After His Death, I Saw How My Dad Shaped Me (Remember Your Roots 2)

My dad was a professor, too. Almost everyone who knew that heard me say, "So I wanted to be anything but."

One morning in the very early 1990s, as we drove down to campus and my high school in his little silver car, he told me again that I'd make a great prof. I said I wanted to make more of a difference to the world. He said I could be like David Suzuki, who had been a geneticist colleague of my dad's before CBC's The Nature of Things and the David Suzuki Foundation.

I thought, Hmmm—but ...

Fast forward 30+ years, and I'm interviewing David Suzuki about seeking transformative change through science for CoSphere's Small Planet Heroes podcast.

The way I told it, I exhausted every other option before following his advice. At U of T, I enrolled in Commerce (and switched to Arts & Science on day one). After my undergrad, I planned on law school (and went to Princeton for a PhD). After Princeton, I appealed to conservation NGOs (and went to Stanford for a postdoc). After Stanford, I interviewed for 13 positions in the Canadian federal government (and went to UBC as a Canada Research Chair).

After he died suddenly and unexpectedly on April 25, I finally realized that I followed the path he imagined for me as a teenager.

I never gave him credit for it. I couldn't even see it until he was gone.

While he was alive, all I focused on were the things I wanted to do things differently. Now it's so obvious that he was just about the best role model a boy could ever hope for.

He modelled balance in academia. I champion the same. He honoured and stayed connected to his mentors. I celebrate remembering our roots (this post is Part 2).

As a person, he was deeply principled and loving—even if he couldn't always express it in the ways I could understand.

Equipped with a new understanding of him, I submitted the following as a Lives Lived essay for The Globe & Mail. They published it today.

I copied the longer initial submission below, with one additional edit.

Voon Loong (Ricky) Chan Connected across Cultures and Continents

Scientist. Athlete. Father. Coach. Born Sep. 8 1942, in Malaysia; died Apr. 25, 2026, in Burlington, of heart attack; aged 83.

Voon Loong Chan learned to ride a bicycle at age 7 on a one-lane dirt road in the village of Temoh, Malaysia, crouching under the crossbar of an adult bike and squeezed between vehicles and a barbed wire fence. The fence kept tigers in the jungle—mostly—but it had failed to protect the village from guerilla soldiers. Voon Loong’s family had already fled for the city of Ipoh, leaving the boy with his uncle.

My parents on a hike

Once a spot had been secured at St. Michael’s—a prominent English-speaking Catholic school in the city—Voon Loong joined his parents and siblings, five other boys and six girls. 

To keep out of city gangs, Voon Loong threw himself into sport. He travelled with friends 100 kilometres over the mountains on a single-speed bike to play basketball, eventually playing for his state. He swam, ran, and played badminton as his studies allowed.

As a teenager, his family came into enough money to send him overseas for school. After his beloved mother admonished him not to “come back with a white wife”, he landed in Melbourne, Australia, to join the new Heidelberg High School. There he met Penny, whose English family wanted nothing less than for her to be that white wife.

Voon Loong and Penny shared an adventuresome spirit and a set of strongly held core values: work hard, tell the truth, make friends, and cherish your family. Otherwise, they contrasted: she was bubbly and free; he was methodical and strategic.

Soon after graduating from the University of Melbourne and marrying in 1966, they began their international travels together. After Voon Loong did a Master’s of Science at Monash, the couple took up their studies in Ontario, at Western. Working at the same Cancer Lab, he studied microbial genetics, she immunology. Bonding to fellow graduate students over chicken curry cooked in beakers, they fell in love with cold Canada.

Ph.D.s in hand, they took up teaching jobs at the University of Malaya. When Malaysia dictated that all instruction was to be done in Malay, Voon Loong sensed that the country was limiting opportunities for Chinese and western students alike. Back across the ocean he went in search of fairness and promise for his children, first for a sabbatical, and then for an Assistant Professorship at the University of Toronto, eventually bringing his family, which by then included two young boys, Chee and Kai.

One of two children, Penny wanted four; one of twelve, Voon Loong wanted two. They compromised on three, and promptly had a Canadian daughter, Soo. In 1980, the rest of the family joined her as proud Canadian citizens. As Voon Loong’s career took off, the young family embraced Canada, skiing, biking, hiking, swimming, canoeing, and camping—visiting every province. British Columbia captivated them for a year, as Voon Loong spent the first of two sabbaticals with UBC’s Nobel Laureate, Michael Smith.

My dad wearing my PLoS Biology Author t-shirt

Voon Loong distinguished himself as a leading microbial geneticist, specializing in Campylobacter jejuni, an important pathogen. It rankled him that funders recruited him to study first-world diseases but spurned his plans to develop a low-cost vaccine for a central cause of diarrheal disease in the tropics.

Modeling the balance that he taught his children, Voon Loong squeezed sports amongst his academic work. In his forties, he took up squash, and simply by studying how good players played, he ascended to its highest heights, winning medals at the World Squash Masters Championships.

Sport was never only for achievement, however; it was always for the friendships that were forged under pressure with play. That said, he liked to tell people how often he won. Surely they wanted to know?

Cycling continued its allure. In 1993, Voon Loong retired as a professor to take up cycle-touring with Penny. The two of them completed dozens of trips across four continents, including a cross-Canada ride in 2008. Again, it wasn’t just the destination but also the journey, as every trip brought new friends, whether they were fellow cyclists from afar or locals who found two shivering rain-soaked seniors in need of a bike shop and decided to transport, feed, and house them for a night.

As his children married and seven beloved grandchildren joined ‘Team Chan’, Voon Loong became head coach of a clan. Together, they biked, swam, paddled, and played every sport imaginable in the ‘Chan Olympics’, as he instilled in all the same values that had guided him through life.

For his family, no ask was too much. Could they send back money to Malaysia from their tiny graduate stipends? Yes. Could a niece come stay for university in Toronto? Sure—we’ll add rooms onto the house. A nephew, too? Great—a sub for 3-on-3 basketball. Another nephew? The more the merrier.

Human connection also inspired his love for pickleball in his seventies. Here was a game, he figured, where he could join up with anyone just about anywhere and make friends. If they were masters of the sport, he studied them; if they were novices, he coached them. He became a certified coach and ambassador for the sport, bringing it to his hometown Ipoh and taking great pride in its flourishing.

It was also about achievement, of course. In his later years, he and Penny made a yearly pilgrimage to Naples, Florida for the US Open Pickleball Championships, the largest and most competitive event in the sport. And he won medal after medal, including a gold and two silvers in the 80+ category just ten days before his death.

In his final days, those closest to him sensed a change in him. He was, at last, content. It wasn’t only that he had ascended so high in the Pickleball ratings (4.68) that there didn’t seem to be another 80-year old left to play, but that he was surrounded and adored by the big, tight, flourishing family he had built with Penny and their fabric of friendships all over the world.

My dad's commitment to study a 'third world' disease (above in red) didn't make the cut, but it mattered hugely to me. He lived by his principles.

The Globe & Mail wanted something that drove us crazy, a flaw or foible (added post hoc in blue). At first I resisted: I had spent my whole life focusing on those. This piece was a gift to him, to make up for my blindness during his life.

Finally, though, I could see the bragging differently. During his life, it felt like he wanted to show others he was better. Now it was just that abandoned seven year-old, one of twelve kids, who needed to be seen.

I love you, Dad, with all of it—not despite it.

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.

Celebrating John Robinson

John Robinson is retiring from U of T. John was a colleague for a decade at UBC, and I was privileged to learn a ton from him. I wouldn't be who I am without him. Here are a few tidbits, to honour him.

1. REGENERATIVE SUSTAINABILITY. Doing more than just doing less bad. John was an early and compelling champion of this crucial idea.

2. CONSTRUCTIVE AMBIGUITY. Yes, sustainability means many things to many people. No, that doesn't mean it's meaningless or uninteresting academically or professionally. Its ambiguity is part of its strength, bringing people together to co-construct what it means for us.

3. IMAGINATION IS KEY. A decade ago, John argued that we needed to 'imagine our way toward sustainability'. Reeling from the first indications of the post-truth world, I couldn't believe my ears. I loved our exchange about it (here). I'm so convinced, I'm now writing a speculative fiction series centering interpersonal trauma and renewal amidst transformative change.

4. HOW TO GET STUFF DONE, when many institutions are involved—including universities. Others got bogged down by bureaucracies, or refused to engage. John dived in and built what was at the time the greenest building in North America, a living lab for sustainability, the Centre for Interactive Research on Sustainability at UBC. A key tip: keep refreshing relationships, even if progress is little.

5. DISAGREE VEHEMENTLY, BUT GENIALLY. If I had a nickel for every time John said, "I completely disagree ...". But even if it was loud, and sometimes fierce, it was also friendly and productive. The exchange above (see 3) felt dramatic at the time, but so nourishing after.

6. BE OPTIMISTIC. Smile. Cheer on your colleagues. Believe we can do better, and we will. John has been an inspiration to so many; his legacy will continue long after his retirement.

Happy retirement, John! You've earned it.

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.

PhD Student Ad: Bird Communities, Scavengers, and Disease Ecology & Evolution

We are seeking up to two PhD students to undertake research involving interactions between bird communities, urban food waste, scavengers, and the evolution and transmission of diseases. Two separate projects are envisioned (likely for two separate students): (a) to undertake a robust field program resurveying bird communities around Vancouver and analyzing this data in the context of previous surveys and an impending tree classification to explore opportunities for urban bird conservation; (b) to model the ecology and evolution of transmission, virulence, and spillover for wildlife diseases (including zoonotic ones) in this context. The successful candidate(s) will join a vibrant team of scholars and practitioners seeking a “Harmonic City”, where bird communities thrive alongside human ones, imbuing cities and suburbs with song.

Students are invited to propose alternative approaches and add-ons, including components with fieldwork, statistical analysis, and mathematical modeling, depending on their interests and skill set.

The successful candidate(s) will likely be supervised by Kai Chan with co-supervision by Chadi Saad-Roy (for disease modeling), and mentorship from Harold Eyster. They will be part of vibrant communities of interdisciplinary scholars at UBC, including CHANS Lab, IRES (Institute for Resources, Environment and Sustainability), the Biodiversity Research Centre, and the Interdisciplinary Biodiversity Solutions Collaboratory (IBioS) (and, if applicable,  also various communities at UBC in mathematical biology and infectious disease dynamics).

Eligible Candidates

Canadian and International students are encouraged to apply. The applicant should have successfully completed a MSc and/or have a strong background in field research and experimental design and statistical analysis, and/or mathematical modeling. Ideal candidates will have strong communication and organizational skills, the ability to work collaboratively in a team, and a keen interest in interdisciplinary research. Candidates should generally have a first-authored article in a peer-reviewed journal published or in press.

An annual Graduate Research Assistant Stipend will be available for 4 years to ensure funding at a minimum rate of CDN $28,000/year plus benefits. Additional funding will be available in the form of Teaching Assistantships. If the candidate does not have NSERC or similar funding they will be expected to be proactive in applying for awards.

Interested applicants should apply to the RES PhD program by December 15 2025. Students wishing to indicate and assess interest before applying can send a cover letter, CV, a statement of grades (including TOEFL score for international students) by email (subject: “Bird communities, Scavengers, and Disease PhD position”) to kai [dot] chan [at] ubc [dot] ca and chadi [dot] saadroy [at] ubc [dot] ca. The anticipated starting date will be September 1 2026 assuming UBC entrance requirements are met.

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.

Announcing Season 2 of Small Planet Heroes, a CoSphere podcast—for you

If you're reading this, I'm guessing you're devoted to societal transformation toward genuine social and ecological sustainability and justice.

If so, we made a podcast for you. Season 2 of CoSphere's Small Planet Heroes launches today.

