“临界点”会混淆并分散人们对紧急气候行动的注意力

IF 29.6 1区 地球科学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Robert E. Kopp, Elisabeth A. Gilmore, Rachael L. Shwom, Helen Adams, Carolina Adler, Michael Oppenheimer, Anand Patwardhan, Chris Russill, Daniela N. Schmidt, Richard York
{"title":"“临界点”会混淆并分散人们对紧急气候行动的注意力","authors":"Robert E. Kopp, Elisabeth A. Gilmore, Rachael L. Shwom, Helen Adams, Carolina Adler, Michael Oppenheimer, Anand Patwardhan, Chris Russill, Daniela N. Schmidt, Richard York","doi":"10.1038/s41558-024-02196-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tipping points have gained substantial traction in climate change discourses. Here we critique the ‘tipping point’ framing for oversimplifying the diverse dynamics of complex natural and human systems and for conveying urgency without fostering a meaningful basis for climate action. Multiple social scientific frameworks suggest that the deep uncertainty and perceived abstractness of climate tipping points render them ineffective for triggering action and setting governance goals. The framing also promotes confusion between temperature-based policy benchmarks and properties of the climate system. In both natural and human systems, we advocate for clearer, more specific language to describe the phenomena labelled as tipping points and for critical evaluation of whether, how and why different framings can support scientific understanding and climate risk management. The tipping points framing is widely used in climate discussions but receives mixed feedback. This Perspective critiques it for oversimplifying the complexities of natural and social systems and failing to drive effective action, and offers recommendations for future improvements.","PeriodicalId":18974,"journal":{"name":"Nature Climate Change","volume":"15 1","pages":"29-36"},"PeriodicalIF":29.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Tipping points’ confuse and can distract from urgent climate action\",\"authors\":\"Robert E. Kopp, Elisabeth A. Gilmore, Rachael L. Shwom, Helen Adams, Carolina Adler, Michael Oppenheimer, Anand Patwardhan, Chris Russill, Daniela N. Schmidt, Richard York\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41558-024-02196-8\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tipping points have gained substantial traction in climate change discourses. Here we critique the ‘tipping point’ framing for oversimplifying the diverse dynamics of complex natural and human systems and for conveying urgency without fostering a meaningful basis for climate action. Multiple social scientific frameworks suggest that the deep uncertainty and perceived abstractness of climate tipping points render them ineffective for triggering action and setting governance goals. The framing also promotes confusion between temperature-based policy benchmarks and properties of the climate system. In both natural and human systems, we advocate for clearer, more specific language to describe the phenomena labelled as tipping points and for critical evaluation of whether, how and why different framings can support scientific understanding and climate risk management. The tipping points framing is widely used in climate discussions but receives mixed feedback. This Perspective critiques it for oversimplifying the complexities of natural and social systems and failing to drive effective action, and offers recommendations for future improvements.\",\"PeriodicalId\":18974,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Climate Change\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"29-36\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":29.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Climate Change\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02196-8\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Climate Change","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-024-02196-8","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在气候变化的讨论中,引爆点已经获得了相当大的吸引力。在此,我们批评“临界点”框架过度简化了复杂的自然和人类系统的各种动态,并且在没有为气候行动建立有意义的基础的情况下传达紧迫性。多种社会科学框架表明,气候临界点的深度不确定性和可感知的抽象性使它们无法触发行动和设定治理目标。这种框架还造成了基于温度的政策基准与气候系统特性之间的混淆。在自然系统和人类系统中,我们提倡使用更清晰、更具体的语言来描述被标记为临界点的现象,并对不同的框架是否、如何以及为什么能够支持科学理解和气候风险管理进行批判性评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
‘Tipping points’ confuse and can distract from urgent climate action
Tipping points have gained substantial traction in climate change discourses. Here we critique the ‘tipping point’ framing for oversimplifying the diverse dynamics of complex natural and human systems and for conveying urgency without fostering a meaningful basis for climate action. Multiple social scientific frameworks suggest that the deep uncertainty and perceived abstractness of climate tipping points render them ineffective for triggering action and setting governance goals. The framing also promotes confusion between temperature-based policy benchmarks and properties of the climate system. In both natural and human systems, we advocate for clearer, more specific language to describe the phenomena labelled as tipping points and for critical evaluation of whether, how and why different framings can support scientific understanding and climate risk management. The tipping points framing is widely used in climate discussions but receives mixed feedback. This Perspective critiques it for oversimplifying the complexities of natural and social systems and failing to drive effective action, and offers recommendations for future improvements.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nature Climate Change
Nature Climate Change ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES-METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES
CiteScore
40.30
自引率
1.60%
发文量
267
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Nature Climate Change is dedicated to addressing the scientific challenge of understanding Earth's changing climate and its societal implications. As a monthly journal, it publishes significant and cutting-edge research on the nature, causes, and impacts of global climate change, as well as its implications for the economy, policy, and the world at large. The journal publishes original research spanning the natural and social sciences, synthesizing interdisciplinary research to provide a comprehensive understanding of climate change. It upholds the high standards set by all Nature-branded journals, ensuring top-tier original research through a fair and rigorous review process, broad readership access, high standards of copy editing and production, rapid publication, and independence from academic societies and other vested interests. Nature Climate Change serves as a platform for discussion among experts, publishing opinion, analysis, and review articles. It also features Research Highlights to highlight important developments in the field and original reporting from renowned science journalists in the form of feature articles. Topics covered in the journal include adaptation, atmospheric science, ecology, economics, energy, impacts and vulnerability, mitigation, oceanography, policy, sociology, and sustainability, among others.
×
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