Dr. Richelle Tanner is an Assistant Professor in the Environmental Science and Policy Program, jointly appointed to the Schmid and Wilkinson Colleges. She is broadly interested in how climate change affects both ecological and human communities, and our mechanisms of resilience. She uses tools from ecology, physiology, genomics, and the social sciences to ask questions about how coastal ecosystems can rapidly adapt to warming temperatures and more unpredictable extreme weather events.

Her current research projects include: 1) sea hare physiology and population dynamics for increasing eelgrass restoration efficacy under climate extremes, 2) socio-ecological best practices for collective action in Phragmites australis invasive species management, and 3) values-based communication strategies for science-informed policy across stakeholder groups in the California Delta.

Dr. Tanner is also the Science Director at the National Network for Ocean and Climate Change Interpretation (www.nnocci.org) and the Reviews Editor at the Journal of Zoology. She received her PhD in Integrative Biology from UC Berkeley and two undergraduate degrees in Environmental Studies and Jazz Studies from the University of Southern California, and completed two postdoctoral positions at UC Davis and Washington State University. Her work has been supported by agencies including the National Science Foundation and the California Sea Grant, and she has published in journals including Marine Ecology Progress Series and Nature Ecology & Evolution.

Engaging the World: Leading the Conversation on Environmental Justice is a series of informed, sustained, and enriching dialogues looking at how environmental toxicity and risk disproportionately impact populations based on race, ethnicity, nationality, and social standing. Environmental Justice brings awareness to these disparities, fighting to ensure that every voice is heard, every challenge is addressed, and every community has a seat at the table for a greener future.

Guest: Dr. Richelle Tanner
Host: Jon-Barrett Ingels
Produced by Public Podcasting in partnership with Wilkinson College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences at Chapman University.

[music]

[00:00:03] Dr. Richelle Tanner: I focus a lot on adaptation, so looking forward instead of mitigation, looking backward. For ecology and environmental science, especially in California, because we're doing this really well, the state level, when we think about restoring towards a new, more resilient future, there's a lot more options open to us than thinking about, how do we make sure we put everything back to what it used to be before humans ruined it all, because we are part of our ecosystem, so we need to figure out how to play a part that's sustainable, and make decisions that are resilient.

[00:00:40] Host: Chapman University's Wilkinson College of Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences, and Heritage Future present, Engaging The World, leading the conversation on environmental justice. This series explores environmental racism, and climate injustice. Since the industrial revolution, we have been choking our waters with waste, poisoning our soil, and contaminating the air we breathe, all in the name of progress.

The most vulnerable communities with the least amount of representation and power suffer through the worst effects. Environmental justice brings awareness to these marginalized communities, their activism in the path forward, fighting to ensure that every voice is heard, every challenge is addressed, and every community has a seat at the table for a greener future. In this episode, we connect with Chapman University professor, Dr. Richelle Tanner, who specializes in environmental science and ecology. Here is Dr. Tanner.

[00:01:45] Dr. Richelle: I am broadly trained as a biologist. My PhD is in Integrative Biology, but my undergrad is in environmental studies, and I'm here teaching environmental science and policy. I do a lot of natural sciences, and a lot of social sciences together in this research program that addresses how climate change is affecting our communities, both ecological communities and human communities that all live together near our coastal ecosystems in California.

What does this mean beyond I do community research? Functionally, it means that I ask a lot of questions about how animals and plants change their physiology, and how they interact with each other with climate change effects, whether that's temperature, or how salty the water is, or how many storms we have, and how many heat waves we have. I also ask questions about how our human communities are interacting with these systems, so whether people have the right information about science, and whether they can use that to advocate for policy that centers their interests.

[00:03:03] Host: That was going to be my next question. What is the connectivity to this environmental justice topic, this fight for environmental justice?

[00:03:17] Dr. Richelle: I found throughout my career that I don't really want to be doing science unless it's in service of society. That can be something that's really hard to tackle as an organismal biologist. The research that I do and communications I think really addresses this environmental justice component where the way that we provide information to the public, and even to different stakeholders that aren't necessarily what we consider the general public allows them to make decisions and advocacy efforts on their own behalf.

One concrete example of this is, I have a project in the California delta, which is near the Bay Area. We are looking at how to best communicate about wetland restoration because that's what the state spends a lot of money on. Wetland restoration is just this idea that we're restoring connectivity between pieces of land that we've filled in previously that are dry, and making them open to the waterways again so that we can have ecosystems that haven't been there in a really long time.

The problem with that is that there are a lot of communities that live right next to those areas that we are restoring water to, and they don't have a voice in the decision. We're doing some research on how to communicate to regular people about what wetland restoration is, what the different components are, and what kinds of actions they can take to be part of the decision that's being made.

[00:05:01] Host: There are other sciences out there that have this luxury of time on their side, Geology, or astronomy. The universe is billions and billions of years old, and it's going to be here for billions and billions of years. There's this timeline that exists in your work, and in ecology, and environmental science, and climate science. We're reaching this point of no return that I keep reading about it, how does that sense of urgency affect the research that you do?

[00:05:37] Dr. Richelle: I don't like to think about it as a point of no return. There's always something we can do to change our future. I think that's a big part of what I do research about, and what I teach about in the environmental literacy efforts that we are doing. It's not too late to do anything. That's the first step in reframing, it's not only for the public but for researchers ourselves, we need to acknowledge that there's still hope. There always is hope. That's where I started to come from.

Then in terms of, how do we keep that urgency? Which is still really important. I focus a lot on adaptation, so looking forward instead of mitigation, looking backward. For ecology and environmental science, especially in California, because we're doing this really well at state level, when we think about restoring towards a new, more resilient future, there's a lot more options open to us than thinking about, how do we make sure we put everything back to what it used to be before humans ruined it all, because we are part of our ecosystem. We need to figure out how to play a part that's sustainable, and make decisions that are resilient. I don't see a point of no return. I try and incorporate that into my research.

[00:07:05] Host: There definitely is more of that pressure of time pressure, I would assume. I'm not a scientist at all, but I just assume in comparison to somebody who's studying fossils, or studying rock formations, or studying planetary masses.

[00:07:27] Dr. Richelle: I think that's what makes it exciting for me, is seeing, like I did some research during my PhD on the effects of future warming. Then three years later, we were taking our temperatures out in the field. Lo and behold, the temperatures we simulated for future warming were already happening three years later, instead of 50 years later. That can be frightening for some people, but it can also show that the research we're doing is useful.

The information we're getting in the lab is actually being represented out in the wild. I tend to study species and ecosystems that are really resilient, and they are going to be here through whatever one is considering the end point of no return. That's probably why I don't think of it as a point of no return, because the animals I study, they're going to be okay, and they're going to uphold their place, their ecosystem service in the habitat they live in, and they're going to help protect our coastlines. That's how I deal with it, I study things that are going to be around. [chuckles]

[00:08:38] Host: In your lecture with Chapman University, you stated one of your goals is to improve environmental literacy, and that literacy leads to advocacy. I'm curious, how challenging is that goal in this age when there's such a large percentage of our population that question everything, including scientists, and misinformation, and disinformation is available just by going on to YouTube?

[00:09:09] Dr. Richelle: The way that I approach environmental literacy is not through this place of disseminating information. It's through a process of building trust with an audience. Obviously, this is what I believe, because this is what I research. But I think this is the only way that we're going to make strides in environmental literacy, is making connections with people on a personal level with their values, and giving them information this way.

The research that I do looks at how to, step by step, give pieces of information that come from a common understanding that's based on personal values instead of whether you have a scientific upbringing or not. One example that I like to give the students is that the word global warming means something different to everyone, and so, we need to find a way to not use that word, but still describe the concept. I think the most important part of it for me is not just describing the science, not giving people the scientific information. I think that's secondary to the main goal, which is making sure that people know what the solution is, because like you said, this field is filled with urgency.

It's not that I would love for everyone to understand the intricacies of how climate change interacts with all of these different issues in our society, but the end goal is, let's all organize to do the same civic action, community-based solution that's divesting from fossil fuels. It doesn't matter if someone agrees with me ideologically if we can all agree that this is something we need to be doing.

