Abstract
The climate change countermovement (CCCM) deploys a broad repertoire of tactics in its effort to cast doubt on the science of climate change. One important yet understudied tactic is the effort by CCCM groups to use open records laws in scientifically uncertain areas to cast doubt on the accuracy of scientific information. This article explores the use of this tactic by CCCM groups and adds to the legal mobilization literature in three ways. First, it traces the origin of CCCM groups to the broader conservative legal movement of the 1970s that challenged the dominance of the liberal legal network. Second, it shows how CCCM groups waged an open records campaign against climate scientists in Virginia and Arizona, causing scientists to countermobilize by organizing their own legal campaigns. Finally, this article provides the first empirical evidence of the effect of CCCM Freedom of Information Act suits on the activities of university researchers. I find, through in‐depth personal interviews with twelve university researchers, that the experience of researchers who have been exposed to open records campaigns has been overwhelmingly negative, has caused them to change their methods of communication, and has imposed a new work burden that draws them away from other work responsibilities. I argue that the costs of these tactics are narrowly borne by a concentrated group of scientists whose production of knowledge is a public good that allows us to address the crosscutting and relentless problem of climate change.
Highlights
As the Earth warms, the politics of climate change keep getting hotter
An extensive climate change countermovement (CCCM) has emerged to challenge the insights generated by scientists who seek to understand more about the causes and consequences of global warming
One negative effect of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests that is regularly cited by supporters of climate scientists is that collaboration between public and private researchers will suffer if emails from private institutions are caught up in information requests against researchers from public institutions. Both the affidavit filed by Hughes (2014) and the testimony received during the Mann litigation in Virginia suggest that public university professors will be less likely to collaborate with their peers at private universities because doing so would require private university researchers to correspond and share data over public technology systems
Summary
If there is support for the legal claims of climate researchers and public universities that open records requests of research and email correspondence (1) can place public universities at a disadvantage vis-à-vis private institutions, (2) will have a chilling effect on university professors in their deliberations with colleagues, and/or (3) will take away time that would ordinarily be spent conducting research for the public, I should expect to see evidence of those claims during in-depth personal interviews with public university researchers and professors who have experienced these requests. Methodology To understand the extent to which open records request campaigns affect the behavior of public university professors, I conducted semi-structured interviews with researchers and scientists to learn more about the experiences of those having to comply with them. #10, #11, and #12) described the requests as very disruptive
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have