Book Review: Edwards, P. N. (2010). A Vast Machine: Computer Models, Climate Data, and the Politics of Global Warming. Cambridge: MIT Press. 518 pp
In: Science communication, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 266-267
ISSN: 1552-8545
9 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Science communication, Band 33, Heft 2, S. 266-267
ISSN: 1552-8545
BACKGROUND: Rural health professionals stand at the forefront of community response to climate change, but few studies have assessed their perceptions of the threat. Further, no previous study has compared the opinions of environmental to public health professionals or extensively analyzed the factors related to these experts' climate beliefs, risk perceptions, and issue prioritization. METHODS: In conjunction with the Montana Climate Assessment's 2021 Special Report on Climate Change and Human Health, the 479 members of the Montana Public Health Association and Montana Environmental Health Association were surveyed during September–October 2019, with 39% completing the survey. We summarized descriptive data about their perceptions of local climate-related changes and their beliefs that global warming is happening, is mostly human-caused, is a risk to human health, and that their offices and others should take action. We also evaluated which sociodemographic and risk perception factors related to these climate beliefs, risk perceptions, and workplace issue prioritization. RESULTS: Health professionals in Montana, a politically conservative state, demonstrated high levels of awareness that global warming is happening, human-caused, and a threat to human health, well above reported rates of public concern. Eighty-eight percent said that global warming is occurring and 69% that it is mostly anthropogenic. Sixty-nine percent said that their own health was already affected by climate, and 86% said they were already seeing at least one climate change-related event in their communities. Seventy-two percent said that their departments should be preparing to deal with climate change's health effects, but just 30% said that it is currently happening. We found no statistically significant differences between Montana environmental health and public health professionals in regression models predicting climate beliefs, risk perception, and prioritization. As in studies of the public, political ideology and the observation of ...
BASE
In: Climatic Change Letters, Forthcoming
SSRN
In: Environmental management: an international journal for decision makers, scientists, and environmental auditors, Band 65, Heft 5, S. 678-688
ISSN: 1432-1009
Climate change is already taking a toll on human health, a toll that is likely to increase in coming decades. The relationship between risk perceptions and vulnerability to climate change's health threats has received little attention, even though an understanding of the dynamics of adaptation among particularly susceptible populations is becoming increasingly important. We demonstrate that some people whose health will suffer the greatest harms from climate change—due to social vulnerability, health susceptibility, and exposure to hazards—already feel they are at risk. In a 2013 survey we measured Maryland residents' climate beliefs, health risk perceptions, and household social vulnerability characteristics, including medical conditions (n = 2126). We paired survey responses with secondary data sources for residence in a floodplain and/or urban heat island to predict perceptions of personal and household climate health risk. General health risk perceptions, political ideology, and climate beliefs are the strongest predictors. Yet, people in households with the following characteristics also see themselves at higher risk: members with one or more medical conditions or disabilities; low income; racial/ethnic minorities; and residence in a floodplain. In light of these results, climate health communication among vulnerable populations should emphasize protective actions instead of risk messages.
BASE
In: Science and public policy: journal of the Science Policy Foundation, Band 47, Heft 4, S. 536-547
ISSN: 1471-5430
In transdisciplinary fields such as science policy, research agendas do not evolve organically from within disciplines but instead require stakeholders to engage in active co-creation. 'Big questions' exercises fulfill this need but simultaneously introduce new challenges in their subjectivity and potential bias. By applying Q methodology to an exercise in developing an international collaborative research agenda for legislative science advice (LSA), we demonstrate a technique to illustrate stakeholder perspectives. While the LSA international respondents—academics, practitioners, and policymakers—demonstrated no difference in their research priorities across advisory system roles, the analysis by developing and developed nation status revealed both common interests in institutional- and systems-level research and distinct preferences. Stakeholders in developing nations prioritized the design of advisory systems, especially in low- and middle-income countries, while those in developed countries emphasized policymaker evidence use. These differences illustrate unique regional research needs that should be met through an international agenda for LSA.
