We are running out of time. Ecosystems across the planet are being destroyed at an accelerating rate. The life sciences – once a field dedicated to the study of living systems and our interactions with them – are increasingly becoming sciences of the dead. Up to one million species are currently threatened with extinction, many of them within decades. This includes as many as 10% of insect species (IPBES, 2019), as well as two in five plant species (Nic Lughadha et al., 2020). Moreover, many species that are not immediately threatened by extinction are suffering population declines (Wagner, 2020). Through a combination of unfettered changes in land use, exploitative farming practices, overfishing, and fossil fuel emissions, our planet is experiencing an extinction process of unprecedented speed (WWF, 2020).

Current projections paint a grim picture for what our planet will look like in the near future, as biodiversity loss is further compounded by climate breakdown (IPBES, 2019). The Secretary-General of the United Nations, António Guterres, recently stressed that “the evidence is irrefutable: greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning and deforestation are choking our planet” (United Nations, 2021). The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) asserts global warming is on track to exceed 2°C during this century (IPCC, 2021), and more recent estimates are even higher (Climate Action Tracker, 2022). Furthermore, research indicates that the human climate niche may dramatically shrink over the next fifty years, making large swaths of the planet incompatible with human survival, and thus forcing mass displacements of hundreds of millions of people (Xu et al., 2020). It has been estimated that the disruption of our climate system will cause around five million excess deaths annually (Bressler, 2021; Zhao et al., 2021), via massively increased risks of heat stress, droughts, crop collapses, outbreaks of diseases and other natural disasters (WHO, 2021). The effect of these climate and ecological crises is exacerbated in lower-income countries, where the capacity for response is substantially decreased due to centuries of colonial appropriation and resource depletion (Fanning et al., 2022; Hickel et al., 2022).

Life scientists have documented the extermination of species and the destruction of ecosystems in excruciating detail (Hodgson et al., 2018; Cordier et al., 2021; Schmolke et al., 2010; Fitzpatrick and Keller, 2015). Yet our measurements, predictions and conclusions are overwhelmingly ignored by politicians, who have the power to stop this process. Even as researchers write countless warnings and reports on the biospheric emergency, the situation gets worse every year (Ripple et al., 2020; Ripple et al., 2017; Pyšek et al., 2020; Georgian et al., 2022; Cavicchioli et al., 2019; Albert et al., 2021). The life sciences thus seem powerless to stop the destruction of their own subject of study.

What has gone wrong? In this article, we highlight how life scientists are failing in our duty to effectively engage with society about the biospheric emergency. We emphasise how a focus on behaviours that maintain the status quo has cornered us into accepting practices and modes of communication that run counter to our own scientific recommendations. This, in turn, is hindering the transformative societal change that is needed to avert the worst consequences of the climate and ecological crises. Motivated by an academic environment that disincentivizes (and even sanctions) social and political critique, many life scientists have resigned themselves to reporting on the consequences of the biospheric emergency, while shying away from its underlying social, economic and political causes.

We, as members of the movement Scientist Rebellion, call on life scientists to address these challenges by rediscovering forms of advocacy and activism that were a distinctive feature of previous generations of academics. To help this effort, we describe how advocacy and activism can be integrated into our scholarly responsibilities – including outreach, teaching and research – without compromising our professional integrity.

Life scientists study the natural world: its past, its present, its future, and its ongoing interactions with human society. In addition to producing knowledge, many scientists feel a duty to relay this knowledge to the public (Douglas, 2009). This duty is also fundamental to many mission-driven professions within the life sciences: the role of conservation biologists and medical researchers, for example, includes an explicit obligation to create and disseminate knowledge in order to preserve life (Meine et al., 2006; Romanello et al., 2021; Bennett et al., 2020).

Thus, for both personal and professional reasons, many life scientists have been trying to communicate the urgency of the climate and ecological crises for decades, so as to trigger the cultural and political mechanisms able to prevent further degradation and collapse of ecosystems worldwide (Díaz et al., 2019; Ripple et al., 2017). In its latest report, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) calls for “fundamental, system-wide reorganisation across technological, economic and social factors, including paradigms, goals and values” (IPBES, 2019), while the IPCC urges “fundamental changes to how society functions, including changes to underlying values, worldviews, ideologies, social structures, political and economic systems, and power relationships" (IPCC, 2022c).

Yet, our societies have not developed the radical, collective and co-ordinated systems change that a planetary-scale emergency would require. Given the level of urgency, it is critical to ask how effective scientific efforts have been at producing such change and/or at galvanising politicians to take action. Here we discuss five areas where we think life scientists have failed in this regard: biodiversity conservation; food security; global public health; mental health; and life sciences education and dissemination. Each area has garnered enormous attention from life scientists, yet the situation in each gets dramatically worse every year.

It is clear that the current situation calls for a radical change in the way we engage with society about the biospheric emergency. What would such a change involve? Many scientists are now outlining a path forward which entails embracing advocacy and activism in academia (Gardner and Wordley, 2019; Gardner et al., 2021; Capstick et al., 2022). Advocacy involves taking a specific public stance in support of a cause – in this case, climate and ecological action (Jickling, 2003; Nelson and Vucetich, 2009). Activism refers to particularly direct forms of advocacy, such as petitioning or protesting. One form of activism that has proven to be highly effective at garnering public support, especially when done peacefully and en masse, is civil resistance (Chenoweth et al., 2011). This involves publicly confronting or refusing to obey a particular law, order, power or rule deemed to be unjust or unethical, with the potential risk for detention or arrest. By placing oneself in a position of vulnerability with respect to a ruling regime (for example, by blocking a road or occupying a building), one can generate public concern and sympathy, in ways other forms of engagement often fail to do (Thackeray et al., 2020). Indeed, civil resistance has been a major force behind societal changes over the past two centuries, including decolonisation processes, labour rights, women’s voting rights, and civil rights for people of colour (Roberts and Ash, 2009; Chenoweth, 2021).

Advocacy and activism need not be seen as a departure from our professional duties as academics, but rather as a natural adaptation of them to times of crisis (Gardner et al., 2021). Scientific freedom is indeed yoked together with responsibility (Douglas, 2021). We are in a privileged position to be able to study life in its various forms, and produce knowledge about it – intimately attached to this freedom is the responsibility to use that knowledge to protect life. As stated in On Being A Scientist, a handbook published by the National Academies for Science, Engineering and Medicine in the United States: “researchers also have the right to express their convictions and work for social change, and these activities need not undercut a rigorous commitment to objectivity in research. The values on which science is based – including honesty, fairness, collegiality, and openness – serve as guides to action in everyday life as well as in research” (NAS, NAE, COSEMPUP, 2009).

Not everyone agrees that scientists should engage in advocacy and activism. Some have argued that scientists should not take normative stances on any subject, and should therefore limit themselves to informing politicians, policymakers and the public about the ever-worsening state of life on Earth (Wells, 2018; Young, 2017). This argument assumes that science can ever exist outside the political arenas that frame how it is practised in the first place. In fact, the vast majority of fields that are now regarded as essential to the scientific community initially grew out of the conscious efforts to improve society and intervene in various crises. From genetic toxicology’s ties to the environmental movements of the 1960s and 70s (Frickel, 2004a) to “crisis disciplines” such as epidemiology and conservation biology, which aim to preserve the foundations supporting human and non-human life (Soulé, 1985; Susser and Bresnahan, 2001; Meine et al., 2006; Cox, 2007) – the struggle for social progress is often, if not always, intrinsically part of knowledge production (Choudry, 2020).

