Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations

Brulle, Robert J.

doi:10.1007/s10584-013-1018-7

Cited by 448 publications

(312 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

276

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Qualitative and historical research has suggested that well-funded and well-organized "contrarian" campaigns are especially important for spreading skepticism or denial where scientific consensus exist-such as in the present case of global warming, or in historical contrarian efforts to create doubt about the link between smoking and cancer (8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15). The primary way that contrarian campaigns create skepticism and ideological polarization is through the production of an alternative contrarian discourse (To be clear, the term discourse here refers to communication in an authoritative fashion about a particular topic or debate), which necessarily takes the form of written text and speech from organizations and individuals (11,14).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change

Farrell

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

438

248

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on large-scale computational data and methods, this research demonstrates how polarization efforts are influenced by a patterned network of political and financial actors. These dynamics, which have been notoriously difficult to quantify, are illustrated here with a computational analysis of climate change politics in the United States. The comprehensive data include all individual and organizational actors in the climate change countermovement (164 organizations), as well as all written and verbal texts produced by this network between 1993-2013 (40,785 texts, more than 39 million words). Two main findings emerge. First, that organizations with corporate funding were more likely to have written and disseminated texts meant to polarize the climate change issue. Second, and more importantly, that corporate funding influences the actual thematic content of these polarization efforts, and the discursive prevalence of that thematic content over time. These findings provide new, and comprehensive, confirmation of dynamics long thought to be at the root of climate change politics and discourse. Beyond the specifics of climate change, this paper has important implications for understanding ideological polarization more generally, and the increasing role of private funding in determining why certain polarizing themes are created and amplified. Lastly, the paper suggests that future studies build on the novel approach taken here that integrates largescale textual analysis with social networks.funding | polarization | politics | computational social science | climate change I deological polarization presents increasingly important challenges for sustainability science and solutions for climate change. Much attention has been given to the outcomes of polarization by demonstrating its effect on individual choices about energy-efficient behavior (1), individual attitudes about climate change (2-6), and variation in individuals' trust in science as a whole, especially among Americans who self-identify as politically conservative (7). Climate change is not the first issue with scientific consensus to become so highly polarized (8, 9), but the magnitude of its ecological and human-health effects-and the socio-political roadblocks for mitigating emissions-have led to a wide body of attitudinal research documenting the current sociopolitical environment of polarization that exists.Despite this fruitful body of individual-level research, we have considerably less data and understanding about the underlying organizational and financial factors that made polarization possible in the first place. Qualitative and historical research has suggested that well-funded and well-organized "contrarian" campaigns are especially important for spreading skepticism or denial where scientific consensus exist-such as in the present case of global warming, or in historical contrarian efforts to create doubt about the link between smoking and cancer (8-15). The primary way that contrarian campaigns create skepticism and ideological polarizati...

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…who participate in the counter movement (14,15). This study combines-and significantly extends-these important approaches with the use of novel computational data-collection methods.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change

Farrell

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

438

248

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It also exploited its close relationship with the administration of President George W. Bush to pressure the administration to remove top scientists from leadership roles in the IPCC and the US National Climate Assessment and to promote federal policies driving further reliance on fossil energy (UCS 2007;Brulle 2014). In 2009, Chevron provided transportation for its employees to attend faux BEnergy Citizens'r allies organized by the American Petroleum Institute (API), purporting to demonstrate grassroots opposition to climate policies (Grandia 2009).…”

Section: What Did the Industrial Carbon Producers Do Instead?mentioning

confidence: 99%

The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responsibility for climate change lies at the heart of societal debate over actions to address it. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change established the principle of Bcommon but differentiated responsibilities^among nations, suggesting that industrialized nations that had produced the greatest share of historic emissions bore particular responsibility for preventing dangerous interference with the climate system. But climate responsibilities can be attributed in other ways as well. Here, we explore the conceptual territory of responsibility. We consider the distinctive responsibilities of the major investor-owned producers of fossil fuels, assessing the actions these companies took and could have taken to act upon the scientific evidence of climate change. We conclude that major investor-owned fossil energy companies carry significant responsibility for climate change. It is still possible for these companies to effectively contribute to a solution. Significant progress in reducing emissions and limiting climate change could be achieved if companies 1) unequivocally communicate to the public, shareholders, and policymakers the climate risks resulting from continued use of their products, and therefore the need for restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions consistent with the 2°C global temperature target; 2) firmly reject contrary claims by industry trade associations and lobbying groups; and, 3) accelerate their transition to the production of low-carbon energy. Evidence from history strongly suggests that a heightened societal focus on their climate responsibilities will be needed to hasten such a transition.

