Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Climate change is socially constructed by the way we imagine the future. Catastrophism and the fear of future climate risk dominate public discourse and constitute how we respond to climate change now. In the debate on climate change, there are two competing catastrophisms: one is emancipatory catastrophism, coined by Ulrich Beck; and the other is what the author of this article calls apocalyptic catastrophism – the dystopian imagination of the future climate and a discourse serving to feed the idea of a ‘techno-fix’, namely geoengineering the Earth’s climate. The two catastrophisms are different in their view on climate change and democracy. This article explores the discursive contours of these two catastrophisms.

Keywords

Catastrophism climate change cosmopolitanism democracy geoengineering

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beck

(2014) Emancipatory catastrophism: What does it mean to climate change and risk society? In: The Seoul Conference 2014 – Climate Change and Risk Society: New Trends of Megacity Transformation, Seoul, 8 July 2014.

Beck

Blok

Tyfield

Zhang

(2013) Cosmopolitan communities of climate risk: Conceptual and empirical suggestions for a new research agenda. Global Networks 13(1): 1–21.

Bulkeley

Broto

Edwards

(2012) Bringing climate change to the city: Towards low carbon urbanism? Local Environment 17(5): 545–551.

Corner

Pidgeon

(2010) Geoengineering the climate: The social and ethical implications. Environment 52(1): 24–37.

Hamilton

(2013) No, we should not just ‘at least do the research’. Nature 496: 139.

Hamilton

(2014) Geoengineering and the politics of science. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists 70(3): 17–26.

Hulme

(2008) The conquering of climate: Discourses of fear and their dissolution. The Geographical Journal 174(1): 5–16.

Hulme

(2009) Why We Disagree About Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Markusson

Ginn

Ghaleigh

Scott

(2014) ‘In case of emergency press here’: Framing geoengineering as a response to dangerous climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change 5(2): 281–290.

10.

Nerlich

Jaspal

(2012) Metaphors we die by? Geoengineering, metaphors, and the argument from catastrophe. Metaphor and Symbol 27(2): 131–147.

11.

Rayner

(2006) Wicked problems: Clumsy solutions – diagnoses and prescriptions for environmental ills. In: Jack Beale Memorial Lecture on Global Environment, Sydney, Australia, July 2006. Available at: www.insis.ox.ac.uk/fileadmin/InSIS/Publications/Rayner_-_jackbealelecture.pdf (accessed 2 October 2014).

12.

Rayner

(2010) How to eat an elephant: A bottom-up approach to climate policy. Climate Policy 10(6): 615–621.

13.

Royal Society (2009) Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty. London: Royal Society.

14.

Stirling

(2014) Transforming power: Social science and the politics of energy choices. Energy Research and Social Science 1: 83–95.

15.

Szerszynski

Kearnes

Macnaghten

. (2013) Why solar radiation management geoengineering and democracy won’t mix. Environment and Planning A 45(12): 2809–2816.

16.

Weingart

Engels

Pansegrau

(2000) Risks of communication: Discourses on climate change in science, politics, and the mass media. Public Understanding of Science 9(3): 261–283.

Catastrophism toward ‘opening up’ or ‘closing down’? Going beyond the apocalyptic future and geoengineering

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References