Scientists are, after all, citizens before scientists. All citizens in a society have a moral obligation to advocate for what they justifiably recognize to be right or good (Nelson and Vucetich, 2009). Thus, our role as citizens entails a responsibility to participate in the betterment of society to the best of our abilities. The fact that we are also scientists should not prevent us from being good citizens, or to abdicate our responsibilities to society. On the contrary, we enjoy the privileged position of having first-hand access to scientific knowledge, so our responsibility is even greater. Indeed, in a crisis situation, failure to advocate for particular positions can have devastating consequences, and even lead to preventable loss of life (Pietrucci and Ceccarelli, 2019; Benessia and De Marchi, 2017). Although many of us are working with non-permanent, short-term contracts – and often lack the rights of full citizens in the societies we live in – advocacy and activism can be a way to more deeply connect with those societies, while participating in global struggles that also affect our homelands (Frickel, 2004b).

Some scientists are, perhaps understandably, wary of damaging their credibility by getting involved in advocacy and activism. However, research indicates that this fear may be unfounded (Kotcher et al., 2017). In fact, the public expects scientists to be actively involved in critical issues, and to participate in policy advocacy, because of their scientific expertise (Cologna et al., 2021). Studies show that, when it comes to ecological activism, scientific objectivity is not inherently compromised by the political aspects of research and communication (Isopp, 2015). In the health sciences, for example, activism has been recommended as "sitting on a spectrum of possible health professional advocacy actions" (Bennett et al., 2020).

In contrast, the fear of being perceived as alarmist has seriously impeded accurate and effective scientific reporting by, for example, leading researchers to consistently underestimate the negative impacts of the climate and ecological crises (Brysse et al., 2013). It has also led many to be dispassionate in their communications, when a more passionate and emotional approach would have been more effective (Brosch, 2021). As Marcus and Oransky wrote in 2017: "Although the conduct of science demands honesty and rigour, nowhere is it written that researchers must remain silent when governments or other powerful players either misuse science or suppress findings in the service of harmful policies" (Marcus and Oransky, 2017).

In this section we discuss how life scientists can include advocacy and activism in their work, in order to increase awareness of the climate and ecological crises, and to foster proactive responses to these crises. We will start with scientific outreach and then move to teaching and research (Figure 1).

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

Outreach is an essential aspect of being an academic, and connecting with the public can be done in many ways. In the biospheric emergency, however, outreach must go beyond conventional ways of making scientific knowledge available to the public. Instead, we argue, scientists must actively participate in movements that are openly engaging with the emergency, via effective forms of direct action that can garner mass media attention (Chenoweth et al., 2011; Chenoweth, 2020). Examples of such actions can include blockades of streets or bridges by scientists (Thompson, 2021), the occupation of corporate or government facilities (Chiarin, 2022), the pasting of pages from scientific papers and reports onto the walls of buildings (Gayle, 2022), and academic strikes (Ambjørseiet, 2022). As trusted communicators (Funk et al., 2020), scientists are also in a unique position to amplify voices of civil resistance that are currently under-powered. For instance, activists blocking the construction of an oil pipeline may be more likely to gain the attention and favour of the public if they are backed by biologists, ecologists or public health experts who can explain to journalists why new pipelines pose an existential risk to both nature and our civilization at large.

Similarly, our teaching practices can be adapted to embrace advocacy and activism, both inside and outside institutions of higher education. For example, scientists can organise street teach-ins on the biospheric emergency while blocking traffic (Nielsen and Thymark, 2021), interrupt our own course curricula with talks about the biospheric emergency (Steinberger, 2022), or even occupy university classrooms (Volkstimme, 2022), thereby putting pressure on institutions to seriously mobilise their resources. The emergency ultimately requires a radical transformation of academic curricula, to provide students not just with knowledge about the consequences of climate and ecological breakdown, but also with the social and political tools to address their causes (Steinberger, 2022).

Our research can also be expanded beyond business-as-usual – that is, beyond the generation of data, models, papers and reports that are largely targeted at other academics (Veríssimo et al., 2020). Instead of designing research programs for a world that will not exist anymore (IPCC, 2021), we can refocus and repurpose our research to develop tools that will help society to cope with the changes the biospheric emergency will cause. At the University of California San Diego, for example, the Climate Psychology and Action Lab is conducting research on socio-behavioural methods to help transition people away from climate skepticism or passivity, and into collective movements that confront fossil fuel extractivism and support renewable energies. Another recently launched initiative – Faculty for a Future – is helping academics transform their research, teaching, engagement, and institutions, so that they can, in turn, guide students and society into a more sustainable future. Along these lines, one of us (CJG) and colleagues recently argued that scientists can collaborate with activist groups, to help them collect evidence and improve strategies for movement-building and visibility (Gardner et al., 2021).

Scientists can also work to transition away from the unsustainable patterns of thinking in which academia has operated for decades, including a strong focus on conformism, competitiveness, opportunism and flexibility. These patterns of thinking are particularly dangerous in the biospheric emergency, as they have driven us to see technocratic approaches as the only solutions to humanity’s problems. Instead scientists must be clear about the kind of knowledge science is capable of producing – including its failures and limitations – without shutting down the concerns of the non-academically-trained public (Stengers, 2018).

Most critically, research in the biospheric emergency needs to involve local stakeholders across all stages of the process, including those who are most directly affected by climate and ecological breakdown (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1993). It is vital for life scientists to listen to, collaborate with, and co-produce with social scientists, humanities scholars and indigenous communities: we must engage in meaningful dialogue with those who have been historically excluded or exploited by colonialism and neo-colonialism. For example, past and ongoing land-grabs, arrests and assassinations of Indigenous activists (Global Witness, 2018) have been key enablers of the climate and ecological crises, by silencing modes of thinking and understanding our world that questioned the socioeconomic norms violently imposed on other cultures (Salomon et al., 2018; Stein et al., 2021).

Many scientists are already engaging in some of these forms of activism (Thompson, 2021). In April 2022, for example, shortly after the publication of one of the IPCC reports, Scientist Rebellion mobilised over 1,500 scientists across 28 countries to highlight the dire global situation outlined by the report (IPCC, 2022b). Researchers of all scientific backgrounds risked arrest across all continents by participating in non-violent disruptive actions directed at governmental, scientific and corporate institutions deemed responsible for the climate and ecological crises (Harvey, 2022; Osborne, 2022). The IPCC report itself had been leaked by anonymous scientists almost a year in advance – another form of scientist activism – due to fears it would be watered down by politicians and corporate lobbyists before publication (Harvey, 2021). This fear was later shown to be founded (Bordera, 2022).

Though regaining momentum today, scientist activism is not new (Figure 2). Its history is long, rich and diverse, testifying against the notion that it is unusual for researchers to get directly involved in societal problems (Moore, 2009). Prominent scientists like Albert Einstein, Bertrand Russell and Linus Pauling actively engaged in the debate on the development of nuclear weapons and the dangers of modern warfare (Russell et al., 1955; Pauling, 1958). American scholars and students participated in numerous teach-ins and strikes in the 1960s (Allen, 2019), as did the Science for the People collective in the late 1960s and early 1970s, in order to protest the US–Vietnam War. Prominent biologists, like Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin, were key figures in this anti-war mobilisation (Schmalzer et al., 2018). Likewise, activism has a proud tradition in the health sciences: scientist-campaigners like Florence Nightingale and Elizabeth Garrett Anderson contributed to major gains in social welfare rights for underprivileged groups, and in the fight for women’s right to vote (Launer, 2021).

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, well-known scientists have participated in activism specifically targeted against ecological deterioration. As early as the 1920s, activist biologists in Brazil were instrumental in influencing public policy to advance environmental protection policies (Duarte and Whitty, 2016). More recently, the climatologist James Hansen has repeatedly engaged in activism, ever since his historic testimony to the US Senate in 1988 to raise public awareness about climate change and its effects on the biosphere. This activism has often been in the form of civil resistance, leading to arrest (Bryner, 2013). Another example is the Argentine biologist Esteban Servat, who rose to global fame after publishing a secret government report on the disastrous effects of fracking in Mendoza, and was then forced into exile from his own country (Ketcham, 2019). He has also been responsible for co-organizing mass mobilisations across the world, highlighting links between social struggles in impoverished nations with environmental abuses by European and North American corporations (Ketcham, 2019; Monbiot, 2022).

