(27 February) “Does (climate) science need to be consensual to be authoritative?” You can view my talk here which was given on Wednesday 6 February 2013 at the STEPS Centre Conference on ‘Credibility across cultures‘. A longer version of this is being prepared for a book, but I have posted here a summary of my argument. It […]
Month: February 2013
The new ‘loss and damage’ agenda and weather event attribution
(28 February) “Can (and should) ‘loss and damage’ be attributed to climate change?” Read my new blog post over at The Fletcher Forum for World Affairs. Following Doha and the COP18, the ‘loss and damage’ agenda now has institutional force, and the coming months and years will see rounds of technical and political negotiation about […]
Writing and climate change
(26 February) I will be speaking alongside authors, poets and playwrights at the UEA Centre for Writing and Science’s day event on Saturday 25 May at the University of East Anglia: “Writing and climate change: the story so far … how do writers and scientists communicate the controversies of climate change? Register here.
The emergence of the geoengineering debate …
(27 February) NEW Paper: “The emergence of the geoengineering debate in the UK print media: a frame analysis” has been published on-line in The Geographical Journal, written with one of my PhD students, Kate Porter. Reference as: Porter,K.E. and Hulme,M. (2013) The emergence of the geoengineering debate in the British print media: a frame analysis The Geographical Journal […]
Does (climate) science need to be consensual to be authoritative?
(13 February) “Does (climate) science need to be consensual to be authoritative?” This was the title of my talk at last week’s STEPS Centre Conference on ‘Credibility across cultures‘. A longer version of this is being prepared for a book, but I have posted here a summary of my argument. It has also been picked up […]
