Twitter conferences as a low‐carbon, far‐reaching and inclusive way of communicating research in ornithology and ecology

Abstract

Academic conferences play an important role in the scientific community by providing an opportunity for researchers to discuss their work and to network. However, drawbacks of traditional face-to-face (F2F) conferences, such as the ostensible exclusion of non-scientists, the substantial environmental footprint, and the large costs in terms of both time and money are increasingly being recognized. As a result, alternative and complementary formats are being explored. One of these is the Twitter conference (TC), in which research is presented and discussed on the social media platform Twitter. Here, we use hashtag and presenter data from several ornithology and ecology conferences (both TCs and F2F events) to explore the potential reach of the tweets and the magnitude of the difference in greenhouse gas emissions between the two conference types. We found that TCs generated greater engagement than F2F events, have the potential to reach a very large audience and result in a substantial reduction in emissions. Further, we argue that the format promotes presenter and audience diversity due to participation being flexible and virtually cost-free. While we recognize some disadvantages of this format compared to F2F events, especially in relation to the social and networking aspects of conferences, we envision that virtual events, such as TCs, will play an important role in the future of science dissemination and outreach. By embracing such opportunities, academic conferences can move towards a more inclusive and sustainable future.

Virtual academic conferencing: a scoping review of 1984–2021 literature. Novel modalities vs. long standing challenges in scholarly communication

“…One theme stands out in this group, i.e., the environmental aspects of virtual conferences, sometimes in comparison with traditional conferences, sometimes as a proposal of solutions to be implemented. The environmental thread, especially in the context of the carbon footprint of virtual conferences, appears more often as one of the enumerated advantages of virtual conferences, but only a few articles explicitly focus on this issue (Caravaggi et al, 2021;Coroama et al, 2012;Ekstrom et al, 2020;Fellermann et al, 2020;Jäckle, 2021;Klöwer et al, 2020;Lester, 2007;Parncutt & Seither-Preisler, 2019;Rubinger et al, 2020).…”

“…Another distinct theme concerns the study of engagement and the social functions of conference attendance. As with the thread on the carbon footprint of conferences, the social interaction thread is very often mentioned as an advantage or disadvantage of a particular type of conference, but only a few papers focus on this issue (Caravaggi et al, 2021;Coroama et al, 2012;Ekstrom et al, 2020;Fellermann et al, 2020;Jäckle, 2021;Klöwer et al, 2020; Virtual academic conferencing... Lester, 2007;Parncutt & Seither-Preisler, n.d., 2019;Rubinger et al, 2020).…”

Paths towards greater consensus building in experimental biology

“…As a community, it is important that we recognize how differential access to resources may impact the ability to implement the changes we suggest, and to mindfully develop ways in which we can more actively engage and encourage participation with our underrepresented and under-funded colleagues (e.g. Caravaggi et al, 2021;Sarabipour et al, 2021).…”