Ideas do not come out of nowhere. We are all influenced by the environment around us. We absorb information and experiences that shape our mindsets. The people we encounter will bring us new ways of seeing the world and inspire us. In this new item, which I hope to make a regular feature, I introduce you to someone who has been an inspiration to me and ask them a few questions about their thoughts on imagination. I’m going go to start with legendary science-poet, Professor Sam Illingworth.
Sam is a Professor in Academic Practice at Edinburgh Napier University. After completing a PhD in Atmospheric Physics at the University of Leicester, Sam instead chose to pursue a career in science communication. He is best known for his poetry, with his science poetry blog attracting over 100,000 readers a year.
He is dedicated to service in scicomm too. He is the Chief Executive Editor for Geoscience Communication and founder of science-art journal Consilience. He was a convener for the popular EGU science communication session, which was where I first met Sam after I presented my work with Humber in a Box.
Sam shares my love for games and has published many himself, including a climate change hack of Settlers of Catan and Carbon City Zero. He gave me a hugest of legs up in my career when he and Rolf Hut approached me about starting Games for Geoscience at EGU – it wouldn’t have happened without them.
I refer to Sam on how science communication research should happen: innovative, blurring boundaries, fun, yet thoroughly evidence-based. Every so often, I revisit his presentation from when he accepted the Katie and Maurice Krafft Award to remind me of these things.
Why is imagination important to the work you do?
Imagination is at the heart of everything I do – whether it is writing poetry, exploring how students interact with GenAI, or making games. For me, poetry is a way of stretching thought, a means of making connections between ideas and disciplines that might not otherwise meet. It is also a space for possibility, for imagining the world not just as it is but as it could be.
How do you keep your imagination sharp?
Writing poetry is one of the best ways I know to keep my imagination alive. The constraints of form – whether haiku, sonnet, or something more free form – force me to think differently, to approach ideas from new angles. I also find that collaborating across disciplines, whether with artists, scientists, or educators, pushes me to engage with new perspectives and ways of thinking.
What are you currently working on you would like to shout about?
Two projects I am particularly excited about at the moment:
Student x GenAI ( https://www.studentxgenai.co.uk/) explores how students are using generative AI, giving them a platform to share their experiences and perspectives. It is an ongoing, collaborative project funded by the Leverhulme Trust that raises some fascinating questions about creativity, authorship, and learning in an AI-shaped world.
Rooted in Crisis ( https://rootedincrisis.com/) is an incredible project at the intersection of science, art, and environmental storytelling. It uses games and narrative to explore climate change, and we should hopefully go live on Kickstarter later this year. We also have some new artwork to share very soon!
What would you write a science-poem about?
This post originally appeared in the Imagination Engines newsletter. To read this content a few weeks earlier, subscribe to the newsletter below.
As I write this, it is currently Trustees Week in the UK – 6th to the 10th of November 2023. Trustees are at the heart of all charities. They are a special type of volunteer who provide leadership to the charity, making sure it fulfils its (legal) purpose and ensuring its volunteers and members have the support they need. This role is called governance.
To date, I have over five years of experience serving as a trustee for different charities. These roles are among the most rewarding things I have done in my career. They also provided me experiences of leadership, collaboration, and communication when I was an early-career researcher, and these have equipped me well for the challenges of my career. I have found new colleagues, new collaborations, and friends for life.
In 2015, I started volunteering as the Press Officer for the British Society for Geomorphology (BSG). This was a non-trustee position, helping the sub-committee for Outreach and Education by maintaining the Society’s social media channels and dealing with press enquiries. I was just two years out from my PhD at this point and it was good exposure to the world of professional societies, which are often small charities. I also had the opportunity to do some exciting things, like supporting a BSG exhibit at Cheltenham Science Festival with my Humber in a Box virtual reality experience.
The BSG Stand at Cheltenham 2015The original Humber in a Box set upThe ‘Hawaiian-Chris’ origin storySteve’s Delorian next door that played Power of Love on a loop for 10 hours for 6 days.
In 2018, I stood for election for Vice-Chair of the Outreach and Education sub-committee of the BSG, to succeed my friend Annie Ockelford (difficult shoes to fill). This was a trustee position and I was elected by the BSG’s membership for a three-year term. For those three years I ran the sub-committee alongside another trustee, firstly Louise Slater and followed by Hannah Williams. The Outreach and Education sub-committee existed to promote geomorphology, careers in it, and its value to society to the public and all levels of education. Some of the core tasks were:
Maintaining relationships with partner organisations, including the Royal Geographical Society and the Geographical Association.
Issuing outreach grant awards to members.
Judging the Marjorie Sweeting Award for best undergraduate dissertation in geomorphology.
Much of my time in this role was affected by the Covid pandemic and resultant lockdowns. But problems present opportunities. The lack of travel saved the Society a lot of money and it needed to spend it (the Charity Commission does not like you building up excessive reserves), so I designed and ran a grant award for digital outreach and educational tools. From my own experience, outreach and science communication grants are usually small (often < £1k) and this means you can not achieve a lot. I was keen to provide something with a bigger budget and see what could be achieved. This enabled us to fund some amazing projects and create some amazing tools for geomorphologists to use:
Steddfod Amgen 2021 Virtual Field trips (example).