show abstract

“…En les últimes dècades, aquesta Cambra de Comerç ha rebut aportacions de nombrosos grups relacionats amb la indús-tria dels combustibles fòssils per ajudar a combatre la legislació sobre el clima i per qüestionar el coneixement científic sobre aquests problemes. Robert Brulle (2014) ha buscat l'origen del finança-ment que ha prestat la indústria dels combustibles fòssils, a través d'una complexa xarxa de grups com el Donors Trust, per a identificar com es difonen les veus d'alguns escèptics, opositors i negacionistes en l'opinió pública.…”

Section: ■ Les Arrels De L'escepticisme Ambientalunclassified

Consensus and contrarianism on climate change: How the USA case informs dynamics elsewhere

Boykoff

2015

Mètode

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Enfront d'una situació general de consens sobre els punts clau del canvi climàtic, un grup heterogeni conegut com «escèptics», «opositors» o «negacionistes» (en anglès skeptics, contrarians i deniers respectivament) ha marcat el debat en l'opinió pública entorn del canvi climàtic i de les mesures polítiques necessàries per a abordar-lo. Aquest text se centra en el context nord-americà i explora alguns dels aspectes socials, polítics i econòmics implicats, així com els trets culturals i psicològics que han infl uït en l'opinió pública, les intencions, creences, punts de vista i comportaments en relació amb la ciència del canvi climàtic i com s'ha de gestionar a llarg termini. Aquest article defensa que l'exemple dels EUA pot aportar informació sobre l'evolució del debat en altres llocs; per defi nició, és important considerar aquests elements contextuals per a millorar la infl uència dels «escèptics», «opositors» i «negacionistes» en el debat actual sobre el canvi climàtic.Paraules clau: consens, escepticisme, negacionisme, canvi climàtic, opinió pública. Al setembre de 2014, el president dels Estats Units, Barack Obama, va pronunciar un discurs en la Cimera sobre el Clima de les Nacions Unides sobre la gravetat del canvi climàtic i la necessitat d'abordar-lo. Va afirmar: «Hi ha un tema que definirà aquest segle més que cap altre. Parle de l'amenaça immediata i creixent del canvi climàtic... Ningú se n'escapara, [i] nosaltres farem la nostra part...» (Mauldin i Sparshott, 2014).En acabar la seua intervenció, molts es van lamentar, com és habitual, per l'abisme que separa el consens científic sobre la contribució humana al canvi climàtic i la falta de mesures polítiques d'actuació. Una bretxa eixamplada per les posicions obstruccionistes d'aquells que anomenem normalment «es-cèptics», «opositors» o «negacionis-tes». Aquests punts de vista contra corrent s'han explicat de diverses maneres: que els sustenten còmplices de les indústries dels combustibles fòssils o polítics (per exemple els congressistes republicans dels EUA), acadèmics renegats o aficionats sense formació (Dunlap, 2013;Victor, 2014).Per exemple, la directora de l'Agència Nord-americana per a la Protecció del Medi Ambient (EPA), Gina McCarthy, va argumentar que calia actuar no «a pesar de l'economia», sinó «justament per ella», i va afegir enèr-gicament que és «trist» que els qui neguen el canvi climàtic «s'amaguen darrere de la paraula economia per a protegir els seus interessos particulars» (Barron-Lopez, 2014). Un altre exemple és el del senador Bernie Sanders, que va comentar: «Això és una crisi, i hem d'abordar-la. La mala notícia és que els republicans del Congrés, molts dels quals ni tan sols creuen en el consens científic sobre l'escalfament global i l'amenaça cada vegada major que representa per al nostre planeta, continuen blocant les iniciatives legislatives per a afrontar la crisi planetària» (Cox, 2014). A primera vista, hom podria fins i tot considerar aquesta dissonància com a soroll en el sistema i desestimar-la. Mantenir-se ferm davan...

show abstract

Institutionalizing delay: foundation funding and the creation of U.S. climate change counter-movement organizations

Cited by 448 publications

References 22 publications

Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change

Corporate funding and ideological polarization about climate change

The climate responsibilities of industrial carbon producers

Consensus and contrarianism on climate change: How the USA case informs dynamics elsewhere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About