IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i6p5411-d1101017.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate Change Science and Policy—A Guided Tour across the Space of Attitudes and Outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz

    (Meteorology Lab., Department of Construction and Geoengineering, Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60637 Poznan, Poland)

  • Adam Choryński

    (Meteorology Lab., Department of Construction and Geoengineering, Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60637 Poznan, Poland)

  • Janusz Olejnik

    (Meteorology Lab., Department of Construction and Geoengineering, Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60637 Poznan, Poland)

  • Hans J. Schellnhuber

    (Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 14412 Potsdam, Germany)

  • Marek Urbaniak

    (Meteorology Lab., Department of Construction and Geoengineering, Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60637 Poznan, Poland)

  • Klaudia Ziemblińska

    (Meteorology Lab., Department of Construction and Geoengineering, Faculty of Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, Poznan University of Life Sciences, 60637 Poznan, Poland)

Abstract

The ongoing debate on global climate change has polarized societies since ever. The attitude of an individual towards its anthropogenic nature as well as the need and extent to which human beings should mitigate climate warming can result from a number of factors. Also, since the consequences of such alteration in global climate have no borders and became much more severe in the last decades, it is worth it to shed some more light on a current state of an interplay between scientific findings and climate policies. In this paper, we examine a low-dimensional space of possible attitudes toward climate change, its impact, attribution, and mitigation. Insights into those attitudes and evidence-based interpretations are offered. We review a range of inconvenient truths and convenient untruths, respectively, related to fundamental climate-change issues and derive a systematic taxonomy of climate-change skepticism. In addition, the media track related to climate change is reconstructed by examining a range of cover stories of important magazines and the development of those stories with global warming. In a second major step, we span a low-dimensional space of outcomes of the combined climate science-policy system, where each of the sub-systems may either succeed or fail. We conclude that the most probable outcome from today’s perspective is still the same as it was 12 years ago: a tragic triumph , i.e., the success of climate science and the simultaneous failure of climate policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz & Adam Choryński & Janusz Olejnik & Hans J. Schellnhuber & Marek Urbaniak & Klaudia Ziemblińska, 2023. "Climate Change Science and Policy—A Guided Tour across the Space of Attitudes and Outcomes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5411-:d:1101017
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5411/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/6/5411/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew J. Hornsey & Emily A. Harris & Paul G. Bain & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 622-626, June.
    2. Tara J. Crandon & James G. Scott & Fiona J. Charlson & Hannah J. Thomas, 2022. "A social–ecological perspective on climate anxiety in children and adolescents," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 12(2), pages 123-131, February.
    3. Whitney Fleming & Adam L. Hayes & Katherine M. Crosman & Ann Bostrom, 2021. "Indiscriminate, Irrelevant, and Sometimes Wrong: Causal Misconceptions about Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 157-178, January.
    4. Dim Coumou & Stefan Rahmstorf, 2012. "A decade of weather extremes," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(7), pages 491-496, July.
    5. Lawrence Hamilton, 2011. "Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for interaction effects," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 231-242, January.
    6. Malte Meinshausen & Nicolai Meinshausen & William Hare & Sarah C. B. Raper & Katja Frieler & Reto Knutti & David J. Frame & Myles R. Allen, 2009. "Greenhouse-gas emission targets for limiting global warming to 2 °C," Nature, Nature, vol. 458(7242), pages 1158-1162, April.
    7. Markus Reichstein & Michael Bahn & Philippe Ciais & Dorothea Frank & Miguel D. Mahecha & Sonia I. Seneviratne & Jakob Zscheischler & Christian Beer & Nina Buchmann & David C. Frank & Dario Papale & An, 2013. "Climate extremes and the carbon cycle," Nature, Nature, vol. 500(7462), pages 287-295, August.
