scholarly journals Multifarious Networks in Climate change Research: Scientists, Policy Makers and the Public

2013 ◽  
pp. 79-89
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Scientists

scholarly journals Shared socioeconomic pathways for climate change research in Finland: co-developing extended SSP narratives for agriculture

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Heikki S. Lehtonen ◽  
Jyrki Aakkula ◽  
Stefan Fronzek ◽  
Janne Helin ◽  
Mikael Hildén ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
National Level ◽  
Global Scale ◽  
Change Scenario ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
Food And Agriculture ◽  
Agriculture And Food ◽  
Farm Subsidies

AbstractShared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs), developed at global scale, comprise narrative descriptions and quantifications of future world developments that are intended for climate change scenario analysis. However, their extension to national and regional scales can be challenging. Here, we present SSP narratives co-developed with stakeholders for the agriculture and food sector in Finland. These are derived from intensive discussions at a workshop attended by approximately 39 participants offering a range of sectoral perspectives. Using general background descriptions of the SSPs for Europe, facilitated discussions were held in parallel for each of four SSPs reflecting very different contexts for the development of the sector up to 2050 and beyond. Discussions focused on five themes from the perspectives of consumers, producers and policy-makers, included a joint final session and allowed for post-workshop feedback. Results reflect careful sector-based, national-level interpretations of the global SSPs from which we have constructed consensus narratives. Our results also show important critical remarks and minority viewpoints. Interesting features of the Finnish narratives compared to the global SSP narratives include greater emphasis on environmental quality; significant land abandonment in SSPs with reduced livestock production and increased plant-based diets; continued need for some farm subsidies across all SSPs and opportunities for diversifying domestic production under scenarios of restricted trade. Our results can contribute to the development of more detailed national long-term scenarios for food and agriculture that are both relevant for local stakeholders and researchers as well as being consistent with global scenarios being applied internationally.

scholarly journals A picture is worth a thousand data points: Exploring visualizations as tools for connecting the public to climate change research

2016 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1201885 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Newell ◽  
Ann Dale ◽  
Celia Winters ◽  
Claudia Alvares
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Data Points

Communicating the Public Health Risks of Climate Change

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melinda R. Weathers ◽  
Edward Maibach ◽  
Matthew Nisbet
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Public Health Community ◽  
Health Organizations ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Community ◽  
Public Health Organizations ◽  
Health And Well Being

Effective public communication and engagement have played important roles in ameliorating and managing a wide range of public health problems including tobacco and substance use, cardiovascular disease, HIV/AIDS, vaccine preventable diseases, sudden infant death syndrome, and automobile injuries and fatalities. The public health community must harness what has been learned about effective public communication to alert and engage the public and policy makers about the health threats of climate change. This need is driven by three main factors. First, people’s health is already being harmed by climate change, and the magnitude of this harm is almost certain to get much worse if effective actions are not soon taken to limit climate change and to help communities successfully adapt to unavoidable changes in their climate. Therefore, public health organizations and professionals have a responsibility to inform communities about these risks and how they can be averted. Second, historically, climate change public engagement efforts have focused primarily on the environmental dimensions of the threat. These efforts have mobilized an important but still relatively narrow range of the public and policy makers. In contrast, the public health community holds the potential to engage a broader range of people, thereby enhancing climate change understanding and decision-making capacity among members of the public, the business community, and government officials. Third, many of the actions that slow or prevent climate change, and that protect human health from the harms associated with climate change, also benefit health and well-being in ways unrelated to climate change. These “cobenefits” to societal action on climate change include reduced air and water pollution, increased physical activity and decreased obesity, reduced motor-vehicle–related injuries and death, increased social capital in and connections across communities, and reduced levels of depression. Therefore, from a public health perspective, actions taken to address climate change are a “win-win” in that in addition to responsibly addressing climate change, they can help improve public health and well-being in other ways as well. Over the past half decade, U.S.-based researchers have been investigating the factors that shape public views about the health risks associated with climate change, the communication strategies that motivate support for actions to reduce these risks, and the practical implications for public health organizations and professionals who seek to effectively engage individuals and their communities. This research serves as a model for similar work that can be conducted across country settings and international publics. Until only recently, the voices of public health experts have been largely absent from the public dialogue on climate change, a dialogue that is often erroneously framed as an “economy versus the environment” debate. Introducing the public health voice into the public dialogue can help communities see the issue in a new light, motivating and promoting more thoughtful decision making.

Unpacking the Levels of Household and Individual Climate Change Adaptation: Empirical Evidence from Leeds, United Kingdom

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 501-513 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chukwuma Otum Ume ◽  
Ogochukwu Onah ◽  
Kehinde Paul Adeosun ◽  
Onyekwe Chris Nnamdi ◽  
Nice Nneoma Ihedioha ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
United Kingdom ◽  
Climate Change Adaptation ◽  
Public Awareness ◽  
Government Support ◽  
Quantitative Aspect ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Wide Range

AbstractThis study set out to empirically determine the current state of individual and household adaptation to climate change in the United Kingdom and how policy makers can improve on it. The study utilized both qualitative and quantitative approaches (mixed method). For the quantitative aspect of the study, a quota-sampling technique was employed in the selection of 650 respondents for the study using a well-structured questionnaire. The quota representation was based on age and gender. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary logit regression. In addition, qualitative content/topic analysis of an in-depth interview of the respondents was employed in further analyzing why and how policy makers can improve climate change adaptation. Findings from the study indicate the dire need for continued government support in household and individual adaptation in Leeds, and this support should also be encouraged in other cities where government intervention is low. Interventions in the form of subsidies, direct regulations, and public awareness are needed. The implementation of these measures is expected to generate a wide range of additional benefits to most vulnerable groups who should be central to the rapidly expanding climate change research and policy agenda in the United Kingdom.

scholarly journals ‘Fake News’ in Science Communication: Emotions and Strategies of Coping with Dissonance Online

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 206-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monika Taddicken ◽  
Laura Wolff
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Science Communication ◽  
Selective Exposure ◽  
Online Information ◽  
Emotional States ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Negative Arousal ◽  
And Coping

In view of events such as the public denial of climate change research by well-known politicians, the effects of postfactual disinformation and emotionalisation are discussed for science. Here, so-called ‘fake news’ are of focus. These are considered problematic, particularly in a high-choice media environment as users tend to show selective behaviour. Much research has demonstrated this selective exposure approach, which has roots in the Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Festinger, 1957). However, research on the processes of coping with dissonance is still considered sparse. In particular, communication scholars have overlooked emotional states and negotiations. This article analyses the affects that are aroused when users are confronted with opinion-challenging disinformation and how they (emotionally) cope by using different strategies for online information. For this, we used the context of climate change that is widely accepted in Germany. The innovative research design included pre- and post-survey research, stimulus exposure (denying ‘fake news’), observations, and retrospective interviews (n = 50). Through this, we find that perceptions and coping strategies vary individually and that overt behaviour, such as searching for counter-arguments, should be seen against the background of individual ideas and motivations, such as believing in an easy rejection of arguments. Confirming neuroscientific findings, participants felt relieved and satisfied once they were able to dissolve their dissonant state and negative arousal. Dissatisfaction and frustration were expressed if this had not been accomplished.

Should we believe model predictions of future climate change?

2008 ◽  
Vol 366 (1885) ◽  
pp. 4647-4664 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reto Knutti
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Models ◽  
Computer Models ◽  
Future Climate ◽  
Future Climate Change ◽  
Climate Modelling ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Numerical Computer ◽  
Model Predictions

Predictions of future climate are based on elaborate numerical computer models. As computational capacity increases and better observations become available, one would expect the model predictions to become more reliable. However, are they really improving, and how do we know? This paper discusses how current climate models are evaluated, why and where scientists have confidence in their models, how uncertainty in predictions can be quantified, and why models often tend to converge on what we observe but not on what we predict. Furthermore, it outlines some strategies on how the climate modelling community may overcome some of the current deficiencies in the attempt to provide useful information to the public and policy-makers.

Moral Reasoning, Intuitions, and Perceptions of Climate Change

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ezra Markowitz
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Moral Issue ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
Technical Issue ◽  
Forthcoming Article ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Please check back later for the full article. Climate change is often perceived by individuals as a scientific, environmental, economic and/or technical issue. Until recently, the moral and ethical dimensions of the issue have appeared to resonate less strongly with many members of the public. Yet for over two decades, climate ethicists and others have argued strenuously that climate change is, perhaps at its core, a moral and ethical issue. What explains this apparent disconnect between normative and subjective perspectives on the moral core of climate change? Research has identified a set of key psychological and cultural mechanisms that influence and at times inhibit individual moral reasoning about climate change and, often, inhibit perceptions of climate change as a moral issue. Moral reasoning and intuitions about climate change in turn influence public engagement with and support for responses to the problem. The research to date suggests several new questions for scholars to examine further, and it offers implications for effective public communication and engagement.

scholarly journals Seeing Is Believing: Understanding & Aiding Human Responses to Global Climate Change

Daedalus ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 149 (4) ◽  
pp. 139-150
Author(s):  
Elke U. Weber
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Financial Risk ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Academic Disciplines ◽  
Institution Building ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
The Public ◽  
Human Perceptions ◽  
Public And Private Sector

This essay traces my academic voyage from studying human perceptions of financial risk to the realization that the human response to climate change is a more fundamental and profound challenge. Along the way, I came to realize that different academic disciplines need to be recruited for two purposes: 1) to tell an accurate story about the motivations and processes by which environmental (and other) decisions get made by stakeholders that range from policy-makers in the public and private sector to the general public; and 2) to determine and implement effective and feasible ways of changing the physical, institutional, and social environment to help myopic decision-makers achieve long(er)-term objectives. I see my voyage as an exercise in applied hope, resisting the constraints that disciplines and academia try to place on scholars and helping others to do so as well, by both example and institution-building.

scholarly journals Climate Change Communication in Norway

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marianne Ryghaug ◽  
Tomas Moe Skjølsvold
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Media Studies ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Scientific Controversy ◽  
Climate Change Communication ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Change Communication ◽  
Research Activities ◽  
The Media

Climate change research, activities, and initiatives in Norway started relatively late, by international comparison. From the beginnings in the early 2000s, research has mainly followed two paths: First, media studies, typically focusing on traditional newspaper representations of climate change and the surrounding debate, and second, research on public perceptions of climate change. Initially, the research field was dominated by media studies and science and technology studies (STS). As climate change and related controversies made headlines during the mid-2000s, the authorities implemented several engagement activities and research programs to improve climate change communication, typically aiming at public education on climate change. Teaching the public about climate change as a scientific phenomenon along the lines of the “knowledge deficit model” was a favored strategy. Research on climate change media coverage indicated that the issue was reported in the same way as other news stories: the journalistic principles of newsworthiness often led newspapers to cover global warming as a contested phenomenon, in which harsh scientific controversy was played out. Thus, the Norwegian media framed the issue similar to U.S. newspapers, giving voice to both concerned climate scientists as well as climate skeptics (representative of “balanced” reporting). Studies of public perceptions of climate change demonstrated that public opinions were largely influenced by this “balanced reporting”: although most people believed the climate threat was real, the many accounts of scientific controversy made people uncertain, and many people questioned the urgency of the issues. This was, of course, not only a result of the media accounts, but also of what the public interpreted as political inertia. Following this, a debate about the ethics of journalism surfaced, and the media increasingly downplayed the controversy angle. Recent research indicates that this may have had paradoxical consequences; downplaying controversy has made climate change less newsworthy, and it has thus been given less priority by Norwegian media. Recently, more disciplinary groups have become interested in climate change communication, from psychology to linguistics, political science, and philosophy. Accordingly, research trajectories have multiplied, and at least two new strands surfaced: how science is communicated in traditional and new social media and the use of climate change knowledge in so-called “climate change services.” The latter strand of research typically also relates to climate change adaptation work, to a greater extent than the earlier works, where the focus has mainly been on mitigation.

Climate Change Conspiracy Theories

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph E. Uscinski ◽  
Karen Douglas ◽  
Stephan Lewandowsky
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Emission ◽  
Global Climate ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
The United States ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Conspiracy Theories ◽  
The Public ◽  
Climate Skepticism

An overwhelming percentage of climate scientists agree that human activity is causing the global climate to change in ways that will have deleterious consequences both for the environment and for humankind. While scientists have alerted both the public and policy makers to the dangers of continuing or increasing the current rate of carbon emission, policy proposals intended to curb carbon emission and thereby mitigate climate change have been resisted by a notable segment of the public. Some of this resistance comes from those not wanting to incur costs or change energy sources (i.e., the carbon-based energy industry). Others oppose policies intended to address climate change for ideological reasons (i.e., they are opposed to the collectivist nature of the solutions usually proposed). But perhaps the most alarming and visible are those who oppose solutions to climate change because they believe, or at least claim to believe, that anthropogenic climate change is not really happening and that climate scientists are lying and their data is fake. Resistance, in this latter case, sometimes referred to as climate “skepticism” or “denialism,” varies from region to region in strength but worldwide has been a prominent part of a political force strong enough to preclude both domestic and global policy makers from making binding efforts to avert the further effects of anthropogenic climate change. For example, a 2013 poll in the United States showed that almost 40% believed that climate change was a hoax. Climate skeptics suggest the well-publicized consensus is either manufactured or illusory and that some nefarious force—be it the United Nations, liberals, communists, or authoritarians—want to use climate change as a cover for exerting massive new controls over the populace. This conspiracy-laden rhetoric—if followed to its logical conclusion—expresses a rejection of scientific methods, scientists, and the role that science plays in society. Skeptic rhetoric, on one hand, may suggest that climate skepticism is psychological and the product of underlying conspiratorial thinking, rather than cognitive and the product of a careful weighing of scientific evidence. On the other hand, it may be that skeptics do not harbor underlying conspiratorial thinking, but rather express their opposition to policy solutions in conspiratorial terms because that is the only available strategy when arguing against an accepted scientific consensus. This tactic of calling into question the integrity of science has been used in other scientific debates (e.g., the link between cigarette smoking and cancer). Opinion surveys, however, support the view that climate change denialism is driven at least partially by underlying conspiratorial thinking. Belief in climate change conspiracy theories also appears to drive behaviors in ways consistent with the behaviors of people who think in conspiratorial terms: Climate change conspiracy theorists are less likely to participate politically or take actions that could alleviate their carbon footprint. Furthermore, some climate skeptics reject studies showing that their skepticism is partially a product of conspiratorial thinking: They believe such studies are themselves part of the conspiracy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document