Ratna Ghosh, Axel van den Berg and Martha Crago: PhDs meeting MPs PHOTO: MIKE PINDER

Go public or perish

PHILIP FINE | In an effort to gain more respect for the social sciences and humanities, 65 of Canada's top researchers met for two days with more than 100 politicians and senior civil servants in Ottawa to try and prove to the government the importance of their work. The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the federal body that funds research not falling under the categories of medical, engineering or pure science, and 25 of the country's universities organized 135 small meetings last week in what seems to be a unique public relations exercise. Included in the elite group were four researchers from McGill: Martha Crago, a professor in the School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, sociology professor Axel van den Berg, French language and literature professor Marc Angenot and dean of education Ratna Ghosh. The politicians conducting meetings included Reform Party leader Preston Manning, Deputy Prime Minister Herb Gray, Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion, Bloc Québécois MP Francine Lalonde and Senator Thérèse Lavoie-Roux. SSHRC president Marc Renaud believes his organization is the first research body in the world to hold this type of event. He met recently with counterparts from similar agencies in Britain, the United States, Australia and several other countries, which, he said, were all interested in emulating the idea. Axel van den Berg appreciated the opportunity to participate. "It's not every day we get to talk to politicians," said the sociologist, whose research on labour unions in Sweden has offered an important comparison for those trying to understand what makes some labour groups keen on technological change, such as the Swedes, and others more fearful, such as Canadians. Ratna Ghosh says SSHRC officials briefed the academics on how to best approach the MPs. "We were told that we should focus on the practical aspects of our work and the significance it had for society. We weren't supposed to say that we were just doing it for the sake of knowledge. "The MPs have to answer to their constituents" should they earmark more money for SSHRC, said Ghosh. "It's easier for them to explain why they're doing it if they can talk about how it would benefit society." Garth Williams, a doctoral student at the University of Ottawa and a former parliamentary intern, provided a tipsheet for the scholars to peruse before their meetings with the MPs. Researchers were counselled that MPs place a lot of emphasis on the personal -- they would be interested in the stories behind why scholars chose their research areas. They would also be impressed by good manners -- treating the MPs' staff politely, for example. They would want to know if research projects had a specific connection to the people the MPs represent in Ottawa. They also appreciate concise, straightforward answers. Coming out of a meeting where she had just talked with an MP and two other researchers in similar fields, Martha Crago seemed utterly inspired. Crago said MP Nancy Karetak Lindell carefully listened to her and showed an active interest in the information Crago presented on language use in aboriginal homes and schools. With the MP's constituency of Nunavut largely made up of aboriginals, Lindell told Crago she would be interested in following up on her research. "I think I might invite her to speak at McGill," said Crago, who knows a half-dozen McGill colleagues involved in northern native issues whom she said could benefit from exchanging ideas with the MP. Last year, Renaud took over SSHRC, whose constituency covers 20,000 university professors and 40,000 graduate students in more than 80 universities. He has for a long time been familiar with the myths that dog these types of researchers. They have been called irrelevant in a time of great technological upheaval, producing students who are unemployable and filling books with jargon-garbled views on subjects that interest only a handful of readers. SSHRC is also very aware that, in cost-cutting times, public image is everything. So researchers, involved in subjects ranging from 18th century Canadian writing to employee creativity, met in small groups in politicians' offices and, with a bit of coaching under their belts, tried to prove their relevance. "You know the old saying, 'Publish or perish'?" Renaud asked rhetorically. "We now have to change that expression to 'Go public or perish.'" "I think we have to get more involved in making the public aware of what we do," agreed Ghosh. "If we don't fund research in the social sciences and humanities in Canada, we'll end up taking our solutions for social problems from other countries -- especially from one particular country south of the border. "We don't want American solutions to Canadian problems." SSHRC officials clearly want to see more money flow through the agency. Even though, in the last federal budget, $13 million was tagged on to the agency's $91 million budget, two studies from outside agencies concluded that SSHRC's budget should be more than doubled. This was pointed out in an impressive package touting the accomplishments of SSHRC-supported researchers in areas of public concern -- including a set of guidelines for ethical practices in human genetics, a multi-volume historical atlas of Canada and centres across the country studying family violence. As politicians of all stripes met with researchers on Parliament Hill, Renaud took time to talk about how important he believes research has been to politicians' work. He cites the recent opinion handed down by the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of Quebec secession. The judges relied on much material that had been researched with SSHRC grants. Renaud would like to see closer ties developed between politicians and academics, in the same way U.S. leaders have relied on university-based thinkers such as economist John Kenneth Galbraith. Stéphane Dion agrees with Renaud, saying it's important to have increased links between policy makers and researchers. "The government has to hear what the experts are saying," said the minister, who was a professor at the Université de Montréal before going into politics. Dion told the McGill Reporter his government has benefited from findings on such things as youth crime. That research proved helpful in countering attacks from the Reform Party and certain lobbyists, who were trying to get the government to take what he sees as too hard a tack on young offenders. A few years ago, Liberal MP Ted McWhinney, a former law professor at Simon Fraser, helped put together a group of MPs who share concerns about universities and who lobby the government on their behalf. The group includes MPs who represent constituencies that include post-secondary institutions and MPs who used to be professors themselves. The group helped raise support for the Canadian Foundation for Innovation and for the Millennium Scholarship Fund. Although he doesn't believe SSHRC is faring all that poorly given the budgetary pressures his government has been facing, McWhinney does admit that researchers in medicine, engineering and science have been receiving better news of late. The CFI, for instance, supports research in these areas while largely ignoring the social sciences and humanities. He said part of the reason is that it's easier to drum up enthusiasm for new medical approaches and high-tech breakthroughs. Genetic research into diseases and improvements in communications technologies present more obvious benefits. "With the social sciences, there is an element of excitement missing. People have to say, 'We're doing very exciting things that can change society.' Maybe that message isn't getting across." Ghosh said the meetings generally went well. In fact, she would have appreciated meeting some MPs who were a little more sceptical about the value of the research that she and her colleagues do. "The MPs I met seemed knowledgeable and interested. They already had an appreciation for the work we do. It felt a bit like preaching to the converted. "I would have liked to have met with MPs who weren't quite as convinced. It would have been a more challenging task. Those are the ones we have to get our message across to." Van den Berg, who was among a group of researchers sharing a drink in the hotel where the academics were staying, said budget cuts, and not research, have been on his mind lately, as his department, and McGill in general, go through some painful staff-cutting. "You need a certain critical mass of professors. If you get below a certain number, your department is not capable of producing good research," he said. Other researchers were sympathetic with van den Berg's lament, having gone through years of cuts themselves. They also talked about the necessary context their research provides in a world so bent on technological innovation. Quoting from T.S. Eliot, University of Alberta researcher Harold Coward said he would like to see social sciences and humanities research be viewed as the "still point in the centre."