Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: climate change versus the ozone hole

2000 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sheldon Ungar
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Popular Culture ◽  
Knowledge Society ◽  
Ozone Hole ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Simultaneous Increase ◽  
Specialized Knowledge ◽  
The Public ◽  
Social Motivations ◽  
Do So

This paper begins with the “knowledge-ignorance paradox”—the process by which the growth of specialized knowledge results in a simultaneous increase in ignorance. It then outlines the roles of personal and social motivations, institutional decisions, the public culture, and technology in establishing consensual guidelines for ignorance. The upshot is a sociological model of how the “knowledge society” militates against the acquisition of scientific knowledge. Given the assumption of widespread scientific illiteracy, the paper tries to show why the ozone hole was capable of engendering some public understanding and concern, while climate change failed to do so. The ozone threat encouraged the acquisition of knowledge because it was allied and resonated with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture. It also engendered a “hot crisis.” That is, it provided a sense of immediate and concrete risk with everyday relevance. Climate change fails at both of these criteria and remains in a public limbo.

scholarly journals What Affects Chinese Residents’ Perceptions of Climate Change?

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (12) ◽  
pp. 4712 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jinjia Wu ◽  
Jiansheng Qu ◽  
Hengji Li ◽  
Li Xu ◽  
Hongfen Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Related Factors ◽  
Climate Change Risk ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Factors Affecting ◽  
National Education ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation

The theme of global sustainable development has changed from environmental management to climate governance, and relevant policies on climate governance urgently need to be implemented by the public. The public understanding of climate change has become the prerequisite and basis for implementing various climate change policies. In order to explore the affected factors of climate change perception among Chinese residents, this study was conducted across 31 provinces and regions of China through field household surveys and interviews. Combined with the residents’ perception of climate change with the possible affected factors, the related factors affecting Chinese residents’ perception of climate change were explored. The results show that the perceptive level of climate change of Chinese residents is related to the education level and the household size of residents. Improving public awareness of climate change risk in the context of climate change through multiple channels will also help to improve residents’ awareness of climate change. On the premise of improving the level of national education, improving education on climate change in school education and raising awareness of climate change risk among dependents will help to improve the level of Chinese residents’ awareness of climate change, which could be instrumental in promoting public participation in climate change mitigation and adaptation actions.

scholarly journals Public understanding of climate change-related sea-level rise

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Priestley ◽  
Zoë Heine ◽  
Taciano L Milfont
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Sea Level Rise ◽  
Sea Level ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Causal Mechanism ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
Adaptation And Mitigation

Sea-level rise resulting from climate change is impacting coasts around the planet. There is strong scientific consensus about the amount of sea-level rise to 2050 (0.24–0.32 m) and a range of projections to 2100, which vary depending on the approach used and the mitigation measures taken to reduce carbon emissions. Despite this strong scientific consensus regarding the reality of climate change-related sea-level rise, and the associated need to engage publics in adaptation and mitigation efforts, there is a lack of empirical evidence regarding people’s understanding of the issue. Here we investigate public understanding of the amount, rate and causes of sea-level rise. Data from a representative sample of New Zealand adults showed a suprising tendency for the public to overestimate the scientifically plausible amount of sea-level rise by 2100 and to identify melting sea ice as its primary causal mechanism. These findings will be valuable for scientists communicating about sea-level rise, communicators seeking to engage publics on the issue of sea-level rise, and media reporting on sea-level rise.

scholarly journals Scientific truth or debate: On the link between perceived scientific consensus and belief in anthropogenic climate change

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 778-796 ◽  
Author(s):  
Raquel Bertoldo ◽  
Claire Mays ◽  
Gisela Böhm ◽  
Wouter Poortinga ◽  
Marc Poumadère ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Human Activity ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Scientific Truth ◽  
The Relationship

Scientists overwhelmingly agree that climate change exists and is caused by human activity. It has been argued that communicating the consensus can counter climate scepticism, given that perceived scientific consensus is a major factor predicting public belief that climate change is anthropogenic. However, individuals may hold different models of science, potentially affecting their interpretation of scientific consensus. Using representative surveys in the United Kingdom, France, Germany and Norway, we assessed whether the relationship between perceived scientific consensus and belief in anthropogenic climate change is conditioned by a person’s viewing science as ‘the search for truth’ or as ‘debate’. Results show that perceived scientific consensus is higher among climate change believers and moreover, significantly predicts belief in anthropogenic climate change. This relationship is stronger among people holding a model of science as the ‘search for truth’. These results help to disentangle the effect of implicit epistemological assumptions underlying the public understanding of the climate change debate.

REFRAMING THE CLIMATE CHANGE CONVERSATION: USING VALUES, EXPLANATORY CHAINS AND METAPHOR TO INCREASE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDING OF CLIMATE CHANGE

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Scallion ◽  
Mark Scallion ◽  
Samantha Pitts ◽  
Samantha Pitts
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Chesapeake Bay ◽  
Sea Level ◽  
Cultural Models ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
Chesapeake Bay Watershed ◽  
Communication Techniques ◽  
Cognitive Gaps

Sea level rise caused by climate change is a significant threat to communities in the Chesapeake Bay watershed. Audubon, in conjunction with NNOCCI, has crafted a locally applicable methodology for successfully sharing climate messages with the public. If enough voices are trained in proven climate communication techniques, the discourse around climate change will change to be productive, creative and solutions focused. Climate communicators and scientists frequently encounter two pitfalls. The first is assuming people have any understanding of climate science. Although studies indicate many feel it is an important issue, many are largely misinformed about the causes and ramifications of climate change. The second is the tendency to talk about climate in the context of unproductive cultural models. A good example of this is graphically highlighting the dire situation that is faced by polar bears, humans or other species, which lead people to quickly disengage from the issue as “too big and scary to deal with.” Through the use of solid explanatory chains, good climate communicators can fill cognitive gaps and avoid unproductive cultural models. Skilled framers direct the conversation towards helpful cultural models and explain climate issues through step-by-step cause and effect and strategically deployed explanatory metaphors. Skilled framers start the conversation with solutions in mind.

scholarly journals A Simple Strategy to Communicate about Climate Attribution

2020 ◽  
Vol 101 (6) ◽  
pp. E949-E953
Author(s):  
Rachel Dryden ◽  
M. Granger Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Discourse ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Weather Extremes ◽  
The Public ◽  
Simple Strategy ◽  
Weather Forecasters ◽  
Weather And Climate ◽  
The Difference

Abstract Hurricane Harvey and other recent weather extremes stimulated extensive public discourse about the role of anthropogenic climate change in amplifying, or otherwise modifying, such events. In tandem, the scientific community has made considerable progress on statistical “climate attribution.” However, explaining these statistical methods to the public has posed challenges. Using appropriately designed “spinner boards,” we find that even members of the general public who do not understand the difference between weather and climate are readily able to understand basic concepts of attribution and explain those concepts to others. This includes both understanding and explaining the way in which the probability of an extreme weather event may increase as a result of climate change and explaining how the intensity of hurricanes can be increased. If properly developed and used by TV weather forecasters and news reporters, this method holds the potential to significantly improve public understanding of climate attribution.

Should You Be a Public Scientist?

2021 ◽  
pp. 375-380
Author(s):  
Dennis Meredith
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Resource Depletion ◽  
Public Understanding Of Science ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
The Public ◽  
It Impacts ◽  
Global Problems ◽  
The Media ◽  
Understanding Of Science

Deciding whether to be a “public scientist”—using the media spotlight to highlight important issues—means deciding whether one is a natural explainer. Also, it must be decided how much time and effort can be committed to such outreach and how it impacts research and other activities. Explaining research does offer satisfactions, in that the researcher is contributing to public understanding of science. One problem is that the coverage of science and technology is small and shrinking. That said, opportunities to reach the public directly through websites and social media are considerable. The role of public scientists and the importance of explaining research in general are becoming ever more critical because failure to bridge the information gulf between researchers and the public will hamper, perhaps tragically, our ability to solve the massive global problems we face—climate change, resource depletion, ecological damage, food security, and disease.

scholarly journals Improving Climate Change Literacy and Promoting Outreach in an Undergraduate Atmospheric Sciences Program

2019 ◽  
Vol 100 (7) ◽  
pp. 1209-1214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janel Hanrahan ◽  
Jason Shafer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Informational Content ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Student Interest ◽  
Atmospheric Sciences ◽  
The Public ◽  
Local Schools ◽  
Career Pathway ◽  
Negative Impacts ◽  
Do So

