In this week’s Chronicle, my colleague Paul Fain interviews Eric Barron, the president of Florida State University, who is also a climatologist and the former director of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. Mr. Barron discusses the current state of climate science — and what directions it should take.
“We have had an intense focus in this country on developing climate models to make predictions,” he says. “But I think we’re discovering that we’re in the infancy of coupling what the atmosphere and the ocean are doing to all the parts in the system. How do plants interact? We have this snapshot today, and not a very deep understanding of how things like that may evolve.”
Climate science is mainly looking at broad trends and tendencies, he says, and mostly not involved in making predictions about things that people might care about, like extreme weather events.
“How we couple the climate story to all these other disciplines is weak right now,” and climate scientists could do more to study biology, agriculture, or public health, he says. “If I really understand the connections of climate to human health, I’ll be forecasting human health the way I forecast the weather.”
“We are in an information deficit,” he continues. “Imagine you’re a city and you decide that you are going to make decisions based on climate change…. Where are you going to go?”
In this short and interesting interview, Mr. Barron also discusses how presidents tackle controversial issues. But Paul left out one question with a potentially controversial answer: “Why hasn’t Florida State University signed the American College & University Presidents’ Climate Commitment?”
The climate commitment has been signed by Florida Atlantic, Florida Gulf Coast, and Florida International Universities, and Universities of Florida, Central Florida, North Florida, and South Florida. Thanks to the genius of Google, if you search the Internet for “Florida State University” and “climate commitment” or “climate neutrality,” you do get hits for FSU — that would be Frostburg State University, also a signatory.
Follow Buildings & Grounds through your favorite RSS reader:
12 Responses to Florida State U. President Talks Climate Change (but a Big Question Remains)
robert0117 - February 10, 2011 at 5:38 pm
I wouldn’t read too much into Florida State University not signing the Climate Commitment. A great many major institutions have not signed it for a variety of reasons, in almost all cases not related to concerns about the Science.
scarlson - February 11, 2011 at 12:31 pm
It’s true that many large institutions have not signed the ACUPCC — and I’m not saying that they have to. I just would have liked to hear the question and the response. –SC
cbres - May 13, 2011 at 10:06 am
For high-level searches especially (though this could work with any search), I strongly recommend that the search committee (working with the consultant or the person who charged the committee) develop and then sign a statement of ethics. That does not address the specifics discussed above, but it does help make the process transparent and the ethical guidelines clear. Sometimes, the process is almost as important as the result.
hawki72 - May 13, 2011 at 10:26 am
wchristie wrote ” … there is little likelihood that an institution will feel compelled to abide by them. …”
dpn33 wrote ” …Apparently, that’s too much to ask from many institutions. ..”
What is it with “the institution?” If I invite someone to interview for a position in my school or department — and I would like to impress them — then it is in my enlightened self-interest to attend to these details. In the candidate’s eyes, I am the institution.
It wouldn’t occur to me to knock on the President’s office door and ask for someone from “the institution” to pick up a candidate at the airport.
The drive from and to the airport provides exceptionally valuable one-on-one time to orient the candidate and make them feel welcome coming in and to debrief them on the way back.
My contribution the the helpful hints list: — Less whining, more thinking
jranelli - May 13, 2011 at 10:36 am
all good and useful comments…on one extreme there are institutions that get it right…when the task was mine, all candidates were thanked for their interest, kept informed as the process included or eliminated them and informed of the chosen candidate as soon as he or she accepted an offer…and, of course, all planes, trains, etc., were met and schedules overseen thoroughly and tended by staff and faculty, (ok, there was some dumb stuff as when deans took pains to assure female candidates that the area was replete with shopping options), and on the other extreme there are the slackers, as noted in the comments and, worse, those who perpetrate pre-cooked searches or engage in unspoken -isms, (my favorite is the invitation of a woman to interview at a selective eastern liberal arts college, where i was visiting, who, because of the subject of her thesis was assumed to be african-american and, not having been met her on arrival, elicited an audible hum when she presented her self and…etc.)
michener1 - May 13, 2011 at 11:26 am
i would add don’t post a job if it is set aside for someone already. it’s a waste of everyone’s time and money and reflects poorly on the program.
walkingtree - May 13, 2011 at 12:24 pm
Because nobody gave me a ride, I thought it was a usual practice to neglect candidates. I am glad that your department abides by the code of conduct and that you are outraged at others who don’t. Hopefully I will get a job in your kind of department.
11152886 - May 13, 2011 at 12:51 pm
Let’s begin earlier in the search process:
1. Were the applicants who did not make the cut for the position notified at all? 2. Did the committee respond to all candidate applications in timely fashion at the close of the search as to when they would be notified as to the finalists?3. When top 3-5 candidates were selected and notified, were the remaining candidates notified at the same time, so they might get on with their lives? As for the first rule, I wrote a letter of recommendation for a highly qualified candidate participating in a national search. The applicant was NEVER notified about search progress or results by the search committee, the department, or the institution. After two months, the candidate finally called the department and was told the position had been filled, and that the candidate had not been in the running. This is disgraceful search committee behavior, and rude to a legitimate candidate.
rrserbs - May 14, 2011 at 11:41 am
For telephone interviews there are a few more questions to consider including. Did the search committee let the candidate know in advance who would be doing the interview? Did the committee provide bios at least several days in advance of the conversation? Did the committee introduce themselves at the beginning of the conversation? Did the candidate have the opportunity to ask questions of the search committee? Did the search committee read the application information provided by the candidate prior to the meeting, and do the questions asked of the candidate reflect that the committee has done its homework?
cobleskill - May 16, 2011 at 11:52 am
It’s also good to orient the candidates to the community and the cost of living there.
copesan - May 16, 2011 at 12:15 pm
All of these suggestions relate to candidates actually invited for interviews and campus visits. How about treating applicants with respect when they apply by acknowledging the receipt of the application, and by sending out rejection letters in a timely fashion?
blue_state_academic - May 16, 2011 at 4:06 pm
Great idea. When we bring finalists in for on-campus interviews, we always schedule them to spend an hour with a local realtor who will drive them around the community and give them some idea of the housing stock, information about schools (if the candidate desires), etc.