COMMUNICATION, CULTURE AND THE ENVIRONMENT

Engaging the Public and  Policymakers

This course reviews research, principles, and issues relevant to engaging the public and policy-makers on climate change, energy, technological innovation, and related sustainability issues. The course is intended to:

  • Familiarize students with different traditions, schools of thought, modes of practice, and areas of research relevant to understanding the connections between science, policy, and communication.
  • Provide an integrated understanding of the institutions, organizations, and actors involved in public communication and policymaker engagement; as well as the different types of professional careers and opportunities.
  • Train students how to find, read, understand, evaluate, discuss, write about, explain, apply, and build on the findings and implications of research from the social sciences, communication, policy studies and related disciplines.
  • Train students to research and write a policy-relevant paper.
  • Train students to apply theory and research to the design, implementation, and evaluation of public engagement initiatives.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

  • Group Discussion Leadership and Translation (20%): For each reading section, two students will be designated discussion leaders and will provide 1-2 page summaries of each reading.  When books are assigned, summaries should be specific to each chapter.
  • Three Discussion and Analysis Papers (30%): Students will be completing three 1,000-word discussion and analysis papers relative to specific readings and topics.
  • Annotated Bibliography* and Synthesis White Paper (50%): Students will be compiling an annotated bibliography of approximately 20 quality academic or research sources on a chosen topic and a 15-20 page paper synthesizing and applying the literature to a chosen topic, written in a style that is broadly accessible and impactful.

*An annotated bibliography is a list of citations to scholarly books, book chapters, journal articles, and reports.  Each citation – usually around 300 words — is followed by a brief descriptive and evaluative paragraph called “the annotation.”  For your annotated bibliography, you should be able to find and describe in your own words relevant journal articles, book chapters, and books on your topic.  The journals, edited volumes, authors, and fields referenced in this course are good places to start to search for relevant sources.  Further instructions and guidelines will be provided, including library instruction.

REQUIRED BOOKS

  • Mike Hulme (2009).  Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction, and Opportunity. New York: Cambridge University Press
  • Daniel Yergin (2012) The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. New York: Penguin.
  • Bill McKibben (2007). Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. New York: Henry Holt.

CLASS SCHEDULE

JANUARY 16: Course Introduction

JANUARY 23: Sustainability Problems: Realities, Myths and Challenges

Reading

  • Daniel Yergin (2012) The Quest: Energy, Security, and the Remaking of the Modern World. New York: Penguin (423-526).
  • Mike Hulme (2009).  Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction, and Opportunity. New York: Cambridge University Press (pg. xxi-34; 322-365).
  • Steffan, W. (2011). A Truly Complex and Diabolical Policy Problem. In D. Schlosberg, J. Dryzek, & R. Norgaard (Eds.). Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. London, UK: Oxford University Press. [Blackboard] & [Google Books]
  • Rosen, J. (2011). Covering Wicked Problems. PressThink [HTML].
  • Revkin, A. (2010). On the Energy Gap and the Climate Crisis. Dot Earth blog, New York Times. [HTML]

Student Prepared Summaries of Readings [Download PDF]

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • Daniel Yergin on telling a story about energy. [Video]
  • PBS News Hour (2012, Dec. 3). World Faces a Fight From Behind to Keep Up with Rising Rate of CO2 Emissions. [Video]
  • Prins, G. (2011). The Wicked Problem of Climate Change. Breakthrough Dialogue. [Video]
  • Hulme, M. (2011). Why We Disagree About Climate Change. Sydney Institute. [Video]
  • Revkin (2012). 9 Billion + 1 Earth. Lecture at Arizona University. [Video]

