globalchange  > 气候变化与战略
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120127
论文题名:
Recalculating climate change consensus: The question of position and rhetoric
作者: Jankó F.; Drüszler Á.; Gálos B.; Móricz N.; Papp-Vancsó J.; Pieczka I.; Pongrácz R.; Rasztovits E.; Dezső Z.S.; Szabó O.
刊名: Journal of Cleaner Production
ISSN: 9596526
出版年: 2020
卷: 254
语种: 英语
英文关键词: Climate change ; Climate change controversy ; Consensus quantification ; Consensus research ; Scientific rhetoric
Scopus关键词: Climate change ; Global warming ; Anthropogenic climate changes ; Anthropogenic global warming ; Consensus quantification ; Quantitative method ; Quantitative result ; Research results ; Research subjects ; Scientific rhetoric ; Abstracting
英文摘要: Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic climate change and its communication have become a controversial research subject in recent years. This paper utilized a reference list from a climate skeptic report and a previously published quantitative method of consensus research to revisit the theoretical and methodological questions. Beyond rating the abstracts according to their position on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), this study classified the strategic in-text functions of the references. Results not only showed the biased character of the literature set, but also revealed a remarkable AGW endorsement level among journal articles that took a position concerning AGW. However, this paper does not argue for modified consensus numbers, but instead emphasizes the role of ‘no position’ abstracts and the role of rhetoric. Our quantitative results provided evidence that abstract rating is a suboptimal way to measure consensus. Rhetoric is far more important than it appears at first glance. It is important at the level of scientists, who prefer neutral language, and at the level of readers such as report editors, who encounter and re-interpret the texts. Hence, disagreement appears to stem from the disparate understanding and rhetorically supported interpretation of the research results. Neutral abstracts and papers seem to provide more room for interpretation. © 2020 Elsevier Ltd
Citation statistics:
资源类型: 期刊论文
标识符: http://119.78.100.158/handle/2HF3EXSE/158239
Appears in Collections:气候变化与战略

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.


作者单位: Department of Human and Economic Geography, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány P. St. 1/c, Budapest, H-1117, Hungary; Department of Meteorology and Geophysics, University of Vienna, Althanstraße 14 / UZA-II / 2G556, Wien, A-1090, Austria; Institute of Environmental and Earth Sciences, Faculty of Forestry, University of Sopron, Bajcsy-Zs. E. U. 4., Sopron, H-9400, Hungary; Department of Ecology and Forest Management, Forest Research Institute, National Agricultural Research and Innovation Center, Várkerület 30/A SárvárH-9600, Hungary; Gyula Roth Technical School of Forestry and Wood Industry, Szent György St. 9., Sopron, H-9400, Hungary; Department of Meteorology, Eötvös Loránd University, Pázmány P. St. 1/a, Budapest, H-1117, Hungary; Alexandre Lamfalussy Faculty of Economics, University of Sopron, Erzsébet U. 9., Sopron, H-9400, Hungary

Recommended Citation:
Jankó F.,Drüszler Á.,Gálos B.,et al. Recalculating climate change consensus: The question of position and rhetoric[J]. Journal of Cleaner Production,2020-01-01,254
Service
Recommend this item
Sava as my favorate item
Show this item's statistics
Export Endnote File
Google Scholar
Similar articles in Google Scholar
[Jankó F.]'s Articles
[Drüszler Á.]'s Articles
[Gálos B.]'s Articles
百度学术
Similar articles in Baidu Scholar
[Jankó F.]'s Articles
[Drüszler Á.]'s Articles
[Gálos B.]'s Articles
CSDL cross search
Similar articles in CSDL Cross Search
[Jankó F.]‘s Articles
[Drüszler Á.]‘s Articles
[Gálos B.]‘s Articles
Related Copyright Policies
Null
收藏/分享
所有评论 (0)
暂无评论
 

Items in IR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.