Scepticism About Anthropogenic Climate Disruption: a Conceptual
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SCEPTICISM ABOUT ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE DISRUPTION: A CONCEPTUAL EXPLORATION Willem Van Rensburg BA, BA (Hons), MA A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2015 School of Political Science and International Studies Abstract Scepticism that human activities are altering the global climate in seriously damaging ways is widely regarded as an aberrant position and a deliberately manufactured phenomenon. The charge against sceptics is that they try to undermine the credibility of mainstream climate science in a ploy to delay progressive climate policies, and thus protect the vested interests of fossil fuel stakeholders. Sceptics are also considered beholden to political conservatism and conservative lobbies, which fear that the climate change agenda is being set by socialist and Green interests and that climate policies would undermine the neo-liberal capitalist status quo. Many observers blame elite sceptics for persistent public scepticism on the climate issue. This study tests these constructions of climate change scepticism through a grounded investigation of the underlying worldview assumptions of sceptics, their conceptual repertoires, and the thematic focal points of their rhetoric. A sample of sceptic texts from Australian sceptics is qualitatively investigated, as well as subjected to computerised textual analysis with a view to identifying characteristic concepts and themes. The study reports (Chapter 4) that climate change scepticism occupies a broad conceptual space which is best understood when distinctions are made between core and concomitant classes of scepticism, subordinate centres of scepticism, and various lower order objects of scepticism. It proposes taxonomies to capture the variety of beliefs and intensities of belief amongst sceptics. It advocates the adoption of semantically accurate and neutral labels for different sceptic persuasions. Next, the underlying worldview assumptions of sceptics are described (Chapter 5) and associated with the cultural archetypes posited by grid-group Cultural Theory. It finds evidence that sceptics are rooted in the individualist worldview, that some are leaning towards the hierarchist view, and that all sceptics stand antithetical to the egalitarian view. This is followed by a grounded computer assisted analysis of the key concepts and themes in the text sample (Chapter 6). Consistent with the evidence of an individualist/hierarchist cultural rationality amongst sceptics, the grounded analysis reveals that sceptics support climate responses that privilege neo-liberal capitalism. However, it also reveals a strong concern for sound science and good governance, and that many sceptics consider the style of the scientific debate and climate related political decision-making a major stumbling block, over and above their epistemic challenges of the physical science. The study next (Chapter 7) zooms in on the climate policy views of sceptics, again through a computer assisted textual analysis, and finds evidence of two distinct approaches, a puritan approach that insists on consistency between the perceived lack of conclusive physical evidence about the causes and ii impacts of climate change and climate policy, as opposed to a pragmatist approach that acknowledges the inevitability of a carbon constrained future but wishes to direct climate policy towards a more nationalistic, careful and measured response pattern. The policy views of seven high profile sceptics, each from a different professional background, are analysed in depth (Chapter 8) in order to corroborate the evidence presented by the computer assisted analysis. It finds that many sceptics are ideologically close to an innovation response to the climate problem, which emphasises energy security and technological solutions to the climate problem. Sceptics are found to be opposed to a green response, which proposes interventionist macro-economic policies aimed at restructuring the prevailing economic systems. The study concludes (Chapter 9) that the sceptic phenomenon is much more heterogeneous than generally understood or acknowledged, and that much of the sceptic rationale rest on relatively neutral notions of due process and responsible governance. It argues that observers need to be mindful of the finer nuances in sceptic thought, how to differentiate between entrenched sceptics and the doubtful and agnostic ones, and how to frame science and policy communications so that they resonate with sceptics’ unique set of worldviews and assumptions. iii Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my research higher degree candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis. iv Publications during candidature Peer-reviewed papers: Van Rensburg, W. (2012). Puritans and Pragmatists: How Climate Change Sceptics Engage the Climate Policy Debate. Public Policy, 7(2), 199-216. Van Rensburg, W. (2013). Climate Change Sceptics Revisited: Creatures of Culture. Melbourne Journal of Politics, 36, 31-50. Van Rensburg, W. (2015). Climate Change Scepticism: A Conceptual Re-evaluation. Sage Open, 5(2), 1-13. Conference presentations: Van Rensburg, W. (2013). Climate Change Scepticism Revisited: The Semantic Landscape. 2013 Australian Political Studies Association Annual Conference, 30 September- 02 October 2013, Murdoch University, Perth, WA. Workshop presentations: Van Rensburg, W. (2012). Climate Change Scepticism: Wrong Science Right Policy? The Politics of Climate Change in Australia, 28-29 November 2012, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD. Van Rensburg, W. (2013). Explaining Climate Change Scepticism. Public Policy Network Conference 2013, 24 - 25 January 2013, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD. Papers currently under peer review: Van Rensburg, W. (2014). Climate Change Scepticism: The Worldview/Ideology Thesis Revisited. Van Rensburg, W. (2014). Computerised Concept Characterisation of Media Text Samples: Managing Multivocality. v Publications included in this thesis No publications included. The ‘Publications during candidature’ form the material basis of chapters 4-8 of the thesis. Contributions by others to the thesis No contributions by others. Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree None. vi Acknowledgements My first thanks go to my dear parents, in memoriam. They raised me with the firm belief that I have academic ability and that I could achieve anything I wanted to. It is due to their steadfast and proud support in my formative years that I have been able to undertake tasks and careers that have made them proud, and would still make them proud. Next, my deepest thanks to my wife, Euodia, for her encouragement to undertake this study and for her unwavering support right through to the end. Without the stability and continuity that she provided during the past four years I would not have been able to complete this project. My sincerest thanks to my two supervisors, Prof. Brian Head and Dr. Ian Ward. It was a long journey, too long, but you never faltered in your belief that we will see this through to the end. Prof. Head has been a rock with his patient and confident management of me and the project. I am also thankful for the opportunities he facilitated for me to engage with other academics. Dr. Ward’s incisive questions and critical comments were invaluable guides. I will miss our many impromptu tearoom discussions. My thanks go to many colleagues who have in some way contributed to my project, amongst others Dr. Julie Connolly, Dr. Timothy Aistrope and Mr. Pedram Rashidi. A special word of thanks to Dr. Lorann Downer for her moral support and encouragement. I would also like to thank Dr. Barbara Sullivan, the Director of the RHD programme in POLSIS, for her continued support of my candidature. She has comforted my anxieties about deadlines on more than one occasion. An additional word of thanks to the support staff at POLSIS, in particular Ms. Vanessa Salam for her administrative management of my candidature, and Mr. Jason Seol, for his prompt responses to my many requests for