Don’t gloss over social science! a response to: Glavovic et al. (2021) ‘the tragedy of climate change science’
Author(s) / Creator(s)
Cologna, Viktoria
Oreskes, Naomi
Abstract / Description
Glavovic et al. ([2021]. The tragedy of climate change science. Climate and Development, 1–5.) recently argued that the science-society contract is broken and that – given the urgency of climate change – scientists should agree to a moratorium on climate change research. We are grateful to the authors for their courage to spark this very important discussion, even if we disagree with their proposed solution. They consider three solutions: continuing with science as usual, increasing social science research, and declaring a moratorium on climate change research and future IPCC reports; they argue that only the latter presents a real prospect for restoring the science-society contract. We certainly agree that the world has largely failed to act on the scientific knowledge on climate change. However, we disagree that the science-society contract is broken and that a moratorium on climate change research is a tenable or meaningful solution. Instead, we suggest that natural scientists have done their job effectively, but that powerful political and cultural forces are standing in the way of effective climate change mitigation and more social science and humanities research is needed to expose and address these power structures.
Persistent Identifier
Date of first publication
2022-05-18
Journal title
Climate and Development
Volume
14
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Publication status
acceptedVersion
Review status
reviewed
Is version of
Citation
-
Response to Glavovic_Cologna&Oreskes_PsychArchives.pdfAdobe PDF - 139.74KBMD5: 4a78734dc3185000dc108454ea80ffe1
-
There are no other versions of this object.
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Cologna, Viktoria
-
Author(s) / Creator(s)Oreskes, Naomi
-
PsychArchives acquisition timestamp2024-01-10T12:44:32Z
-
Made available on2024-01-10T12:44:32Z
-
Date of first publication2022-05-18
-
Abstract / DescriptionGlavovic et al. ([2021]. The tragedy of climate change science. Climate and Development, 1–5.) recently argued that the science-society contract is broken and that – given the urgency of climate change – scientists should agree to a moratorium on climate change research. We are grateful to the authors for their courage to spark this very important discussion, even if we disagree with their proposed solution. They consider three solutions: continuing with science as usual, increasing social science research, and declaring a moratorium on climate change research and future IPCC reports; they argue that only the latter presents a real prospect for restoring the science-society contract. We certainly agree that the world has largely failed to act on the scientific knowledge on climate change. However, we disagree that the science-society contract is broken and that a moratorium on climate change research is a tenable or meaningful solution. Instead, we suggest that natural scientists have done their job effectively, but that powerful political and cultural forces are standing in the way of effective climate change mitigation and more social science and humanities research is needed to expose and address these power structures.en
-
Publication statusacceptedVersionen
-
Review statusrevieweden
-
ISSN1756-5529
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/9532
-
Persistent Identifierhttps://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.14062
-
Language of contenteng
-
PublisherTaylor & Francisen
-
Is version ofhttps://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2022.2076647
-
Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)150
-
TitleDon’t gloss over social science! a response to: Glavovic et al. (2021) ‘the tragedy of climate change science’en
-
DRO typearticleen
-
Journal titleClimate and Developmenten
-
Volume14
-
Visible tag(s)Accepted Manuscripten