The Digital Resource Series was rounded off with a knowledge sharing workshop, with expert contributions from Bethan Davies, Leah Forsythe, and Chloe Leach. These recorded presentations are still freely available to anyone and I look back with pride at the knowledge we were able to capture and share through this grant call. Check out the videos, they are inspiring.
It was also in this role that I developed a love for video editing. Steve Brace, the representative from the Royal Geographical Society supporting our sub-committee, suggested making some videos introducing some of the great debates in geomorphology. These were to act as provocations to be used by teachers, showing that there are open questions in geomorphology – things we don’t understand. With the support of the membership, I started these videos and made two episodes. I enjoyed this a lot and I see this as the moment that started my journey to the Floodology YouTube channel. The events of summer 2020 led to society engaging with more important debates and I did not feel it was appropriate to continue the series then. Sadly, I did not get chance to revisit it.
In September 2021, at the end of my three-year term, I left my role as Trustee of the BSG. I did so with great memories and am pleased with what we had achieved in that time. Earlier in 2021, I had also left academia to join the Environment Agency as a Senior Advisor in Hydrology. This marked a shift in my professional focus from the mud and rocks in rivers, to the water in (and especially out) of them. I successfully stood for election as a Trustee of the British Hydrological Society (BHS) and the week after my role ended at the BSG, my new role began at the BHS.
The BHS is organised differently to the BSG and instead of having a defined role I joined as one of a group of seven ‘ordinary members’. The ordinary members are all elected Trustees, serving for three years, and each contributing to several of the sub-committees. I have had roles in the Communications and Publications and the Equality, Diversity and Inclusion sub-committees.
At this time, my wife had been helping a group apply for charitable status and had been researching charity governance in detail. This proved useful as I took in a lot of this information in by osmosis and volunteered to perform a review of the BHS’ governance following guidance from the Charity Commission. If you wish to do a similar task, I recommend the following resources:
Following my review, I made several recommendations that are currently being implemented by the board of trustees. This includes changing the BHS’s charitable status, creating new policy documents and codes of conduct, and restructuring the Society’s governance and volunteering set up.
On this last point, my recommendations drew strongly on my experience at the BSG and what I saw that worked well there. I consider myself a disorganised person (undiagnosed ADHD) but I also strongly believe that organisation and structure is immensely freeing and can inspire creativity (there’s a reason the blank page is the hardest place to start writing from). By giving each ordinary member a defined role, leading just one sub-committee, and supported by new non-trustee volunteers, I hope we will be able to achieve more and be more reflexive to challenges and opportunities.
My trustee role in the BHS will be as Chair of the Communications and Publications sub-committee and our key tasks will be:
Producing the quarterly editions of Circulation magazine.
Maintaining and growing the BHS social media channels.
Maintaining the BHS website.
But our remit does not end there. With new volunteers joining there will be new voices, fresh energy, and innovative ideas to deliver more for the benefit of the charity, for hydrology as a discipline, and for the members.
In September 2024 my term at the BHS will end. I plan to take a break from volunteering after six years at that point to focus on new things – I’d like to put more time and energy into new ventures like the FloodSkinner brand and other projects currently in development. However, I know my trustee story is not over yet and I will be back volunteering in the future when the time is right.
Being a trustee is a serious role. You take on a legal role with responsibilities and even risks. But it is highly rewarding and places you in a position where you can affect real change. It is a unique opportunity to contribute based on your skills, experiences, and drive. It is a role where you can make it what you want – just supporting the charity tick over in its day-to-day function is extremely valuable and there are always opportunities to do more.
If you’d like to know more about being a trustee, especially if you’d like my role from September 2024, please do reach out.
Slovenia, and its capital, Ljubljana, are beautiful. Just stunning. I just want to get that out of the way straight off! Just look at this panorama of Lake Bled to give you some idea.
I travelled there because I was invited to lecture on communicating hydrology as part of the HydRoData summer school at the University of Ljubljana. The summer school was jointly organised by the university and the UNESCO Chair on Water-related Disaster Risk Reduction.
Students on the course learnt valuable skills on collecting, managing, and processing hydrological data, including fieldwork and coding using R. My lecture fell in the middle of the week-long programme, on September 6th.
The run-in to the lecture was not ideal. I lost most of August to an awful bout of Covid (definitely not a cold!). I don’t fly so was travelling by rail and, whilst travelling out, our return leg via Milan got cancelled due a landslide blocking all routes between Italy and France. We had to quickly book a new route via Munich*.
However, I put a lot of work into my lecture and I am proud of the content I shared with the students. Titled “Hydrology. Sci-comm. Games”, I took the students through the importance of being able to effectively communicate hydrology. I drew on my backgrounds in both research and operational hydrology to discuss specific issues around that research-practice nexus.
Me presenting at the HydRoData summer school. Picture by Nasrin Attal.
