Why I no longer support #EndPlantBlindness

How can we eradicate prejudices in science communication?

Last month I wrote and published a piece called Seeing the wood for the trees. The piece, which gave a brief overview of the term ‘plant blindness’, was written with absolute sincerity. Yet now, a month later, I cannot support this term. So what changed in such a short space of time?

Little more than a week ago, while scrolling down my Twitter timeline, I came across a letter to the editor for the special edition of Plants, People, Planet on ‘plant blindness’. The letter, entitled We do not want to “cure plant blindness” we want to grow plant love, is an excellent read that points out the ableism of using a disability metaphor to draw attention to this complex problem.

Ableism is defined by the Centre for Disability Rights as “a set of beliefs or practices that devalue and discriminate against people with physical, intellectual, or psychiatric disabilities and often rests on the assumption that disabled people need to be ‘fixed’ in one form or the other”. The use of disability metaphors is a form of ableism as it frames abled bodies as the benchmark, with the assumption that all people should experience the world in the same way and this implies that people with disabilities have a less fulfilling experience of the world. In their letter MacKenzie et al. point out that the term “positions ‘blindness’ as a deficit that must be cured and negates the possibility that blind people can lead lives that are full of rich sensory flora experiences”. This is obviously not true as we can experience the botanical world through immersion of any of our senses. Kate Parsley, a Ph.D. candidate working on botany education in the Sabel Lab, has proposed the use of Plant Awareness Disparity (PAD) as an alternative term to ‘plant blindness’ in a forthcoming paper. As she explains in this twitter thread PAD still aligns with the original goals of the term ‘plant blindness’ and focuses on the attentional portion of the phenomenon without being ableist.

As science communicators, I believe it is important that we ensure that the language we use is inclusive, and I failed here by supporting a term without considering its ableist implications. We are inherently imperfect as people, and I don’t believe that there is any shame in admitting these types of faults if they are accompanied with corrective actions. This has been an opportunity to learn and unlearn, to introspect on my usage of other common phrases that include disability metaphors, and to question why I placed so much emphasis on appreciating the botanical world with only one of my senses in the first place.

Frank discussions about inclusivity within the scientific academy are necessary, and social media can be a powerful tool to amplify marginalised voices. Coordinated campaigns such as the recent #BlackBotanistsWeek have been heralded for their success in creating these dialogues, and it’s important that they happen regular. I want to encourage all scientists and science communicators, but in particular those like me that come from a position of intersectional privilege, to listen and to introspect on our role in perpetuating prejudices in our work.


Seeing the wood for the trees

What is plant blindness?

Take a moment to look at the image below and think about what you see. If the first thing you saw was a giraffe on a cloudy day, you might be suffering from a phenomenon known as plant blindness. That giraffe is but one of hundreds of individual, and equally important, organisms pictured in this species-rich savannah mosaic.

A species-rich savannah (📷 Credit)

Plant blindness is a term coined by botanists James Wandersee and Elisabeth Schussler to describe the inability to “see or notice the plants in one’s own environment” and “recognise the importance of plants in the biosphere and in human affairs”. This phenomenon is complex and multi-faceted, and influenced by a number of factors. These range from an evolutionary pre-disposition for filtering out “backgrounds” in order to better-see potential danger, to plants being under-represented in the schooling system’s biology curriculum. In the South African system children only receive 22 hours of plant-related biology education between grade R and grade 9, and this has real-world implications from both a conservation and agrofood system perspective.

The disparities in conservation funding and attention are well documented, with conventionally charismatic animal species (such as the above giraffe) receiving disproportionately more resources than their less show-worthy counterparts. And yet, despite being the cornerstone of all ecosystems, plant species receive less than a fraction of the focus that even the most unassuming animal species receive. South Africa, as the third-most biodiverse country in the world, has over 2500 plant species at threat of extinction. As a society, we will never conserve what we don’t value, and we rarely value something we don’t see. Social media has been a powerful tool for conservation science communication to raise awareness of South Africa’s floral biodiversity through campaigns such as the Botanical Society of South Africa’s #FloralFriday series. One of the successes of is that most people would instantly understand the importance of conserving these species and their ecosystems. What I think is less common knowledge is how the conservation of these species is so important to the future of the agrofood system. In 2018 I wanted to see if my friends were aware of how many plant species they rely on in their daily lives, and used this in a short video on plant blindness that I made for a science communications course.

Ending plant blindness is as much about seeing the plants around us as it is in recognising the way we use plants in our daily lives. Food is the most obvious contribution, but plant-based susbtances and materials can be found in almost everything we use. Conserving our native species is invaluable as they act as a reserve for unique genes and phytochemicals, but this is one step in a much larger process and these plants will rely on an extensive network of plant and soil scientists to get them into your daily life. Throughout my undergrad I constantly had my degree, a BScAgric in Applied Plant and Soil Sciences, jokingly referred to as BSc Gardening. While I still find the humour in this, and absolutely do love gardening as a hobby, the joke does reflect how little most people understand about the complexity of the agrofood system that supports them. Plant production is not just about planting a few seeds and hoping for the best, but about unpacking and optimising complex living systems. We face a severe shortage of young scientists in the industry and, although social media is making it more accessible for the public to see the behind-the-scenes work that goes into producing plants, plant blindness still affects student’s awareness of career opportunities in the industry. This is not only careers working directly with plants, but avenues such as soil chemistry and irrigation biophysics as well.

We need bright, passionate minds to keep our agrofood system resilient and diverse in the face of climate change. For any budding young scientists reading this still exploring their career options, take a look at some of the possibilities in the plant and soil sciences and don’t hesitate to reach out to scientists on social media!