Scientists active in the public sphere recognize the importance of broader communications but sometimes have an incomplete or exaggerated view of the risks to both their public and professional reputations as a function of their advocacy. These risks are connected fundamentally to the degree that the advocacy positions they take are based on values that are shared (or not) with their audiences. An encapsulation of the connections between Risks, Advocacy, and Values in Engagement (RAVE) may help inform choices that public scientists must make.

The lessons learned from the Fukushima Daiichi accident have focused on preventive measures designed to protect nuclear reactors, and crisis management plans. Although there is still no end in sight to the accident that occurred on March 11, 2011, how engineers have handled the aftermath offers new insight into the capacity of organizations to adapt in situations that far exceed the scope of safety standards based on probabilistic risk assessment and on the comprehensive identification of disaster scenarios. Ongoing crises in which conventional resources are lacking, but societal expectations are high, call for "engineering thinking in emergency situations." This is a new concept that emphasizes adaptability and resilience within organizations-such as the ability to create temporary new organizational structures; to quickly switch from a normal state to an innovative mode; and to integrate a social dimension into engineering activities. In the future, nuclear safety oversight authorities should assess the ability of plant operators to create and implement effective engineering strategies on the fly, and should require that operators demonstrate the capability for resilience in the aftermath of an accident.

As illustrated powerfully by the 2013-2016 Ebola outbreak in western Africa, infectious diseases create fear and psychological reactions. Frequently, fear transforms into action - or inaction - and manifests as "fear-related behaviors" capable of amplifying the spread of disease, impeding lifesaving medical care for Ebola-infected persons and patients with other serious medical conditions, increasing psychological distress and disorder, and exacerbating social problems. And as the case of the US micro-outbreak shows, fear of an infectious-disease threat can spread explosively even when an epidemic has little chance of materializing. Authorities must take these realities into account if they hope to reduce the deadly effects of fear during future outbreaks.

A significant share of anthropogenic global warming comes from livestock production. There is debate about whether there can be any role for livestock in a climatically sustainable future; the debate is particularly heated for cows and sheep, largely due to the methane they burp out. However, short-lived gases like methane affect climate in a fundamentally different way than long-lived gases like carbon dioxide. Consequently, climate stabilization does not require zeroing-out cattle herds. But this doesn't mean we can eat our beef and have it (a tolerable climate) too-livestock still contribute to global warming. Preventing or limiting future growth in livestock-related emissions can represent a sensible part of the portfolio of responses to the climate crisis, particularly when carbon dioxide emissions are not on track to reach net zero sufficiently quickly.

When ordinary citizens think of cyber threats, most are probably worried about their passwords and banking details, not a terrorist attack. The thought of a shooting in a mall or a bombing at an airport is probably more frightening than a cyber breach. Yet terrorists aim for mental as well as physical destruction, and our research has found that, depending on who the attackers and the victims are, the psychological effects of cyber threats can rival those of traditional terrorism.