I shared some tips on constructing effective storytelling and how they can use their own passions to help engage people with their research and projects. I structured the lecture around the six key attributes, or qualities, I believe society needs from hydrologists**. These are:
Knowledgeable
Technical
Practical
Playful
Sharing
Collaborative
You will be hearing a lot more from regarding these six qualities as I plan to create a set of resources around them. I’m sure they’ll feature on my Floodology channel in the near-future too.
If you’d like me to share this lecture with your students or group, please do get in touch. In the meantime, here is some my awful photography that does not do Slovenia justice.
Chris
*This too was disrupted when a broken powerline closed all of Munich station. We ended up waiting nearly 6 hours for a FlixBus in a bleak car park outside Salzburg…
I am speaking to the environmental modellers now. Imagine, you have been asked to make your model better, to improve its performance, and generally make it a more useful tool for decision makers. You have got a generous budget and free reign to do whatever you want. Just take a short moment to think about what you would do.
When you read the paragraph above, what did you think about? I am going to guess it was something along the lines of “Amazing, I’m going to add in representation of that process the model currently doesn’t have”. Maybe it was how you would increase the resolution of the model or how you would collect more data to add into it. I am also going to guess that you did not think about what you would take away from your model.
A recent study by Adams et al (2021), published in Nature, found that we are hard wired to solve solutions by adding things in rather than looking at taking things away, despite the fact that taking something away would have been the better and more efficient way. I really encourage you to watch the video below that nicely summarises this work.
I know when I have approached modelling problems, my go to has been to add something in, rather than to consider what could be taken away. Yet, often when we add in new processes or increase the resolutions we may improve our outputs but we also increase the complexity, resulting in slower processing speeds and increased uncertainties. When assessing the models on how useful they are to decision makers, we may have actually made them worse.
The European Centre for Medium Weather Forecasts (ECMWF) have recently upgraded their Integrated Forecast System. One of the improvements they made is a great example of taking something away to solve a problem. Previously, they had stored numbers using 64-bits of memory within their computers. Using 64-bit over 32-bit allows you to store bigger numbers, i.e., use more decimal places and increase the precision of the output. This sounds like it is better, it sounds like if you had the option to go to 128-bit you ought to as you could have even bigger numbers and even greater precision still. The flipside is that storing and computing with bigger numbers takes a tiny bit longer to do each time and when multiplied over the vast number of sums the supercomputers at ECMWF do, this adds up. They realised that they did not need that level of precision and, for many processes, using 32-bit instead of 64-bit made little different to the output. Making the switch reduced the computational load by 40%, meaning swifter, and therefore more useful, results.
This is not anything new in numerical modelling and reduced-complexity approaches are popular and long established. However, these were designed with a conscious effort to take things away and it is when we stop making this conscious effort that we default back to adding things in as a first option. This is especially true, as the video tells us, when our cognitive load is high. Next time you sit down to solve a modelling problem make sure to remind yourself to stop and think – what can I take away to make this better?
Chris
Fridays are my non-work day so I try to write a short blog post on my thoughts about environmental modelling, games, or really anything else that is on my mind. The purpose is for nothing more than the love of writing and for practice but I do hope you enjoy them. For the avoidance of any doubt, all of the views and opinions I express in these blogs are very much my own and not those of my employer.
One thing I’d really like to do in 2021 is get back into writing just for fun. Although I have written a lot academically in the last few years, my space and time to just write my thoughts had become really squeezed. I hope to use some spare time on Friday mornings to quickly put a few words together about what’s on my mind at the time and re-engage with the craft. These are my own personal views and opinions.
On the useful-ness of models
Most numerical modellers will be familiar with mathematician George Box’s quote “All models are wrong, but some are useful”. I love this quote, as even though I don’t think it was intended for numerical simulations, it strikes right at the heart of many of the issues our research community are trying to address.
Too often though, we don’t consider how ‘useful’ our models are. How wrong they are? Yes, we look at that all the time. We develop new ways to calculate, express, and communicate how wrong they are. We work hard on new methods and at collecting new, more, and better data so we can make the models less wrong. When we’ve done this, we have models that are either less wrong, which is good as they will be right more often, or are able to show us how wrong they might be, which is also good as it allows people to make better informed choices about risks.
When we do consider how useful a model is, it’s often in the ways discussed above. Providing decision makers with the information about how wrong a model is lets them make a better informed decision. It is more useful to them. Great, box ticked. But, in my opinion, the model does not stop there.
In a recent post for CIWEM, Phiala Mehring, a floodie, research director, and PhD researcher, discussed how we communicate with communities affected, or at risk of being affected, by flooding. It’s a really important post so please go read it here. There was one paragraph that really stood out for me:
In this situation, to this audience, it does not matter how precise and accurate that model had been made. All the effort and hours put in developing methods to communicate how wrong the model might be do not matter either. It also does not matter how useful decision makers found it. Here, in this situation, the model is useless.
How we utilise model results when working out in the real-world communicating flood risk is a crucial facet of the model’s development and its use. It’s just as important as finding reliable and accurate rainfall information to input into it right at the start of the chain. And it’s the reason we should always measure our models by that one criteria George Box proposed to us – how useful they are.
GeoSkinner 