[00:11:05] Host: Now, with regards to advocacy and involvement, how important is government, like local, state, and federal in support of your work? On a larger note, what role does politics play, either to advance your research, or to hinder it?

[00:11:27] Dr. Richelle: I work a lot with government agencies in the ecology side of what I do. I think we are coming to a reckoning, at least in the ecology side of the agencies, like this is Cal fish and wildlife in California, Department of Water Resources, that type of agency, because that's what I interact with, they are slowly starting to understand that social science is really vital to how we make decisions. I would anticipate that in the coming years, it's going to be more and more important for that side of my research.

Generally, I interact with them largely on the natural sciences side, because the communications research I do is not for policy makers. There are tons of people out there who do that really, really well. I'm interested in how to, like you said, improve environmental literacy for regular communities, and communities that have traditionally not had a voice, and so, I don't talk a lot to policymakers, because what I need to know, lots of other people are doing that research, and this is a community effort.

[00:12:40] Host: I'm sure there's, especially working in the wetlands here in California, water is such a hot-button political issue. Does that affect your work at all, or do you just step aside from that?

[00:12:57] Dr. Richelle: Oh no. I work in nearshore ecosystems, so I work in water. I think it affects the solutions that we provide, and that we research heavily to provide to communities once they are achieving environmental literacy. As part of this communications package, we definitely talk a lot about water politics, and other intersectional issues in California. We have so many natural resources here that only a very small percentage of our population gets to benefit from, our agriculture or water.

[00:13:35] Host: I just know growing up in California, that the estuaries, and the delta, whether it's protecting a species of fish, or letting farmers access the water, that it's been for decades this hot-button political issue that's local to our state, and unique to California.

[00:14:03] Dr. Richelle: I think a normal person that lives right next to the delta probably doesn't have a great understanding of those politics at all, or really access to the resource themselves. That's something we deal with a lot, with wetland restoration, because the people who are in the community living right next to it can't even walk onto the land, it's private land, or it's owned by the government, and they've put a large fence around it. It's not for recreation.

Water politics plays a big part in it, but it's all about knowing what scale of information, and what scale of solution to provide to a particular audience. I talk to my students a lot about this. You have to know your audience to be able to give them something that they can feel a part of. Telling people about the huge water politics issues that we have in the state of California is probably not helpful if you are a recent immigrant to the area, or you don't have a lot of political power, if you're of a lower socioeconomic status. That's not relevant to you. What's relevant to you is what's happening in your backyard.

I think that's what I mean in saying that I don't interact a ton with policymakers, is because there is no avenue for local communities to interact in that way with policymakers. In providing information about the science that policymakers are using to decide what to do with that land, if we can let people know how that is working, and make that part of the process more accessible, that's at least one step towards reconciling these two groups that never talk to each other, because at the end of the day, we can't pretend that a community will be able to directly access a policymaker if they don't have some sort of financial power over them. That's just how our system works.

[00:16:07] Host: Is there a challenge? I know this tucks on to what you were just saying. When you're dealing with a community who is focusing mainly on what's in their own backyard, sometimes it becomes even more myopic than that. Their concern is how they're going to pay their rent, or how they're not going to get sick during a pandemic, or how they're going to provide education for their children. Is it hard to expand the site of a community beyond some of these more pressing issues? When you're looking at going back to this timeline that's not a timeline, but kind of is a timeline, is it hard to expand their view beyond what is right in front of this community being their family, their livelihood, their home?

[00:17:04] Dr. Richelle: Yes. I think the issues that face, honestly, the majority of our population have been in trouble for the climate action movement. It's fighting for attention, and fatigue in decision-making and caring about an issue that's a little more ambiguous feels really far in the future, but at the same time, right upon us. I think helping people to understand that the effects of climate change are completely intersectional with all of the other issues that are really immediate to them is super important. Climate change and human health are really closely connected.

One example is with the urban heat island effect. As we get more and more heat waves, people who live in cities are more vulnerable to those heat waves. One, because some of them don't have air conditioning, or a way to shelter from it, but also because heat waves are intensified where there's a lot of concrete, or a lot of agriculture, so people living in these areas are going to feel more of the brunt of the effects of climate change. If we can communicate about how human health, or even there are studies about how mental health is impacted by climate change, if we can help people understand those nuances, I think it will bring it closer to an issue that they care about for the long term.

