Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Has the grand idea of geoengineering as Plan B run out of steam?
Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. (LUCE)
Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. (LUCE)
2016 (English)In: The Anthropocene Review, ISSN 2053-0196, E-ISSN 2053-020X, Vol. 3, no 1, 64-74 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Paul Crutzen’s 2006 call for geoengineering research triggered public debate in the mass media of several countries. Since then, a common belief among numerous involved scientists has been that more geoengineering experimentation or research is needed and that geoengineering should be carefully considered in a precautionary way as an emergency option or ‘Plan B’. Despite the controversial potential of geoengineering in terms of mega-risks, ethical dilemmas and governance challenges, public geoengineering debate in the daily press from 2006 to 2013 was heavily dominated by accounts of scientists’ arguments for more geoengineering research or even deployment, only about 8% of mass media articles expressing criticism of geoengineering. However, based on a reading of 700 articles published worldwide in 2014 and 2015, we demonstrate a gradual shift in the coverage, and the daily press now primarily reports critical views of geoengineering technologies. The patterns outlined here point in the same direction: It seems as though the grand idea of geoengineering as Plan B is fading.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Sage Publications, 2016. Vol. 3, no 1, 64-74 p.
Keyword [en]
climate change, climate engineering, discourse analysis, geoengineering, mass media, public debate
National Category
Environmental Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-122389DOI: 10.1177/2053019615614592OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-122389DiVA: diva2:866068
Projects
LUCE
Funder
Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning, 2012-1838Swedish Research Council for Environment, Agricultural Sciences and Spatial Planning, 2012-725
Available from: 2015-10-30 Created: 2015-10-30 Last updated: 2017-12-01Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(469 kB)152 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT02.pdfFile size 469 kBChecksum SHA-512
626aa0eb7dd110aae677253c7ec41cf24c14ddf3f7bf1d43046cbdd59551a4b9af43dd263e038455fd0843eff9b233a4a21e9e9c12b41209435f839eedd2a6c8
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Hansson, AndersAnshelm, Jonas
By organisation
Technology and Social ChangeFaculty of Arts and Sciences
In the same journal
The Anthropocene Review
Environmental Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 152 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 584 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf