Nattapong Sanchan Bangkok University

A Story Behind Global Warming

Background reading connected to the Online Debate Data and the SSSD.

Contents

  1. Global Warming Definition
  2. Climate Change Movement
  3. References

Global Warming

Global warming* is a phenomenon involving the increase in global-average temperature. It is one of the greatest problems, directly and indirectly affecting the natural balance of the environment and life on earth. There are several consequences resulting from global warming: changes in climate, the melting of ice over the Arctic and Antarctic regions, the increase of sea levels, and unusual weather phenomena are examples of consequences caused by global warming. These consequences affect our existence and survival.

*In this article, the terms “global warming” and “climate change” are used interchangeably. In scientific context, climate change has a broader meaning: changes in climate characteristics. The earth's average temperature change, the flow of ocean currents that causes the decrease and increase of temperature in some areas, rainfall, and snowfall are examples of climate change. Global warming has a more specific meaning, in which temperature increases over time (Boykoff, 2007).

Climate Change Movement

There are numerous examples of the climate change movement. For instance, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was founded in 1988 to “provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of knowledge in climate change and its potential environmental and socio-economic impacts” (IPCC, 2012). This organization does not itself carry out research or monitor climate change data; it assesses and reviews scientific information from published climate change literature. The IPCC has three working groups. Working Group I addresses the climate system and climate change assessment. Working Group II assesses the vulnerability of the economy and natural systems to climate change, and adaptation options. Working Group III assesses alternatives for mitigating climate change by limiting or preventing greenhouse gas emissions.

Another example of the climate change movement is the establishment of the Kyoto Protocol. In order to maintain the concentration of greenhouse gas emissions at a safe level, the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) was established on 11 December 1997 (UNFCCC, 2012b). Three parties participate in this convention. The first, Annex I countries, are developed countries that respond to the reduction of gas emissions according to their mutual agreement — for instance, an agreement to reduce greenhouse gas release by 5% in the 2008–2012 period. The second, Annex II countries, are responsible for providing financial resources to developing countries in coping with gas emissions and climate change. The third, Non-Annex countries, are developing countries required to cooperate on the insurance and technological transfer needed to handle gas emissions and climate change (UNFCCC, 2012a). The coordination of these parties aims to tackle climate change by stabilizing the amount of gas released worldwide.

As climate change is one of the most serious issues, governments in many countries have put effort into launching campaigns and enacting legislation to mitigate this problem. However, this effort does not seem to have been successful. In the United Kingdom, for example, the government attempted to promote low-carbon behaviors by launching campaigns to foster greener attitudes among the population, such as “Are You Doing Your Bit?” and the “UK Energy Saving Trust’s” campaign. These campaigns may have raised awareness for a few years at the outset, but over the long term they were not able to extensively foster a greater proportion of people to take part. This is not, therefore, an effective approach to changing people's behaviors (Ockwell et al., 2009). Psychologically, people do not always act in the way they feel (Lorenzoni et al., 2007; Whitmarsh, 2008, as cited in Ockwell et al., 2009). While some people participate in the campaigns, others consider it difficult or not suited to their lifestyle. Many people ignore the campaigns because they consider participation a waste of time, and some believe the government alone should take responsibility (Lorenzoni et al., 2007; Whitmarsh, 2008, as cited in Ockwell et al., 2009). Consequently, these campaigns have not been sufficiently effective in tackling the climate change problem.

Why does the government not successfully enact legislation if voluntary campaigns cannot be relied on? Carter and Ockwell (2007) illustrate that a primary barrier to the introduction of climate change legislation is that government fears negative public response. Environmental policy is usually a matter of regulation or taxation, and because the environmental issue is broadly regarded as “unpopular” by the public, it becomes difficult for government to convince people to make sacrifices for the benefit of those not yet born. Introduction becomes even harder when only a few groups of countries follow a regulation while others take it for granted. A clear example that alarmed the government was the fuel protest by UK drivers in 2000, which deeply worried the government as it brought the country to a halt: protesters blockaded fuel depots and pressed the government to remove a fuel tax that increases every year (Carter and Ockwell, 2007). Once a tax is cancelled, people tend to revert to old behaviors, as no regulation remains to hold them accountable. Another barrier is that government must attend to other, higher-priority issues — quality of life, health, education, and social security — so budget for environmental issues remains small. Furthermore, the mismatch between the multi-decade timeframe of environmental issues and the few-year electoral cycle contributes to the failure of legislative introduction (Ockwell et al., 2009). Nonetheless, in 2008 the UK government launched a national climate change policy, the UK Climate Change Act 2008, legally binding targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 34% by 2020 and 80% by 2050 (Parliament, 2008); the public widely complained about this regulation.

The climate change movement also occurs in the United States. Brulle et al. (2012) analyzed surveys collected over a 9-year period, 2002–2010, to identify factors influencing the level of public concern toward climate change, and found that public concern has varied considerably over the decades. For instance, the percentage of the US public expressing concern fluctuated between 2004 and 2010: 26% in 2004, rising to 41% by 2007, before dropping to 28% in 2010. Respondents tended to answer survey questions based on recent information they had received, so information from political entities played a significant role in shaping responses. Public concern also does not rely heavily on scientific articles, since the general public rarely reads them; popular magazines about climate change attract more interest (Brulle et al., 2012).