In: Environmental science & policy, Band 66, S. 314-323
ISSN: 1462-9011
The quantity and complexity of scientific and technological information provided to policymakers have been on the rise for decades. Yet little is known about how to provide science advice to legislatures, even though scientific information is widely acknowledged as valuable for decision-making in many policy domains. We asked academics, science advisers, and policymakers from both developed and developing nations to identify, review and refine, and then rank the most pressing research questions on legislative science advice (LSA). Experts generally agree that the state of evidence is poor, especially regarding developing and lower-middle income countries. Many fundamental questions about science advice processes remain unanswered and are of great interest: whether legislative use of scientific evidence improves the implementation and outcome of social programs and policies; under what conditions legislators and staff seek out scientific information or use what is presented to them; and how different communication channels affect informational trust and use. Environment and health are the highest priority policy domains for the field. The context-specific nature of many of the submitted questions—whether to policy issues, institutions, or locations—suggests one of the significant challenges is aggregating generalizable evidence on LSA practices. Understanding these research needs represents a first step in advancing a global agenda for LSA research. ; Additional co-authors: Harris Francis Andoh, Laura dos Santos Boeira, Pieter van Boheemen, Robert Cook-Deegan, Gavin Costigan, Meghnath Dhimal, Martín Hernán Di Marco, Donatus Dube, Abiodun Egbetokun, Jauad El Kharraz, Liliana Estrada Galindo, Mark W. J. Ferguson, José Franco, Zach Graves, Emily Hayter, Alma Cristal Hernández-Mondragón, Abbi D. Hobbs, Kerry L. Holden, Carel IJsselmuiden, Ayodele Samuel Jegede, Snezana B. Krstic, Jean-Marie Mbonyintwali, Sisay Derso Mengesha, Tomas Michalek, Hiroshi Nagano, Michael Nentwich, Ali Nouri, Peter Dithan Ntale, Olusegun M. ...
BASE
In: Akerlof , K , Tyler , C , Foxen , S E , Heath , E , Gual Soler , M , Allegra , A , Cloyd , E T , Hird , J A , Nelson , S M , Nguyen , C T , Gonnella , C J , Berigan , L A , Abeledo , C R , Al-Yakoub , T A , Andoh , H F , dos Santos Boeira , L , van Boheemen , P , Cairney , P , Cook-Deegan , R , Costigan , G , Dhimal , M , Di Marco , M H , Dube , D , Egbetokun , A , El Kharraz , J , Galindo , L E , Ferguson , M W J , Franco , J , Graves , Z , Hayter , E , Hernández-Mondragón , A C , Hobbs , A D , Holden , K L , IJsselmuiden , C , Jegede , A S , Krstic , S B , Mbonyintwali , J-M , Mengesha , S D , Michalek , T , Nagano , H , Nentwich , M , Nouri , A , Ntale , P D , Ogundele , O M , Omenma , J T , Pau , L-F , Peha , J M , Prescott , E M , Ramos-Vielba , I & Roberts , R 2019 , ' A collaboratively derived international research agenda on legislative science advice ' , Palgrave Communications , vol. 5 , no. 1 , 108 . https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-019-0318-6
The quantity and complexity of scientific and technological information provided to policymakers have been on the rise for decades. Yet little is known about how to provide science advice to legislatures, even though scientific information is widely acknowledged as valuable for decision-making in many policy domains. We asked academics, science advisers, and policymakers from both developed and developing nations to identify, review and refine, and then rank the most pressing research questions on legislative science advice (LSA). Experts generally agree that the state of evidence is poor, especially regarding developing and lower-middle income countries. Many fundamental questions about science advice processes remain unanswered and are of great interest: whether legislative use of scientific evidence improves the implementation and outcome of social programs and policies; under what conditions legislators and staff seek out scientific information or use what is presented to them; and how different communication channels affect informational trust and use. Environment and health are the highest priority policy domains for the field. The context-specific nature of many of the submitted questions—whether to policy issues, institutions, or locations—suggests one of the significant challenges is aggregating generalizable evidence on LSA practices. Understanding these research needs represents a first step in advancing a global agenda for LSA research.
BASE