A snapshot of science communication in Japan

Author: Simon Pleasants and Hiromitsu Urakami

Springer Nature recently surveyed over 1,000 researchers in Japan to better understand the current state of science communication* and the motivations for doing it. Simon Pleasants, senior editor, and Hiromitsu Urakami, academic engagement director, Japan, here share some thoughts presented at the Japan Research Advisory Forum held in 2023.

As publishers, we help to advance scientific discovery by empowering scientists to communicate their research. Specifically, we support the research community by providing platforms, services and tools to enable its members to effectively communicate their research, thereby supporting cross-disciplinary, global conversations. As part of that commitment, Springer Nature set up the Japanese Research Advisory Forum** in 2022 to bring leaders in academia and science communication together to explore this topic. A follow-up meeting was held in October 2023.

More than a decade ago, the Japanese government started a policy to encourage researchers to communicate their findings to a broader audience. At the October 2023 meeting, the Japan Research Advisory Forum discussed our new survey results that seek to illuminate the scope of research communication in Japan, thereby helping us discover how we can better support researchers. Such surveys are important, as they enable us to gain a grass-roots understanding of what is impacting researchers.

Over 90% of Japanese researchers believe in the importance of communicating their work

The survey showed some very encouraging results, the most significant being that 94% of respondents said that communicating their research to the wider community was very important to them, and 87% were interested in doing this. These results confirm the experience of Amane Koizumi, project professor at the National Institutes of Natural Sciences, who commented that a survey conducted by JST in 2013 showed that two-thirds of researchers had gained experience in disseminating information about their own research through science communication activities. The results of this survey far exceed those of that time, and we feel that the situation has changed over the past 10 years!

However, some feel science communication still has room for improvement

Koizumi conjectured that these positive results may be attributable to the Japanese government’s decade-old policy that requires researchers to communicate their findings more. Despite the willingness to communicate, there was the feeling that this policy could engender an unhelpful mentality towards science communication, turning it into a box-ticking exercise. Magdalena Skipper, editor-in-chief of Nature and chief editorial advisor of Nature Portfolio, noted the value to extend the policy from merely encouraging researchers to broadcasting science to actually engaging with the public to increase the impact of research and to understand the public’s interests and needs.

More support is needed to help communicate globally and connect Japanese researchers to the public

Amidst heightened interest to increase global dissemination of Japanese research, surprisingly, only 35% of the respondents said that they had targeted the global audience in communicating their research. In contrast, 72% targeted Japan (multiple responses were possible to the question). Skipper commented that she was also intrigued that 31% of respondents said that finding the right audience was a challenge for them. Antoine Bocquet, managing director of Springer Nature Japan, added that funders compel researchers to communicate, but often researchers don’t know whom to target.

Researchers are conscious of their need for support in this area, with 77% of respondents saying they wanted more support with communicating their research results. Yasushi Ogasaka, managing director of the department of international strategy at the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development, said that he sees scientists who want to communicate to the wider community but don’t know how. He also suggested that one way to help them reach the general public is to provide advice on what the community wants to know.

Several of the forum participants noted the one-way nature of a lot of science communication, along with a disconnect between researchers and the public. Most researchers do not seem to be aware of what the general public is interested in. The importance of describing the significance of incremental advances was also raised by David Kornhauser, global communications director at Kyoto University, as the nature of research is that often many small steps are needed on the way to attaining major breakthroughs.

One way to better connect with the public is to present some of the human drama behind discoveries. Yuko Harayama, professor emeritus of Tohoku University and co-chair of the Japanese Association for the Advancement of Science, and Aya Furuta, senior writer at Nikkei and editor and writer at Nikkei Science pointed out the importance to convey not just the outcomes, but also how the researchers achieved them. Forum members agreed that the journey should be communicated and that the public can’t share the excitement unless they describe the winding road they went along, which is usually absent in press releases.

The benefits to researchers of doing science communication was also pointed out, with the need for researchers to think about their work. It provides a good opportunity to review what they have done, and it can give birth to new ideas. Junichiro Yamaguchi, a professor at Waseda University, pointed out another benefit of promoting research to broader audiences: when he produces a press release on a paper, it encourages his team, which sets up a positive-feedback loop.

Communication is not a one-way street. Nick Campbell, vice president for academic affairs at Springer Nature summed up the session by commenting that as we look to the future, we need to move on from the achievement of Japanese scientists realizing the importance of communication to actively engaging the public.

###

This piece forms part of a series of blogs from the Japan Advisory Forum, the second of which covers AI. The Japanese version of the JRAF discussion can be viewed in Nature Digest.

The results of the survey are available on Figshare and can be used provided attribution is given. The infographic can also be viewed on Figshare.

###

* In this article and in the survey we conducted, by “science communication”, we mean communication, promotion or dissemination of research such as press releases, media interviews, social media, lectures and more. However, presentations at scientific conferences were not included.  

** As one of the world’s largest publishers of research and education content, Springer Nature is committed to opening the doors to discovery and ensuring that the research community is provided with the platforms and resources to leave a lasting impact on society. As part of that ongoing commitment, Springer Nature held its inaugural Japan Research Advisory Forum in 2022 and the second forum in 2023. The 2023 forum members (affiliations at the time of the forum) are: 

• Aya Furuta, senior writer at Nikkei and editor and writer at Nikkei Science
• Yuko Harayama, professor emeritus of Tohoku University and co-chair of the Japanese Association for the Advancement of Science
• Kei Kano, a professor at Shiga University
• Amane Koizumi, project professor at the National Institutes of Natural Sciences
• David Kornhauser, global communications director at Kyoto University
• Yasushi Ogasaka, managing director of the department of international strategy at the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development
• Junichiro Yamaguchi, a professor at Waseda University
• Antoine Bocquet, managing director of Springer Nature Japan
• Nick Campbell, vice president for academic affairs at Springer Nature
• Magdalena Skipper, editor-in-chief of Nature and chief editorial advisor of Nature Portfolio
• Hiromitsu Urakami, academic engagement director, Japan, at Springer Nature

###

Related links:

Springboard blog - What works best in science communication