scholarly journals Agency and climate change: a quantitative-structuralist approach to the assignment of moral agency in mitigation

2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 17
Author(s):  
Erik Thorstensen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Moral Agency ◽  
The Other ◽  
Mitigation Measures ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
The Public ◽  
Structuralist Approach ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Ipcc Working Group

<p>This article uses the IPCC Working Group III’s latest report on mitigation of climate change as its material. The ambition is to investigate how the IPCC assigns moral agency to non-experts. For this, the article analyzes whether the terms “citizens”, “stakeholders”, “the public” and “laypeople” are presented as barriers to, drivers for or neutral towards mitigation measures. The “public” stand out in the IPCC report as a much larger barrier to mitigation than the other groups. This article relates these finding to work conducted by Brian Wynne (1991) and Mike Michael (2009) regarding perception of the public by scientific assessments. This article documents that the IPCC Working Group III tends to replicate stereotypes of the public from such scientific assessments.</p>

IS THE IPCC’s 5TH ASSESSMENT A DENIER OF POSSIBLE MACROECONOMIC BENEFITS FROM MITIGATING CLIMATE CHANGE?

2016 ◽  
Vol 07 (01) ◽  
pp. 1640003 ◽  
Author(s):  
RICHARD A. ROSEN
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Integrated Assessment ◽  
Working Group ◽  
The Self ◽  
Research Teams ◽  
Group Iii ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Systematic Methodology ◽  
Ipcc Working Group

This review summarizes what we know about the macroeconomics of mitigating climate change over the period 2010 to 2100 as presented in the 2014 IPCC Working Group III report. The review finds that little more, if anything, has been learned about the macroeconomics of mitigating climate change over the long run since the 2007 IPCC report. Furthermore, while the 2014 report is quite self-critical about the serious weaknesses in its methodologies, the self-criticisms are not explicitly taken into account when the net macroeconomic costs of mitigation are reported. Nor do the research teams that run the integrated assessment models relied on in the report utilize any systematic methodology for assessing the inherent uncertainty in the macroeconomic results reported. Thus, the basic quantitative “findings” are misleading — and, perhaps, even deceptive — in part because they appear to preclude the possibility of large macroeconomic benefits from mitigating climate change.

scholarly journals The Evolution of Communicating the Uncertainty of Climate Change to Policymakers: A Study of IPCC Synthesis Reports

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 2466
Author(s):  
Tomas Molina ◽  
Ernest Abadal
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Economic Systems ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Call To Action ◽  
The Public ◽  
Level Of Confidence ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Degree Of Certainty ◽  
History Of ◽  
Tackle Climate Change

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports on climate change have served to alert both the public and policymakers about the scope of the predicted changes and the effects they would have on natural and economic systems. The first IPCC report was published in 1990, since which time a further four have been produced. The aim of this study was to conduct a content analysis of the IPCC Summaries for Policymakers in order to determine the degree of certainty associated with the statements they contain. For each of the reports we analyzed all statements containing expressions indicating the corresponding level of confidence. The aggregated results show a shift over time towards higher certainty levels, implying a “Call to action” (from 32.8% of statements in IPCC2 to 70.2% in IPCC5). With regard to the international agreements drawn up to tackle climate change, the growing level of confidence expressed in the IPCC Summaries for Policymakers reports might have been a relevant factor in the history of decision making.

scholarly journals The Dynamics of Issue Attention in Online Communication on Climate Change

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ines Lörcher ◽  
Irene Neverla
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Online Communication ◽  
Discussion Forums ◽  
The Public ◽  
Quantitative Content ◽  
Ipcc Report ◽  
Automated Coding ◽  
Issue Attention ◽  
Reader Comments ◽  
Shed Light

Issues and their sub-topics in the public agenda follow certain dynamics of attention. This has been studied for “offline” media, but barely for online communication. Furthermore, the enormous spectrum of online communication has not been taken into account. This study investigates whether specific dynamics of attention on issues and sub-topics can be found in different online public arenas. We expect to identify differences across various arenas as a result of their specific stakeholders and constellations of stakeholders, as well as different trigger events. To examine these assumptions, we shed light on the online climate change discourse in Germany by undertaking a quantitative content analysis via manual and automated coding methods of journalistic articles and their reader comments, scientific expert blogs, discussion forums and social media at the time of the release of the 5th IPCC report and COP19, both in 2013 (n = 14.582). Our results show online public <em>arena-specific dynamics</em> of issue attention and sub-topics. In journalistic media, we find more continuous issue attention, compared to a public arena where everyone can communicate. Furthermore, we find <em>event-specific dynamics</em> of issue attention and sub-topics: COP19 received intensive and continuous attention and triggered more variation in the sub-topics than the release of the IPCC report.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document