Between Conflation and Denial – The politics of climate expertise in Australia (original) (raw)
Related papers
Climate Change Sceptical Frames: The Case of Seven Australian Sceptics
Australian Journal of Politics & History, 2017
Climate change sceptics are known for their resistance to proactive climate response policies, especially policies aimed at restricting greenhouse gas emissions. It is often assumed that scepticism about the science behind climate change would lead directly to outright rejection of all proactive climate policies aimed at mitigating emissions and adapting to climate-induced changes already under way. This article demonstrates the variability among the climate policy views of seven well-known Australian climate change sceptics in the period 2007-2012. Using the lens of frame-analysis, we unpack some key sceptic rationales and narratives. The analysis shows that sceptics share a master frame that privileges individualist-libertarian-progress-social order values, which are thus likely to conflict with the values implicit in conventional climate policy remedies. The analysis also shows that sceptical preoccupations diverge at more detailed framing levels, with various practical concerns and fears often at the centre of sceptical argumentation
In Australia, climate change is a particularly contentious issue of public debate, with approximately half the population rejecting the scientific consensus on the reality of anthropogenic climate change. This widespread scepticism may have serious implications in regard to public support for the implementation of climate change mitigation policies. This study seeks to gain insights into how lay Australians, both climate change “acceptors” and “sceptics”, perceive and understand climate change. In order to do so, the study utilises data from in-depth qualitative interviews conducted with thirteen members of the Australian public during June 2012. Specifically, the data from these interviews are analysed to examine similarities and differences in the interview subject’s Mental Models about climate change (and factors that may have influenced the construction of these Mental Models). The results of this analysis are assessed having regard to the Public Understanding of Science (PUS) framework, along with previous PUS studies specifically related to climate change. In particular, the applicability of the two main theoretical arms of PUS, the Deficit Model and the Contextual Approach, to the public understanding of climate change is examined. The results of the study reveal that most of the interview subjects have a clear understanding of the basic principles of climate change science, as well as the basic arguments of prominent climate change sceptics. Significantly, the accuracy of the interview subjects’ Mental Models about climate change science does not seem to be related to their position as either an “acceptor” or “sceptic.” Whereas, levels of trust in climate scientists, and a willingness to differentiate between the legitimacy of information produced by climate change experts and sceptical commentators, appear to be key differences in the formation of “acceptor” and “sceptic’” Mental Models. In addition, regardless of their position on climate change, all of the interview subjects reveal concerns about sustainable resource use and general environmental protection - issues that are directly linked to climate change mitigation. Therefore, by focussing on these commonalities in the Mental Model’s held by members of the public, rather than on the more contentious elements of climate change, it may be possible to design more effective communication strategies to engender public support for addressing the climate change issue.
Book Review: Climate Politics and the Climate Movement in Australia (2013)
If it is now clear beyond all reasonable doubt that scientific consensus has confirmed the anthropogenic causes of global climate change, it clearly doesn't follow that the usual non-scientific channels of communicating the scale of the problem are adequate to the task. References to old social planning terms like 'super wicked' for the problem of global climate change simply no longer cut it, and an ancillary term like 'hyperbolic discounting': policy-speak for burying your head in the sand, now only serves as an example of the kind of banal jargon that effectively elides common understanding.
Beyond 'deniers' and 'believers': towards a map of the politics of climate change
The politics of climate change is not concerned solely with rival scientific claims about global warming but also with how best to govern the climate. Despite this, categories in climate politics remain caught up in the concepts of the ‘science wars’, rarely progressing far beyond the denier/believer-dichotomy. This article aims to nudge climate politics beyond the polarized scientific debates while also counteracting the de-politicisation that comes from assuming scientific claims lead directly to certain policies. First existing typologies of climate political positions are reviewed. Diverse contributions make up an emerging field of ‘climate politology’ but these tend to reduce climate politics either to views on the science or to products of cultural world-views. Drawing on policy analysis literature, a new approach is outlined, where problem-definitions and solution-framings provide the coordinates for a two-dimensional grid. The degree to which climate change is considered a ‘wicked’ problem on the one hand, and individualist or collectivist ways of understanding political agency on the other, provide a map of climate political positions beyond ‘believers’ vs ‘deniers’.
SAGE Open, 2017
The contextual drivers of climate change scepticism are well described and explained in the literature. A key assumption underlying most of the scholarly constructions of the sceptical phenomenon is that the key objections raised by sceptics to climate science and climate policy proposals represent some form of submerged deception or self-delusion on their part. This article refocuses attention on sceptics’ central criticisms, and argues that direct responses to these criticisms should not be neglected in favor of a primary focus on sceptics’ possible inner motivations. The article investigates the core objections raised by sceptics, with particular attention to the views of one prominent Australian sceptic, Andrew Bolt. We argue that some of these objections should be treated as legitimate forms of dissent, and that ongoing constructive responses to such criticisms are necessary to counter the impact of climate change scepticism.
2017
This is a thesis by publication comprising four published research papers and an overarching statement which examine the language and discourse of the climate change debate in Australia since 2007. Published over the period of my candidacy, the papers individually explore a range of questions about the broader underpinning drivers of a unique period of political disruption in Australia – the so-called ‘climate wars’. Thematically, this thesis considers how the scientific urgency and moral imperative for climate change policy action, so powerful in 2007, degenerated into a rancorous political wedge that provided the catalyst for the removal of three sitting prime ministers. The thesis addresses a number of pertinent questions. What is it about climate change as a scientific, environmental, economic, psychological, social, cultural and ethical and ideological phenomenon that offers insight into this remarkable period of Australian political history? What does the political narrative o...
In the lead up to the 2007 election, Kevin Rudd famously amplified the environmental political rhetoric on climate change by referring to it as “the great moral challenge of our generation”. However an examination of three key political speeches on implementing climate change policy, concludes that scant attention has been paid to the notion of the moral and ethical elements of the debate from either side of Australian politics. This paper examines the discursive dimensions of these speeches and considers the broader implications for the status of the climate change policy currently being played out in the Australian political arena.