Orchestrating the climate choir The boundaries of scientists’ expertise, the relevance of experiential knowledge and quality assurance in the public climate debate

Author:

Nicolaisen Peter Busch1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Aarhus Universitet

Abstract

Abstract Scientific knowledge is at the heart of discussions about climate change. However, it has been proposed that the apparent predominance of climate science in the societal debate should be reconsidered and that a more inclusive approach is warranted. Further, the introduction of new communication technology has made the information environment more fragmented, possibly endangering the quality of societal deliberation on climate-related issues. Using focus group methodology, this paper explores how climate scientists, climate journalists, and citizens perceive scientific experts’ mandate when they communicate publicly, the role of experiential knowledge in discussions of climate-related issues, and who they prefer to guard the quality of the climate information exchanged in the public sphere. The findings show that scientific experts are perceived to carry a high degree of legitimacy, but only within their own narrow specialty, while experiential knowledge was seen as more useful in applied domains of science than in arcane research fields. In the new media landscape, journalists are still generally preferred as gatekeepers by all three actor types.

Publisher

Research Square Platform LLC

Reference54 articles.

1. The role of media between expert and lay knowledge: A study of Iberian media coverage on climate change;Areia NP;Sci Total Environ,2019

2. Auerbach CF, Silverstein LB (2003) Qualitative data: An introduction to coding and analysis. New York University Press

3. Author (2022)

4. Barbour R (2018) Doing Focus Groups (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526441836

5. Beck U (1992) In: Featherstone M (ed) Risk Society Towards a New Modernity. Sage Publications

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3