Orchestrating the climate choir: the boundaries of scientists’ expertise, the relevance of experiential knowledge, and quality assurance in the public climate debate

IF 4.8 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Peter Busch Nicolaisen
{"title":"Orchestrating the climate choir: the boundaries of scientists’ expertise, the relevance of experiential knowledge, and quality assurance in the public climate debate","authors":"Peter Busch Nicolaisen","doi":"10.1007/s10584-024-03697-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Scientific knowledge is at the heart of discussions about climate change. However, it has been proposed that the apparent predominance of climate science in the societal debate should be reconsidered and that a more inclusive approach is warranted. Further, the introduction of new communication technology has made the information environment more fragmented, possibly endangering the quality of societal deliberation on climate change concerns. Using focus group methodology, this paper explores how climate scientists, climate journalists, and citizens perceive scientific experts’ mandate when they communicate publicly, the role of experiential knowledge in discussions of climate-related issues, and who the three actors prefer to guard the quality of the climate information exchanged in the public sphere. The findings show that scientific experts are perceived to carry a high degree of legitimacy, but only within their own narrow specialty, while experiential knowledge was seen as more useful in applied domains of science than in arcane research fields. In the new media landscape, journalists are still generally preferred as gatekeepers by all three actor types.</p>","PeriodicalId":10372,"journal":{"name":"Climatic Change","volume":"45 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Climatic Change","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-024-03697-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Scientific knowledge is at the heart of discussions about climate change. However, it has been proposed that the apparent predominance of climate science in the societal debate should be reconsidered and that a more inclusive approach is warranted. Further, the introduction of new communication technology has made the information environment more fragmented, possibly endangering the quality of societal deliberation on climate change concerns. Using focus group methodology, this paper explores how climate scientists, climate journalists, and citizens perceive scientific experts’ mandate when they communicate publicly, the role of experiential knowledge in discussions of climate-related issues, and who the three actors prefer to guard the quality of the climate information exchanged in the public sphere. The findings show that scientific experts are perceived to carry a high degree of legitimacy, but only within their own narrow specialty, while experiential knowledge was seen as more useful in applied domains of science than in arcane research fields. In the new media landscape, journalists are still generally preferred as gatekeepers by all three actor types.

Abstract Image

编排气候合唱团:科学家专业知识的界限、经验知识的相关性以及公开气候辩论中的质量保证
科学知识是气候变化讨论的核心。然而,有人提出,应重新考虑气候科学在社会辩论中的明显主导地位,并应采取更具包容性的方法。此外,新通信技术的引入使得信息环境更加分散,可能会危及社会对气候变化问题的讨论质量。本文采用焦点小组的方法,探讨了气候科学家、气候记者和公民如何看待科学专家在公开交流时的职责,经验知识在气候相关问题讨论中的作用,以及三方更倾向于由谁来保证在公共领域交流的气候信息的质量。研究结果表明,科学专家被认为具有很高的合法性,但仅限于他们自己狭窄的专业领域,而经验知识被认为在科学应用领域比在神秘的研究领域更有用。在新的媒体环境中,记者仍被所有三种行为者普遍视为守门人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Climatic Change
Climatic Change 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
4.20%
发文量
180
审稿时长
7.5 months
期刊介绍: Climatic Change is dedicated to the totality of the problem of climatic variability and change - its descriptions, causes, implications and interactions among these. The purpose of the journal is to provide a means of exchange among those working in different disciplines on problems related to climatic variations. This means that authors have an opportunity to communicate the essence of their studies to people in other climate-related disciplines and to interested non-disciplinarians, as well as to report on research in which the originality is in the combinations of (not necessarily original) work from several disciplines. The journal also includes vigorous editorial and book review sections.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信