This article has focused on the life sciences. However, we believe our recommendations are broadly applicable to all scientists and academics, regardless of their area of expertise. In times of emergency, the entire scientific community must act their part: we are among the most trusted members of society (Funk et al., 2020) and we cannot let our immense prestige, knowledge and privilege go to waste.

We set out to write this perspective because we are all currently participating in activism. We ask our colleagues, mentors, students and teachers to join us. Let us not turn ourselves into passive witnesses of mass death and extinction. We are life scientists after all – let’s stand up for life.

N/A.

1. 1. Albert JS
   2. Destouni G
   3. Duke-Sylvester SM
   4. Magurran AE
   5. Oberdorff T
   6. Reis RE
   7. Winemiller KO
   8. Ripple WJ

   (2021) Scientists’ warning to humanity on the freshwater biodiversity crisis

   Ambio 50:85–94.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-020-01318-8

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. Book

   1. Allen J

   (2019)

   Scientists, Students, and Society (March 4, Anniversary Edition)

   MIT Press.

   • Google Scholar
3. Website

   1. Ambjørseiet T

   (2022) Forskere og aktivister streiket for klima

   Accessed June 2, 2022.

   https://underdusken.no/klima-ntnu-streik/forskere-og-aktivister-streiket-for-klima/303204
4. Website

   1. APA

   (2020) Majority of US Adults Believe Climate Change Is Most Important Issue Today

   Accessed September 20, 2022.

   https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2020/02/climate-change
5. 1. Arora Nk

   (2019) Impact of climate change on agriculture production and its sustainable solutions

   Environmental Sustainability 2:95–96.

   https://doi.org/10.1007/s42398-019-00078-w

   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Benessia A
   2. De Marchi B

   (2017) When the earth shakes and science with it the management and communication of uncertainty in the L’Aquila earthquake

   Futures 91:35–45.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2016.11.011

   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Bennett H
   2. Macmillan A
   3. Jones R
   4. Blaiklock A
   5. McMillan J

   (2020) Should health professionals participate in civil disobedience in response to the climate change health emergency?

   Lancet 395:304–308.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(19)32985-X

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Berrang-Ford L
   2. Sietsma AJ
   3. Callaghan M
   4. Minx JC
   5. Scheelbeek PFD
   6. Haddaway NR
   7. Haines A
   8. Dangour AD

   (2021) Systematic mapping of global research on climate and health: a machine learning review

   The Lancet. Planetary Health 5:e514–e525.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00179-0

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. Website

   1. Bordera Juan

   (2022) How the Corporate Interests and Political Elites Watered down the World’s Most Important Climate Report

   Accessed April 27, 2022.

   https://mronline.org/2022/04/27/how-the-corporate-interests-and-political-elites-watered-down-the-worlds-most-important-climate-report
10. 1. Bradshaw CJA
    2. Ehrlich PR
    3. Beattie A
    4. Ceballos G
    5. Crist E
    6. Diamond J
    7. Dirzo R
    8. Ehrlich AH
    9. Harte J
    10. Harte ME
    11. Pyke G
    12. Raven PH
    13. Ripple WJ
    14. Saltré F
    15. Turnbull C
    16. Wackernagel M
    17. Blumstein DT

    (2021) Underestimating the challenges of avoiding a ghastly future

    Frontiers in Conservation Science 1:e19.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2020.615419

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Bressler Rd

    (2021) The mortality cost of carbon

    Nature Communications 12:4467.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-24487-w

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Brosch T

    (2021) Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review

    Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences 42:15–21.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.001

    • Google Scholar
13. Website

    1. Bryner J

    (2013) NASA Climate Scientist Arrested in Pipeline Protest

    Accessed February 14, 2013.

    https://www.livescience.com/27117-nasa-climate-scientist-arrest.html
14. 1. Brysse K
    2. Oreskes N
    3. O’Reilly J
    4. Oppenheimer M

    (2013) Climate change prediction: erring on the side of least drama?

    Global Environmental Change 23:327–337.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.10.008

    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Capstick S
    2. Thierry A
    3. Cox E
    4. Berglund O
    5. Westlake S
    6. Steinberger JK

    (2022) Civil disobedience by scientists helps press for urgent climate action

    Nature Climate Change 12:773–774.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01461-y

    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Carlson CJ
    2. Albery GF
    3. Merow C
    4. Trisos CH
    5. Zipfel CM
    6. Eskew EA
    7. Olival KJ
    8. Ross N
    9. Bansal S

    (2022) Climate change increases cross-species viral transmission risk

    Nature 607:555–562.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04788-w

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. Book

    1. Carson R

    (1962)

    Silent Spring

    Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Cavicchioli R
    2. Ripple WJ
    3. Timmis KN
    4. Azam F
    5. Bakken LR
    6. Baylis M
    7. Behrenfeld MJ
    8. Boetius A
    9. Boyd PW
    10. Classen AT
    11. Crowther TW
    12. Danovaro R
    13. Foreman CM
    14. Huisman J
    15. Hutchins DA
    16. Jansson JK
    17. Karl DM
    18. Koskella B
    19. Mark Welch DB
    20. Martiny JBH
    21. Moran MA
    22. Orphan VJ
    23. Reay DS
    24. Remais JV
    25. Rich VI
    26. Singh BK
    27. Stein LY
    28. Stewart FJ
    29. Sullivan MB
    30. van Oppen MJH
    31. Weaver SC
    32. Webb EA
    33. Webster NS

    (2019) Scientists’ warning to humanity: microorganisms and climate change

    Nature Reviews. Microbiology 17:569–586.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41579-019-0222-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. Book

    1. Chenoweth E
    2. Stephan MJ
    3. Stephan M

    (2011)

    Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict

    Columbia University Press.

    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Chenoweth E

    (2020) The future of nonviolent resistance

    Journal of Democracy 31:69–84.

    https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2020.0046

    • Google Scholar
21. Website

    1. Chenoweth E

    (2021) Civil Resistance: What Everyone Needs to Know

    Accessed February 4, 2021.

    https://whateveryoneneedstoknow.com/view/10.1093/wentk/9780190244392.001.0001/wentk-9780190244392
22. Website

    1. Chiarin M

    (2022) Clima, ricercatori si incatenano davanti alla raffineria di eni a marghera

    Accessed April 6, 2022.

    https://nuovavenezia.gelocal.it/venezia/cronaca/2022/04/06/news/clima-ricercatori-si-incatenano-davanti-alla-raffineria-di-eni-a-marghera-1.41354461
23. 1. Choudry A

    (2020) Reflections on academia, activism, and the politics of knowledge and learning

    The International Journal of Human Rights 24:28–45.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2019.1630382

    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Clayton S

    (2020) Climate anxiety: psychological responses to climate change

    Journal of Anxiety Disorders 74:102263.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102263

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. Website

    1. Climate Action Tracker

    (2022) Despite Glasgow Climate Pact 2030 Climate Target Updates Have Stalled

    Accessed June 3, 2022.

    https://climateactiontracker.org/publications/despite-glasgow-climate-pact-2030-climate-target-updates-have-stalled
26. Website

    1. Coi G
    2. Weise Z

    (2022) Excess deaths surged as heat wave hit europe

    Accessed March 8, 2022.

    https://www.politico.eu/article/excess-death-surged-heat-wave-hit-europe
27. 1. Cologna V
    2. Knutti R
    3. Oreskes N
    4. Siegrist M

    (2021) Majority of german citizens, us citizens and climate scientists support policy advocacy by climate researchers and expect greater political engagement

    Environmental Research Letters 16:024011.

    https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abd4ac

    • Google Scholar
28. Website

    1. Convention on Biological Diversity

    (2020) Global Biodiversity Outlook 5

    Accessed August 18, 2020.

    https://www.cbd.int/gbo5
29. 1. Cordier T
    2. Alonso-Sáez L
    3. Apothéloz-Perret-Gentil L
    4. Aylagas E
    5. Bohan DA
    6. Bouchez A
    7. Chariton A
    8. Creer S
    9. Frühe L
    10. Keck F
    11. Keeley N
    12. Laroche O
    13. Leese F
    14. Pochon X
    15. Stoeck T
    16. Pawlowski J
    17. Lanzén A

    (2021) Ecosystems monitoring powered by environmental genomics: a review of current strategies with an implementation roadmap

    Molecular Ecology 30:2937–2958.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/mec.15472

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Cox R

    (2007) Nature’s “ crisis disciplines”: does environmental communication have an ethical duty?