JANUARY 30: Models and Approaches to Engaging the Public and Decision-Makers

  • Brossard, D., & Lewenstein, B. V. (2009). A Critical Appraisal of Models of Public Understanding of Science: Using Practice to Inform Theory. In L. Kahlor & P. Stout (Eds.), Communicating Science: New Agendas in Communication (pp. 11-39). New York: Routledge. [Blackboard]
  • Nisbet, M.C. & Scheufele, D.A. (2009). What’s Next for Science Communication? Promising Directions and Lingering Distractions. American Journal of Botany, 96(10), 1767–1778. [PDF]
  • Sarewitz, D. (2010).  Not by Experts Alone.  Nature, August 2010 [HTML]
  • Moser, S. (2011). Communicating Climate Change: Closing the Science-Action Gap. In D. Schlosberg, J. Dryzek, & R. Norgaard (Eds.). Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. London, UK: Oxford University Press. [Blackboard] & [Google Books].
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2011). Public Opinion and Political Participation. In D. Schlosberg, J. Dryzek, & R. Norgaard (Eds.). Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. London, UK: Oxford University Press. [HTML]
  • Lindenfeld, L.A., D.M. Hall, B. McGreavy, L. Silka, D. Hart. 2012. Creating a place for Communication Research in Sustainability Science. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature & Culture. Volume 6 (March), pp. 23-43. [Library Gateway]
  • Revkin, A. (2011, April 14). Climate, Communication and the Nerd Loop.  The Dot Earth, New York Times. [Read and Watch Interview Randy Olson.]
  • Nisbet, M.C., Hixon, M., Moore, K.D., & Nelson, M. (2010). The Four Cultures: New Synergies for Engaging Society on Climate change. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 8, 329-331. [HTML]

Student Prepared Summaries of Readings

Lecture Slides for Jan 30, Feb. 6, Feb. 13 & 20, Feb. 27 Class Sessions

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • Scheufele, D.A. (2012). The Macro View in Science Controversies. Sackler “Science of Science Communication” Colloquium, National Academies of Sciences [Video]
  • Olson, R. (2011). Dude, Where’s My Climate Change Movement? Presentation to 50th Anniversary of the World Wildlife Fund. [ Watch the Video].

***ASSIGNMENT DUE***

One-page description of your intended research project.

FEBRUARY 6: Library Research Instruction

  • Meet at 1145pm in Library Classroom 306 for instruction on conducting library research for your annotated bibliography and project.  Spend the rest the class time finding studies and other resources relevant to your project.

FEBRUARY 13 and FEBRUARY 20: Ideology, Culture and Wicked Problems

Partisanship and Ideology

  • Guber, D.L. (2013). A Cooling Climate for Change? Party Polarization and the Politics of Global Warming.  American Behavioral Scientist, 57 (1): 93-115. [Library Gateway]
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2011). Projections of Influence: How Ideology Shapes Our Perceptions.  Chapter 4 in Climate Shift: Clear Vision for the Next Decade of Public Debate. American University: School of Communication. [HTML]

Wicked Problems, Values and Moral Foundations

  • Rayner, S. (1992). Cultural Theory and Risk Analysis. In S. Krimsky & D. Golding (Eds.), Social Theories of Risk (pp. 83-115). [Blackboard]
  • Kahan, D. (2012, Aug. 15). Why We Are Poles Apart on Climate Change. Nature. [HTML]
  • Hoffman, A. (2012). Climate Science as Culture War. Stanford Social Innovation Review. [HTML]
  • Shellenberger, M. & Nordhaus, T. (2013, Winter). Wicked Polarization: How Prosperity, Democracy and Experts Divided America. Breakthrough Journal. [HTML]
  • Noorgard, K. (2011). Climate Denial: Emotion, Psychology, Culture, and Political Economy. In D. Schlosberg, J. Dryzek, & R. Norgaard (Eds.). Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. London, UK: Oxford University Press. [Blackboard] & [Google Books]
  • Graham, J., Nosek, B.A., & Haidt, J. (2012). The Moral Stereotypes of Liberals and Conservatives: Exaggeration of Differences across the Political Spectrum. PLoS One. [HTML]
  • Revkin, A. (2012, Nov. 6). Why Climate Disasters Might Not Boost Public Engagement.  Dot Earth, New York Times. [HTML]

Student Prepared Summaries of Readings

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • Kahan, D. (2012). Science Communication as the New Political Science. Sackler “Science of Science Communication” Colloquium, National Academies of Science [Video]
  • Moyers & Co. (2012, Feb. 3). Interview with Jonathon Haidt. [Video]
  • Hoffman, A. (2012). Culture, Ideology and a Social Consensus on Climate Change. Simon Fraser University. [Video]

FEBRUARY 27: Scientists, Experts and Their Institutions

Reading

  • Pielke, R.A. (2007). The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. New York: Cambridge University Press, (pp 1-22 and pp 135-162.) [Blackboard]
  • Besley J. & Nisbet, M.C. (2011). How Scientists View the Public, the Media, and the Political Process. Public Understanding of Science [HTML].
  • Sarewitz, D. (2012, Jan. 2). Science Must Be Seen to Bridge the Political Divide. Nature. [HTML]
  • Hulme, M. (2009).  Why We Disagree about Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction, and Opportunity. New York: Cambridge University Press (pg. 72-108).
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2009). The Ethics of Framing Science. In B. Nerlich, B. Larson, & R. Elliott (Eds.). Communicating Biological Sciences: Ethical and Metaphorical Dimensions (pp 51-74). London: Ashgate. [HTML]
  • Osmond et al (2010). The Role of Interface Organizations in Science Communication and Understanding. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. [HTML]
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2010). Do Scientists Have a Special Responsibility to Engage in Advocacy? Q&A with Michael Nelson.  Age of Engagement blog, Big Think.com. [HTML].

Student Prepared Summaries of Readings

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • Pielke, R. (2013, Feb.) Promises & Paradoxes of Scientific Authority Panel. The STEPS Centre, University of Sussex, UK. [Video]
  • Hulme, M. (2013. Feb.). Promises & Paradoxes of Scientific Authority Panel. The STEPS Centre, University of Sussex, UK [Video]
  • Wynne, B. (2013, Feb.) Who’s Expertise Counts? Panel. The STEPS Centre, University of Sussex, UK [Video]
  • Pielke, R. (2012, Feb.) The Honest Broker. The Lowy Institute for International Policy [Video].
  • Harvard University Center for the Environment (2012, Sept. 27). Science & Advocacy: The Legacy of Silent Spring, Panel Discussion [Video]

***ASSIGNMENT DUE***

First Analysis Paper

MARCH 6 AND MARCH 20: Interest Groups, Social Movements & Politicization

Reading

Polarization and Politicization

  • Dunlap, R. & McCright, A. (2011). Organized Climate Change Denial. In D. Schlosberg, J. Dryzek, & R. Norgaard (Eds.). Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. London, UK: Oxford University Press. [Blackboard] & [Google Books]
  • Sarewitz, D. 2009. The Rightful Place of Science. Issues in Science and Technology, Summer 2009: 89-94. [PDF].
  • Nisbet, M.C. & Scheufele, D.A. (2012, Aug.) The Polarization Paradox: Why Hyperpartisanship Promotes Conservatism and Undermines Liberalism. Breakthrough Journal, 3, 55-69. [HTML]

The Environmental Movement

  • Schellenberger, M. & Nordhaus, T. (2004).  The Death of Environmentalism:  Global Warming Politics in a Post-Environmental World. The Breakthrough Institute.  [PDF]
  • Kloor, K. (2012). The Great Schism in the Environmental Movement. Slate magazine. [HTML]
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2011). Climate Shift: Clear Vision for the Next Decade of Public Debate. American University: School of Communication. [Introduction, Chapter 1 & Chapter 2]
  • Petra Bartosiewicz and Marissa Miley, “The Too Polite Revolution: Why the Recent Campaign to Pass Comprehensive Climate Legislation in the United States Failed.” Scholars Network. [PDF]
  • Skocpol, T. You Can’t Change the Climate from Inside Washington. Foreign Policy, 2013, Jan. 25. [HTML]
  • Nisbet, M.C., Markowitz, E.M., & Kotcher, J. (2012). Winning the Conversation: Framing and Moral Messaging in Environmental Campaigns. In L. Ahern & D. Bortree, (Eds.). Talking green: Exploring current issues in environmental communication. New York: Peter Lang. [PDF]

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • PBS Frontline “Climate of Doubt” [Video]
  • PBS American Experience: Earth Days [Video]
  • PBS Journey to Planet Earth: Plan B: Mobilizing to Save Mobilization [Video]

MARCH 27:  Journalists, News Organizations and Social Media

Reading

Covering Climate Change and Energy: Challenges Across News Beats

  • Revkin, A. (2007). Climate Change as News: Challenges in Communicating Environmental Science. In J.C. DiMento & P.M. Doughman (Eds.), Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. Boston, MA: MIT Press, pp. 139-160. [PDF]
  • Journalist Resource. Interview with Andrew Revkin. Shorenstein Center, Harvard University. [HTML]
  • Revkin, A. (2012, Sept. 27). How Rachel Carson Spurred Chemical Concerns by Highlighting Uncertainty. The Dot Earth blog, The New York Times.com [HTML]
  • Brumfiel, J. (2009). Supplanting the Old Media? Nature, 458, 274-277. [PDF]
  • Revkin, A. (2012). The Changing Newsroom Environment. Dot Earth, New York Times. [HTML]
  • Brainard, C. (2012). Environment Coverage TBD. Columbia Journalism Review. [HTML]
  • Russell, C. (2009, Sept/Oct). The New Energy Beat. Columbia Journalism Review. [HTML]
  • Russell, C. (2011, April 8). The Importance of Energy Reporters. Columbia Review of Journalism. [HTML]

