Overwhelming Scientific Consensus Research Articles

Learning from and about scientists: Consensus messaging shapes perceptions of climate change and climate scientists

Abstract Despite overwhelming scientific consensus on the existence of human-caused climate change, public opinion among Americans remains split. Directly informing people of scientific consensus is among the most prominent strategies for climate communication, yet the reasons for its effectiveness and its limitations are not fully understood. Here, we propose that consensus messaging provides information not only about the existence of climate change but also traits of climate scientists themselves. In a large (N = 2,545) nationally representative survey experiment, we examine how consensus information affects belief in human-caused climate change by shaping perceptions of climate scientist credibility. In the control group (N = 847), we first show that people learn both from and about climate scientists when presented with consensus and that perceived scientist credibility (especially skill) mediates up to about 40% of the total effect of consensus information on climate belief. We demonstrate that perceptions of climate scientists are malleable with two novel interventions that increase belief in climate change above and beyond consensus information.

Communicating climate change: how (not) to touch a cord with people and promote action

Abstract Climate science has established human activity as the major cause of climate change. The successive reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have also provided future scenarios of the detrimental effect of rising temperatures. Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus, the voices of climate deniers are still given ample space in the media. Moreover, the urgency of the problem and the importance of taking action are difficult to communicate to the public. This paper analyses the communication strategies employed by climate scientists, climate deniers and climate activists to identify similarities and differences, in particular with regard to expressing (un)certainty. The data are media reports from major British and US newspapers, IPCC reports and the speeches of climate activists, in particular Greta Thunberg. The data are analysed by means of qualitative (eco)critical discourse analysis. The aim is to draw conclusions about how climate change could be communicated more effectively to the general public to promote action.

Explaining how long CO₂ stays in the atmosphere: Does it change attitudes toward climate change?

Despite overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change, the majority of Americans are not very worried about it. This may be due in part to insufficient understanding of the urgency and seriousness, which may be related among some, to distrust of the scientific community. We test these hypotheses in an experimental study using a broadly nationally representative sample. An explanation of the delay between the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and cessation of global warming was compared to two control groups, one with basic climate change information and another with no information. Participants also received climate predictions that either included or excluded uncertainty estimates for a 3 × 2 complete factorial design. Results suggest that the delay explanation increased participants understanding of this issue and reduced their agreement with a wait-and-see strategy, especially among conservatives. Moreover, uncertainty estimates increased trust in climate predictions and ratings of climate scientists' expertise and understanding. Uncertainty estimates also increased concern about climate change and the perception of scientific consensus. Although in some cases small, these positive effects were seen across political ideology groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Socioeconomic Roots of Climate Change Denial and Uncertainty among the European Population

Abstract Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus, in many Western countries, there appears to be a considerable share of people questioning the existence and anthropogenic cause of climate change. Climate change disbelief includes the absolute rejection of the existence of anthropogenic climate change (climate change denial) as well as a lack of sureness about the anthropogenic cause of climate change (climate change uncertainty). Although considerable research on this phenomenon has been conducted, the roots of climate change disbelief are not yet fully understood. In this article, data from Round 8 of the European Social Survey are used to study the possible socioeconomic roots of climate change disbelief at the individual, regional, and country level. Results show that climate change denial is a marginal phenomenon among European populations but that a great share of people attributes climate change equally to human influences and natural processes. Thereby, it appears that the level of climate change disbelief varies between countries, and even more so between regions within countries. Results of various three-level multilevel models show that socioeconomic factors can partly explain this variation. Individuals who feel insecure about their economic future are significantly more likely to reject the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Furthermore, climate change denial and uncertainty are more common in more rural and less prosperous regions and in countries more economically dependent on fossil fuels. The results contribute to a deeper understanding of climate change disbelief among the European population and have important implications for climate change mitigation efforts.

Do Source cues or frames matter? Convincing the public about the veracity of climate science

AbstractObjectiveA significant portion ofthe American public does not accept the current overwhelming scientific consensus about the anthropogenic causality of climate change. This issue has been politicized and is now highly partisan. Because the military is the most trusted public institution in the United States, and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the government agency with primary oversight of climate policy, we test whether source cues from these entities, as well as threat frames centered on either national security or the economy, influence the willingness of people to believe climate change is human‐caused.MethodsWe conduct a post‐test controlled experiment to test the comparative effects of varying both source cue and frame.ResultsWe find that the U.S. Military source cue generally produced a weaker belief that climate change is human‐caused, for both Democrats and Republicans, while the EPA had a more positive influence.ConclusionThe results suggest the limitations of national security framing and point to the importance of neutral, non‐partisan source cues, especially in appeals directed at Republicans.

