Content uploaded by Riley E. Dunlap
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Riley E. Dunlap on Dec 20, 2016
Content may be subject to copyright.
Challenging Climate Change: The Denial Countermovement
... The challenge of communicating climate science has been further complicated by fossil fuel interests embarking on an organized disinformation campaign designed to sow doubt about the causes of climate change by questioning and undermining the science and highlighting uncertainties and knowledge gaps (Oreskes and Conway, 2010;Dunlap and McCright, 2015). This included coordinated attacks on outspoken scientists accusing them of alarmism (Mann, 2015), potentially leading climate scientists and advocates to tone down their communications and err on the side of least drama (Brysse et al., 2013). ...
This study examines how the climate action group Extinction Rebellion represents scientific knowledge in the public presentations used to recruit new members. Using a combination of semi-structured interviews and recordings of the talks and comparing them across four versions, we examine how the talk developed and identify four distinct modes of science communication. This analysis also highlights that many factors shape the mode of science communication employed, with the outcome particularly influenced by the editors' concept of how to best motivate action, as well as changes in the wider communication environment and the evolution of the movement's strategic aims. We note the way in which the modes are expressions of “boundary work” seeking to either include or exclude scientific views the group perceives as either aligning with, or running counter to, their political goals.
... The last 30 years were marked by the occurrence of conferences on climate change and the consequent increase in the number of publications on the topic, where scientific discourses gained greater prominence in the different media (DUNLAP and McCRIGHT, 2015;PAINTER et al., 2020). ...
The understanding of scientific topics by society is considered complex and the different media play an important role when trying to transmit information. This study sought to contextualize how the communication of climate change occurred, considering the last 50 years and highlighting the Brazilian scenario, through an integrative literature review. Sixty-three articles were used, from which it became evident that the transmission of news by the media has always presented problems at different scales, having strong political influence and inclinations to the economic moment. The results also showed the high level of disinformation and misinformation, especially in digital media, worldwide. In Brazil, television remains the most used media, but in which little attention is perceived to scientific matters. Finally, the present research brings as a novelty to the state of the art, the indication of important questions to be answered and complemented in this area of study, such as the possibility of works to understand the public's relationship with the various media, with regard to the consumption, interpretation and appropriation of news.
... The conservative side in particular has pushed a much more ideologically cohesive way of influencing the policy process since the 1970s, and donors and their organizations have actively helped pave the way for this development. Under the pretext of advancing education as a charitable endeavor and while remaining under the guise of charitable entities, conservative donors and foundations have actively pushed conservative interests on the political agenda, for example through funding of conservative and libertarian think tanks such as the Heritage Foundation and the K Cato Institute (Dunlap and McCright 2015;Skocpol and Hertel-Fernandez 2016, p. 683;Abelson 2018). ...
Wealthy citizens have influenced public debates and the political process in the United States in many ways, for example through donations or campaign finance. Philanthropy is viewed increasingly as another vehicle of more indirect elite influence. Although institutionally designed to stay above the partisan fray, philanthropy has increasingly been politicized over the last decades against the backdrop of growing partisan polarization. The conservative side in particular has consolidated influence through conservative foundations, think tanks, and new tools of giving such as donor-advised funds. Climate change is one issue in which conservatives have pushed skeptical views and disinformation over the last decades. Conservative actors backed by philanthropic activity have shaped public discourse according to climate-skeptic views and have worked to block political action on climate change while also forming global networks and practices across the Atlantic. While trying to retain the image of academic research and political neutrality, right-wing European think tanks are spreading climate change disinformation, often with connections to their American counterparts and with the support of American conservative donors and foundations. Overall, this paper argues that parts of the philanthropic sector in the United States have abandoned early notions of public charity in order to pursue considerable societal and political goals under the guise of philanthropic activity that provides tax benefits and the image of political neutrality. This paper builds on research that shows how much the interests of the wealthy are reflected in political decision-making in the United States (Bartels 2008; Page, Bartels, and Seawright 2013; Gilens and Page 2014), dark money debates in U.S. politics (Mayer 2017; Oklobdzija 2019), and discussions around the role of philanthropic foundations in a democratic society (Reich 2013, 2018).
