A Reply to Cook and Oreskes on Climate Science Consensus Messaging

In their replies to our paper (Pearce et al., 2017), both Cook and Oreskes agree with our central point: that deliberating and mobilizing policy responses to climate change requires thinking beyond public belief in a scientific consensus. However, they both continue to defend consensus messaging, either because of ‘the dangers of neglecting to communicate the scientific consensus’ (Cook, 2017, p. 1) or because ‘“no consensus”…remains… a contrarian talking point’ (Oreskes, 2017, p. 1). Both highlight previously conducted market research by fossil fuel companies which suggested that scientific uncertainty provided a political weapon in fighting regulation, concluding that incorrect public perceptions of the scientific consensus weaken support for policy action (Oreskes, 2017, p. 2)

Design and analysis of DLS steel/composite thick-adhernd adhesive joints

The paper describes experimental and numerical techniques to study the structural design and behaviourof thick-adherend DLS joints that are based on steel /steel and steel/composites and epoxy adhesives, withfocus on long overlap joints. A standard fabrication method was followed to produce 60 specimens of various dimensions and materials

Beyond counting climate consensus

Several studies have been using quantified consensus within climate science as an argument to foster climate policy. Recent efforts to communicate such scientific consensus attained a high public profile but it is doubtful if they can be regarded successful. We argue that repeated efforts to shore up the scientific consensus on minimalist claims such as ‘humans cause global warming’ are distractions from more urgent matters of knowledge, values, policy framing and public engagement.  Such efforts to force policy progress through communicating scientific consensus misunderstand the relationship between scientific knowledge, publics and policymakers. More important is to focus on genuinely controversial issues within climate policy debates where expertise might play a facilitating role. Mobilising expertise in policy debates calls for judgment, context and attention to diversity, rather than deferring to formal quantifications of narrowly scientific claims

Understanding the influence of farmer motivations on changes to soil erosion risk on sites of former serious erosion in the South Downs National Park, UK

Serious soil erosion occurred in the South Downs National Park, southern England in the years 1982–2006 and details of around 400 sites are contained in a database. In 2010 we revisited 85 of the most serious sites where erosion of >10 m3 ha−1 y−1 had been recorded in order to assess land use change and any conservation measures undertaken. At 79% of the sites land use change had resulted in a reduction in the risk of erosion, most notably at 28 sites with a shift to permanent grass from winter cereals. At only 21% of sites was the risk of erosion unchanged. Twenty two farmers responsible for 66 of the sites were interviewed. Land management practices had changed on all of the fields of interest to this study since the time of the serious erosion events, to those which have the potential to lower soil erosion risk. Sixteen interviewees claimed that erosion was a motivating reason for changing their practices, due to either experiencing on or on- and off-farm impacts firsthand (12), having knowledge or suspicion of serious erosion having occurred on their land prior to their management (three), or having no knowledge of any serious erosion on their land but just wanting to reduce overall erosion risk (one). Amongst the main changes reported are changes of land use from winter cereals to grass or to overwinter stubble which have undoubtedly reduced the risk of erosion. However, some changed practices claimed by farmers, such as along-the-contour-working, earlier sowing and the use of rollers may be of little value. Furthermore, deeper analysis of farmers’ motivations regarding changes in land management practices suggests a complex picture in which a range of socio-economic influences come into play over time including financial incentives offered by agri-environmental schemes which were found to be an important driver of change. Future changes in farming economics may therefore undermine the reduction in erosion risk in the longer term

Participatory modelling for stakeholder involvement in the development of flood risk management intervention options

Advancing stakeholder participation beyond consultation offers a range of benefits for local flood risk management, particularly as responsibilities are increasingly devolved to local levels. This paper details the design and implementation of a participatory approach to identify intervention options for managing local flood risk. Within this approach, Bayesian networks were used to generate a conceptual model of the local flood risk system, with a particular focus on how different interventions might achieve each of nine participant objectives. The model was co-constructed by flood risk experts and local stakeholders. The study employs a novel evaluative framework, examining both the process and its outcomes (short-term substantive and longer-term social benefits). It concludes that participatory modelling techniques can facilitate the identification of intervention options by a wide range of stakeholders, and prioritise a subset for further investigation. They can help support a broader move towards active stakeholder participation in local flood risk management

Sediment source fingerprinting: benchmarking recent outputs, remaining challenges and emerging themes

Abstract: Purpose: This review of sediment source fingerprinting assesses the current state-of-the-art, remaining challenges and emerging themes. It combines inputs from international scientists either with track records in the approach or with expertise relevant to progressing the science. Methods: Web of Science and Google Scholar were used to review published papers spanning the period 2013–2019, inclusive, to confirm publication trends in quantities of papers by study area country and the types of tracers used. The most recent (2018–2019, inclusive) papers were also benchmarked using a methodological decision-tree published in 2017. Scope: Areas requiring further research and international consensus on methodological detail are reviewed, and these comprise spatial variability in tracers and corresponding sampling implications for end-members, temporal variability in tracers and sampling implications for end-members and target sediment, tracer conservation and knowledge-based pre-selection, the physico-chemical basis for source discrimination and dissemination of fingerprinting results to stakeholders. Emerging themes are also discussed: novel tracers, concentration-dependence for biomarkers, combining sediment fingerprinting and age-dating, applications to sediment-bound pollutants, incorporation of supportive spatial information to augment discrimination and modelling, aeolian sediment source fingerprinting, integration with process-based models and development of open-access software tools for data processing. Conclusions: The popularity of sediment source fingerprinting continues on an upward trend globally, but with this growth comes issues surrounding lack of standardisation and procedural diversity. Nonetheless, the last 2 years have also evidenced growing uptake of critical requirements for robust applications and this review is intended to signpost investigators, both old and new, towards these benchmarks and remaining research challenges for, and emerging options for different applications of, the fingerprinting approach

A community approach to catchment management

Involving the public in environmental management is high on the political agenda. This project has explored how such involvement might be achieved in the Loweswater catchment in Cumbria.The research was designed to create and support a new process to enable residents, land owners, institutions and scientists to work together to make decisions that affect the water quality of the lake

Latour’s object-orientated politics for a post-political age

What, for Latour, does politics mean? Or, to be more precise, what being for Latour is political – who or what is his political subject? To try and answer these questions, this article compares two strands of thinking concerned with the nature of politics and the political: Latour's Dingpolitik or object-orientated politics and post-foundational political writings on the post-political condition. Both Latour and critics of the post-political condition hold that the excluded and suppressed come back to haunt their suppressors, shattering illusions of Modernity and neoliberal, cosmopolitan ideals. In both accounts, the excluded hold the key to political change. However, while post-political discourse relies heavily on an abstract, universalized, absent human subject as the agent of emancipatory political change, for Latour the excluded that undermine Modernity's dichotomous constitution are the multiple beings and things that bring reality forth – concrete, variously entangled, translated and translating, mediated and mediating actants; quasi-objects, or, as he also calls them, mediators. Bringing these two different ways of thinking about politics and the political alongside each other I aim to show that Latour's ontologically grounded conception of politics has far greater transformative potential than the proposals found in post-foundational accounts of the post-political condition. These writings, in spite of their emancipatory intent, tend to remain at the level of critique while falling short of a vision for concrete, pragmatic proposals of how to compose a better common world