IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v5y2015i2p2158244015579723.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate Change Scepticism

Author

Listed:
  • Willem Van Rensburg

Abstract

“Climate change scepticism†is a familiar concept in popular and scholarly discourse and generally refers to a family of arguments and individuals that reject, dispute, or question the orthodox view of the climate issue. At close range though, it is evident that the concept is often used casually, without consideration of the complexity of the category it represents. Scholars have varied interpretations of the concept and sometimes actively dispute its meaning and reach. The article proposes that the sceptic phenomenon can be variegated according to the types of sceptic critiques and, additionally, according to sceptics’ attitudinal characteristics. Taxonomies are proposed for each. The types of sceptic arguments are organised in a conceptual hierarchy consisting of two classes of critiques (“core†and “concomitant†), three centers of scepticism (“evidence,†“process,†and “response†), and seven specific objects of scepticism. For the attitudinal characteristics of sceptics, the article takes stock of the different motives, modes, and certainties of belief among sceptics. It proposes some relabeling of the category and subcategories to more accurately describe nuances in sceptic positions, as well as to dispose of unproductive labels. The article suggests how the refined conceptualisation might help observers and policy practitioners to manage the sceptic challenge in a more discerning and constructive fashion.

Suggested Citation

  • Willem Van Rensburg, 2015. "Climate Change Scepticism," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(2), pages 21582440155, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:2158244015579723
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244015579723
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244015579723
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244015579723?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mike Hulme & Martin Mahony, 2013. "Climate panel is ripe for examination," Nature, Nature, vol. 502(7473), pages 624-624, October.
    2. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett & Michael B. Ward, 2013. "Climate change scepticism and public support for mitigation: evidence from an Australian choice experiment," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-47, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    3. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2012. "The Rise of Global Warming Skepticism: Exploring Affective Image Associations in the United States Over Time," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1021-1032, June.
    4. Jaeseung Lee & Trudy Cameron, 2008. "Popular Support for Climate Change Mitigation: Evidence from a General Population Mail Survey," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 41(2), pages 223-248, October.
    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. Willem Van Rensburg & Brian W. Head, 2017. "Climate Change Scepticism: Reconsidering How to Respond to Core Criticisms of Climate Science and Policy," SAGE Open, , vol. 7(4), pages 21582440177, December.
    2. Walter Leal Filho & Mark Mifsud & Petra Molthan-Hill & Gustavo J. Nagy & Lucas Veiga Ávila & Amanda Lange Salvia, 2019. "Climate Change Scepticism at Universities: A Global Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, May.
    3. Teresa Ashe & Marianna Poberezhskaya, 2022. "Russian climate scepticism: an understudied case," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 172(3), pages 1-20, June.
    4. Timo Busch & Lena Judick, 2021. "Climate change—that is not real! A comparative analysis of climate-sceptic think tanks in the USA and Germany," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Amelia Sharman & Richard Perkins, 2017. "Post-decisional logics of inaction: The influence of knowledge controversy in climate policy decision-making," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 49(10), pages 2281-2299, October.

    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. Kohei Imamura & Kohei Takenaka Takano & Nobuhito Mori & Tohru Nakashizuka & Shunsuke Managi, 2016. "Attitudes toward disaster-prevention risk in Japanese coastal areas: analysis of civil preference," 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. 82(1), pages 209-226, May.
    2. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    3. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    4. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    5. Kauder, Björn & Potrafke, Niklas & Ursprung, Heinrich, 2018. "Behavioral determinants of proclaimed support for environment protection policies," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 26-41.
    6. Fouquet, Roger, 2012. "The demand for environmental quality in driving transitions to low-polluting energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 138-149.
    7. Chukwuedozie K. Ajaero & Arinze T. Mozie & Issah N. Abu, 2018. "Migrating from Migratory Waters to Migration of Livelihoods," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 136(1), pages 319-333, February.
    8. Ann L. Owen & Emily Conover & Julio Videras & Stephen Wu, 2012. "Heat Waves, Droughts, and Preferences for Environmental Policy," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(3), pages 556-577, June.
    9. Thomas Lundhede & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Nick Hanley & Niels Strange & Bo Jellesmark Thorsen, 2015. "Incorporating Outcome Uncertainty and Prior Outcome Beliefs in Stated Preferences," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 91(2), pages 296-316.
    10. Glenk, Klaus & Colombo, Sergio, 2013. "Modelling Outcome-Related Risk in Choice Experiments," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(4), pages 1-20.
    11. Tobias Börger & Nick Hanley & Robert J. Johnston & Keila Meginnis & Tom Ndebele & Ghamz E. Ali Siyal & Frans de Vries, 2024. "Equity preferences and abatement cost sharing in international environmental agreements," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 106(1), pages 416-441, January.
    12. Canales, Elizabeth & Bergtold, Jason S. & Williams, Jeffery & Peterson, Jeffrey, 2015. "Estimating farmers’ risk attitudes and risk premiums for the adoption of conservation practices under different contractual arrangements: A stated choice experiment," 2015 AAEA & WAEA Joint Annual Meeting, July 26-28, San Francisco, California 205640, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    13. Torres, Cati & Faccioli, Michela & Riera Font, Antoni, 2017. "Waiting or acting now? The effect on willingness-to-pay of delivering inherent uncertainty information in choice experiments," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 231-240.
    14. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett, 2011. "Household perceptions of climate change and preferences for mitigation action: the case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 417-436, December.
    15. Daniel Musitu-Ferrer & Celeste León-Moreno & Juan Evaristo Callejas-Jerónimo & Macarena Esteban-Ibáñez & Gonzalo Musitu-Ochoa, 2019. "Relationships between Parental Socialization Styles, Empathy and Connectedness with Nature: Their Implications in Environmentalism," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(14), pages 1-20, July.
    16. Alló, Maria & Loureiro, Maria L., 2014. "The role of social norms on preferences towards climate change policies: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 563-574.
    17. Carson, Richard T. & Louviere, Jordan J. & Wei, Edward, 2010. "Alternative Australian climate change plans: The public's views," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 902-911, February.
    18. Andor, Mark A. & Schmidt, Christoph M. & Sommer, Stephan, 2018. "Climate Change, Population Ageing and Public Spending: Evidence on Individual Preferences," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 173-183.
    19. Williams, Galina & Rolfe, John, 2017. "Willingness to pay for emissions reduction: Application of choice modeling under uncertainty and different management options," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 302-311.
    20. Cai, Beilei & Cameron, Trudy Ann & Gerdes, Geoffrey R., 2011. "Distal order effects in stated preference surveys," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(6), pages 1101-1108, April.

    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:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:2:p:2158244015579723. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.