    8. Shelley Boulianne & Mireille Lalancette & David Ilkiw, 2020. "“School Strike 4 Climate”: Social Media and the International Youth Protest on Climate Change," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 208-218.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz & Janusz Olejnik & Marek Urbaniak & Klaudia Ziemblińska, 2023. "Storing Carbon in Forest Biomass and Wood Products in Poland—Energy and Climate Perspective," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-18, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nathaniel Geiger & Bryan McLaughlin & John Velez, 2021. "Not all boomers: temporal orientation explains inter- and intra-cultural variability in the link between age and climate engagement," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-20, May.
    2. Sarah Ann Wheeler & Céline Nauges & Alec Zuo, 2021. "How stable are Australian farmers’ climate change risk perceptions? New evidence of the feedback loop between risk perceptions and behaviour," Post-Print hal-04670841, HAL.
    3. Isabel Dorado-Liñán & Blanca Ayarzagüena & Flurin Babst & Guobao Xu & Luis Gil & Giovanna Battipaglia & Allan Buras & Vojtěch Čada & J. Julio Camarero & Liam Cavin & Hugues Claessens & Igor Drobyshev , 2022. "Jet stream position explains regional anomalies in European beech forest productivity and tree growth," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    4. Johansson, Alva & Berggren, Niclas & Nilsson, Therese, 2022. "Intolerance predicts climate skepticism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    5. Llewelyn Hughes & David M. Konisky & Sandra Potter, 2020. "Extreme weather and climate opinion: evidence from Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 723-743, November.
    6. Samuel Pearson & Matthew J. Hornsey & Saphira Rekker & Belinda Wade & Chris Greig, 2024. "Publicly expressed climate scepticism is greatest in regions with high CO2 emissions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(5), pages 1-16, May.
    7. Lindy Williams & David Kay, 2024. "Might I have to move due to climate change? The role of exposure to risk and political partisanship in anticipation of future relocation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(9), pages 1-25, September.
    8. Andrew G. Meyer, 2022. "Do economic conditions affect climate change beliefs and support for climate action? Evidence from the US in the wake of the Great Recession," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 64-86, January.
    9. Ting Liu & Nick Shryane & Mark Elliot, 2022. "Attitudes to climate change risk: classification of and transitions in the UK population between 2012 and 2020," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    10. Yanira Guanche García & Maha Shadaydeh & Miguel Mahecha & Joachim Denzler, 2019. "Extreme anomaly event detection in biosphere using linear regression and a spatiotemporal MRF model," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 98(3), pages 849-867, September.
    11. Joshua A. Basseches & Rebecca Bromley-Trujillo & Maxwell T. Boykoff & Trevor Culhane & Galen Hall & Noel Healy & David J. Hess & David Hsu & Rachel M. Krause & Harland Prechel & J. Timmons Roberts & J, 2022. "Climate policy conflict in the U.S. states: a critical review and way forward," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 1-24, February.
    12. Lorteau, Steve & Muzzerall, Parker & Deneault, Audrey-Ann & Kennedy, Emily Huddart & Rocque, Rhéa & Racine, Nicole & Bureau, Jean-François, 2024. "Do climate concerns and worries predict energy preferences? A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    13. Sebastian Sippel & F Otto, 2014. "Beyond climatological extremes - assessing how the odds of hydrometeorological extreme events in South-East Europe change in a warming climate," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 125(3), pages 381-398, August.
    14. Kathryn T. Stevenson & M. Nils Peterson & Howard D. Bondell, 2018. "Developing a model of climate change behavior among adolescents," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 589-603, December.
    15. E. Keith Smith & Lynn M. Hempel, 2022. "Alignment of values and political orientations amplifies climate change attitudes and behaviors," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(1), pages 1-28, May.
    16. Fankhauser, Samuel & Hepburn, Cameron, 2010. "Designing carbon markets. Part I: Carbon markets in time," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(8), pages 4363-4370, August.
    17. van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. & Botzen, W.J.W., 2015. "Monetary valuation of the social cost of CO2 emissions: A critical survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 33-46.
    18. Simon Levin & Anastasios Xepapadeas, 2021. "On the Coevolution of Economic and Ecological Systems," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 13(1), pages 355-377, October.
    19. Huicai Yang & Shuqin Zhao & Zhanfei Qin & Zhiguo Qi & Xinying Jiao & Zhen Li, 2024. "Differentiation of Carbon Sink Enhancement Potential in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region of China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-15, March.
    20. Kriegler, Elmar, 2011. "Comment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 594-596, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:6:p:5411-:d:1101017. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.