    Environmental Communication 1:5–20.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/17524030701333948

    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Cunsolo A
    2. Ellis NR

    (2018) Ecological grief as a mental health response to climate change-related loss

    Nature Climate Change 8:275–281.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-018-0092-2

    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Dai A

    (2013) Increasing drought under global warming in observations and models

    Nature Climate Change 3:52–58.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1633

    • Google Scholar
33. 1. de Bruin W
    2. Rabinovich L
    3. Weber K
    4. Babboni M
    5. Dean M
    6. Ignon L

    (2021) Public understanding of climate change terminology

    Climatic Change 167:e83.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03183-0

    • Google Scholar
34. 1. DeLonge MS
    2. Miles A
    3. Carlisle L

    (2016) Investing in the transition to sustainable agriculture

    Environmental Science & Policy 55:266–273.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2015.09.013

    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Díaz S
    2. Settele J
    3. Brondízio ES
    4. Ngo HT
    5. Agard J
    6. Arneth A
    7. Balvanera P
    8. Brauman KA
    9. Butchart SHM
    10. Chan KMA
    11. Garibaldi LA
    12. Ichii K
    13. Liu J
    14. Subramanian SM
    15. Midgley GF
    16. Miloslavich P
    17. Molnár Z
    18. Obura D
    19. Pfaff A
    20. Polasky S
    21. Purvis A
    22. Razzaque J
    23. Reyers B
    24. Chowdhury RR
    25. Shin YJ
    26. Visseren-Hamakers I
    27. Willis KJ
    28. Zayas CN

    (2019) Pervasive human-driven decline of life on earth points to the need for transformative change

    Science 366:eaax3100.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aax3100

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. Book

    1. Douglas HE

    (2009) Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal

    University of Pittsburgh Press.

    https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt6wrc78

    • Google Scholar
37. Book

    1. Douglas H

    (2021)

    Scientific freedom and social responsibility

    In: Douglas H, editors. In Science, Freedom and Democracy. New York, NY: Routledge. pp. 68–87.

    • Google Scholar
38. Book

    1. Duarte R
    2. Whitty D

    (2016) Activist Biology: The National Museum, Politics, and Nation Building in Brazil

    University of Arizona Press.

    https://doi.org/10.2458/azu_uapress_9780816541706

    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Dunlap RE
    2. Jacques PJ

    (2013) Climate change denial books and conservative think tanks: exploring the connection

    The American Behavioral Scientist 57:699–731.

    https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213477096

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Fanning AL
    2. O’Neill DW
    3. Hickel J
    4. Roux N

    (2022) The social shortfall and ecological overshoot of nations

    Nature Sustainability 5:26–36.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-021-00799-z

    • Google Scholar
41. Website

    1. FAO

    (2019) The State of the World’s Biodiversity for Food and Agriculture

    Accessed December 4, 2019.

    https://www.fao.org/state-of-biodiversity-for-food-agriculture/en
42. Website

    1. FAO

    (2022) FAOSTAT

    Accessed September 13, 2022.

    https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data
43. 1. Fitzpatrick MC
    2. Keller SR

    (2015) Ecological genomics meets community-level modelling of biodiversity: mapping the genomic landscape of current and future environmental adaptation

    Ecology Letters 18:1–16.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12376

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. Book

    1. Frickel S

    (2004a)

    Chemical Consequences: Environmental Mutagens, Scientist Activism, and the Rise of Genetic Toxicology

    Rutgers University Press.

    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Frickel S

    (2004b) Just science? organizing scientist activism in the US environmental justice movement

    Science as Culture 13:449–469.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/0950543042000311814

    • Google Scholar
46. Website

    1. Funk C
    2. Tyson A
    3. Kennedy B
    4. Johnson C

    (2020) Scientists Are among the Most Trusted Groups in Society, Though Many Value Practical Experience over Expertise

    Accessed September 29, 2020.

    https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2020/09/29/scientists-are-among-the-most-trusted-groups-in-society-though-many-value-practical-experience-over-expertise
47. 1. Funtowicz SO
    2. Ravetz JR

    (1993) Science for the post-normal age

    Futures 25:739–755.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/0016-3287(93)90022-L

    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Gardner CJ
    2. Wordley CFR

    (2019) Scientists must act on our own warnings to humanity

    Nature Ecology & Evolution 3:1271–1272.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-019-0979-y

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Gardner CJ
    2. Bullock JM

    (2021) In the climate emergency, conservation must become survival ecology

    Frontiers in Conservation Science 2:e12.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2021.659912

    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Gardner CJ
    2. Thierry A
    3. Rowlandson W
    4. Steinberger JK

    (2021) From publications to public actions: the role of universities in facilitating academic advocacy and activism in the climate and ecological emergency

    Frontiers in Sustainability 2:e19.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2021.679019

    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Garnett ST
    2. Burgess ND
    3. Fa JE
    4. Fernández-Llamazares Á
    5. Molnár Z
    6. Robinson CJ
    7. Watson JEM
    8. Zander KK
    9. Austin B
    10. Brondizio ES
    11. Collier NF
    12. Duncan T
    13. Ellis E
    14. Geyle H
    15. Jackson MV
    16. Jonas H
    17. Malmer P
    18. McGowan B
    19. Sivongxay A
    20. Leiper I

    (2018) A spatial overview of the global importance of indigenous lands for conservation

    Nature Sustainability 1:369–374.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-018-0100-6

    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Gasparrini A
    2. Guo Y
    3. Hashizume M
    4. Lavigne E
    5. Zanobetti A
    6. Schwartz J
    7. Tobias A
    8. Tong S
    9. Rocklöv J
    10. Forsberg B
    11. Leone M
    12. De Sario M
    13. Bell ML
    14. Guo YLL
    15. Wu C
    16. Kan H
    17. Yi SM
    18. de Sousa Zanotti Stagliorio Coelho M
    19. Saldiva PHN
    20. Honda Y
    21. Kim H
    22. Armstrong B

    (2015) Mortality risk attributable to high and low ambient temperature: a multicountry observational study

    Lancet 386:369–375.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)62114-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Gaupp F
    2. Hall J
    3. Mitchell D
    4. Dadson S

    (2019) Increasing risks of multiple breadbasket failure under 1.5 and 2 °C global warming

    Agricultural Systems 175:34–45.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2019.05.010

    • Google Scholar
54. Website

    1. Gayle D

    (2022) XR scientists glue hands to business department in london climate protest

    Accessed April 13, 2022.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/apr/13/xr-scientists-glue-hands-to-business-department-in-london-climate-protest
55. 1. Georgian S
    2. Hameed S
    3. Morgan L
    4. Amon DJ
    5. Sumaila UR
    6. Johns D
    7. Ripple WJ

    (2022) Scientists’ warning of an imperiled ocean

    Biological Conservation 272:109595.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2022.109595

    • Google Scholar
56. Website

    1. Gerwin M

    (2020) Citizens’ Assemblies: Guide to Democracy That Works

    Accessed September 13, 2022.

    https://citizensassemblies.org/download
57. 1. Gibb R
    2. Redding DW
    3. Chin KQ
    4. Donnelly CA
    5. Blackburn TM
    6. Newbold T
    7. Jones KE

    (2020) Zoonotic host diversity increases in human-dominated ecosystems

    Nature 584:398–402.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2562-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Gilens M
    2. Page BI

    (2014) Testing theories of American politics: elites, interest groups, and average citizens

    Perspectives on Politics 12:564–581.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1537592714001595

    • Google Scholar
59. Website

    1. Global Witness

    (2018) At What Cost? Irresponsible Business and the Murder of Land and Environmental Defenders in 2017

    Accessed July 24, 2018.

    https://apo.org.au/node/184396
60. Website

    1. Gore T

    (2020) Confronting carbon inequality: putting climate justice at the heart of the COVID-19 recovery

    Accessed September 21, 2020.

    https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10546/621052/mb-confronting-carbon-inequality-210920-en.pdf
61. 1. Gourdji SM
    2. Sibley AM
    3. Lobell DB

    (2013) Global crop exposure to critical high temperatures in the reproductive period: historical trends and future projections

    Environmental Research Letters 8:024041.

    https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024041

    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Green AJK

    (2021) Challenging conventions—A perspective from within and without

    Frontiers in Sustainability 2:e38.

    https://doi.org/10.3389/frsus.2021.662038

    • Google Scholar
63. Website

    1. Harvey F

    (2021) IPCC steps up warning on climate tipping points in leaked draft report

    Accessed June 23, 2022.

    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/23/climate-change-dangerous-thresholds-un-report
64. Website

    1. Harvey C

    (2022) Scientists risk arrest to demand climate action

    Accessed April 11, 2022.

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-risk-arrest-to-demand-climate-action
65. 1. Hatfield JL
    2. Prueger JH

    (2015) Temperature extremes: effect on plant growth and development

    Weather and Climate Extremes 10:4–10.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wace.2015.08.001

    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Hayes K
    2. Blashki G
    3. Wiseman J
    4. Burke S
    5. Reifels L

    (2018) Climate change and mental health: risks, impacts and priority actions

    International Journal of Mental Health Systems 12:28.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s13033-018-0210-6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Hayward G
    2. Ayeb-Karlsson S

    (2021) “Seeing with empty eyes”: A systems approach to understand climate change and mental health in Bangladesh

    Climatic Change 165:1–30.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03053-9

    • Google Scholar
68. Book

    1. Hickel J

    (2020)

    Less Is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World

    Random House.

    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Hickel J
    2. Dorninger C
    3. Wieland H
    4. Suwandi I

    (2022) Imperialist appropriation in the world economy: drain from the global south through unequal exchange, 1990–2015

    Global Environmental Change 73:102467.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102467

    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Hodgson JC
    2. Mott R
    3. Baylis SM
    4. Pham TT
    5. Wotherspoon S
    6. Kilpatrick AD
    7. Raja Segaran R
    8. Reid I
    9. Terauds A
    10. Koh LP
    11. Yoccoz N

    (2018) Drones count wildlife more accurately and precisely than humans

    Methods in Ecology and Evolution 9:1160–1167.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12974

    • Google Scholar
71. Website

    1. IATP, GRAIN, Heinrich Böll Stiftung

    (2017) Big Meat and Dairy’s Supersized Climate Footprint

    Accessed November 7, 2017.

    https://www.iatp.org/supersized-climate-footprint
72. Website

    1. IPBES

    (2019) Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services

    Accessed March 31, 2022.

    https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/publication/global-assessment-report-biodiversity-ecosystem-services-intergovernmental-science-0_en
73. Report

    1. IPCC

    (2021)

    Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    Cambridge University Press.

    • Google Scholar
74. Report

    1. IPCC

    (2022a)

    Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    Cambridge University Press.

    • Google Scholar
75. Report

    1. IPCC

    (2022b)

    Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

    Cambridge University Press.

    • Google Scholar
76. Report

    1. IPCC

    (2022c) FAQ 6: What Is Climate Resilient Development and How Do We Pursue It

    IPCC.

    https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/about/frequently-asked-questions/keyfaq6

    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Isopp B

    (2015) Scientists who become activists: are they crossing a line?

    Journal of Science Communication 14:C03.

    https://doi.org/10.22323/2.14020303

    • Google Scholar
78. Book

    1. Jackson T

    (2016) Prosperity without Growth: Foundations for the Economy of Tomorrow

    Routledge.

    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315677453

    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Jacques PJ
    2. Dunlap RE
    3. Freeman M

    (2008) The organisation of denial: conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism

    Environmental Politics 17:349–385.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/09644010802055576

    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Jickling B

    (2003) Environmental education and environmental advocacy: revisited

    The Journal of Environmental Education 34:20–27.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/00958960309603496

    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Kelman I
    2. Ayeb-Karlsson S
    3. Rose-Clarke K
    4. Prost A
    5. Ronneberg E
    6. Wheeler N
    7. Watts N

    (2021) A review of mental health and wellbeing under climate change in small island developing states (SIDS)

    Environmental Research Letters 16:033007.

    https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/abe57d

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. Website

    1. Ketcham C

    (2019) Esteban servat on the creation of ecoleaks

    Patagonia. Accessed February 13, 2019.

    https://eu.patagonia.com/nl/en/stories/the-first-eco-leak/story-71914.html
83. 1. Kleinman DL
    2. Vallas SP

    (2001) Science, capitalism, and the rise of the'‘nowledge worker'’ the changing structure of knowledge production in the United States

    Theory and Society 30:451–492.

    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1011815518959

    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Kotcher JE
    2. Myers TA
    3. Vraga EK
    4. Stenhouse N
    5. Maibach EW

    (2017) Does engagement in advocacy hurt the credibility of scientists? results from a randomized national survey experiment

    Environmental Communication 11:415–429.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2016.1275736

    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Lamb WF
    2. Mattioli G
    3. Levi S
    4. Roberts JT
    5. Capstick S
    6. Creutzig F
    7. Minx JC
    8. Müller-Hansen F
    9. Culhane T
    10. Steinberger JK

    (2020) Discourses of climate delay

    Global Sustainability 3:e13.

    https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.13

    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Launer J

    (2021) Medical activism

    Postgraduate Medical Journal 97:611–612.

    https://doi.org/10.1136/postgradmedj-2021-140809

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Leal Filho W
    2. Sima M
    3. Sharifi A
    4. Luetz JM
    5. Salvia AL
    6. Mifsud M
    7. Olooto FM
    8. Djekic I
    9. Anholon R
    10. Rampasso I
    11. Kwabena Donkor F
    12. Dinis MAP
    13. Klavins M
    14. Finnveden G
    15. Chari MM
    16. Molthan-Hill P
    17. Mifsud A
    18. Sen SK
    19. Lokupitiya E

    (2021) Handling climate change education at universities: an overview

    Environmental Sciences Europe 33:109.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-021-00552-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Lewandowsky S

    (2020) Climate change, disinformation, and how to combat it

    SSRN Electronic Journal 1:773.

    https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3693773

    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Lewandowsky S

    (2021) Climate change disinformation and how to combat it

    Annual Review of Public Health 42:1–21.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-090419-102409

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Lucas A

    (2021) Investigating networks of corporate influence on government decision-making: the case of Australia’s climate change and energy policies

    Energy Research & Social Science 81:102271.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102271

    • Google Scholar
91. Website

    1. Mackenzie W

    (2018) A brief history of commercial whaling and Greenpeace

    Accessed September 10, 2018.

    https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/18307/history-commercial-whaling-greenpeace
92. Website

    1. Marcus A
    2. Oransky I

    (2017) Should Scientists Engage in Activism?

    Accessed February 7, 2017.

    http://theconversation.com/should-scientists-engage-in-activism-72234
93. 1. Meine C
    2. Soulé M
    3. Noss RE

    (2006) “A mission-driven discipline”: the growth of Conservation Biology

    Conservation Biology 20:631–651.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00449.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Miles-Novelo A
    2. Anderson CA

    (2019) Climate change and psychology: effects of rapid global warming on violence and aggression

    Current Climate Change Reports 5:36–46.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s40641-019-00121-2

    • Google Scholar
95. Website

    1. Monbiot G

    (2022) There’s a simple way to unite everyone behind climate justice – and it’s within our power

    Accessed September 9, 2022.