It includes an incredible line-up of change-makers at the intersection of transformative change and science (both natural and social): Alex Morton, Suzanne Simard, Teika Newton, Eli Enns, Ingrid Waldron, David Boyd, Terre Satterfield, Sir Bob Watson, and David Suzuki.

The conversations were individually inspiring, and as a collection we hope they weave into something that can help grow an intersectional transformational community to leverage the change we need.

I hope you’ll listen, subscribe/follow, and favourite/like the series and each episode. Because it’s fun, engaging, and uplifting. And maybe educational, too.

In solidarity,

Kai

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.

Pitching YOUR Uncharted Territory: How to think of your proposal in relation to your supervisor when applying to grad school

by Kai Chan

This is an extra post in a series, How to Write a Winning Proposal—in 10 Hard Steps

Every day, millions of prospective graduate students reach out to prospective graduate supervisors. If that’s you, or it will be soon, you’re probably wondering:

“Should I pitch my own unique idea? Or just indicate a general interest in a professor’s area? What’s the best strategy to win over prospective supervisors, and land a great Master’s / PhD position?”

The unfortunate truth is that neither of those choices is quite right. In the space of interdisciplinary research related to people and nature, the likely winning strategy requires both independent creativity and adaptability to fit your supervisor’s interests and expertise.

Although neither “pitch your own” and “interest in professor’s area” is sufficient, both could be a good starting point. But the process that needs to ensue requires more careful thought than the vast majority of prospective students put in.

In many cases, this seems to be because students just don’t know how to approach this complex problem. That’s where this post comes in, to help.

In some cases, prospective students aren’t yet capable of doing the careful thought that I call for below. In my opinion, if the careful thought below feels too hard or onerous and boring, this might indicate that now is not the right time for you to apply to a research-based graduate program.

Why “pitch your own” often won’t work alone

The motivation for “pitch your own” is obvious. You want a research project that will be fulfilling, and you need to demonstrate originality. What better way to achieve both goals than to propose your own independent project?

It’s thinking of “independent” as not in close conversation with your prospective supervisors’ work that problems arise. If you go it alone here, and you don’t attend to what you can learn from the research that prospective supervisors have conducted, it’s likely that your prospective supervisor won’t be able to fund your work. Even if they could, they’re unlikely to take you on because professors need to grow our knowledge and research portfolio strategically and robustly. Venturing out into new, disconnected territory is a recipe for us to spread ourselves thin and to fail to serve our students well.

If your research isn’t in close conversation with your supervisors’ work, you can’t benefit much from their supervision. And that draws away from our motivation as supervisors, because we seek mentorship relationships where we contribute meaningfully.

Moreover, without putting your research in conversation with a nuanced set of other research, it’s likely to seem “basic”. Every question worth investigating has been considered carefully by many researchers before you. Only by engaging directly with those other efforts can you identify where you can add meaningful value.

Writing a proposal is like drawing or painting a landscape picture of a mountain. It takes nuance to do it well, and it needs the landscape. Credits: Mountain icon created by azmianshori - Flaticon; Peaks icon created by PLANBSTUDIO - Flaticon; Landscape icon created by Freepik - Flaticon 

Why “interest in professor’s area” won’t work alone

Given the difficulty of pitching a novel piece of research before even starting a grad program, it’s understandable that many students resort to a chameleon strategy of appearing to be adaptable to work on any project their supervisor might suggest. But I’m wary of this strategy, for several reasons.

Students are not, in fact, equally motivated by all kinds of problems. If they are, it’s because they’re not really motivated by any of them. And intrinsic motivation, that sense of purpose and curiosity, is essential to a successful graduate program.

Moreover, most supervisors are looking for students who can and will advance projects substantially without micromanaging. This isn’t laziness; it’s because great things only happen when there are multiple brains, each with their own rich history and insights, come together.

And, so, even if this strategy seems to be paying off in attracting a prospective supervisor, the student should be wary. Because supervisors who are not steered by the student’s own curiosity and creativity might not be the kind of professor you want in charge of your life for the next few years.