The nature and origins of political polarization over science.

People have a tendency to disregard information that contradicts their partisan or ideological identity. This inclination can become especially striking when citizens reject notions that scientists would consider “facts” in the light of overwhelming scientific evidence and consensus. The resulting polarization over science has reached alarming levels in recent years. This theoretical review conceptualizes political polarization over science and argues that it is driven by two interrelated processes. Through psychological science rejection, people can implicitly disregard scientific facts that are inconsistent with their political identity. Alternatively, citizens can engage in ideological science rejection by adhering to a political ideology that explicitly contests science. This contestation can in turn be subdivided into four levels of generalization: An ideology can dispute either specific scientific claims, distinct research fields, science in general, or the entire political system and elite. By proposing this interdisciplinary framework, this article aims to integrate insights from various disciplines.

‘Time to Wake Up’: Climate change advocacy in a polarized Congress, 1996-2015

ABSTRACT Scholars who study the failure of climate change policy in the United States tend to focus on the mechanics of denial and the coordinated efforts of political operatives, conservative think tanks, and partisan news outlets to cast doubt on what has become overwhelming scientific consensus. In contrast, we address a factor that has been understudied until now – the role of climate change advocacy in the U.S. Congress. Using quantitative text analysis on a corpus of floor speeches published in the Congressional Record between 1996 and 2015, we find notable differences in the language partisans use. Democrats communicate in ways that are message-based, emphasizing the weight of scientific evidence, while Republicans tend towards a softer, cue-based narrative based on anecdotes and storytelling. We end with a discussion of what climate change advocates can hope to accomplish through the ‘politics of talk,’ especially in an age of heightened polarization.

The Implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards and the Tumultuous Fight to Implement Climate Change Awareness in Science Curricula

The following article examines the implementation and controversy that surround climate change education and the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). In order to fully understand why NGSS and climate change education continue to generate significant public debate, one must examine the work of both climate advocates and detractors. Therefore, this paper first examines the manner in which climate change continues to remain a debatable topic of discussion throughout American classrooms despite overwhelming scientific consensus. After, it explores how the debate over climate change stems from differing ethical cornerstones. Moreover, it delves into the oppositional perspective on climate change implementation by exploring the work of Truth in Texas Textbooks (TTT). Subsequently, it introduces and analyzes the creation and implementation of NGSS and discusses how adoption of NGSS and stronger levels of opposition to TTT is responsive policy that remains a necessary step to challenging global issues created by climate change.

Environmental change of coastal Sundarbans: Impact on livelihood and standard of living status of indigenous people

AbstractThere is overwhelming scientific consensus that environmental change is currently having ecological and socioeconomical impacts at the micro and macrolevel. Over the coming decades, the impact of development, climate change, and urbanization on the ecosystem is likely to become even more ruthless in the Sundarbans. Like many other ecologically sensitive areas, the Sundarbans of the Indian state of West Bengal and of Bangladesh are being stressed climatically to the extreme due to their geographical location. This study explores both the ways in which residents of communities in the West Bengal and Bangladesh Sundarbans perceive changes in the environment, as well as intergenerational changes in livelihoods to be driven in a large part by environmental changes. Persons from a total of 368 households were interviewed using a structured interview tool. As an example of differences in perception between residents of the two areas, survey respondents from communities of the Sundarbans of Bangladesh were more likely to perceive that rainfall amounts are changing than did the residents interviewed from the Sundarbans of West Bengal. From the sample data, it is shown that in the Sundarbans of Bangladesh, 59% of the respondents, as compared to 63% of the respondents in West Bengal, reported that they had chosen to enter their parents’ occupations. From the multivariate logistic regression analysis, it was observed that, especially in Bangladesh when compared to West Bengal, the state of the environment plays a vital role in whether respondents adopt occupations other than those of their parents.

