Communicating climate change through ICT-based visualization: Towards an analytical framework

Sustainability (Switzerland)

Volumn 5, Issue 11, 2013, Pages 4760-4777

  Wibeck, Victoria ^a   Neset, Tina Simone ^a   Linnér, Björn Ola ^a  

^a LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Climate change; Communication; Dome theatre; Visualization

Indexed keywords

ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK; CLIMATE CHANGE; CLIMATE MODELING; GEODESY; INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY; SUSTAINABILITY; VISUALIZATION;

EID: 84894069930     PISSN: 20711050     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/su5114760     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. UNEP climate change strategy. Available online: http://www.unep.org/pdf/UNEP_CC_STRATEGY_web.pdf (accessed on 1 July 2013).
2. Moser, S. Communicating climate change: History, challenges, process and future directions. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 2010, 1, 31-53.
3. Wolf, J.; Moser, S. Individual understandings, perceptions, and engagement with climate change: Insights from in-depth studies across the world. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 2011, 2, 547-569.
4. Nerlich, B.; Koteyko, N.; Brown, B. Theory and language of climate change communication. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Clim. Change 2010, 1, 97-110.
5. Wibeck, V. Enhancing learning, communication and public engagement about climate change-some lessons from recent literature. Environ. Educ. Res. 2013, doi:10.1080/13504622.2013.812720.
6. Nisbet, M.; Scheufele, D. What's next for science communication? Promising directions and lingering distractions. Am. J. Bot. 2009, 96, 1767-1778.
7. Sheppard, S.R.J.; Shaw, A.; Flanders, D.; Burch, S.; Wiek, A.; Carmichael, J.; Robinson, J.; Cohen, S. Future visioning of local climate change: A framework for community engagement and planning with scenarios and visualisation. Futures 2011, 43, 400-412.
8. Few, R.; Brown, K.; Tompkins, E. Public participation and climate change adaptation: Avoiding the illusion of inclusion. Clim. Policy 2011, 7, 46-59.
9. Sheppard, S.R.J. Landscape visualisation and climate change. Environ. Sci. Policy 2005, 8, 637-654.
10. Sheppard, S.R.J. Visualizing Climate Change: A Guide to Visual Communication of Climate Change and Developing Local Solutions; Routledge: London, UK, 2012.
11. Wiek, A.; Iwaniec, D. Quality criteria for visions and visioning in sustainability science. Sustain. Sci. 2013, doi:10.1007/s11625-013-0208-6.
12. Neset, T., Johansson, J., Linnér, B.-O., Eds. State of Climate Visualization; CSPR Report 2009:4; Linköping University: Linköping, Sweden, 2009.
13. Ware, C. Visual Thinking in Design; Morgan Kaufmann: Burlington, MA, USA, 2008.
14. Fiske, J. Introduction to Communication Studies, 3rd ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2011.
15. Hulme, M. The conquering of climate: Discourses of fear and dissolution. Geogr. J. 2008, 174, 5-16.
16. Linnér, B.-O. Klimatpolitik och domedagsbasuner. In Apocalypse now-fakta, ideologi och domedags-scenarior i klimatförändringarnas kölvatten (in Swedish); Gustafsson-Lundberg, J., Liljefors Persson, B., Eds.; Föreningen lärare i religionskunskap: Lomma, Sweden, 2008.
17. Moser, S.; Dilling, L. Making climate hot: Communicating the urgency and challenge of global climate change. Environment 2004, 46, 32-46.
18. Moser, S. Talk of the city: Engaging urbanites on climate change. Environ. Res. Lett. 2006, 1, 1-10.
19. Nicholson-Cole, S.A. Representing climate change futures: A critique on the use of images for visual communication. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2005, 29, 255-273.
20. O'Neill, S.; Nicholson-Cole, S. "Fear won't do it": Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Sci. Commun. 2009, 30, 355-379.
21. Kahlor, L.; Rosenthal, S. If we seek, do we learn? Predicting knowledge on global warming. Sci. Commun. 2009, 30, 380-414.
22. Harré, R.; Brockmeier, J.; Mühlhäuser, P. Greenspeak: A Study of Environmental Discourse; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1999.
23. Davies, B.; Harré, R. Positioning: The discursive production of selves. J. Theory Soc. Behav. 1990, 20, 43-63.
24. Budescu, D.; Broomell, S.; Por, H. Improving communication of uncertainty in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Psychol. Sci. 2009, 20, 299-308.
25. Fortner, R.W.; Lee, J.-Y.; Corney, J.R.; Romanello, S.; Bonnell, J.; Luthy, B.; Figuerido, C.; Ntsiko, N. Public understanding of climate change: Certainty and willingness to act. Environ. Educ. Res. 2000, 6, 127-141.
26. Morton, T.A.; Rabinovich, A.; Marshall, D.; Bretschneider, P. The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Glob. Environ. Change 2011, 21, 103-109.
27. Poortinga, W.; Spence, A.; Whitmarsh, L.; Capstick, S.; Pidgeon, N.F. Uncertain climate: An investigation into public scepticism about anthropogenic climate change. Glob. Environ. Change 2011, 21, 1015-1024.
28. Wibeck, V.; Linnér, B.-O. Public understanding of uncertainties in climate science and policy. In Global Change Management: Knowledge Gaps, Blindspots and Unknowables; Ibisch, P., Cybulla, F., Geiger, L., Eds.; Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft: Baden-Baden, Germany, 2012.
29. Linnér, B.-O. Learning for Survival. In Att lära för överlevnad: utbildningsprogrammen och miljöfrågorna 1962-2002 (in Swedish); Stiftelsen Etermedia i Sverige, Arkiv förlag: Lund, Sweden, 2005.
30. Asplund, T. Metaphors in climate discourse: An analysis of Swedish farm magazines. J. Sci. Commun. 2011, 10, A01.
31. Koteyko, N.; Thelwall, M.; Nerlich, B. From carbon markets to carbon morality: Creative compounds as framing devices in online discourses on climate change mitigation. Sci. Commun. 2010, 32, 25-54.
32. Lakoff, R.; Johnson, M. Metaphors We Live by; University of Chicago Press: Chicago, IL, USA, 1980.
33. Nerlich, B. 'Climategate': Paradoxical metaphors and political paralysis. Environ. Values 2010, 19, 419-442.
34. Nerlich, B.; Jaspal, R. Metaphors we die by? Geoengineering, metaphors, and the argument from catastrophe. Metaphor Symb. 2012, 27, 131-147.
35. Wibeck, V. Images of environmental management: Competing metaphors in focus group discussions of Swedish environmental quality objectives. Environ. Manag. 2012, 49, 776-787.
36. Wibeck, V. Social representations of climate change in Swedish lay focus groups: Local or distant, gradual or catastrophic? Public Underst. Sci. 2012, doi:10.1177/0963662512462787.
37. Doyle, J. Picturing the clima(c)tic: Greenpeace and the representational politics of climate change communication. Sci. Cult. 2007, 16, 129-150.
38. MacEachren, A.M.; Kraak, M.-J. Research challenges in geovisualization. Cartogr. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 2001, 28, 3-12.
39. Maceachren, A.M.; Gahegan, M.; Pike, W.; Brewer, I.; Cai, G.; Lengerich, E.; Hardistry, F. Geovisualization for knowledge construction and decision support. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl. 2004, 24, 13-17.
40. Neset, T.-S.; Wibeck, V.; Uhrqvist, O.; Johansson, J. Visualizing Climate Change: The Potential of Dome Presentations as a Tool for Climate Communication. In Proceedings of the Eurographics 2010, Norrköping, Sweden, 3-7 May 2010; pp. 31-35.
41. Leiserowitz, A.; Maibach, E.; Roser-Renouf, C.; Hmielowski, J. Global Warming's Six Americas, May 2011; Yale Project on Climate Change Communication: New Haven, CT, USA, 2011.
42. A framework for pro-environmental behaviours. Available online: http://www.defra.gov.uk/ publications/files/pb13574-behaviours-report-080110.pdf (accessed on 1 July 2013).
43. Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA). Allmänheten och klimatförändringen 2009 (in Swedish); Report 6311; SEPA: Stockholm, Sweden, 2009.
44. Maibach, E.W.; Leiserowitz, A.; Roser-Renouf, C.; Mertz, C.K. Identifying like-minded audiences for global warming public engagement campaigns: An audience segmentation analysis and tool development. PLoS One 2011, 6, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0017571.
45. Akerlof, K.; Bruff, G.; Witte, J. Audience segmentation as a tool for communicating climate change. Park Sci. 2011, 28, 55-64.
46. Neresini, F.; Pellegrini, G. Evaluating Public Communication of Science and Technology. In Handbook of Public Communication of Science and Technology; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2008.
47. Norrköping Visualization Centre. Available online: http://www.visualiseringscenter.se (accessed on 1 July 2013).
48. The Elumenati. Available online: http://www.elumenati.com/products/geodome (accessed on 1 July 2013).
49. Norrköping Visualization Centre. Available online: http://www2.visualiseringscenter.se/technology/ en/index.php (accessed on 1 July 2013).
50. Moscovici, S. The Phenomenon of Social Representations. In Social Representations; Farr, R., Moscovici, S., Eds.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1984.
51. Höijer, B. Emotional anchoring and objectification in the media reporting on climate change. Public Underst. Sci. 2010, 19, 717-731.
52. Olausson, U. "We're the ones to blame": Citizens' representations of climate change and the role of the media. Environ. Commun. 2011, 5, 281-299.
53. SCISS. Available online: http://www.sciss.se (accessed on 1 July 2013).
54. Manzo, K. Beyond polar bears? Re-envisioning climate change. Meterol. Appl. 2010, 17, 196-208.
55. Europeans' attitudes towards climate change. Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/ archives/ebs/ebs_300_full_en.pdf (accessed on 1 July 2013).
56. Mindmap Analyzer. Available online: http://www.mindmap-analyzer.se (accessed on 1 July 2013)
57. Lourdel, N.; Gondran, N.; Laforest, V.; Debray, B.; Brodhag, C. Sustainable development cognitive map: A new method of evaluating student understanding. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2007, 2, 170-182.
58. Marková, I.; Grossen, M.; Linell, P. Dialogue in Focus Groups: Exploring Socially Shared Knowledge; Equinox: London, UK, 2007.
59. Wibeck, V.; Öberg, G.; Abrandt-Dahlgren, M. Learning in focus groups: An analytical dimension for enhancing focus group research. Qual. Res. 2007, 7, 249-262.
60. Jovchelovitch, S. Contextualising Focus Groups: Understanding Groups and Cultures. In Proceedings of the V Meeting of "Conversation et Language", Paris, France, 2001.
61. Wilkinson, S. Focus group methodology: A review. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 1998, 1, 181-203.