Talking Climate Science in a Skeptical World PETER J.

JACQUESDEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL

SCIENCEUNIVERSITY OF CENTRAL

FLORIDA

& the National Communications Association 99th Annual

Convention, Nov. 22, 2013

Presented to the

The most perplexing feature of current federal environmental policy is that public attitudes, compelling science, and pragmatic solutions matter so little. Poll after poll demonstrates that the American people embrace environmental values and support stronger environmental protections. The mobilization of competent scientific expertise to speak with overwhelming consistency about environmental threats, such as global warming and biodiversity loss, is extraordinary and unprecedented…Yet the prospects for U.S. government leadership on these and other environmental issues is grim. Gridlock appears to be the likely scenario, with the rollback of current environmental policies at least as plausible. How can this be?

Mark Van Putten 2005

To shed light on the increasing use of environmental skepticism and its link to conservative think tanks (funded by industry and conservative foundations) Prof. Dunlap and I examined the growing spate of books espousing such skepticism.

Jacques, Peter J., Riley E. Dunlap, and Mark Freeman. "The Organization of Denial: Conservative Think Tanks and Environmental

Scepticism." Environmental Politics 17, no. 3 (2008): 349 — 85.:This article is available through open access here http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09644010802055576#.Uo0u-MQqhIQ

2008 Study

Study of Books Promoting Environmental Skepticism

Methods and Results

• We compiled a list of 141 English-language books (as close to the entire population as we could achieve) espousing environmental skepticism that were published through 2005, and examined their links to conservative think tanks (CTTs) via (a) authors’ formal affiliations and/or (b) publication by a CTT Press.

• Their numbers exploded in 1992, the year of the Rio Earth Summit.

Books Before and After the 1992 Rio Summit

Percentages:27/141= 19%114/141= 81%

© Riley E. Dunlap

Themes of Environmental Skepticism

1. Based on “junk science”2. Environmental protection lower

priority3. Anti-regulation and anti- corporate

liability 4. Environmentalism threat to Western progress and Northern consumption

1990s?

1990s?

1990s?

1990s?

1990s?

1990s?

130 or 92% of books advocating environmental

skepticism had a connection to one or more CTT

Findings• Elite-led counter-movement primarily in the US, organized by conservative think tanks, was responsible for substantial opposition to environmentalism (anti-environmentalism)

• This counter-movement is probably one reason American environmental commitment has weakened over the last few decades

The next stage of our research focused specifically on climate denial books[This work is also available via open access at the ABS website:http://abs.sagepub.com/content/57/6/699.full.pdf+html ]

Climate denial is defined in the study as the rejection of orthodox climate science regarding:• Trend of climate warming since mid-20th Century• Attribution of humans as the dominate force in contemporary warming

• Dangerous Impact of climate change

Rejection of orthodox climate science is consistently used to to legitimate mitigation Delay which we also measured

Operationalization of Denial

Findings

• Continued commitment from CTTs

• The publication of books rejecting mainstream climate change science had grown dramatically from 2000-2010, but they changed in composition of expertise and authority

• Evidence of domestic popular and international diffusion

Photo: Pöllö

72%

28%

All Climate Denial Books

CTT AffiliationNo Affiliation

87%

13%

Climate Denial Books NOT Self-published

CTT Affiliation No Affiliation

Climate Denial Books Affiliated with Conservative Think Tanks

Climate denial is a conspicuously Anglo affair, and in particular a U.S. peculiarity, but there are signs of internationalization, organized via CTTs

*Based on first author/editor for multi-authored/edited books.**Includes 2 each for Denmark, France and Sweden and 1 each for Czech Republic, Germany, New Zealand and the Netherlands.

66

19

7 610

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

USA UK Canada Australia Others**

Books by Nation of Author/Editor*

Num ber of Books

Climate denial began with leading contrarian scientists but has seen declining need for this authority as the counter-movement becomes more populist

Percentages of Books by Educational Backgrounds of Authors/ Editors by Decade

Natural Science PhD

Other PhD No PhD Total Books

1980’s 80% (4) 0% (0) 20% (1) 100% (5)

1990’s 53% (10) 37% (7) 11% (2) 101%* (19)

Since 2000 33% (28) 17% (14) 50% (42) 100% (84)

All years 39% (42) 19% (21) 42% (45) 100% (108)*Rounding error

Author/Editor Education by Nation

USA UK Other All Books

Nat Sci PhD 48% (32) 11% (2) 35% (8) 39% (42)

Other PhD 18% (12) 32% (6) 13% (3) 19% (21)

Non PhD 33% (22) 58% (11) 52% (12) 42% (45)

Totals 99%*(66) 101%* (19) 100% (23) 100% (108)

*Rounding error

Taken together, 65% of the authors are not natural science Ph.D.s

AT LEAST 90% of climate denial books do not receive peer review• Individuals promoting climate change denial,

including book authors, mainly criticize climate science, and only rarely contribute to the scientific literature.

• They avoid peer-review via blog posts, op-eds, CTT reports and books. A large majority (97 of 108) of the books we examined are self-published or published either by a conservative press or a popular press. Only 11 are issued by publishing houses that specialize in natural science books, and four of these are by Multi-Science Publishing in the UK which also publishes Energy & Environment--a marginal journal best known as an outlet for climate change contrarians.

• None of them are published by a university press. • It therefore seems likely that at most 10 percent

of the books have undergone peer review by individuals with expertise in climate science.

“By its very nature, ecology affords a continuing

critique of man’s operations within the ecosystem,” and if, “taken seriously as an

instrument for the long-run welfare of mankind, [it

would] endanger the assumptions and practices

accepted by modern societies, whatever their doctrinal commitments…”

Paul Sears, 1964Former AAAS President