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/24/rich-nations-climate-debt-cancelling-debts-emissions-global-debt-swap-campaign
96. Book

    1. Moore K

    (2009) Disrupting Science: Social Movements, American Scientists, and the Politics of the Military, 1945-1975

    Princeton University Press.

    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400823802

    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Mora C
    2. McKenzie T
    3. Gaw IM
    4. Dean JM
    5. von Hammerstein H
    6. Knudson TA
    7. Setter RO
    8. Smith CZ
    9. Webster KM
    10. Patz JA
    11. Franklin EC

    (2022) Over half of known human pathogenic diseases can be aggravated by climate change

    Nature Climate Change 12:869–875.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01426-1

    • Google Scholar
98. Report

    1. Mundy P

    (2021) Meat Atlas: Facts and Figures about the Animals We Eat

    Heinrich Böll Stiftung, Friends of the Earth Europe, Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz.

    https://eu.boell.org/en/MeatAtlas

    • Google Scholar
99. Book

    1. NAS, NAE, COSEMPUP

    (2009)

    On Being A Scientist: A Guide to Responsible Conduct in Research

    National Academies Press.

    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Nelson MP
     2. Vucetich JA

     (2009) On advocacy by environmental scientists: what, whether, why, and how

     Conservation Biology 23:1090–1101.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01250.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Nic Lughadha E
     2. Bachman SP
     3. Leão TCC
     4. Forest F
     5. Halley JM
     6. Moat J
     7. Acedo C
     8. Bacon KL
     9. Brewer RFA
     10. Gâteblé G
     11. Gonçalves SC
     12. Govaerts R
     13. Hollingsworth PM
     14. Krisai‐Greilhuber I
     15. Lirio EJ
     16. Moore PGP
     17. Negrão R
     18. Onana JM
     19. Rajaovelona LR
     20. Razanajatovo H
     21. Reich PB
     22. Richards SL
     23. Rivers MC
     24. Cooper A
     25. Iganci J
     26. Lewis GP
     27. Smidt EC
     28. Antonelli A
     29. Mueller GM
     30. Walker BE

     (2020) Extinction risk and threats to plants and fungi

     PLANTS, PEOPLE, PLANET 2:389–408.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/ppp3.10146

     • Google Scholar
102. Website

     1. Nielsen NA
     2. Thymark F

     (2021) Forskere blokerer gaden foran klimaministeriet: »lyt til videnskaben

     Accessed October 25, 2021.

     https://videnskab.dk/kultur-samfund/forskere-blokerer-gaden-foran-klimaministeriet-lyt-videnskaben
103. 1. Nyhan B
     2. Porter E
     3. Wood TJ

     (2022) Time and skeptical opinion content erode the effects of science coverage on climate beliefs and attitudes

     PNAS 119:e2122069119.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122069119

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
104. Website

     1. Osborne M

     (2022) Scientists stage worldwide climate change protests after IPCC report

     Accessed April 13, 2022.

     https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/scientists-stage-worldwide-climate-protests-after-ipcc-report-180979913
105. 1. Oswald Y
     2. Owen A
     3. Steinberger JK

     (2020) Large inequality in international and intranational energy footprints between income groups and across consumption categories

     Nature Energy 5:231–239.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-020-0579-8

     • Google Scholar
106. Book

     1. Pauling L

     (1958)

     No More War

     New York: Dodd, Mead & Co.

     • Google Scholar
107. 1. Pietrucci P
     2. Ceccarelli L

     (2019) Scientist citizens: rhetoric and responsibility in L’Aquila

     Rhetoric and Public Affairs 22:95–128.

     https://doi.org/10.14321/rhetpublaffa.22.1.0095

     • Google Scholar
108. 1. Pyšek P
     2. Hulme PE
     3. Simberloff D
     4. Bacher S
     5. Blackburn TM
     6. Carlton JT
     7. Dawson W
     8. Essl F
     9. Foxcroft LC
     10. Genovesi P
     11. Jeschke JM
     12. Kühn I
     13. Liebhold AM
     14. Mandrak NE
     15. Meyerson LA
     16. Pauchard A
     17. Pergl J
     18. Roy HE
     19. Seebens H
     20. van Kleunen M
     21. Vilà M
     22. Wingfield MJ
     23. Richardson DM

     (2020) Scientists’ warning on invasive alien species

     Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 95:1511–1534.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12627

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
109. Website

     1. Raymond G

     (2018) Here’s why the Endangered Species Act was created in the first place

     Accessed October 31, 2022.

     https://time.com/5345913/endangered-species-act-history/
110. 1. Ripple WJ
     2. Wolf C
     3. Newsome TM
     4. Galetti M
     5. Alamgir M
     6. Crist E
     7. Mahmoud MI
     8. Laurence WF

     (2017) World scientists’ warning to humanity: A second notice

     Bioscience 67:1026–1028.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix125

     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Ripple WJ
     2. Wolf C
     3. Newsome TM
     4. Barnard P
     5. Moomaw WR

     (2020) World scientists’ warning of a climate emergency

     BioScience 70:8–12.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biz088

     • Google Scholar
112. Book

     1. Roberts A
     2. Ash TG

     (2009)

     Civil Resistance and Power Politics: The Experience of Non-Violent Action from Gandhi to the Present

     Oxford University Press.

     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Robottom I
     2. Hart P

     (1995) Behaviorist ee research: environmentalism as individualism

     The Journal of Environmental Education 26:5–9.

     https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1995.9941433

     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Rojas-Downing MM
     2. Nejadhashemi AP
     3. Harrigan T
     4. Woznicki SA

     (2017) Climate change and livestock: impacts, adaptation, and mitigation

     Climate Risk Management 16:145–163.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2017.02.001

     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Romanello M
     2. McGushin A
     3. Di Napoli C
     4. Drummond P
     5. Hughes N
     6. Jamart L
     7. Kennard H
     8. Lampard P
     9. Solano Rodriguez B
     10. Arnell N
     11. Ayeb-Karlsson S
     12. Belesova K
     13. Cai W
     14. Campbell-Lendrum D
     15. Capstick S
     16. Chambers J
     17. Chu L
     18. Ciampi L
     19. Dalin C
     20. Dasandi N
     21. Dasgupta S
     22. Davies M
     23. Dominguez-Salas P
     24. Dubrow R
     25. Ebi KL
     26. Eckelman M
     27. Ekins P
     28. Escobar LE
     29. Georgeson L
     30. Grace D
     31. Graham H
     32. Gunther SH
     33. Hartinger S
     34. He K
     35. Heaviside C
     36. Hess J
     37. Hsu SC
     38. Jankin S
     39. Jimenez MP
     40. Kelman I
     41. Kiesewetter G
     42. Kinney PL
     43. Kjellstrom T
     44. Kniveton D
     45. Lee JKW
     46. Lemke B
     47. Liu Y
     48. Liu Z
     49. Lott M
     50. Lowe R
     51. Martinez-Urtaza J
     52. Maslin M
     53. McAllister L
     54. McMichael C
     55. Mi Z
     56. Milner J
     57. Minor K
     58. Mohajeri N
     59. Moradi-Lakeh M
     60. Morrissey K
     61. Munzert S
     62. Murray KA
     63. Neville T
     64. Nilsson M
     65. Obradovich N
     66. Sewe MO
     67. Oreszczyn T
     68. Otto M
     69. Owfi F
     70. Pearman O
     71. Pencheon D
     72. Rabbaniha M
     73. Robinson E
     74. Rocklöv J
     75. Salas RN
     76. Semenza JC
     77. Sherman J
     78. Shi L
     79. Springmann M
     80. Tabatabaei M
     81. Taylor J
     82. Trinanes J
     83. Shumake-Guillemot J
     84. Vu B
     85. Wagner F
     86. Wilkinson P
     87. Winning M
     88. Yglesias M
     89. Zhang S
     90. Gong P
     91. Montgomery H
     92. Costello A
     93. Hamilton I

     (2021) The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: code red for a healthy future

     The Lancet 398:1619–1662.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01787-6

     • Google Scholar
116. Website

     1. Royal College of Psychiatrists

     (2021) Position Statement PS03/21: Our Planet’s Climate and Ecological Emergency

     Accessed May 5, 2021.

     https://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/docs/default-source/improving-care/better-mh-policy/position-statements/position-statement-ps03-21-climate-and-ecological-emergencies-2021.pdf
117. Website

     1. Russell B
     2. Einstein A
     3. Born M
     4. Bridgman PW
     5. Infeld L
     6. Joliot-Curie F
     7. Muller HJ

     (1955) The Russell-Einstein Manifesto

     Accessed June 9, 1955.

     https://pugwash.org/1955/07/09/statement-manifesto
118. 1. Salomon AK
     2. Lertzman K
     3. Brown K
     4. Secord D
     5. McKechnie I

     (2018) Democratizing conservation science and practice

     Ecology and Society 23:1.

     https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-09980-230144

     • Google Scholar
119. 1. Schlenker W
     2. Roberts MJ

     (2009) Nonlinear temperature effects indicate severe damages to U.S. crop yields under climate change

     PNAS 106:15594–15598.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906865106

     • Google Scholar
120. Book

     1. Schmalzer S
     2. Chard DS
     3. Botelho A

     (2018)

     Science for the People: Documents from America’s Movement of Radical Scientists

     University of Massachusetts Press.

     • Google Scholar
121. 1. Schmeller DS
     2. Courchamp F
     3. Killeen G

     (2020) Biodiversity loss, emerging pathogens and human health risks

     Biodiversity and Conservation 29:3095–3102.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-020-02021-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
122. Book

     1. Schmelzer M
     2. Vetter A
     3. Vansintjan A

     (2022)

     The Future Is Degrowth: A Guide to A World Beyond Capitalism

     Verso.

     • Google Scholar
123. 1. Schmolke A
     2. Thorbek P
     3. DeAngelis DL
     4. Grimm V

     (2010) Ecological models supporting environmental decision making: a strategy for the future

     Trends in Ecology & Evolution 25:479–486.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2010.05.001

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
124. Book

     1. Smaje C

     (2020)

     A Small Farm Future: Making the Case for A Society Built around Local Economies, Self-Provisioning, Agricultural Diversity and A Shared Earth

     Chelsea Green Publishing.

     • Google Scholar
125. Book

     1. Smith G

     (2009) Democratic Innovations: Designing Institutions for Citizen Participation

     Cambridge University Press.

     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511609848

     • Google Scholar
126. 1. Soulé ME

     (1985) What is conservation biology?

     BioScience 35:727–734.

     https://doi.org/10.2307/1310054

     • Google Scholar
127. Report

     1. Stein S
     2. Ahenakew C
     3. Jimmy E
     4. Andreotti VDO
     5. Valley W
     6. Amsler S
     7. Calhoun B

     (2021)

     Developing stamina for decolonizing higher education

     A Workbook for Non-Indigenous People.

     • Google Scholar
128. Website

     1. Steinberger J

     (2019) A Postmortem for Survival: On Science, Failure and Action on Climate Change

     Accessed April 14, 2019.

     https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/a-postmortem-for-survival-on-science-failure-and-action-on-climate-change-35636c79971e
129. Website

     1. Steinberger J

     (2022) The kids are not OK

     Accessed May 15, 2022.

     http://yaleclimateconnections.org/2022/05/the-kids-are-not-ok
130. Book

     1. Stengers I

     (2018)

     Another Science Is Possible: A Manifesto for Slow Science

     John Wiley & Sons.

     • Google Scholar
131. 1. Stevenson RB
     2. Nicholls J
     3. Whitehouse H

     (2017) What is climate change education?

     Curriculum Perspectives 37:67–71.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-017-0015-9

     • Google Scholar
132. 1. Stoddard I
     2. Anderson K
     3. Capstick S
     4. Carton W
     5. Depledge J
     6. Facer K
     7. Gough C
     8. Hache F
     9. Hoolohan C
     10. Hultman M
     11. Hällström N
     12. Kartha S
     13. Klinsky S
     14. Kuchler M
     15. Lövbrand E
     16. Nasiritousi N
     17. Newell P
     18. Peters GP
     19. Sokona Y
     20. Stirling A
     21. Stilwell M
     22. Spash CL
     23. Williams M

     (2021) Three decades of climate mitigation: why haven’t we bent the global emissions curve?

     Annual Review of Environment and Resources 46:653–689.

     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104

     • Google Scholar
133. 1. Susser E
     2. Bresnahan M

     (2001) Origins of epidemiology

     Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 954:6–18.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2001.tb02743.x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
134. 1. Thackeray SJ
     2. Robinson SA
     3. Smith P
     4. Bruno R
     5. Kirschbaum MUF
     6. Bernacchi C
     7. Byrne M
     8. Cheung W
     9. Cotrufo MF
     10. Gienapp P
     11. Hartley S
     12. Janssens I
     13. Hefin Jones T
     14. Kobayashi K
     15. Luo Y
     16. Penuelas J
     17. Sage R
     18. Suggett DJ
     19. Way D
     20. Long S

     (2020) Civil disobedience movements such as school strike for the climate are raising public awareness of the climate change emergency

     Global Change Biology 26:1042–1044.

     https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14978

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
135. Website

     1. Thomas A
     2. Deshmukh R

     (2019) Beard grooming market size, share & trends |industry forecast - 2026

     Accessed November 19, 2019.

     https://www.alliedmarketresearch.com/beard-grooming-market
136. 1. Thompson R
     2. Hornigold R
     3. Page L
     4. Waite T

     (2018) Associations between high ambient temperatures and heat waves with mental health outcomes: A systematic review

     Public Health 161:171–191.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2018.06.008

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
137. 1. Thompson T

     (2021) Scientist rebellion: researchers join protesters at COP26

     Nature 599:357.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-03430-5

     • Google Scholar
138. 1. Tigchelaar M
     2. Battisti DS
     3. Naylor RL
     4. Ray DK

     (2018) Future warming increases probability of globally synchronized maize production shocks

     PNAS 115:6644–6649.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1718031115

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
139. 1. Tollefson J

     (2020) Why deforestation and extinctions make pandemics more likely

     Nature 584:175–176.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-02341-1

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
140. Website

     1. United Nations

     (2021) Guterres: the IPCC report is a code red for humanity

     Accessed August 8, 2021.

     https://unric.org/en/guterres-the-ipcc-report-is-a-code-red-for-humanity
141. 1. Veríssimo D
     2. Pienkowski T
     3. Arias M
     4. Cugnière L
     5. Doughty H
     6. Hazenbosch M
     7. de Lange E
     8. Moskeland A
     9. Grace M

     (2020) Ethical publishing in biodiversity conservation science

     Conservation and Society 18:220.

