Purpose of ReviewThrough a systematic search of English language peer-reviewed studies, we assess how health professionals and the public, worldwide, perceive the health implications of climate change.Recent FindingsAmong health professionals, perception that climate change is harming health appears to be high, although self-assessed knowledge is low, and perceived need to learn more is high. Among the public, few North Americans can list any health impacts of climate change, or who is at risk, but appear to view climate change as harmful to health. Among vulnerable publics in Asia and Africa, awareness of increasing health harms due to specific changing climatic conditions is high. Americans across the political and climate change opinion spectra appear receptive to information about the health aspects of climate change, although findings are mixed.SummaryHealth professionals feel the need to learn more, and the public appears open to learning more, about the health consequences of climate change.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s40572-018-0190-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
This paper argues that all students, whatever their linguistic identities, can benefit from an explicit and structured introduction to academic writing. It argues that this tuition should no longer be seen as support, and therefore marginalised, but as a transformative process of acculturation that needs to be located in the mainstream of the university. For illustration, it examines a course that does precisely this and which, in a radical departure from other practices, is embedded in the curriculum as a requirement. It discusses the theoretical contexts of the course and shows how the content and methodology is underpinned and informed by new understandings of the cultural, linguistic and epistemological aspects of acquiring academic literacies.
Recent reviews describe academic scholarship on environmental communication as a subdiscipline of communication studies focused on mass media. However, these reviews may not provide a full picture of the field. We searched one of the most comprehensive citation databases (Scopus) for articles published from 1970 to 2019 containing the root terms environment* communicat*. The dataset (n = 474) revealed an increase over time in the number of journals that publish environmental communication studies and the breadth of their National Science Foundation disciplinary categorizations. Climate communication, corporate social responsibility, and public engagement and participation represent the most frequent abstract topics. Through co-citation analysis of journals cited in references, we found that the foundational literatures informing the field have grown into dense, interconnected networks across disparate areas of scholarship that span the social sciences, natural sciences, engineering, and business. This disciplinary convergence is a positive sign for the field’s potential to address problems of societal importance.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.