Rolf David Vogt, a professor of chemistry at Oslo University, who devotes into environmental research through interdisplinary approach. Through collaboration with experts from other fields, he aims at generating knowledge for sustainable management of the natural resources. Currently, he weighs his research on China’s envirornmental problems. Shu Jianjun, a senior editor from Social Sciences in China Press had an interview with him.

CSST: Chemists are often pictured doing their work in labs. How did you get out of the lab and on the road to environmental research and conservation? 

Vogt: It is a requisite environmental studies that one needs to conduct research in situ, i.e.in the environment. Laboratory studies, while suitable for testing a clear hypothesis generated through field studies, are prone to be poor reflections of the actual conditions in the environment. Therefore, unlike most chemistry, which has a conceptually inductive approach, environmental chemistry — like all other environmental studies — needs to adopt a deductive approach. Yet, in the interpretation of the deduced findings, we draw upon our conceptual understanding of chemistry.

Furthermore, the main challenge posed to previous environmental studies was the vast number of unmeasured and unknown factors influencing the parameters in question. Today we have chemical analytical tools capable of producing large matrices with data and powerful tools to interpret these data. This gives us a unique ability to develop a novel understanding regarding the processes governing the mobility and transportation of elements and compounds in the environment.

I have therefore, since the start of my career, worked in the field collecting soil and water samples. This means being out in all kinds of weather, summer and winter, day and night; i.e. experiencing the hardships of being a true researcher. After returning to the lab, we continue by analyzing the samples for a large span of parameters using multivariate statistics to deduce empirical relationships between the parameters and interpreted these using my knowledge and understanding of the biogeochemistry and the environment.

Now, as a professor I have the pleasure to supervise master’s students that love working in the field. Because field work is extremely laborious, this is something that my colleagues working in the private sector cannot endure. I therefore also see conducting field work as a task that needs to be and should be conducted by the universities using student labor.

CSST: What are your research interests and what projects have you been focusing on during your professional career?

Vogt: I started off studying the effects of acid rain in Norway – focusing on the processes governing the leaching of labile aluminum, which was the cause for the fish die-offs. This evolved into studies of heavy metals, and as Eastern Europe was opening up at that time, we concentrated on studying the situation in Poland. The general idea then was that the heavy metal concentrations there were so high that we could study the concentration of fractions and individual species of heavy metal compounds in actual environmental samples.

It turned out that the heavy metal concentrations in regional Polish environmental samples were low – actually lower than in southernmost Norway. As China’s economy started rapid growth, prompting environmental concerns about its acid rain problem in the late 1980s, we turned our attention to China. Using our experience from the acid rain studies in Norway, we started a collaboration with the Research Centre for Eco-Environmental sciences (RCEES) setting up interdisciplinary watershed studies in Guizhou and ChongQing. This developed into the large interdisciplinary acid rain research project IMPACTS, covering watershed studies in Hunan and Guangdong.

I recieved funding for an interdisciplinary study of the environmental and social drivers and pressures governing the fluxes of phosphorous to surface waters (EUTROPIA). With my background in China and with the enormous challenges China has with eutrophication, the natural next step was to conduct a similar study in China. Thus the SinoTropia project was launched.

CSST: Have your studies in any way been related to climate change?

Vogt: Climate is a fundamental driver for all processes governing mobility and transport of nutrients and pollutants in the environment. Changes in the amount and intensity of precipitation dictate the path of water flow, which again controls the possibility of deeper soil layers to adsorb and remove constituents washed out of the forest floor or agricultural plough layer. Temperature not only affects the speed of reactions but also dictates whether the precipitation falls as rain or snow as well as the mechanical effects of freezing and thawing. Basically, all my studies have therefore been related to climate change.

More directly, the studies of dissolved natural organic matter (DNOM) have had a climate change dimension. The point here is that the concentration of DNOM has more than doubled in surface waters in southern Norway and Sweden. This is partly explained by climate change and partly by the decrease in acid rain. The increase due to climate change is mainly linked to increase in precipitation amount and intensity increasing the flux of surface runoff and sublateral flow through the forest floor directly into surface water – bypassing the adsorptive capacity of deeper soil layers.

CSST: I know you are conducting joint projects with China in the area of climate change, can you tell me more about the projects?

Vogt: By ”this study” I assume you are referring to the SinoTropia study. The main conclusions so far in the SinoTropia study is that the agricultural soils in the local watershed of the YuQiao reservoir are extremely over-fertilized. This is mainly due to a large amount of animal husbandry producing vast amounts of dung that is either applied as manure onto the fields or just disposed of in the environment.

The agricultural literacy of the farmers is limited, based predominantly on indigenous knowledge developed during times that were quite different from the current situation, with effulge of nutrients. The sound traditional agricultural practice of circular economy – using waste as a resource – thus generates an environmental problem.

The social science studies indicate that most local farmers are conscientious of the environment and adhere to an eco-friendly worldview, aware of the eutrophication problem and possibly the link to their actions – but what shall they do?

CSST: What is the significance of this study?

Vogt: In Western countries, the livestock allowed for each farmer is limited by the farms’ access to agricultural fields that require and are able to adsorb the excess manure. This regulatory practice appears to be largely absent in China. This may perhaps instead be dealt with (this is beyond the scope of this study) by a system for collection of the dung and sewage, processing it to generate biogas and higher grade manure for wholesale in agricultural regions that lack nutrients.