Social Dimensions of Resilience in Social-Ecological Systems

Resilience is generally considered the capacity to tolerate, absorb, cope with, and adjust to changing social or environmental conditions while retaining key elements of structure, function, and identity. The social dimensions of resilience are vital to understanding the impacts of environmental changes, such as climate change, on social-ecological systems. In this Primer, we introduce key social factors that provide resilience in linked social-ecological systems, including (1) assets, (2) flexibility, (3) social organization, (4) learning, (5) socio-cognitive constructs, and (6) agency. Emerging frontiers of resilience include applying social-ecological network approaches, investigating power relations, and exploring how transformative versus adaptive changes can promote resilience. A further understanding of the social dimensions of social-ecological systems can provide valuable information on how these systems may respond to change and equip us with the knowledge to support or build resilience in vulnerable systems.

Climate science curricula in Canadian secondary schools focus on human warming, not scientific consensus, impacts or solutions.

Despite an overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change poses severe risks to human and natural systems, many young Canadian adults do not view it as a major issue. We analyzed secondary science curricula in each province for their coverage of climate change according to six core topics: physical climate mechanisms (“It’s climate”), observed increase in temperature (“It’s warming”), anthropogenic causes of warming (“It’s us”), scientific consensus (“Experts agree”), negative consequences associated with warming (“It’s bad”), and the possibility for avoiding the worst effects (“We can fix it”). We found that learning objectives tend to focus on knowledge of the first three elements, with little or no emphasis on scientific consensus, climate change impacts, or ways to address the issue. The provinces of Saskatchewan and Ontario provide the most comprehensive standards for climate change education, while Nova Scotia and New Brunswick provide the least. We conducted interviews with individuals responsible for curriculum design in six different provinces to understand how curriculum documents are developed and whether political controversies influence the writing process. Interviewees described a process relying on input from professionals, institutions, and members of the public where curriculum developers made decisions independent of political concerns. In some cases, efforts to provide balance may have led to a focus on social controversy, contrary to overwhelming scientific consensus. Curriculum documents are the basis for teacher instruction and textbook content; aligning these documents with the best possible evidence can improve student learning and engage the next generation of Canadians on the critical issue of climate change.

Between science and local knowledge: improving the communication of climate change to rural agriculturists in the Bolgatanga Municipality, Ghana

ABSTRACTThere is an overwhelming scientific consensus that global climate is changing with associated devastating, yet differential impacts on different world regions. This, therefore, calls for efforts to improve our understanding of the phenomenon as a way of enhancing mitigation and adaptation measures. Although a lot has been done in this respect, the present study examines the extent to which misnomers associated with the calendar months and local climate events can be employed to convey the phenomenon of climate change to rural agriculturists in the Bolgatanga municipality. The study establishes that the names of the calendar months, which serve as goalposts for local agricultural practices no longer portray their true meaning due to climate change. The study, therefore, recommends the use of nuanced ways of communicating climate change to local agriculturists, using scientific research, lived experiences as well as socially and culturally embedded tools such as misnomers associated with local climate events.

Scientific mistakes from the agri-food biotech critics

Critics of the use of advanced biotechnologies in the agri-food sector (“New Breeding Techniques”, comprising CRISPR) demand a strict regulation of any such method, even more severe than rules applied to so-called “Genetically Modified Organisms” (i.e. recombinant DNA processes and products). But their position is unwarranted, since it relies on faulty arguments.While most life scientists have always explained that the trigger for regulation should be the single product and its phenotypic traits, opponents insist that the target should be certain biotech processes.The antagonists maintain that NBTs are inherently risky: this belief is exactly the opposite of a long-standing, overwhelming scientific consensus. NBTs involve unpredictable effects, but it is the same for the results of any other technique. The critics wrongly equate “unintended” with “harmful” and misunderstand two meanings of “risk”: the “risk” of not achieving satisfactory results does not automatically translate into health or environment “risks”. Generic claims that allergenic or toxic properties are a hidden danger of outcomes from NBTs are unsubstantiated – as they would be for traditional techniques.Among several errors, we criticize the misuse of the Precautionary principle, a misplaced alarm about “uncontrolled spreading” of genetically engineered cultivars and the groundless comparison of (hypothetical) agricultural products from NBTs with known toxic substances.In order to “save” traditional techniques from “GMO”-like regulations, while calling for the enforcement of similar sectarian rules for the NBTs, the dissenters engage in baseless, unscientific distinctions.Important and necessary socio-economic, ethical and legal considerations related to the use of agri-food biotechnologies (older and newer) are outside the scope of this paper, which mostly deals with arguments from genetics, biology, and evolutionary theory that are provided by those who are suspicious of NBTs. Yet, we will provide some hints on two additional facets of the debate: the possible motivations for certain groups to embrace views which are utterly anti-scientific, and the shaky regulatory destiny of NBTs in the European Union.

