Opening up the societal debate on climate engineering: how newspaper frames are changing

Scholte, Samantha S.K.; Vasileiadou, Eleftheria; Petersen, Arthur C.

doi:10.1080/1943815x.2012.759593

Cited by 54 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 36 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Climate engineering technologies have repeatedly been described as emerging technologies . Our study confirms that they share similarities with other emerging technology areas in their upstream and potentially transformative characteristics.…”

Section: Discussion: Dual High‐stake Technologies?supporting

confidence: 80%

“…In their review of a limited sample of climate engineering papers, Huttunen and Hildén identified a risk–benefit framing as structuring academic discourse on climate engineering, noting that ‘geoengineering is seen as both an opportunity and a threat’ (p. 4). This is similar to framings identified in media discourse on climate engineering, for example, where innovation and risk frames coexist or where the weighing of risks and benefits is prominent …”

Section: Discussion: Dual High‐stake Technologies?supporting

confidence: 53%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dual high‐stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature

Linnér

Wibeck

2015

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature on climate engineering, or geoengineering, covers a wide range of potential methods for solar radiation management or carbon dioxide removal that vary in technical aspects, temporal and spatial scales, potential environmental impacts, and legal, ethical, and governance challenges. This paper presents a comprehensive review of social and natural science papers on this topic since 2006 and listed in SCOPUS and Web of Science. It adds to previous literature reviews by combining analyses of bibliometric patterns and of trends in how the technologies are framed in terms of content, motivations, stakes, and recommendations. Most peer-reviewed climate engineering literature does not weigh the risks and new, additional, benefits of the various technologies, but emphasizes either the potential dangers of climate engineering or the climate change consequences of refraining from considering the research, development, demonstration, and/or deployment of climate engineering technologies. To analyse this polarity, not prevalent in the literature on earlier emerging technologies, we explore the concept of dual high-stake technologies. As appeals to fear have proven ineffective in spurring public engagement in climate change, we may not expect significant public support for climate engineering technologies whose rationale is not to achieve benefits in addition to avoiding the high stakes of climate change. Furthermore, in designing public engagement exercises, researchers must be careful not to steer discussions by emphasizing one type of stake framing over another. A dual high-stake, rather than risk-benefit, framing should also be considered in analysing some emerging technologies with similar characteristics, for example, nanotechnology for pollution control.

show abstract

Section: Discussion: Dual High‐stake Technologies?supporting

confidence: 80%

Section: Discussion: Dual High‐stake Technologies?supporting

confidence: 53%

Dual high‐stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature

Linnér

Wibeck

2015

WIREs Climate Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nerlich and Jaspal argued that the language of active scientists-as key communicators about geoengineering-was shaping the way that geoengineering was being reported and debated (see also Luokkanen et al 2013). Scholte et al (2013) investigated how newspaper frames on geoengineering had evolved over time, from 2002-2011. Their analysis emphasised that while initial media coverage focused on the technical aspects of geoengineering-often describing geoengineering as a 'technofix' (whether positively or negatively)-frames emphasising more ambivalent positions emerged later.…”

Section: Framing Geoengineeringmentioning

confidence: 99%

Like artificial trees? The effect of framing by natural analogy on public perceptions of geoengineering

Corner

Pidgeon

2014

Climatic Change

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The linguistic frames used to describe new areas of science and technology can have a powerful effect on the way that those technologies are perceived by the general public. As geoengineering continues to attract scholarly and policy interest, a number of frames have emerged in the scientific, political and media discourse. In the current paper, we provide an empirical test of one of the most prevalent framing devices: describing geoengineering technologies by analogy to natural processes. In an online experiment with members of the UK public, participants who read a description of geoengineering technologies as analogous to natural processes were more likely to support geoengineering as a response to climate change. In addition, participants' views about the relationship between geoengineering and nature strongly predicted support for geoengineering. Our findings suggest that communicators should be cautious when using natural analogies to communicate about geoengineering with the general public, as frame choice is likely to influence public attitudes and potentially convey undue positivity.

show abstract

“…There is thus widespread awareness among academics of the existence of these views, and yet, to date, there has been very little engagement with these ideas: the topic has only received a passing mention in academic publications (Brewer ; Buck ; Fleming ; Sweeney ), and those examining discourses around geoengineering have, to date, focused on unpicking the discourses of the more powerful actors (Sikka ), or examining mainstream media framings (Porter and Hulme ; Scholte et al . ), rather than these marginal claims.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Climates of suspicion: ‘chemtrail’ conspiracy narratives and the international politics of geoengineering

Cairns

2014

Geographical Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concurrent with growing academic and policy interest in 'geoengineering' the global climate in response to climate change, a more marginal discourse postulating the existence of a climate control conspiracy is also proliferating on the Internet. Here, the term 'chemtrails' is used interchangeably with the term geoengineering to describe the belief that the persistent contrails left by aeroplanes provide evidence that a secret programme of large-scale weather and climate modification is ongoing. Despite recent calls for greater appreciation of the diverse ways in which people conceive of and relate to ideas of climate control, and widespread acknowledgement of the importance of democratic public engagement in governance of geoengineering, the chemtrail conspiracy narrative has received very little attention in academic work to date. This paper builds on work highlighting the instability of the distinction between 'paranoid' and 'normal' views, and examines the chemtrail conspiracy narrative as a discourse rather than a pathology (either psychological or sociological). The analysis finds that while some elements of the chemtrail narrative do not lend themselves to democratic processes of deliberation, and potential for engagement with more mainstream discourse appears to be low, nevertheless certain elements of the discourse (such as the moral outrage at the idea of powerful elites controlling the climate, or the importance of emotional and spiritual connections to weather and climate) highlight concerns of relevance to mainstream geoengineering debates. Furthermore, the pervasive suspicion that characterises the narrative and its reminder of the key role that trust plays in knowledge creation and the justification of beliefs, signals what is likely to be a perennial issue in the emerging international politics of geoengineering.

show abstract

Opening up the societal debate on climate engineering: how newspaper frames are changing

Cited by 54 publications

References 36 publications

Dual high‐stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature

Dual high‐stake emerging technologies: a review of the climate engineering research literature

Like artificial trees? The effect of framing by natural analogy on public perceptions of geoengineering

Climates of suspicion: ‘chemtrail’ conspiracy narratives and the international politics of geoengineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About