Nature’s New Journal on Climate Change

As the title suggests, Nature have released the first addition to the new Nature Climate Change journal. I like what I’ve read of it so far.

Putting together the list of scientific papers regarding climate change, I must admit I’m growing a little bored. The case is a strong one that time and time again is verified independently through many other studies. I, for one, don’t need the constant reiteration (although am more than happy to continue to work on increasing the list so as I can provide it as a resource for my readers and because every now and then I stumble upon and absolutely interesting papers – hopefully I can hit 400 papers by the end of the month) and Nature’s new journal provides broader scope than just the physical sciences of climate change. For instance, two of the feature articles were very interesting.

Opening the future: looks into new ways how the climate community can develop scenarios that better reflect our choices and the results. That Inman pays homage to H. G. Wells, a personal hero of mine (no doubt some readers are aware of my parody of the opening of War of the Worlds last year), in relation to these scenarios was of particular interest. 🙂

It isn’t easy being green: Here Chris Woodside explores the social science aspect of climate change and meeting the challenges – especially in energy consumption. The “Jones effect”, or peer pressure, that I’ve discussed many times previously seems to undermine action (and strengthen my belief that the picture adjacent truly reflects a deep set desire in social status).

I look forward to more discussions able to the social aspects of the challenges that face human activity in the coming century and recommend everyone to pop over to the new journal seeing as to the best of my knowledge, this first installment is largely (if not entirely) free!

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “Nature’s New Journal on Climate Change

  1. I liked it too – several interesting articles on what is really the ‘battlefield’ of climate change, which is social science (for now). I’m planning a podcast or two with one of my coursemates about the ‘flood’ study, which was a little dubious but tells an interesting story.

    Like

    1. When I read about the UK flood story, I wasn’t altogether too impressed, I’d have to admit. It’s basically making the mistake of pinning single weather events to climate change and suggesting fear is a useful tool – both ideas I’m happy to stay well away from (yet contrarian comments continually accuse me of doomsday talk – go figure!).

      I’ll keep an eye out for your podcasts.

      Like

  2. brilliant the best for me is the following statement: ” shopping for a particular future that looks appealing, this process could encourage people to figure out how to create the kind of future they want — and how to avoid the futures they fear.”
    This goes together with the research from Chris Woodside how people act and how so much behaviour is “peer” pressured. On the moment it is not cool to be green as green still has a sort of silly hippie syndrome.
    The statement also relate to carbon-labelling which in my opinion should be very clear without numbers as 28 kilo carbon as this says noting if you can not compare it with something else.
    The idea of choosing your future by looking at what you buy sound positive to me. A big car future shows dead tree, small car future shows living tree, bicycle future shows a healthy living tree, walking future shows a big healthy living tree. Not to place this on a label but more into peoples mind.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s