Public communication of climate change science: Engaging citizens through apocalyptic narrative explanation

Technical Communication Quarterly

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 49-81

  Spoel, Philippa ^a   Goforth, David ^a   Cheu, Hoi ^a   Pearson, David ^a  

^a LAURENTIAN UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CITIZEN ENGAGEMENTS; PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS; SCIENCE POLICIES;

COMMUNICATION;

CLIMATE CHANGE;

EID: 68149147256     PISSN: 10572252     EISSN: 15427625     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10572250802437382     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Bak, P., 1996. How nature works: The science of self-organized criticality, New York: Springer Verlag.
2. Barton, B. F., and Barton, M., 1988. Narration in technical communication. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 2: 36-48.
3. Bazerman, C., 1997. “ Reporting the experiment: The changing account of scientific doings in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1665-1800. ”. In Landmark essays on rhetoric of science, Edited by: Harris, R. A., 169-186. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
4. Bell, A., 1994. Media (mis)communication on the science of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 3: 259-275.
5. Bord, R., O'Connor, R., and Fisher, A., 1997. Is an accurate understanding of global warming necessary to promote a willingness to sacrifice?. Risk, 8: 339-354.
6. Bord, R., O'Connor, R., and Fisher, A., 2000. In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change?. Public Understanding of Science, 9: 205-218.
7. Bostrom, A., Morgan, M. G., Fischhoff, B., and Read, D., 1994. What do people know about global climate change? 1. Mental models. Risk Analysis, 16: 959-970.
8. Boykoff, M. T., and Boykoff, J. M., 2004. Balance as bias: Global warming and the U.S. prestige press. Global Environmental Change, 14: 125-136.
9. Bryson, M. A., 2003. Nature, narrative, and the scientist-writer: Rachel Carson's and Loren Eiseley's critique of science. Technical Communication Quarterly, 12: 369-387.
10. Bulkeley, H., 1997. Global risk, local values: “Risk society” and the greenhouse issue in Newcastle, Australia. Local Environment, 2: 261-274.
11. Bulkeley, H., 2000. Common knowledge? Public understanding of climate change in Newcastle, Australia. Public Understanding of Science, 9: 313-333.
12. Burgess, J., Harrison, C., and Filius, P., 1998. Environmental communication and the cultural politics of environmental citizenship. Environment and Planning, A30: 1445-1460.
13. Carvalho, A., 2007. Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge: Re-reading news on climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 16: 223-243.
14. Climate Change Project. (2008). About us. Retrieved April 30, 2008, from http://www.theclimateproject.org/aboutus.php
15. Corbett, J. B., and Durfee, J. L., 2004. Testing public (un)certainty of science: Media representations of global warming. Science Communication, 26: 129-151.
16. Cox, J. R., 2004. “Free trade” and the eclipse of civil society: Barriers to transparency and public participation in NAFTA and the Free Trade area of the Americas. ”. In Communication and public participation in environmental decision making, Edited by: Depoe, S. P., Delicath, J. W., and Elsenbeer, M.-F. A., 201-219. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
17. Depoe, S., Delicath, J. W., and Elsenbeer, M- F. A., 2004. Communication and public participation in environmental decision making, Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
18. Eden, S., 1996. Public participation in environmental policy: Considering scientific, counter-scientific and non-scientific contributions. Public Understanding of Science, 5: 183-204.
19. Consuming, engaging, and confronting science: The emerging dimensions of scientific citizenshipElam, M., & Bertilsson, M. (2002). Discussion Paper One. STAGE (Science, Technology, and Governance in Europe) Funded by the European Commission's Fifth Framework Programme, contract number HPSCE-CT2001-50003.
20. Environment Canada. (1997). Climate change action fund. Retrieved April 30, 2008, from http://www.pyr.ec.gc.ca/en/climate/climate_ccaf.shtml
21. Fischer, F., 2000. Citizens, experts, and the environment: The politics of local knowledge, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
22. Gore, A., 1992. Earth in the balance: Ecology and the human spirit., New York: Penguin Books.
23. Gore, A., 2006. An inconvenient truth., New York: Rodale.
24. Hamilton, J. D., 2003. Exploring technical and cultural appeals in strategic risk communication: The Fernald radium case. Risk Analysis, 23: 291-302.
25. Healey, P., Irwin, A., Nunes, J., Boudourides, M., Kallerud, E., Glimell, H., et al. (2005). Science, technology and governance in Europe: Challenges of public engagement. Final report, vol. 1. STAGE (Science, Technology, and Governance in Europe). Funded by the European Commission's Fifth Framework Programme, contract number HPSCE-CT2001-50003.
26. Irwin, A., 2001. Constructing the scientific citizen: Science and democracy in the biosciences. Public Understanding of Science, 10: 1-18.
27. Johnson-Sheehan, R., and Rode, S., 1999. On scientific narrative: Stories of light by Newton and Einstein. Journal of Business and Technical Communication, 13: 336-357.
28. Killingsworth, M. J., and Palmer, J. S., 1992. Ecospeak: Rhetoric and environmental politics in America., Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
29. Killingsworth, M. J., and Palmer, J. S., 1996. “ Millennial ecology: The apocalyptic narrative from Silent Spring to Global Warming. ”. In Green culture: Environmental rhetoric in contemporary America, Edited by: Herndl, C. G., and Brown, S. C., 21-45. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
30. Kinsella, W. J., 2004. “ Public expertise: A foundation for citizen participation in energy and environmental decisions. ”. In Communication and public participation in environmental decision making, Edited by: Depoe, S. P., Delicath, J. W., and Elsenbeer, M.-F. A., 83-95. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
31. Lay, M. M., 1982. Teaching narrative in technical writing courses. The Technical Writing Teacher, 9: 156-158.
32. Lowe, T., Brown, K., Dessai, S., deFrancaDoria, M., Haynes, K., and Vincent, K., 2006. Does tomorrow ever come? Disaster narrative and public perceptions of climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 15: 435-457.
33. McComas, K., and Shanahan, J., 1999. Telling stories about global climate change: Measuring the impact of narratives on issue cycles. Communication Research, 26: 30-57.
34. Myers, G., 1990. “ Making a discovery: Narratives of split genes. ”. In Narrative in culture: The uses of storytelling in the sciences, philosophy, and literature, Edited by: Nash, C., 102-126. London: Routledge.
35. Myers, G., 1994. “ Narratives of science and nature in popularizing molecular genetics. ”. In Advances in written text analysis, Edited by: Courtland, M., 179-190. New York: Routledge.
36. Norris, S. P., Guilbert, S. M., Smith, M. L., Hakinelahi, S., and Phillips, L. M., 2005. A theoretical framework for narrative explanation in science. Science Education, 89: 535-563.
37. Norton, T., 2007. The structuration of public participation: Organizing environmental control. Environmental Communication, 1: 146-170.
38. O'Connor, R. E., Bord, R. J., and Fisher, A., 1999. Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis, 19: 461-471.
39. Opel, A., 2007. Structural change? Environmental documentary and globalization. Environmental Communication, 1: 111-118.
40. Plough, A., and Krimsky, S., 1987. The emergence of risk communication studies: Social and political context. Science, Technology and Human Values, 12: 4-10.
41. Robert, E., O'Connor, R., Bord, J., and Fisher, A., 1998. The curious impact of knowledge about climate change on risk perceptions and willingness to sacrifice. Risk Decision and Policy, 3: 145-155.
42. Science North Enterprises. 2001. Climate change: Script matrix, Sudbury, Ontario: Science North Science Centre.
43. Shanahan, J., and Good, J., 2000. Heat and hot air: Influence of local temperature on journalists' coverage of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 9: 285-295.
44. Stamm, K., Clark, F., and Eblacas, P., 2000. Mass communication and public understanding of environmental problems: The case of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 9: 219-237.
45. Sturgis, P., and Allum, N., 2004. Science in society: Re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding of Science, 13: 55-74.
46. Tevelow, A., 2004. “ Global governance and social capital: Mapping NGO capacities in different institutional contexts. ”. In Communication and public participation in environmental decision making, Edited by: Depoe, S. P., Delicath, J. W., and Elsenbeer, M.-F. A., 223-233. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
47. Trumbo, C., 1996. Constructing climate change: Claims and frames in U.S. news coverage of an environmental issue. Public Understanding of Science, 5: 269-283.
48. Tytler, R., Duggan, S., and Gott, R., 2001. Public participation in an environmental dispute: Implications for science education. Public Understanding of Science, 10: 343-364.
49. Waddell, C., 1996. “ Saving the great lakes: Public participation in environmental policy. ”. In Green culture: Environmental rhetoric in contemporary America, Edited by: Herndl, C. G., and Brown, S. C., 141-165. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
50. Walker, G. B., 2007. Public participation as participatory communication in environmental policy decision-making: From concepts to structured conversations. Environmental Communication, 1: 99-110.
51. Weingart, P., Engels, A., and Pansegrau, P., 2000. Risks of communication: Discourse on climate change in science, politics, and the mass media. Public Understanding of Science, 9: 261-283.
52. Wilkins, L., 1993. Between facts and values: Print media coverage of the greenhouse effect, 1987-1990. Public Understanding of Science, 2: 71-84.
53. Zehr, S., 2000. Public representations of scientific uncertainty about global climate change. Public Understanding of Science, 9: 85-103.