Social science and the challenge of global environmental change

Abstract

Summary: why social scientists care about GEC, some history, potential directions. 1) History: a) 1980, largely climate modeling; b) 1986, IGBP organize by ICSU to rationalize links between social and natural sciences; c) 1988, Tokyo, first meeting of ISSC, UNU, and International Federation of Institutes of Advanced Study (IFIAS); d) 1990, meeting of scientific advisory committee of IGBP. 2) Questions: a) why GEC when other topics exist?; b) can social science help?; and c) how does GEC influence social science. 3) Why GEC? Intellectually exciting, human environment (deforestation, water, agricultural land degradation, soil erosion, fossil fuel consumption, CO2 emissions and other gases). More important is the interplay of driving forces and human adaptation, particularly for policy studies. Challenges: lack of data, protocols, knowledge of natural/physical changing quickly, and the need to resist offering quick and dirty solutions. What is truly needed is institutes, scientists, data, and desire to test basic social theory. GEC is important to SS because it is a source of funding, GEC is a central issue, integrates different area, and uses new analytical methods. 4) Can social science truly add anything to GEC? GEC is an inherently human phenomenon, even if emphasis is still on the physical. IPCC outlines carbon sinks/sources, cloud cover, and ice sheets as important, but underemphasized the human dimensions of this (e.g., CO2 emissions or sea level rise adaptation). Similarly, rice-paddy methane emissions, savanna fires, energy consumption, and deforestation. Social scientists can question the simplifying assumptions of current models and can focus on the role of adaptation. 5) How does GEC influence social science? GEC extends social theory, expands analytical technique, and improves institutional resources, makes integration easier, looks at spatial and temporal scale.