Previous posts in this series
#1 How much do we value democracy?
#2 A “LOVELY” depiction of a terrifying trend
Are we behavior analysts doing everything we can to change the world? You need only flip through any issue of Behavior and Social Issues for reminders of how much change is needed, with respect to certain issues like climate change, how little time remains for meaningful changing. With that as context, please jointly consider two points:
- Behavior analysts are very good at mobilizing behavior analysts. The very first behavior analysis conference appears to have been held in 1947 and we fellow travelers have been convening with gusto ever since. ABAI held its 50th annual conference in 2024, and hosts recurring international and speciality meetings. Many, MANY groups other than ABAI (international, regional, and local) conference on the regular as well. That’s a lot of people gathered in a lot of cities over a lot of years! And what has been accomplished through all of this gathering? Well, obviously the sharing of much good science and the cultivating of much collegial camaraderie, which is no trivial thing.
- Behavior analysts have struggled to mobilize public policy. Since the world is a big place, a lot of world-changing requires the intervention of governments and other large-scale entities that, as a discipline, we haven’t been so great at nudging. Behavior and Social Issues has long called for us to figure this out — check almost any issue for relevant discussion. Way back in the 1980s, ABAI commissioned a task force to examine and advocate for public policy influence, and its recommendations are great, though it’s not clear how much influence they’ve had. Recently, more and more people in our field are commenting on the public policy imperative (e.g.. here and here and here and here and here and here). But I wouldn’t say that this disciplinary conversation, however beneficial, has exactly left no stone unturned….
For example, what if all of the concentrated person power gathered at all of those behavior analysis conferences could somehow be marshaled toward persuading policy makers to do the right thing?
Never forget that most lawmakers and other policy professionals are beholden to the public for their jobs, and they take notice when multiple citizens speak up on public issues. It’s said that outreach from even a few dozen citizens, focused on a single issue in a short time frame, can change how policy makers approach that issue. And with that in mind, check out a short article on the advocacy efforts of the popular band AJR, and, if you have time, this 3-minute video in which the band describes they try to leverage their popularity toward climate and environmental action by partnering with various local groups when they tour.
As the article notes, the band’s concerts lead to measurable advocacy outcomes, recently including:
- In Chicago, 200 fans contacted Illinois legislators urging them to pass a clean jobs bill.
- In Salt Lake, over 700 fans wrote Utah legislators urging action to reverse the shrinkage of Great Salt Lake.
- In Phoenix, more than 1000 contacted city leaders urging action on the city’s growing heat crisis.
Now ask yourself: When’s the last time, at a big behavior analysis meeting, you saw all of that raw person power, representing a clear commitment to doing good, channeled into direct policy-focused action? I’ve had a lot of people tell me that “behavior analysis can save the world,” but even though the “AJR Initiative” is incredibly simple, I’ve never seen that. Which seems a major missed opportunity. Aren’t we supposed to be experts in behavior? We talk a lot about changing the world, so shouldn’t we be leveraging all of the change we possibly can?
Ruben Ardila, in the novel Walden Three (Spanish pdf here), wrote that the science of behavior, “has the principles and the laws to change the world, but it doesn’t have the power.” But is that completely true? What if, say, ABAI, as the world’s biggest behavior analysis organization, were to select a handful of change-the-world issues — or even just one! — and look for ways to make a difference on the ground in each city where its members convene? One option, inspired by AJR, is to induce individual members to advocate for local initiatives that are tied to Big World Problems.
But there are other possibilities. Take climate and the environment. Are our behavior analysis organizations working to assure that their conferences create as little waste as possible? When in town, are they building partnerships that help to empower local advocacy groups? And for goodness sake, are they discussing the carbon footprint created when a bunch of behavior analysts travel in from all over (usually in cars or planes) for the weekend?
Look, I’m not naive. AJR, as an independent three-member band, has a lot of latitude in deciding what public issues it wants to promote through its concerts. By contrast, a behavior analysis organization is a herd of cats. Getting members to agree on anything is not easy. But neither are any of the other problems in behavior we work on, so I don’t see that as an excuse to do nothing.
If a behavior analysis group out there is already committed to conference-leveraged public policy advocacy, I’ve not heard about it — but would like to. So, if your behavior analysis organization has made responsible environmental stewardship or other public issues a centerpiece of its convention efforts, why not let everyone know about that? Use the Comments option at the bottom of this post or, better yet, contact me (tscritc@ilstu.edu) about writing a guest post!
If your behavior analysis organization is NOT currently leveraging its conventions for good, why not insist that they do so? Remember, decision makers start to take notice when multiple constituents speak out on an issue, so why not raise a little bit of (constructive) hell? I love our conferences, so I’m not saying to burn the house down, just to contact your association’s leaders, and maybe forward this post to like minded colleagues who might do the same. Silence, after all, is complicity with the status quo.