IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v154y2019i1d10.1007_s10584-019-02414-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public communication by climate scientists: what, with whom and why?

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Entradas

    (London School of Economics and Political Science
    University Institute of Lisbon)

  • Joana Marcelino

    (University Institute of Lisbon
    Universidade de Lisboa)

  • Martin W Bauer

    (London School of Economics and Political Science)

  • Bruce Lewenstein

    (Cornell University)

Abstract

Public communication of science has increasingly been recognised as a responsibility of scientists (Leshner, Science p. 977, 2003). Climate scientists are often reminded of their responsibility to participate in the public climate debate and to engage the public in meaningful conversations that contribute to policy-making (Fischhoff 2013). However, our understanding about climate scientists’ interactions with the public and the factors that drive or inhibit them is at best limited. In a new study, we show that it is the most published and not necessarily the most senior, which often talk in public, and it is primarily intrinsic motivation (as opposed to extrinsic reward), which drive them to engage in public communication. Political orientations, academic productivity and awareness of controversy, the topic raises in the public domain, were also important determinants of a climate’s scientist public activity. Future research should explore what is required to protect the intrinsic motivation of scientists.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Entradas & Joana Marcelino & Martin W Bauer & Bruce Lewenstein, 2019. "Public communication by climate scientists: what, with whom and why?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 69-85, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:154:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02414-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02414-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02414-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-019-02414-9?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dan Kahan, 2012. "Why we are poles apart on climate change," Nature, Nature, vol. 488(7411), pages 255-255, August.
    2. Nick Pidgeon, 2012. "Public understanding of, and attitudes to, climate change: UK and international perspectives and policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(sup01), pages 85-106, September.
    3. Adam Wilke & Lois Morton, 2015. "Climatologists’ patterns of conveying climate science to the agricultural community," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 32(1), pages 99-110, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Friederike Hartz, 2024. "“We are not droids”– IPCC participants’ senses of responsibility and affective experiences across the production, assessment, communication and enactment of climate science," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(6), pages 1-21, June.
    2. Marta Entradas & Martin W Bauer & Colm O'Muircheartaigh & Frank Marcinkowski & Asako Okamura & Giuseppe Pellegrini & John Besley & Luisa Massarani & Pedro Russo & Anthony Dudo & Barbara Saracino & Car, 2020. "Public communication by research institutes compared across countries and sciences: Building capacity for engagement or competing for visibility?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-17, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Janel Jett & Leigh Raymond, 2021. "Issue Framing and U.S. State Energy and Climate Policy Choice," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(3), pages 278-299, May.
    2. Cristina Gómez-Román & Maria Luisa Lima & Gloria Seoane & Mónica Alzate & Marcos Dono & José-Manuel Sabucedo, 2020. "Testing Common Knowledge: Are Northern Europeans and Millennials More Concerned about the Environment?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    3. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    4. Walter Leal Filho & Mark Mifsud & Petra Molthan-Hill & Gustavo J. Nagy & Lucas Veiga Ávila & Amanda Lange Salvia, 2019. "Climate Change Scepticism at Universities: A Global Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-13, May.
    5. Agneman, Gustav & Henriks, Sofia & Bäck, Hanna & Renström, Emma, 2024. "On the nexus between material and ideological determinants of climate policy support," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    6. Debra Javeline & Tracy Kijewski-Correa & Angela Chesler, 2019. "Does it matter if you “believe” in climate change? Not for coastal home vulnerability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 511-532, August.
    7. Lauren Baker & Michael Dove & Dana Graef & Alder Keleman & David Kneas & Sarah Osterhoudt & Jeffrey Stoike, 2013. "Whose Diversity Counts? The Politics and Paradoxes of Modern Diversity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(6), pages 1-24, June.
    8. O'Dell, Dallas & Contu, Davide & Shreedhar, Ganga, 2025. "Public support for degrowth policies and sufficiency behaviours in the United States: a discrete choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126084, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. repec:osf:socarx:hr5ba_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Juliette N. Rooney-Varga & Florian Kapmeier & John D. Sterman & Andrew P. Jones & Michele Putko & Kenneth Rath, 2020. "The Climate Action Simulation," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 51(2), pages 114-140, April.
    11. Trawöger, Lisa, 2014. "Convinced, ambivalent or annoyed: Tyrolean ski tourism stakeholders and their perceptions of climate change," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 338-351.
    12. Monika Pompeo & Nina Serdarevic, 2021. "Is information enough? The case of Republicans and climate change," Discussion Papers 2021-08, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    13. Stuart Bryce Capstick, 2013. "Public Understanding of Climate Change as a Social Dilemma," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 5(8), pages 1-18, August.
    14. Demski, Christina & Evensen, Darrick & Pidgeon, Nick & Spence, Alexa, 2017. "Public prioritisation of energy affordability in the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 404-409.
    15. Andrea Cerase & Lorenzo Cugliari, 2023. "Something Still Remains: Factors Affecting Tsunami Risk Perception on the Coasts Hit by the Reggio Calabria-Messina 1908 Event (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    16. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014. "The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 937-948, May.
    17. Allison M. Chatrchyan & Rachel C. Erlebacher & Nina T. Chaopricha & Joana Chan & Daniel Tobin & Shorna B. Allred, 2017. "United States agricultural stakeholder views and decisions on climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(5), September.
    18. Ruef, Franziska & Ejderyan, Olivier, 2021. "Rowing, steering or anchoring? Public values for geothermal energy governance," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    19. Stone, Daniel F., 2019. "“Unmotivated bias” and partisan hostility: Empirical evidence," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 12-26.
    20. Gloria Freschi & Marialuisa Menegatto & Adriano Zamperini, 2023. "How Can Psychology Contribute to Climate Change Governance? A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(19), pages 1-24, September.
    21. Marta Iturriza & Josune Hernantes & Ahmed A. Abdelgawad & Leire Labaka, 2020. "Are Cities Aware Enough? A Framework for Developing City Awareness to Climate Change," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-22, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:154:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02414-9. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.