Words matter. It’s vital terms like ‘crisis’ and ‘calamity’ don’t become rhetorical devices devoid of real content as we argue about what climate action to take.
Australia abandoned its moral obligations under Kyoto. By carrying our mistakes into the Paris deal, we risk firming our status as a global climate pariah.
For decades Australian scientists have, clearly and respectfully, warned about the risks to Australia of a rapidly heating climate. After this season’s fires, perhaps it’s time to listen.
Economic and political assessments of climate change have for years helped justify inaction. Now, young environmentalists worldwide are shifting the debate to focus on values, ethics and justice.
Ten years ago, politicians such as Tony Abbott would routinely voice disdain for climate science. Now, while the policy debate remains fierce, the battleground has shifted to economics and jobs.
Why assembling two teams to debate climate change is all about political spectacle and sowing doubt – and has nothing to do with actual climate science.
Climate models have been criticised because observations could not find the predicted “hot spot” of strong warming in the troposphere. But analyses now show that the tropospheric hot spot is indeed real.
The climate debate seems to be as polarised as ever. While joint political pledges offer some hope that climate change no longer has to be a partisan issue, a look at the comments below most articles on…
Professor of Management & Organizations; Professor of Environment & Sustainability; Professor of Sustainable Enterprise at the Ross School of Business and School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan