Dominik Collet, Sam White, Scott Bremer, Brita Brenna, Håkon Glørstad, Ingar Mørkestøl Gundersen, Heli Huhtamaa, Kirstin Krüger, Hans W. Linderholm, Fredrik Charpentier Ljungqvist, Astrid E. J. Ogilvie, Helene Løvstrand Svarva, Bergsveinn Þórsson
{"title":"The Little Ice Age: The History and Future of a Traveling Concept","authors":"Dominik Collet, Sam White, Scott Bremer, Brita Brenna, Håkon Glørstad, Ingar Mørkestøl Gundersen, Heli Huhtamaa, Kirstin Krüger, Hans W. Linderholm, Fredrik Charpentier Ljungqvist, Astrid E. J. Ogilvie, Helene Løvstrand Svarva, Bergsveinn Þórsson","doi":"10.1002/wcc.70023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"First coined in the 1930s, with reference to glaciation in North America, the concept of the “Little Ice Age” has undergone continuous revisions. It has traveled academically from glaciology to climatology, archeology, history, and, most recently, climate communication. Over time, it has grown into one of the most discussed topics in the field of climate history and attracts both considerable scholarly interest and public attention. The term “Little Ice Age” has been criticized for oversimplifying climatic change, focusing too much on temperature, and excluding possible effects on humans. Yet it remains a powerful “boundary object” in interdisciplinary cooperation, science communication, and the “environing” of history. In this sense, it serves similar functions as other concepts in the field of human–environment interactions, such as “global warming” or “climate resilience.” This article investigates the contested history and the potential uses of the “Little Ice Age” concept. It explores how the concept encourages interdisciplinary consilience, global perspectives, and public debate. In summary, these aspects are connected and contrasted to the use of similar concepts, such as “climate resilience” and “tipping points” in the sphere of climate–society interactions.This article is categorized under: <jats:list list-type=\"simple\"> <jats:list-item>Climate, History, Society, Culture > Major Historical Eras</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Communication</jats:list-item> <jats:list-item>Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Learning from Cases and Analogies</jats:list-item> </jats:list>","PeriodicalId":501019,"journal":{"name":"WIREs Climate Change","volume":"75 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"WIREs Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.70023","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
First coined in the 1930s, with reference to glaciation in North America, the concept of the “Little Ice Age” has undergone continuous revisions. It has traveled academically from glaciology to climatology, archeology, history, and, most recently, climate communication. Over time, it has grown into one of the most discussed topics in the field of climate history and attracts both considerable scholarly interest and public attention. The term “Little Ice Age” has been criticized for oversimplifying climatic change, focusing too much on temperature, and excluding possible effects on humans. Yet it remains a powerful “boundary object” in interdisciplinary cooperation, science communication, and the “environing” of history. In this sense, it serves similar functions as other concepts in the field of human–environment interactions, such as “global warming” or “climate resilience.” This article investigates the contested history and the potential uses of the “Little Ice Age” concept. It explores how the concept encourages interdisciplinary consilience, global perspectives, and public debate. In summary, these aspects are connected and contrasted to the use of similar concepts, such as “climate resilience” and “tipping points” in the sphere of climate–society interactions.This article is categorized under: Climate, History, Society, Culture > Major Historical ErasPerceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > CommunicationVulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change > Learning from Cases and Analogies