Changing the intellectual climate

How the global change science community is currently portraying the character and role of the social sciences and humanities is problematic, according to this Perspective. Measures needed to bring other visions and voices into the debate about global environmental change are identified. Calls for mo...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Nature climate change 2014-09, Vol.4 (9), p.763-768
Main Authors: Castree, Noel, Adams, William M., Barry, John, Brockington, Daniel, Büscher, Bram, Corbera, Esteve, Demeritt, David, Duffy, Rosaleen, Felt, Ulrike, Neves, Katja, Newell, Peter, Pellizzoni, Luigi, Rigby, Kate, Robbins, Paul, Robin, Libby, Rose, Deborah Bird, Ross, Andrew, Schlosberg, David, Sörlin, Sverker, West, Paige, Whitehead, Mark, Wynne, Brian
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
706/648/264
706/689/680
Climate Change
Climate Change/Climate Change Impacts
Earth and Environmental Science
Environment
Environmental changes
Environmental Law/Policy/Ecojustice
Environmental problems
Human ecology and demography
perspective
Social sciences
Sociology
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:How the global change science community is currently portraying the character and role of the social sciences and humanities is problematic, according to this Perspective. Measures needed to bring other visions and voices into the debate about global environmental change are identified. Calls for more broad-based, integrated, useful knowledge now abound in the world of global environmental change science. They evidence many scientists' desire to help humanity confront the momentous biophysical implications of its own actions. But they also reveal a limited conception of social science and virtually ignore the humanities. They thereby endorse a stunted conception of 'human dimensions' at a time when the challenges posed by global environmental change are increasing in magnitude, scale and scope. Here, we make the case for a richer conception predicated on broader intellectual engagement and identify some preconditions for its practical fulfilment. Interdisciplinary dialogue, we suggest, should engender plural representations of Earth's present and future that are reflective of divergent human values and aspirations. In turn, this might insure publics and decision-makers against overly narrow conceptions of what is possible and desirable as they consider the profound questions raised by global environmental change.
ISSN:1758-678X
1758-6798
1758-6798
DOI:10.1038/nclimate2339