Hope and Fear: The Theological Side of Framing Environmental Change

Ehret, Verna Marina

doi:10.1080/21550085.2013.801187

Cited by 7 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hope was not found to be arousing in our study. Although hope is considered as important as fear in encouraging active social actions on climate change (Clingerman & Ehret, 2013), in our study's context, hopeful images disengaged the participants. The fact that images of officials and campaigners did not resonate is also consistent with the climate change visual communication literature, which suggests that overusing photographs of protesters and activist campaigns may lead to a reduction in their effectiveness (Chapman et al, 2016) and, furthermore, that politicians featuring prominently in climate change images may make lay public feel climate change is less salient to them (O'Neill et al, 2013).…”

Section: Consensus and Communicationmentioning

confidence: 59%

Promoting Concern for Climate Change: A Study of Wildfire Photographs Using Q Methodology

Duan

Hepworth

Ormerod

et al. 2021

Science Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study employs Q methodology to identify responses to wildfire imagery and climate change concern. Using photographs shared on Twitter during California’s 2018 Camp Fire, findings reveal three different perspectives on what images evoked the most concern among individuals: catastrophic destruction, smokescapes, and human or animal suffering. Results also reveal the images that evoke the least concern, such as scenes of aid and support and officials’ rescue meetings. These results extend literature on the role of visuals in climate change communication and have implications for the selection of images that appeal to the various perspectives of the broader public.

show abstract

Section: Consensus and Communicationmentioning

confidence: 59%

Promoting Concern for Climate Change: A Study of Wildfire Photographs Using Q Methodology

Duan

Hepworth

Ormerod

et al. 2021

Science Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, Mike Hulme () has suggested three different frames are in use when understanding our fear of climate change: judgment, pathology, and catastrophe (see also Nerlich and Jaspal ). Similarly, Cheryl Hall points out the uneasy extremes of hope and despair that often are used to frame environmental issues such as climate change (Hall ; for a theological response, see Clingerman and Ehret ). Dane Scott () has investigated some of the frames that are used specifically in the case of geoengineering, including seeing geoengineering as an insurance policy or Plan B, and as a technological fix.…”

Section: Geoengineering Theology and The Selfmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such a balance has an analogy in theological reflection on climate change, as seen in Clingerman and Ehret ().…”

mentioning

confidence: 97%

Geoengineering, Theology, and the Meaning of Being Human

Clingerman

2014

Zygon

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of the lack of a meaningful international response to global warming, geoengineering has emerged as a potential technological response to climate change. But, thus far, little attention has been given to how religion impacts our understanding of geoengineering. I defend the need to incorporate theological reflection in the conversation of geoengineering by investigating how geoengineering proposals contain an implicit anthropology. A significant framework for our assessment of geoengineering is the balance of human capability and fallibility-a balance that is at the center of theological and religious interpretations of the meaning of the human condition. Similarly, geoengineering challenges our past understandings of theological anthropology.News reports and international scientific assessments make clear that climate change is a pressing issue. Yet we face political gridlock, personal unwillingness to modify habits and lifestyles, and a hesitation to make the necessary radical changes to social structures. What are we to do? Perhaps out of desperation or due to our confidence in human technological prowess, the lack of a measured answer to global warming has led to more extreme proposals. One such proposal is geoengineering (sometimes called climate engineering), the possibility of large-scale human technological manipulation of the climate in order to forestall temperatures associated with catastrophic global warming. Over the past decade, geoengineering has gone from fanciful science fiction to the pages of academic journals.Although geoengineering has captured the attention of climate scientists, ethicists, and policy analysts, scant attention has been given to how religion and theology impact our understanding of geoengineering. This is unfortunate, because this lack of religious reflection results in a distorted understanding of the impact geoengineering might have. Furthermore, Forrest Clingerman is associate professor in the 6 Forrest Clingerman 7 this lack limits our ability to assess how climate engineering currently is understood by society. Theology-broadly speaking, critical reflection on ultimacy, meaning and the sacred as these are manifested in existencehas much to say about geoengineering, and much to learn from it. In fact, theological reflection can uncover a wide variety of positions related to geoengineering, from a clear condemnation to a cautious acceptance (a spectrum described in more detail elsewhere; see Clingerman 2012). In order to promote further reflection on this subject, the present essay addresses one of the most important areas in which theological reflection should have a voice in the geoengineering debate: the interpretation of the nature of being human, or what can be identified as philosophical and theological theories of anthropology. Climate engineering challenges us to rethink our sense of being human in ways that have profoundly theological implications. I wish to show that a significant framework for our assessment of geoengineering is the balance of human capa...

show abstract

“…While “playing God” is the most obvious example of religion influencing the framing of geoengineering, there are others. The discourse of a coming “climate apocalypse” appeals to religious language to describe geoengineering, the problems it is attempting to solve, or both (Clingerman and Ehret, 2013; Hall, 2013; Hulme, 2008; Skrimshire, 2009). More indirectly, religious belief often orients the ideals that frame this debate: hope that human beings can live harmoniously in nature without technological intervention resonates with stories of Eden shared by the three major monotheistic religions, while hope that human beings can innovate and engineer a way out of environmental problems is consistent with teachings in the same religions that God gave human beings authoritative “dominion” over other creatures and the Earth as a whole.…”

Section: Religion Frames Geoengineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Playing God: Why religion belongs in the climate engineering debate

O’Brien¹

2014

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Religion will play an important role in public perceptions of geoengineeringÑthe intentional manipulation of the planetÕs environment to counteract anthropogenic climate change. Religious leaders and scholars can therefore be valuable contributors to the geoengineering debate that has already begun among scientists, engineers, and policy makers. The authors offer four reasons why religion should be part of this debate: Religion is fundamental to how most human beings and societies understand themselves and their place in the world; religion can both challenge and justify scientific authority; religious narratives and symbols can provide frames for understanding geoengineering; and religion offers vocabulary for moral debate. Scholars of theology, ethics, and religious studies can act as mediators between the scientific and faith communities, providing a critical voice in understanding how religion affects the climate conversation, and in engaging a wider public.

show abstract

Hope and Fear: The Theological Side of Framing Environmental Change

Cited by 7 publications

References 5 publications

Promoting Concern for Climate Change: A Study of Wildfire Photographs Using Q Methodology

Promoting Concern for Climate Change: A Study of Wildfire Photographs Using Q Methodology

Geoengineering, Theology, and the Meaning of Being Human

Playing God: Why religion belongs in the climate engineering debate

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About