     https://doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_19_56

     • Google Scholar
142. 1. Vicedo-Cabrera AM
     2. Scovronick N
     3. Sera F
     4. Royé D
     5. Schneider R
     6. Tobias A
     7. Astrom C
     8. Guo Y
     9. Honda Y
     10. Hondula DM
     11. Abrutzky R
     12. Tong S
     13. de Sousa Zanotti Stagliorio Coelho M
     14. Saldiva PHN
     15. Lavigne E
     16. Correa PM
     17. Ortega NV
     18. Kan H
     19. Osorio S
     20. Kyselý J
     21. Urban A
     22. Orru H
     23. Indermitte E
     24. Jaakkola JJK
     25. Ryti N
     26. Pascal M
     27. Schneider A
     28. Katsouyanni K
     29. Samoli E
     30. Mayvaneh F
     31. Entezari A
     32. Goodman P
     33. Zeka A
     34. Michelozzi P
     35. de’Donato F
     36. Hashizume M
     37. Alahmad B
     38. Diaz MH
     39. De La Cruz Valencia C
     40. Overcenco A
     41. Houthuijs D
     42. Ameling C
     43. Rao S
     44. Ruscio FD
     45. Carrasco-Escobar G
     46. Seposo X
     47. Silva S
     48. Madureira J
     49. Holobaca IH
     50. Fratianni S
     51. Acquaotta F
     52. Kim H
     53. Lee W
     54. Iniguez C
     55. Forsberg B
     56. Ragettli MS
     57. Guo YLL
     58. Chen BY
     59. Li S
     60. Armstrong B
     61. Aleman A
     62. Zanobetti A
     63. Schwartz J
     64. Dang TN
     65. Dung DV
     66. Gillett N
     67. Haines A
     68. Mengel M
     69. Huber V
     70. Gasparrini A

     (2021) The burden of heat-related mortality attributable to recent human-induced climate change

     Nature Climate Change 11:492–500.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01058-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
143. Website

     1. Volkstimme

     (2022) Hörsaal der uni leipzig weiterhin von klima-aktivisten besetzt

     Accessed May 13, 2022.

     https://www.volksstimme.de/deutschland-und-welt/hoersaal-der-uni-leipzig-weiterhin-von-klima-aktivisten-besetzt-3377784
144. 1. Wagner DL

     (2020) Insect declines in the anthropocene

     Annual Review of Entomology 65:457–480.

     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ento-011019-025151

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
145. Report

     1. Waldron A
     2. Adams V
     3. Allan J
     4. Arnell A
     5. Asner G
     6. Atkinson S
     7. Baccini A

     (2020)

     Protecting 30% of the planet for nature: costs, benefits and economic implications

     Global Biodiversity Framework.

     • Google Scholar
146. Website

     1. Wells T

     (2018) Academics Should Not Be Activists

     Accessed December 17, 2018.

     https://3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2018/12/academics-should-not-be-activists.html
147. Website

     1. WHO

     (2020) Mental Health Atlas 2020

     Accessed October 8, 2021.

     https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240036703
148. Website

     1. WHO

     (2021) Climate Change and Health

     Accessed October 30, 2021.

     https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/climate-change-and-health
149. 1. Whyte K

     (2018) Settler colonialism, ecology, and environmental injustice

     Environment and Society 9:125–144.

     https://doi.org/10.3167/ares.2018.090109

     • Google Scholar
150. Website

     1. WWF

     (2020) Living Planet Report 2020

     Accessed September 10, 2020.

     https://www.worldwildlife.org/publications/living-planet-report-2020
151. 1. Wynes S
     2. Nicholas KA

     (2017) The climate mitigation gap: education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions

     Environmental Research Letters 12:074024.

     https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541

     • Google Scholar
152. 1. Xu C
     2. Kohler TA
     3. Lenton TM
     4. Svenning JC
     5. Scheffer M

     (2020) Future of the human climate niche

     PNAS 117:11350–11355.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1910114117

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
153. Website

     1. Young RS

     (2017) A scientists’ march on Washington is a bad idea

     Accessed January 31, 2017.

     https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/a-scientists-march-on-washington-is-a-bad-idea.html
154. 1. Zhao C
     2. Liu B
     3. Piao S
     4. Wang X
     5. Lobell DB
     6. Huang Y
     7. Huang M
     8. Yao Y
     9. Bassu S
     10. Ciais P
     11. Durand JL
     12. Elliott J
     13. Ewert F
     14. Janssens IA
     15. Li T
     16. Lin E
     17. Liu Q
     18. Martre P
     19. Müller C
     20. Peng S
     21. Peñuelas J
     22. Ruane AC
     23. Wallach D
     24. Wang T
     25. Wu D
     26. Liu Z
     27. Zhu Y
     28. Zhu Z
     29. Asseng S

     (2017) Temperature increase reduces global yields of major crops in four independent estimates

     PNAS 114:9326–9331.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1701762114

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
155. 1. Zhao Q
     2. Guo Y
     3. Ye T
     4. Gasparrini A
     5. Tong S
     6. Overcenco A
     7. Urban A
     8. Schneider A
     9. Entezari A
     10. Vicedo-Cabrera AM
     11. Zanobetti A
     12. Analitis A
     13. Zeka A
     14. Tobias A
     15. Nunes B
     16. Alahmad B
     17. Armstrong B
     18. Forsberg B
     19. Pan SC
     20. Íñiguez C
     21. Ameling C
     22. De la Cruz Valencia C
     23. Åström C
     24. Houthuijs D
     25. Dung DV
     26. Royé D
     27. Indermitte E
     28. Lavigne E
     29. Mayvaneh F
     30. Acquaotta F
     31. de’Donato F
     32. Di Ruscio F
     33. Sera F
     34. Carrasco-Escobar G
     35. Kan H
     36. Orru H
     37. Kim H
     38. Holobaca IH
     39. Kyselý J
     40. Madureira J
     41. Schwartz J
     42. Jaakkola JJK
     43. Katsouyanni K
     44. Hurtado Diaz M
     45. Ragettli MS
     46. Hashizume M
     47. Pascal M
     48. de Sousa Zanotti Stagliorio Coélho M
     49. Valdés Ortega N
     50. Ryti N
     51. Scovronick N
     52. Michelozzi P
     53. Matus Correa P
     54. Goodman P
     55. Nascimento Saldiva PH
     56. Abrutzky R
     57. Osorio S
     58. Rao S
     59. Fratianni S
     60. Dang TN
     61. Colistro V
     62. Huber V
     63. Lee W
     64. Seposo X
     65. Honda Y
     66. Guo YL
     67. Bell ML
     68. Li S

     (2021) Global, regional, and national burden of mortality associated with non-optimal ambient temperatures from 2000 to 2019: a three-stage modelling study

     The Lancet. Planetary Health 5:e415–e425.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00081-4

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Fernando Racimo

   Fernando Racimo is at the University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark and Scientist Rebellion Denmark.

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   For correspondence

   fracimo@sund.ku.dk

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5025-2607

2. Elia Valentini

   Elia Valentini is at the University of Essex, Colchester, United Kingdom, Scientist Rebellion Italy, and Scientist Rebellion United Kingdom

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0259-6824

3. Gaston Rijo De León

   Gaston Rijo De León is at the Institut Pasteur, Paris, France and Scientist Rebellion France

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4096-6817

4. Teresa L Santos

   Teresa L Santos is at the Universidade de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal and Scientist Rebellion Portugal

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7493-2172

5. Anna Norberg

   Anna Norberg is at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway and Scientist Rebellion Norway

   Contribution

   Investigation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3520-1043

6. Lane M Atmore

   Lane M Atmore is at the University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway and Scientist Rebellion Turtle Island

   Contribution

   Investigation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8903-8149

7. Myranda Murray

   Myranda Murray is at the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway and Scientist Rebellion Norway

   Contribution

   Investigation, Visualization, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5376-4069

8. Sanja M Hakala

   Sanja M Hakala is at the University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland and Scientist Rebellion Switzerland

   Contribution

   Investigation, Visualization, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3762-623X

9. Frederik Appel Olsen

   Frederik Appel Olsen is at the University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

   Contribution

   Investigation, Writing – original draft

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3571-2812

10. Charlie J Gardner

    Charlie J Gardner is at the University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom and Scientist Rebellion United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Writing – review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

11. Julia B Halder

    Julia B Halder is at Imperial College, London, United Kingdom and Scientist Rebellion United Kingdom

    Contribution

    Conceptualization, Writing – review and editing

    Competing interests

    No competing interests declared

• 7,195

  Page views

• 533

  Downloads

• 10

  Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.