International Debate

“Fighting for the social sciences”

May 23, 2011 1819

A new post on the Center for International Forestry Research blog sets out the importance of social sciences in understanding the causes and consequences of climatic change.

Social science is treated as the poor cousin by climate scientists, according to Dr Diana Liverman, a plenary speaker at the Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers held in April. Dr Liverman demonstrated how natural scientists, who receive most of the funding for climate science, tend to harbour a series of incorrect assumptions about human behaviour and societies.

Physical scientists assume that the principal threat to food security from climate change is due to effects on agricultural yields. Research has been focussed on developing drought-tolerant crops for example, instead of examining how climate change affects food prices and politics. This ignores other factors that will determine availability and access to food. Recent instability in food prices (and consequent food riots in developing nations) has been driven not just by climate or competition from biofuels, but also due to changes in energy costs, population growth, dietary changes and financial speculation, says Liverman.

Dr Liverman argued that climate modellers and other physical scientists are naive when they ‘throw their research over the fence’ and assume that data such as climatic forecasts will benefit society at large. Research from Brazil has shown that drought forecasts can exacerbate poverty because drought predictions are used to justify the withdrawal of credit and seeds to farmers.

The drivers and consequences of environmental change are not pre-determined, despite widespread views to the contrary in the natural science community.  We are wrong to assume that population size is the main determinant of deforestation, for example, when a study by Erica Lambim (Stanford University) clearly shows that population is generally less important that economic, technological and political factors. In addition, reducing population growth in developing countries will not be achieved merely by supplying contraceptives. Huge declines in fertility rates are largely due to woman’s choices and this rests on improving the status of women through literacy and employment opportunities…

Read the full blog-post here.

Related Articles

New Guide Recognizes the Value of Good Curation
Bookshelf
October 29, 2025

New Guide Recognizes the Value of Good Curation

Read Now
The Musée des Confluences: Celebrating Secularism and the Sciences
Public Engagement
October 13, 2025

The Musée des Confluences: Celebrating Secularism and the Sciences

Read Now
Public Health and American Exceptionalism: Part II Raw Milk
Public Policy
September 27, 2025

Public Health and American Exceptionalism: Part II Raw Milk

Read Now
Public Health and American Exceptionalism: Part I – Vaccine Mandates
Public Policy
September 15, 2025

Public Health and American Exceptionalism: Part I – Vaccine Mandates

Read Now
CDC – Meltdown or Hissy Fit?

CDC – Meltdown or Hissy Fit?

At the time of writing, there is a new stand-off between the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Trump administration […]

Read Now
Ramanan Laxminarayan on Antibiotic Use

Ramanan Laxminarayan on Antibiotic Use

Let’s say you were asked to name the greatest health risks facing the planet. Priceton University economist Ramanan Laxminarayan, founder and director […]

Read Now
Isaac Asimov’s Critique of Algorithmic Thinking

Isaac Asimov’s Critique of Algorithmic Thinking

Isaac Asimov (1920-1992) left a legacy of influence that many more literary writers might envy. In his own lifetime, he was one […]

Read Now
0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments