the XVIIe century, it is a question of affirming an autonomy of science outside the influence of the State and the Church. In the XXethis claim no longer serves to escape guardianship, but often to mask the balance of power and interests that shape research.
What are the other specificities of Labos1point5?
The movement is experiencing both a phase of intensification of its activities and institutional recognition, without renouncing its ambition to be a national movement associating reflection on the purposes of research and support for laboratories that want to change their practices. Behind the carbon footprint, there is the idea that the knowledge thus produced could contribute to transforming ways of working. Of course, being exposed to information does not automatically lead to action. Otherwise, we would not understand the difficulties in combating global warming, on which there is total scientific consensus. Knowledge alone is not enough, even more so if it avoids establishing a balance of power. It is also in this sense that we must understand the desire expressed by some to restore power to laboratories and to break with the current organization of scientific life.
You have 23.8% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.