... Similarly, respondents' opinions on "Fresh water" are expected to differ since water shortages frequently occur in Japan in some places and not in others. In addition, previous studies have reported that respondents' opinions on "Carbon sequestration and storage" and "Habitats for species" differ depending on their perceptions of climate change and the destruction of habitats for wild plants and animals (e.g., Riley and McCright, 2015;Thiene et al., 2012). From these points of view, it is understandable that respondents' valuations of the four FES differed. ...
... As a form of propaganda, disinformation is not new (Pomerantsev, 2019;Schultz & Godson, 1984). There are several studies of disinformation efforts conducted by the fossil fuel industry, focusing on the discrepancy between what was known -both by individual actors and publicly -and what was promoted through advertising and lobbying (Dunlap & McCright, 2015;Union of Concerned Scientists, 2007). There are also many studies of deceptive marketing and public relations practices by companies and governments relating to GHG emissions (Higham & Font, 2020;Marquis et al., 2016;Miller Gaither & Gaither, 2016). ...
This essay studies the propaganda language of contemporary – or late – fossil capital. Whereas the traditional understanding of propaganda focuses on the dissemination of information (or disinformation) in order to promote a political cause or ideology, I argue that the main form and vehicle of propaganda for late fossil capital is the massive use of terms and tropes, together with particular rhetorical devices, for example, the interpellation of the individual consumer as responsible for mitigating climate change. The essay studies the language of fossil capital based primarily on marketing material by fossil fuel companies, in the US and other Western countries, such as advertising and advertorials, current and archived websites, social media, corporate sustainability reports, as well as material produced by industry organisation such as the American Petroleum Institute and the Heartland Institute. A large part of the material is taken from two North American legal complaints, Connecticut v. Exxon Mobil Corporation (2020) and City of New York v. Exxon Mobil Corp. et al. (2021).
Transdisciplinary sustainability science integrates multiple perspectives, promotes internal reflexivity and situated learning, and engages with multiple stakeholders to solve real-world sustainability challenges. Therefore, transdisciplinary approaches to teaching and learning for sustainability science have traditionally focused on promoting core skills such as systems thinking and science communication. However, as the socio-ecological crises grow in intensity and complexity, so too must our conceptualisation of the core tenants of transdisciplinary sustainability science. To this end, we propose a model for teaching and learning that considers the contemporary pressures of sustainability science praxis. We highlight how social science perspectives can be used to situate considerations of power, justice, and historical responsibility at the centre of sustainability discussions while helping students understand the drivers of transformative change at the individual and societal levels. We outline the benefits of using arts-based approaches in the classroom to facilitate participation and opportunities for creative expression and peer and co-learning. We also discuss the importance of and provide strategies for supporting students in dealing with anxiety and ecological grief. We provide suggestions for assessment strategies that can be used to develop a range of competencies in students, including systems thinking, empowerment and collaboration. In a novel way, we model transdisciplinarity by drawing on insights from the disciplines in which we have expertise, including education, psychology, health, sociology, communications, social work, and science. We also provide an actionable, adaptable model for teaching and learning sustainability science in a rapidly warming world.
This book analyses how liberalism has shaped our understanding of climate change and how liberalism is legitimated in the face of a crisis for which liberalism has no answers.
The language and symbolism we use to make sense of climate change arose in the post WWII liberal institutions of the West. This language and symbolism, in neutralising the philosophical and ideological challenge climate change poses to the legitimacy of free-market liberalism, has also closed off the possibility of imagining a different kind of future for humanity.. The book is structured around a repurposing of the ‘guardrail’ concept, commonly used in climate science narratives to communicate the boundary between safe and dangerous climate change. Five discursive ‘guardrails’ are identified, which define a boundary between safe and dangerous ideas about how to respond to climate change. The theoretical treatment of these issues is complemented with data from interviews with opinion-formers, decision-makers and campaigners, exploring what models of human nature guide and political possibilities their approach to the politics of climate change governance.
This essay considers the catastrophe of anthropogenic climate change in relation to two possible critical-theoretic dispositions. The first, represented by an emblematic passage from Adorno, retains the hope for the realization of a “rational society.” The second, represented by a complementary passage from Foucault, enjoins critical theory to abandon any ambition toward criticizing or transforming society at a totalizing level. We argue that the unfolding climate catastrophe demands a conception of critical theory more in line with the first disposition, and that the relevance of the skeptical disposition is likewise seriously undermined if climate change is taken into account.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.