[00:18:37] Host: I think this ties in nicely with my next question, it's the importance of cross-discipline with regards to your work. In the lecture, you spoke with a professor of sociology, and a professor of psychology at Chapman University. I'm curious how those fields play a role in your research.

[00:19:01] Dr. Richelle: I think I am really excited to learn a lot more about psychology and sociology. The social science side of my research is fairly new, considering that my background is in organismal biology. I came to this because I just cared so deeply about how our research was affecting communities. I didn't want to sit in the ivory tower. I'm learning about environmental psychology, and how sociology is important for the translation of science. I found it really, I guess, comforting to talk to these people who are also interested in the same issues, but just from a different perspective.

I think our government and our academic systems are realizing that that's really the only way that we'll find a good solution for climate change, is if we have all of these different disciplinary perspectives. You can see what has happened with the pandemic. They really needed a social scientist. When they made all of those announcements about mandates and about vaccines, it was all made from this hard science perspective, and it didn't work. Because we didn't understand how people were going to react. I think that was a great example of what is happening with the climate change movement too. It's a lot of science, and people aren't being told why they should care.

[00:20:35] Host: You chose to pursue two different bachelor degrees. I know this is a full left turn from where we were just going. Was there a moment in your life-- you have your science degree, but you also have a degree in music, and was that a potential pursuit? Was it like rolling the dice, and seeing which one you're going to choose? Flipping a coin after getting two undergraduate degrees?

[00:21:13] Dr. Richelle: I think it was more of, I was really passionate about music to the point where I wanted to go to a music conservatory, which is what the USC Thornton School of Music is. Despite that, I knew that that was not going to be my career. I knew I wanted to go into environmental science, get a graduate degree. It was this passion project that was a huge part of my undergraduate career. I think looking back on it, it really gave me skills to interact with people who were nothing like me, and probably contributed to the path that I'm on right now pursuing communications research, which I never thought I would be doing as an organismal biologist.

[00:22:00] Host: I was going to ask, how does music, and jazz music specifically integrate into your work, or into your way, your approach or research?

[00:22:15] Dr. Richelle: Jazz music is different than all of the other kinds of music because it's largely improvisational. I like to think of it as, we all have a framework to work from, all of the players in a band or an orchestra, and everyone has to communicate really, really well to make sure that the product coming out is cohesive. I think I learned a lot about how to interact with people, and produce this piece of music that was enjoyable without having a set plan beforehand. I got really good at improvisation. When I was a kid, I was really shy, so music definitely helped me become a public speaker. I'm sure it played a huge role in where I am today.

I think the benefits are not really clear in terms of concrete things other than, you're being good at being in a team, being good at communication, improvisation, and exposure to this industry that is so different from academia and the sciences. Beyond that, I'm sure there are really good benefits interpersonally that I gained that I still don't fully grasp.

[00:23:49] Host: Adding on to that, we've talked about the importance of the different sciences, and the importance of policy, the importance of social sciences, and communication. How important are the arts with regards to this issue of environmental justice?

[00:24:09] Dr. Richelle: I love this question, and I have a lot of students in my environmental communication class right now who are art minors, or art majors, which I think is really cool. Overall, art has a central place in the climate action movement. From the communications perspective, it's a piece of communication that everyone can understand. You don't need to understand language, you don't need to understand certain nuances that require a scientific understanding. It's something that everyone can consume. It's really accessible to lots of different types of people, and it can be on our sidewalks, on our buildings.

It doesn't have to be in a gallery. I think for that reason, it's a really, really great communication tool. It's also accessible in terms of who produces it. You don't have to be a trained scientist, whatever type of scientist you are, a social scientist, natural scientist, whatever to make art, and to impact people with your art. I think this is why we see a lot of diverse communities, and people from marginalized backgrounds turning to art as their expression for motivating change in environmental science and climate change.

[00:25:39] Host: If you would like to continue the conversation, visit chapman.edu/wilkinson to hear the full lecture with Dr. Tanner and her colleagues. For more socially conscious content, visit public podcasting.org, or follow us on Apple, Spotify or wherever you podcast.