Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Scopus||Web of Science®||Altmetric|
|Title:||Statistical language backs conservatism in climate-change assessments|
|Citation:||Bioscience, 2019; 69(3):209-219|
|Publisher:||Oxford University Press|
|Salvador Herrando-Pérez, Corey J A Bradshaw, Stephan Lewandowsky, David R Vieites|
|Abstract:||The scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change is empirically settled, but communicating it to nonscientific audiences remains challenging. To be explicit about the state of knowledge on climate science, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has adopted a vocabulary that ranks climate findings through certainty-calibrated qualifiers of confidence and likelihood. In this article, we quantified the occurrence of knowns and unknowns about “The Physical Science Basis” of the IPCC's Fifth Assessment Report by counting the frequency of calibrated qualifiers. We found that the tone of the IPCC's probabilistic language is remarkably conservative (mean confidence is medium, and mean likelihood is 66%–100% or 0–33%), and emanates from the IPCC recommendations themselves, complexity of climate research, and exposure to politically motivated debates. Leveraging communication of uncertainty with overwhelming scientific consensus about anthropogenic climate change should be one element of a wider reform, whereby the creation of an IPCC outreach working group could enhance the transmission of climate science to the panel's audiences.|
|Keywords:||Climate change; communication; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; terminology; uncertainty|
|Rights:||© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the American Institute of Biological Sciences. All rights reserved.|
|Appears in Collections:||Aurora harvest 4|
Environment Institute publications
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.