Our social studies indicate that increased agricultural literacy will improve the ability of the willing farmers to implement best management practices (BMP). Most of the other farmers may be motivated to enhance their BMP by making environmental concerns more popular. 

In a broader context, the study has a significance in terms of generating knowledge and understanding needed for deciding upon appropriate abatement actions, thereby ensuring a sustainable supply of safe and sound freshwater for the general public.

CSST: Why do comparative studies play an important role in your research? 

Vogt: The main drivers and pressures governing processes in the environment differ under different environments. Knowledge generated from studies in one area may thus not be applicable in another. Models used for predictions are typically developed on the basis of comprehensive studies in a specific watershed. The mere copying and application of such models under other environmental conditions are therefore likely not sound. Comparative studies are thus needed in order to highlight these differences and understand how the models may be adapted to adequately reflect the processes in a different environment.

Furthermore, biogeochemical studies are based on statistical deductions of empirical relationships between explanatory and response parameters. Studying such relationships at only one site provides you with a rather narrow window of observations as the span in the parameters are restricted. The picture may then be unclear due to the effect of confounding factors influencing your data. Including more sites broadens your perspective and provides you with a better overview.

CSST: Any other projects are you working on relating to China?

Vogt: A project with relevance for China is the IMPACTS project. This was truly inter-disciplinary catchment studies. Monitoring of physical and hydro-biogeochemical fluctuations in climate, air quality, vegetation health, soil properties, and water chemistry.

I will say that an important significance of the IMPACT project was that we were able to bring together natural scientist from different sectors in China, such as CAS and CAF institutes, universities and local research institutes. These colleagues have continued their collaboration after the project ended, sharing their data. Such cooperation across administrative sectors is lacking in China, and this is hampering scientific progress — especially in regards to interdisciplinary studies. In order to achieve this, one needs to build trust with regard to IPR.

Furthermore, at least two of the five integrated research sites that were studied in the IMPACTS project have continued their role as important and valuable monitoring and integrated experimental sites.

CSST: Since the 1990s, China's natural environment and the ecology have experienced considerable changes in the form of pollution and ecological deterioration – also becoming public issues. What is your take on this?

Vogt: Despite considerable abatement actions, the environmental deterioration is clear in China. The main driver for this is the strong increase in GDP driven by export and the growing Chinese middle class. Though the overall picture is that everything is going the wrong way in China, this is not the case.

More focus should be given to all the success stories in order to inspire and show the way. For example, I remember terrible air pollution in some Chinese cities in the early 1990s due to coal burning and cooking in open street stalls. This has now been practically solved by converting to gas in cities.

Enhanced public awareness is needed. Consumers must be informed of the environmental consequences of their choices and given the opportunity to make environmentally friendly choices.

It is apparently an unsolvable paradox that improving quality of life is a cause of environmental challenges, but this is not necessarily the case. Examples from developed countries show that there is a large gap in the high end of the human development index (HDI), yet small differences in their net detrimental effect on the environment. This means that it is possible to find ways to improve livelihood without increasing the pollution by making the right choices.

CSST: You have extensive experience in working in China, what’s your impression?

Vogt: I wish to conduct environmental research in China for several reasons. For the reasons of comparative studies explained above, I’m looking to expand my perspective. The world’s environmental challenges are not solved in Norway. The Chinese authorities have proven that they have the will, commitment and power to implement whatever abatement actions are required in order to ensure sustainable development.

What is needed is adequate knowledge derived from conceptually based impact scenarios providing sound cause-effect and dose-response relationships. I therefore feel that conducting environmental research in China makes a difference. In most Western countries the problem is not lack of scientific evidence but rather the government’s lack of ability and will to implement the necessary abatement actions. In this regard, China might also mean a difference, by acting as a role model for developing countries – showing how it is possible to combine economic development and environmental sustainability.

I also find working with Chinese colleagues inspiring and mind opening. Compared to my Chinese colleagues, most of my Western colleagues are suffering from tunnel vision due to the fact they all basically have the same background. Chinese colleagues tend to look at things in new ways and approach the questions from new angles.

CSST: Science continues to be the main driving force in the field of environmental and ecological studies, and in particular for the understanding of what factors are causing today’s environmental changes, which are often irreversible. Natural science methodology often appears as the dominant and paradigmatic approach, but chemical and physical analyses alone are insufficient. In this regard, what is the significance of interdisciplinary research?

Vogt: I think I have more or less answered this question already – but I will try to point out the main points. Conducting natural science studies at sites with strong anthropogenic influence is practically impossible without first-hand knowledge of what is going on at the site. For this, we need cooperation with social scientists. They are also in contact with the problem owners and are thus better able to identify and define the research questions that need to be answered. On the other hand, social scientists need cooperation with natural scientists to add ane element of quality control to their factual basis.

For instance, the interdisciplinary approach adopted in the SinoTropia project enables us to disclose the links between the activities in society and the results we are measuring in our environmental samples. Assessment of our chemical data characterising soil and water samples is practically impossible in strongly anthropogenically influenced sites without knowledge of what is going on in the study site. Social scientists are able to generate the required information needed by the natural scientists. Furthermore, social sciences are setting the agenda for the natural science studies by identifying the knowledge needed among management and decisionmakers. Likewise, natural sciences serve social scientists by assessing the quality of the existing knowledge basis as well as discovering ”the facts on the ground” of the state of the environment as well as the effects of abatement actions.