AbstractMitigation of human-caused climate change is essential to lessen the extent of future negative impacts, but many people are not aware of the urgency of the situation. For meaningful climate change action to be realized, accurate information must be conveyed by experts to nonexperts. Improved climate change literacy may thus be achieved in two ways. First, we must increase the number of scientists who are knowledgeable about climate change, and second, we must encourage these experts to engage with nonexperts and provide them with adequate resources to do so. Such efforts are currently being implemented in the undergraduate Atmospheric Sciences/Meteorology program (ATM) at Northern Vermont University–Lyndon. To increase knowledge, all ATM students regardless of career pathway are required to take courses that cover the science of human-caused climate change. They are then encouraged to communicate this knowledge to the public. Students are creating informational content for a department-run website and are regularly given opportunities to engage with the public at local schools and events. The results of these curricular and extracurricular changes are promising. Student interest in the topic of climate change has increased and they have demonstrated a heighted sense of responsibility to engage with the public about this challenging topic.

scholarly journals Public understanding of climate change-related sea-level rise

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (7) ◽  
pp. e0254348
Author(s):  
Rebecca K. Priestley ◽  
Zoë Heine ◽  
Taciano L. Milfont
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Sea Level Rise ◽  
Sea Level ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Causal Mechanism ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
Adaptation And Mitigation

Sea-level rise resulting from climate change is impacting coasts around the planet. There is strong scientific consensus about the amount of sea-level rise to 2050 (0.24–0.32 m) and a range of projections to 2100, which vary depending on the approach used and the mitigation measures taken to reduce carbon emissions. Despite this strong scientific consensus regarding the reality of climate change-related sea-level rise, and the associated need to engage publics in adaptation and mitigation efforts, there is a lack of empirical evidence regarding people’s understanding of the issue. Here we investigate public understanding of the amount, rate and causes of sea-level rise. Data from a representative sample of New Zealand adults showed a suprising tendency for the public to overestimate the scientifically plausible amount of sea-level rise by 2100 and to identify melting sea ice as its primary causal mechanism. These findings will be valuable for scientists communicating about sea-level rise, communicators seeking to engage publics on the issue of sea-level rise, and media reporting on sea-level rise.

scholarly journals Fluffy metaphors of an overheated debate: Why climate change is neither communicated nor understood as an existential threat?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bálint Forgács ◽  
Csaba Pléh
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Emotional Valence ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Specialized Knowledge ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cognitive Limitations ◽  
Metaphors In Science ◽  
Fossil Fuel Industry ◽  
Prompt Action ◽  
Fuel Industry

Metaphors of climate change, as many other scientific metaphors, are often inaccurate, if not in their intended content but in their form and emotional valence. A literal ‘greenhouse’ is an eloquent construction designed to preserve heat, ‘warmth’ is an overall positive notion (as opposed to ‘overheating’). First, we are going to overview how metaphors are comprehended, from their neural processing to their use in communication in an attempt to describe their working. Next, we are going to explore how metaphors in science deliver messages and how they spread, focusing on two powerful metaphors: an identical replication theory (memetics), and a vision constant reformulation through viral spreading (epidemiology). The form-content distinction is particularly relevant to how scientific metaphors frame debates via their spreading: it is the form that is transmitted, but which are the analogous parts of the content that should be carried over? We then turn to the challenges of climate communication: the reasons for climate metaphors not fulfilling their purpose (e.g., due to the implications of their literal reading); the hostile environment the fossil fuel industry has created for climate scientists (e.g., disinformation and defamation campaigns); the strategies climate scientist could adapt as a community to inform the public and decision makers of the looming cataclysm (e.g., finding a unitary voice as a group with privileged access to specialized knowledge). Next, we are going to address the dire, literal consequences of climate destruction and present ideas on how metaphors and expressions could be improved to transmit a message appalling enough to prompt action. We conclude by an overview of cognitive limitations of everyday thinking and mechanisms of inferential communication to provide ideas for science communicators in persuading contemporaries. Scientists and science journalists should choose their metaphors particularly carefully regarding climate change, as minor misconceptions are leading mankind towards collective extinction.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document