Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature

Environmental Research Letters - Tập 8 Số 2 - Trang 024024 - 2013
John Cook1,2,3, Dana Nuccitelli3,4, Sarah Green5, Mark Richardson6, Bärbel Winkler3, Rob Painting3, Robert G. Way7, Peter Jacobs8, Andrew G. Skuce9,3
1Global Change Institute, University of Queensland, Australia
2School of Psychology, University of Western Australia, Australia
3Skeptical Science, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
4Tetra Tech, Incorporated, McClellan, CA, USA
5Department of Chemistry, Michigan Technological University, USA
6Department of Meteorology, University of Reading, UK
7Department of Geography, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada
8Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, USA
9Salt Spring Consulting Ltd, Salt Spring Island, BC, Canada

Tóm tắt

Abstract We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors’ self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Allègre, 2012, No need to panic about global warming, Wall Street Journal

Anderegg, 2010, Expert credibility in climate change, Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA, 107, 12107, 10.1073/pnas.1003187107

Boykoff, 2007, Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United States and United Kingdom from 2003 to 2006, Area, 39, 470, 10.1111/j.1475-4762.2007.00769.x

Boykoff, 2004, Balance as bias: global warming and the US prestige press, Glob. Environ. Change, 14, 125, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2003.10.001

Boykoff, 2008, ‘Ye Olde Hot Aire’: reporting on human contributions to climate change in the UK tabloid press, Environ. Res. Lett., 3, 10.1088/1748-9326/3/2/024002

Bray, 2010, The scientific consensus of climate change revisited, Environ. Sci. Policy, 13, 340, 10.1016/j.envsci.2010.04.001

Brysse, 2012, Climate change prediction: erring on the side of least drama?, Glob. Environ. Change, 23, 327, 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.10.008

Ding, 2011, Support for climate policy and societal action are linked to perceptions about scientific agreement, Nature Clim. Change, 1, 462, 10.1038/nclimate1295

Doran, 2009, Examining the scientific consensus on climate change, EOS Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 90, 22, 10.1029/2009EO030002

Hansen, 2007, Scientific reticence and sea level rise, Environ. Res. Lett., 2, 10.1088/1748-9326/2/2/024002

Houghton, 2001

Houghton, 1996

Leiserowitz, 2012, Climate change in the American mind: Americans’ global warming beliefs and attitudes in September 2012

Lewandowsky, 2012, The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science, Nature Clim. Change, 3, 399, 10.1038/nclimate1720

Nisbet, 2007, The polls—trends—twenty years of public opinion about global warming, Public Opin. Q., 71, 444, 10.1093/poq/nfm031

Oddie, 2012, Is the ‘anthropogenic global warming’ consensus on the point of collapse? If so, this is just the right time for Chris Huhne to leave the Government

Oreskes, 2004, Beyond the ivory tower. The scientific consensus on climate change, Science, 306, 1686, 10.1126/science.1103618

Oreskes, 2007, The scientific consensus on climate change: how do we know we’re not wrong?

Oreskes, 2010, My facts are better than your facts: spreading good news about global warming, 135

Pew, 2012

Schulte, 2008, Scientific consensus on climate change?, Energy Environ., 19, 281, 10.1260/095830508783900744

Shwed, 2010, The temporal structure of scientific consensus formation, Am. Sociol. Rev., 75, 817, 10.1177/0003122410388488

Solomon, 2007

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Environmental Research Letters

Tập 8 Số 2

024024

Thông tin tác giả