Article Accepted Manuscript

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

  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Cologna, Viktoria
  • Author(s) / Creator(s)
    Oreskes, Naomi
  • PsychArchives acquisition timestamp
    2024-01-10T12:44:32Z
  • Made available on
    2024-01-10T12:44:32Z
  • Date of first publication
    2022-05-18
  • 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.
    en
  • Publication status
    acceptedVersion
    en
  • Review status
    reviewed
    en
  • ISSN
    1756-5529
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12034/9532
  • Persistent Identifier
    https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.14062
  • Language of content
    eng
  • Publisher
    Taylor & Francis
    en
  • Is version of
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2022.2076647
  • Dewey Decimal Classification number(s)
    150
  • Title
    Don’t gloss over social science! a response to: Glavovic et al. (2021) ‘the tragedy of climate change science’
    en
  • DRO type
    article
    en
  • Journal title
    Climate and Development
    en
  • Volume
    14
  • Visible tag(s)
    Accepted Manuscript
    en