The solution: Fleshing out nuance via supervisors’ research

The only real way forward is to braid together your interests with those of prospective supervisors (Figure 1?). You can start anywhere, the point is to keep reading and braiding.

You can begin with your own idea, and identify prospective supervisors based on that. Then read some of their papers, and refine your idea based on those. If it’s too much of a reach, rethink the prospective supervisors until you find a good fit. Refine your ideas based on their research, then reach out, get more input, and refine some more.

You can also begin by identifying prospective supervisors, reading their research. If you’re bored by a paper, pass it over. If you’re bored by all of a professors’ papers, move on to the next candidate. Once you get to papers that interest you, pay special attention to the latter parts of recent Discussion sections. That’s where you’ll find clues about what your supervisor is excited to work on. If one or more of those ideas excites you, too, dig a bit deeper, and start to form some of your own ideas about what you could do in that space.

It's crucial that the larger landscape you depict in your proposal integrates ideas beyond your prospective supervisor's research. Don't just cite their work! Their research exists in a broader context, and by depicting that, you'll demonstrate your capacity to contribute new insights.

Either way, what you’re aiming for is like the third image above, on the right. If writing a proposal is like drawing a mountain, what you really need to do is to draw a mountain in its landscape (of the literature), where your mountain is squarely in the range of your supervisor’s previous climbs.

That’s how you can explore your own uncharted territory, and have fun and good company doing it. Bon voyage!

The Intro to this series (with links to the full set): How to Write a Winning Proposal—in 10 Hard Steps

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.

Trump and Mega-Fires

by Kai Chan

With yesterday's election result, authoritarianism is at our doorstep. Western nations were so certain that state-run media plus state propaganda was the route to authoritarian regimes. Now it is obvious: an equally possible route is through unbridled capitalism with corporate control of the media, unconstrained social media, and money in politics.

The warnings were all there, eight years ago, and with the narrow miss four years ago. Trump didn't pull this off because he's Mr. Invincible in the sense of being a superhero among mortals. He triumphed because the echo chambers of American social and political systems are deeply vulnerable to bullying blow-hards and unfairly favour the wealthy.

Eight years ago, it became clear that the truth was not enough. At CHANS Lab, we were already employing tools of science communication that were more sophisticated than a simple bullhorn or press release.

Four years ago, I wrote about the need to seize the opportunity while we had it, to reign in out-of-control media, social media, and political systems (this would mean tightly controlling money in politics, including Super PACs and dark money). We missed our chance, perhaps imagining that Trump's first presidency was an isolated phenomenon. It wasn't: it was a symptom of a failing system.

A second Trump presidency will be a wildfire of massive proportions, a mega-fire. In my undergraduate class, ENVR 430, students learn how different climate-fuelled mega-fires are from regular fires (fires that would have been common historically). Whereas 'regular' forest fires would generally burn small areas, leaving some or many adult trees and the soils intact, mainly clearing the understory, mega-fires burn huge expanses including the biggest trees and organic soils including the seed bank. They so completely remove the structures of the old system that they enable entirely new systems, generally much less productive ones.

How ecosystems respond to 'regular' wildfire, with a cycle of adaptive renewal. Adapted from C.S. Holling 1986, 2001.

How ecosystems respond to mega-fires, which burn hotter and at greater spatial scales, eliminating pathways of ecosystem memory. From Chan, ENVR 430 lecture for Week 6, Air & Fire.

Get ready a mega-fire and prepare for its aftermath, when there is at least an opportunity to reshape the system for the better.

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.

System Change is Needed but Elusive: What Next?

Dr. Kai Chan is a professor and Canada Research Chair at the University of British Columbia, a TEDx speaker, and founder of CoSphere, a Community of Small-Planet Heroes.

[Reposted from the National Observer; Meta doesn't allow links to media organizations in Canada, so link here instead, and then go there.]

It has been five years since 132 nations declared that only a complete overhaul of how our world works could save it. Yet we are still sleepwalking deeper into the climate and ecological crisis. A million species are still at risk of extinction, and we are among those that will lose from our inaction. We have been lulled into complacency by urgent distractions and the comforts of modern life. For a healthy, sustainable future, we must change the very systems we rely on: economic, political, social, and more.

While the COVID pandemic interrupted the groundswell of climate concern, the nations were never really poised to initiate the “transformative change” they touted. The declaration was not mere posturing, though. As a leading author of the UN report that inspired the declaration—the Global Assessment of the UN’s Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services—I could see genuine concern in the diplomats who negotiated the summary. But there’s a huge gap between calling for system change and making it happen. In hindsight, it was naïve to think that governments could undertake such a transformation without an adamant social movement demanding it.

Galvanizing that unified social movement is our task. It falls upon us to demand systems change towards sustainability. Fortunately, this doesn’t require giving up a day job to stop traffic on busy bridges. Instead, it starts from five feasible but essential foundations:

Go Deep: we move beyond what’s quick and easy—both in our actions, and in policy. Picking low-hanging fruit is not a recipe for system change. It’s a favored approach of policymakers to achieve short-term wins when the system works well. New technologies like electric vehicles might help somewhat, but they are popular because they don’t require changes in our economic, political, or social systems. This easy approach is insufficient.

So we challenge doing what’s easy in law and policy. We also need to prioritize what’s effective in the long term, reminding skeptics that we are beyond easy solutions. So, not only subsidies to encourage low-carbon technology, but reforming the much larger subsidies that support the status quo in agriculture, fishing, and other resource extraction.

Update Tradition: we transcend “this is how we do things”. How often have you heard people justify an action this way? History provides context, but we cannot fix what’s broken by following precedent.

We can challenge decision-making by questioning the process. Policymaking in many nations is rooted in economic analyses that assume little will change. This is self-defeating when seeking system change. Economic analysis must be complemented by systems science—the integrated study of social and natural systems that acknowledges deep uncertainty, nonlinear change, and multiple ways of knowing. This way we don’t get trapped in decisions that only make sense economically in the short term.

Embrace Uncertainty: we resist oversimplifying problems. As American writer H.L. Mencken wrote, “For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong.” Populist political parties spout simple-sounding solutions to all that’s broken, glossing over the uncertainty and unintended consequences inherent in big changes. We must keep questioning.

We also can’t be certain about our own favored policies for big changes. Is a strong carbon tax the way to go? Maybe. Should governments subsidize businesses facing rising fuel costs? Probably not, but maybe. When systems evolve, everything is subject to change, and the way forward is to proceed adaptively. Not meekly, but boldly, experimenting for the sake of learning, with a plan to use that learning to improve our decision making and institutions.

Seek Widespread Solidarity: we embrace multiple perspectives. It is easy to find comfort in echo chambers. However, polarization not only breeds hate and fear, it poisons harmonious futures. To change laws, the economy, and society in democratic nations, we must push together.

We can guard against division by actively supporting rigorous and balanced journalism, so we draw from a common body of facts across the political spectrum. Some of my students turned away from mainstream media because coverage of fighting in Gaza felt biased—because it legitimized perspectives other than their own. But juxtaposing contrasting perspectives in context is what’s needed—that’s how journalism favors discussion over disconnection.

Engage Science: we enhance public access to system science (as with CoSphere). With everything connected, how else can we orient efforts to change systems, or anticipate the resulting impacts? How else can we contest policies? When politicians of all stripes promise to make housing affordable, voters struggle to interpret what each intends, or what evidence supports each approach. By enlisting academics—whose job it is to assess evidence while divulging and overcoming biases—we can all interpret claims and better understand pressing problems.

We can initiate and grow partnerships involving academics and communities. Scientists like me have long felt that merely studying problems is deeply unsatisfying. While I remain curious, my bigger purpose is to help anyone find community in their unique contribution to a better future. I’m not alone.

Globally, we’re not on track to rosy futures. But by leveraging systems together, boldly and adaptively, we can meet this challenge that’s bigger than any of us alone.

CHANS Lab Views by Kai Chan's lab is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Based on a work at https://chanslabviews.blogspot.com.