An important contribution to tackling one of humanity’s greatest challenges

At first glance, intellectual property rights and climate change might not seem the most comfortable of bedfellows but, in this detailed and expansive text, Wei Zhuang systematically explains the importance of the former to the latter, and suggests what might need to change in order to improve humanity’s chances of combating climate change. Dr Zhuang justifiably takes the overwhelming scientific consensus that human-induced climate change (often called ‘global warming’) is real, and threatens the survival of humanity as we know it, pretty much as read. As noted by Ban Ki-moon in 2008, it is ‘the defining challenge of our era’. The author then introduces environmentally sound technologies (ESTs) as a critical tool in mitigating such climate change (there is no universal definition of ESTs, but key components are reduced use of resources and generation of pollutants, and greater sustainability, so would include eg wind and solar energy technologies). Dr Zhuang suggests that innovation in, and adoption of, ESTs is highly concentrated in a small number of developing countries. Indeed, the author notes that six countries—the USA, Japan, Germany, France, the UK and (South) Korea—account for 78 per cent of the world’s EST patents; as a proxy for adoption, around 80 per cent of patent licence fee payments are made from OECD countries (ie the most developed countries), and 98 per cent of such payments are received into such countries. While it is arguably better that such technologies are concentrated in the most developed countries (in general, the leading emitters of greenhouse gases) than in less developed (and less polluting) countries, the author is undoubtedly right to note that greater transfer of ESTs to developing countries is highly desirable as part of the necessary transition to a low-carbon global economy. Dr Zhuang therefore asks, and answers, the question of whether the existing international legal framework covering IPRs is adequate to incentivize adequate transfer of ESTs and, if not, how the system might be changed.

Responding to misinformation and criticisms regarding United States cat predation estimates

Misinformation (or denialism), the disingenuous assertion of information contradicting overwhelming scientific consensus, increasingly poses a challenge for invasion biology. The issue of free-ranging domestic cats (Felis catus) provides an example of this misinformation: overwhelming consensus shows that cats are invasive species that impact wildlife and human health yet free-ranging cat advocates propagate misinformation about such impacts to support policies keeping cats on the landscape. These advocates also attempt to discredit peer-reviewed scientific research on cat impacts, as exemplified by the response to a high-profile paper estimating cats annually kill billions of U.S. birds and mammals (Loss et al. in Nat Commun 4:1396, 2013). Although favorably received by scientific and invasive species management communities, an effort was launched to discredit this paper by criticizing its methods, including a report commissioned by a feral cat advocacy group and a post by a feral cat blogger. These same organizations and individuals have made similar criticisms at scientific conferences and policy roundtables. Given the realized effects of this campaign in influencing invasive species policy, we here respond to these criticisms and show they are characterized by numerous errors and misrepresentations. We conclude that the criticisms are part of the broader campaign to fabricate doubt about outdoor cat impacts and stymie policies favoring removal of cats from the landscape. Because misinformation surrounding cats is emblematic of the broader issue of misinformation and denialism, this response will not only facilitate evidence-based policy for managing cats but also stimulate research and discussion into causes and impacts of misinformation in invasion biology.

Changes in perceived scientific consensus shift beliefs about climate change and GM food safety.

Despite an overwhelming scientific consensus, a sizable minority of people doubt that human activity is causing climate change. Communicating the existence of a scientific consensus has been suggested as a way to correct individuals’ misperceptions about human-caused climate change and other scientific issues, though empirical support is mixed. We report an experiment in which psychology students were presented with consensus information about two issues, and subsequently reported their perception of the level of consensus and extent of their endorsement of those issues. We find that messages about scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change and the safety of genetically modified food shift perceptions of scientific consensus. Using mediation models we also show that, for both these issues, high consensus messages also increase reported personal agreement with the scientific consensus, mediated by changes in perceptions of a scientific consensus. This confirms the role of perceived consensus in informing personal beliefs about climate change, though results indicate the impact of single, one-off messages may be limited.

