The Philosophers' Cocoon

I don't know how and when the pandemic will end, but we can be reasonably confident it will end.

And in this not-too-distant future, we can ask: how will we do conferencing and seminars post-pandemic?

Our present way of doing things (well, pre-2020) burns a lot of fossil fuels. An international flight, e.g., from London to Chicago, generates more CO2 than the average person in dozens of countries does in an entire year. Even in countries where lots of people fly (e.g., in the US well over 80% of people have flown at some point in their lives), the majority of people fly relatively little. It's difficult to estimate, but one ballpark figure estimate says the /average American flies fewer than two times a year. Academics fly much above the average in their countries. 

Though minds are focused on the pandemic, and in the US, on the presidential election too, the climate crisis continues unabated. We had, prior to the pandemic, some vague aspirations of how to make conferencing and other academic meetings more sustainable. We debated flying less frequently, maybe holding part of our conferences online. Some of us placed limits on transcontinental flights. 

Some of our aspirations have now met a sobering reality, with a year (and likely more) of severe restrictions on travel and online conferencing. What have we learned about the viability of conferencing online as a carbon-low alternative to flying around to conferences scattered across the globe? 

I asked people on Twitter (almost 1000 responses) how online and in-person conferences compare, and whether respondents think online is a viable alternative to in-person. (Note, Twitter only allows for 4 responses which made it impossible for me to make the poll symmetrical. A symmetrical poll should include "Only online from now on," to balance out "not a viable alternative".) However, given how the poll drops off at "better than in-person" at only 9.3%, I do think it gives some indication of the mood music.

These results, if representative, are sobering. Over 75% of respondents think that either online conferences are not a viable alternative, or that they're acceptable but inferior. Note though, that the most common response, with over 60% of respondents is that they're still acceptable. 

I found this intriguing given that all the conferences I was supposed give talks at in 2020 have been cancelled or postponed. Several times organizers told me explicitly they didn't want to go online. One small workshop I was supposed to present at has now been shifted to summer 2022 because the organizers deemed the chance bigger it could go ahead in person during that time.

Perhaps my experience is anomalous. Or, perhaps the 15% who think online conferences are not viable are more likely to be more senior. The professional benefit to holding conferences online, rather than postponing them or cancelling them, is greater for junior folks. If you're not tenured, it is just not feasible to hit the pause button on presenting your research. But this is just a hypothesis, and needs more investigation.

When my co-organizer and I went ahead with a conference on original sin and the Fall (this was because of constraints by the funder), we got several appreciative emails of grad students, assistant professors, and PhD holders on the market that we went ahead and they could give their presentations. 

Nevertheless, though events like the conference we organized can be stimulating, energizing, and valuable, I alongside many other people have gained a renewed appreciation for the value of in-person conferencing, such as the socializing and informal networking.

Human beings are social creatures and we're not well suited to do our socializing purely online.

Perhaps Zoom fatigue is a major factor making remote conferences unattractive. I have heard from many academics they find it an uphill battle to attend online seminar talks (more so than previous in-person talks) organized by their department, especially if these fall late in the week  after having hours of teaching and meetings online. One person said to me that the only thing that motivated her to attend these was a sense of duty. When the pandemic is over Zoom fatigue will be less of an issue, and so would potentially make online events more attractive. 

Even so, it is not easy to come up with a viable online equivalent for informal socializing which is so important at conferences. Zoom drinks are a poor replacement for this; perhaps a slack channel or better use of the chat function, or other ways to build in unstructured time for socializing might help to make online conferences better. Perhaps we are not putting in enough to make this happen, in part because we hope to go back to "normal" (pre-pandemic times), and would just want to shake off these Zoom conferences as some nightmarish time that's thankfully over.  

One thing that came up in my Twitter poll was accessibility. Online events can be more accessible for disabled people, or people with long-term illness, who could otherwise not travel to attend (also not pre- and post-pandemic times).

It is also easier for people with no travel budget, often in precarious positions or in institutions with low research funds, to be part of the academic conversation with things moving online.

However, the problem of academic elitism continues to play a role if we were to move more online, also post-pandemic, since one is no longer restricted by budgets for travel and can get very prestigious, well-known folks over at little cost. One might think "Now's the opportunity to invite such-or-so". We could use online events to make philosophy more truly global, connecting with philosophers from the global south particularly those from departments that have no travel funding, and in this way help to make philosophy in western philosophy departments more inclusive, more relevant, and more geared towards issues that are of interest to a broader segment of the world population. It would be good to think, moving forward, of how we can make such connections happen. 

In sum, I'm inclined to think that online conferences can be a viable, carbon-friendly supplement to conferencing we do in person, and it's worthwhile thinking of how we can make conferencing more sustainable and equitable. Maybe this would mean having more regional in-person events and more international online events. Maybe this would mean concentrating one's academic meetings into a longer meeting in smaller groups (some of the best events I've been to were two-week workshops), with thought put into how to make this work for people with e.g., caring responsibility. Maybe some of the e.g., APA meetings could rotate so as to be held online. 

I know our minds are now occupied with pandemic and elections, but still throwing these ideas out there.