False Balance and Misinformation

  • Nisbet, M.C. (2011). Death of a Norm? Evaluating False Balance in Media Coverage. Chapter 3 in Climate Shift: Clear Vision for the Next Decade of Public Debate. Washington, DC: American University (HTML).
  • Feldman, L. et al. (2011). Climate on Cable: The Nature and Impact of Global Warming Coverage on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC. International Journal of Press/Politics. [HTML].

Online News and Social Media

  • Fahy, J. & Nisbet, M.C. (2011). The Science Journalist Online: Shifting Roles and Emerging Practices.  Journalism: Theory, Practice & Criticism. [HTML]
  • Scheufele, D.A & Nisbet, M.C. (2012). Online News and the Demise of Political Disagreement. Communication Yearbook. [HTML].
  • Brossard, D. & Scheufele, D.A. (2012). Science, New Media and the Public. Science, 339, 40-41. [HTML]

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • Revkin, A. (2011).  Conveying the Climate Story. Presentation to the Google Science Communication Fellows Program. [Watch Video].

Student Prepared Summary of Readings

***ASSIGNMENT DUE MARCH 27***

Second Analysis Paper

APRIL 3: Technological Innovation and the Case of Food Biotechnology

  • Hallman, W.K. (2009).  GM Foods in Hindsight.  In E. Einsiedel (Eds), Emerging Technologies: From Hindsight to Foresight. Vancouver, CA: UBC Press. [Blackboard]
  • Nisbet, M., & Huge, M. (2007). Where Do Science Debates Come From? Understanding Attention Cycles and Framing. In The media, the Public, and Agricultural Biotechnology, 193–230. [PDF]
  • Brossard, D. & Nisbet, M.C. (2007). Deference to Scientific Authority Among a Low Information Public: Understanding American views about Agricultural Biotechnology.  International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 19, 1, 24-52. [PDF]
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2012, May 25). Squaring the Genetically Modified Crop Circle. New Scientist magazine. [HTML]
  • Kloor, K. (2012). Delusions of Danger. Slate magazine [HTML]
  • Sarewitz, D. (2012). Liberalism’s Modest Proposals. Breakthrough Journal. [HTML]

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • PBS Frontline Harvest of Fear [Video]
  • Lynas, M. (2012). Lecture to Oxford Food Conference. [Text and Video]

APRIL 10: The Local Economy Movement: A Case Study

  • Bill McKibben (2007). Deep Economy: The Wealth of Communities and the Durable Future. New York: Henry Holt.
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2013). Nature’s Prophet: Bill McKibben as Journalist, Public Intellectual, and Activist. Joan Shorenstein Center for Press, Politics, and Public Policy.  Discussion Paper Series.  Cambridge, MA: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University. [PDF]

Watch and Discuss Video in Class

  • PBS NOW Fixing the Future [Video]

**RESEARCH PAPER DUE**

APRIL 17: Investing in Community Based Resilience and Engagement

  • Moser, S.C., (2011). Adaptation, mitigation, and their disharmonious discontents: An essay. Climatic Change, 111(2):165–175 [PDF].
  • Moser, S. C. (in press). Navigating the political and emotional terrain of adaptation: Communication challenges when climate change comes home. In: Successful Adaptation to Climate Change: Linking Science and Practice in a Rapidly Changing World, ed. S.C. Moser and M.T. Boykoff, Routledge, London. [PDF]
  • Stockholm Resilience Centre. What is Resilience? An Introduction to Social Ecological Research. [PDF]
  • Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Leiserowitz A (2008). Communication and Marketing as Climate Change Intervention Assets: A Public Health Perspective. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 35(5), 488-500. [HTML]
  • Nisbet, M.C., Maibach, E. & Leiserowitz, A. (2011). Framing Peak Petroleum as a Public Health Problem: Audience Research and Participatory Engagement.  American Journal of Public Health, 101: 1620-1626. [HTML]
  • Nisbet, M.C. (2012). Diffusing Public Anger Over Climate Change. The Public Voice blog at The Breakthrough [HTML]

APRIL 24: TBA

ASSIGNMENT DUE

Third Analysis Paper