A ‘burning opportunity’ for human rights: Using human rights as a catalyst for policies to mitigate the health risk of household air pollution

With over 3 billion people dependent on traditional cooking and heating technologies, efforts to address the health burden of exposure to household air pollution (HAP), as well as other sociodemographic impacts associated with energy poverty, are central to sustainable development objectives. Yet despite overwhelming scientific consensus on the health burden of HAP exposure, particularly harms to impoverished women and children in developing countries, advocates currently lack a human rights framework to mitigate HAP exposure through improved access to cleaner household energy systems. This article examines the role of human rights in framing state obligations to mitigate HAP exposure, supporting environmental health for the most vulnerable through intersectional obligations across the human right to health, the collective right to development, and women’s and children’s rights. Drawing from human rights advocacy employed in confronting the public health harms of tobacco, we argue that rights-based civil society advocacy can structure the multi-sectoral policies necessary to address the impacts of HAP exposure and energy poverty, facilitating accountability for human rights implementation through international treaty bodies, national judicial challenges, and local political advocacy. We conclude that there is a pressing need to build civil society capacity for a rights-based approach to cleaner household energy policy as a means to address the environmental health effects of energy poverty.

A 'burning opportunity' for human rights: using human rights as a catalyst for policies to mitigate the health risk of household air pollution.

With over 3 billion people dependent on traditional cooking and heating technologies, efforts to address the health burden of exposure to household air pollution (HAP), as well as other sociodemographic impacts associated with energy poverty, are central to sustainable development objectives. Yet despite overwhelming scientific consensus on the health burden of HAP exposure, particularly harms to impoverished women and children in developing countries, advocates currently lack a human rights framework to mitigate HAP exposure through improved access to cleaner household energy systems. This article examines the role of human rights in framing state obligations to mitigate HAP exposure, supporting environmental health for the most vulnerable through intersectional obligations across the human right to health, the collective right to development, and women's and children's rights. Drawing from human rights advocacy employed in confronting the public health harms of tobacco, we argue that rights-based civil society advocacy can structure the multi-sectoral policies necessary to address the impacts of HAP exposure and energy poverty, facilitating accountability for human rights implementation through international treaty bodies, national judicial challenges and local political advocacy. We conclude that there is a pressing need to build civil society capacity for a rights-based approach to cleaner household energy policy as a means to alleviate the environmental health effects of energy poverty.

Assessing the Influence of an Educational Presentation on Climate Change Beliefs at an Evangelical Christian College

ABSTRACTDespite an overwhelming scientific consensus, a significant proportion of the American public continues to reject anthropogenic climate change. This disparity is particularly evident among evangelical Christians, for whom theological conservatism, general scientific skepticism, political affiliations, and sociocultural influences may impede their acceptance of human-caused climate change. Climate advocates have attempted to engage the evangelical community through various educational initiatives; lacking empirical measurement, however, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding the efficacy of such programs. Here, we present the results of a study that addresses this lack by adapting questions from the Six Americas of Global Warming survey to measure the climate change beliefs of undergraduate students at an evangelical Christian college before and after attending a lecture by a Christian climate scientist. The 88 participants who successfully completed a pre- and posttreatment survey were divided into three groups: the first attended a live lecture, the second attended a recorded lecture, and the third attended a similar version of the same recorded lecture in which the presenter removed material addressing common misconceptions about climate change. The results demonstrate a significant increase in the proclimate beliefs for students in all three groups. There was no significant difference between the impacts of the live and recorded lectures or between the recorded lectures with and without misconceptions. These findings affirm the value of climate education among evangelicals; highlight the potential utility of such presentations, both recorded and live; and point to opportunities for research in the area of faith-based climate communication.

Metaphors for the War (or Race) against Climate Change

ABSTRACTDespite overwhelming scientific consensus, millions of Americans fail to view climate change as a pressing threat. How can we address this disconnect between science and public opinion? In the present study, we investigated the role of metaphorical framing in shaping attitudes toward climate change. Participants read a brief article that metaphorically described US efforts to reduce carbon emissions as a war or race against climate change, or non-metaphorically described it as the issue of climate change. We further manipulated whether these emission-reduction goals emphasized the relatively near or distant future. We found that, compared to the race frame, the war metaphor made people perceive more urgency and risk surrounding climate change and express a greater willingness to increase conservation behavior, irrespective of the time horizon. Those who read the non-metaphorical report tended to respond in between these two extremes. We discuss the implications of these findings for climate communications.