One of the most consequential moments in the US climate movement was President George W. Bush's 2001 announcement that the United States would not support the Kyoto Protocol — a decision that became a complex, sensational topic in the US press and media (Boykoff and Boykoff, 2007). British Prime Minister Tony Blair said it was wrong for the United States not to coordinate with the protocol and not to help combat climate change, in which “economic growth and environmental awareness can coexist” (Alvarez, 2003, as cited in Brechin, 2003).

As in the United Kingdom, mitigation efforts in the United States also encountered barriers. Betsill (2001) studied obstacles to climate change mitigation based on the Cities for Climate Change Protection (CCP) campaign and identified three main barriers. First, bureaucratic structures are not well suited to handling climate change policy: city governments are typically divided into specialized departments whose officers focus narrowly on their own work, with little cross-department interaction, whereas climate change mitigation requires coordination across planning, emissions control, and quality management. Second, not all local cities have the administrative capacity to develop local policy, and staff working on mitigation need specialized skills in collecting and analyzing emissions data — work that is difficult to assign to existing officials, requiring new positions. Third, budget allocation is a significant obstacle, as several cities are unwilling to invest financial resources in controlling gas emissions given the large costs involved (Betsill, 2001). This mirrors the UK government's perspective that higher-priority issues take precedence.

As noted, climate change is a serious issue that organizations, governments, and individuals have paid close attention to. However, not everyone agrees that global warming exists. Hulme (2009) argued that climate change is “an environmental, cultural and political phenomenon which is re-shaping the way we think about ourselves, our societies and humanity's place on Earth.” In a study by Leiserowitz et al. (2012), 1,061 American adults aged 18 and older were asked about climate change; the study found that between 2010 and 2012, the number of Americans believing in the existence of global warming rose by 13 percentage points, from 57% in January 2010 to 70% in September 2012, while the proportion of non-believers declined by nearly half. This shift was linked to awareness of recent phenomena including heat waves, widespread drought, floods, wildfires, and violent storms — consistent with Brulle et al.'s (2012) finding that the public tends to respond based on recent information received. Although a greater proportion of people agree that climate change exists than disagree, this demonstrates that people view its existence from very different angles.

In an online discussion forum, Debate (2013), under the popular topic “Is global climate change man-made?”, people expressed controversial sentiments and opinions, both positive and negative, about global warming. Some argue that global warming does not really exist, and instead attribute rising carbon dioxide to plant decay; others describe it as a government “imposture” used to control and regulate behavior, or claim that scientists exaggerate the issue to secure research funding — believing that the world's temperature naturally fluctuates and that global warming and cooling have existed for centuries, and therefore that global warming does not certainly exist. Others contrarily believe in the existence of global warming, citing scientific research and facts: as the world industrializes, people consume more natural resources, and the burning of petroleum and gas produces carbon dioxide, the predominant cause of climate change; deforestation also contributes, removing trees that would otherwise help remove carbon dioxide from the air. Without alternative energy sources and reforestation, they argue, climate change will continue to worsen.

References

  • Betsill, M. M. (2001). Mitigating climate change in US cities: Opportunities and obstacles. Local Environment, 6(4):393–406.
  • Boykoff, M. T. and Boykoff, J. M. (2007). Climate change and journalistic norms: A case-study of US mass-media coverage. Geoforum, 38(6):1190–1204. Theme Issue: Geographies of Generosity.
  • Brechin, S. R. (2003). Comparative public opinion and knowledge on global climatic change and the Kyoto Protocol: the US versus the world? International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy, 23:106–134.
  • Brulle, R. J., Carmichael, J., and Jenkins, J. C. (2012). Shifting public opinion on climate change: an empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the U.S., 2002–2010. Pages 169–188.
  • Carter, N. and Ockwell, D. (2007). New Labour, New Environment? An analysis of the Labour Government’s policy on climate change and biodiversity loss. (July):1–191.
  • Debate (2013). Is global climate change man-made? http://www.debate.org/opinions/is-global-climate-change-man-made.
  • Hulme, M. (2009). Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction and Opportunity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, NY, USA.
  • IPCC (2012). Organization. http://www.ipcc.ch/organization/organization.shtml.
  • Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Feinberg, G., and Peter, H. (2012). Climate change in the American mind: Americans' global warming beliefs and attitudes in September 2012. Yale University and George Mason University. New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change.
  • Lorenzoni et al., 2007; Whitmarsh, 2008, as cited in Ockwell et al., 2009.
  • Ockwell, D., Whitmarsh, L., and O'Neill, S. (2009). Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation. Science Communication, 30(3):305–327.
  • Parliament, U. (2008). UK Climate Change Act 2008.
  • UNFCCC (2012a). Parties & Observers. http://unfccc.int/parties_and_observers/items/2704.php.
  • UNFCCC (2012b). Status of Ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/status_of_ratification/items/2613.php.

↑ back to top