Geesthachter Umfragen unter Klimaforschern: Von Hamburg nach Qingdao Hans von Storch, Dennis Bray Institute of Coastal Research HZG, Geesthacht, Germany 19 April 2018 - Forschungskolloquium „Neues aus der sozialwissenschaftlichen Klimaforschung“ , Hamburg

Background and motivation Climate science was for a long time an almost dormant science, mostly descriptive, with little public attention. With the advent of the perspective of man-made climate change in the 1970s the situation changed significantly. Climate science became mostly climate change science, and dealt not only with the dynamics of the climate system but also with the sensitivity of external influences, mostly human ones, with the impact of such changes and with the options societies have for responding to such changes. Thus, climate science began to occupy center stage in public and political debates and decision processes, with scientists playing significant roles as policy advisors to the political discussion and information providers to the general public. Our interest developed concerning the nature of the information being presented to the public and political sphere, and the potential of discrepancies between science and advice. As one part of the equation it was deemed necessary to gather the perceptions that climate scientists held of the abilities of climate science and an assessment of the impacts of global warming. As such, we began conducting surveys from the Institute of Coastal Research of HZG Research Center.

HZG-Surveys A series of surveys among international scholars of climate science. These were done by Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch, and we would like to extend this series, but would need some volunteers for doing so. The first survey was prepared by a series of anonymous in-depth interviews with international scholars, and was run from MPI of Meteorology. Later, (mostly) graduate students of climate and environmental sciences at the Ocean University of China (Qingdao) and the “School of Integrated Climate System Science“ (SICSS) at the University of Hamburg were surveyed. Chen Xueen made possible that we could run the survey in Qingdao; later Andreas Ullmann repeated it in Hamburg. Also Birgit Pfau-Effinger, Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch contributed to the evaluation of the results. We hope to be able to run the survey at other graduate schools. Parallel to that, Beate Ratter had FORSA surveying Hamburg citizens once a years since 2008 (https://www.hzg.de/imperia/md/content/hzg/institut_fuer_kuestenforschung/kso/studien/risikobewusstsein_der_hamburger_buerger_fuer_den_klimawandel_2017.pdf). Dennis Bray surveyed Baltic scientists http://www.baltex-research.eu/BACC/material/SurBACC_IBS_Report_48.pdf, and regional politicians https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/files/publication/2015/martinez_11_baltex_policymakers_survey_tolles_layout.pdf analysing the regional scientific and political perceptions of climate change. 

Part I: The Bray-and-von Storch surveys among international populations of climate scientists Originally a project funded by the Thyssen foundation, Dennis Bray (a sociologist) and Hans von Storch (a natural scientist) have surveyed the opinions of international climate scientists about the state of climate science, the state and change of climate and the role of science and climate in policy-making. After the end of the Thyssen-funding, the project was continued at the Helmholtz Zentrum Geesthacht. In 2016 Dennis Bray retired and went back to his home country Canada, while Hans von Storch became a part-time emeritus. So far, five surveys among international populations of climate scientists were designed and conducted. In this presentation, some results derived from these surveys are reviewed.

558 (undetermined response rate) The first of in so far five surveys among international populations of climate scientists were designed and conducted in 1996 and the last in 2013. We asked for their opinions on climate change, on climate models but also about the role of science and scientists in society and for policymaking. While questions were not strictly identical, many of the questions remained the same, and allow now an assessment to what extent opinions and perceptions among climate scientists have changed over time.   1996 2003 2008 2013 2015 Sample (scientists) 1000 unknown 2677 4491 3879 Distribution (countries) 5 30 35 53 Distribution means Hard Copy Electronic - uncontrolled - posting request for participation on institutional lists Electronic, controlled invitation Response Rate approximately 40% 558 (undetermined response rate) 18% 7% 17%

Selected Publications von Storch, Hans, and Dennis Bray, 2017 Manifestation and Attribution - more than models. Meteorology Hydrology and Water Management 5, 47-52, DOI: 10.26491/mhwm/67388 Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2017: The Normative Orientations of Climate Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 23; 1351–1367; DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9605-1 Ratter, Beate M.W., Katharina H.I. Philipp and Hans. von Storch, 2012: Between hype and decline – recent trends in public perception of climate change. Environmental Science & Policy 18: 3 – 8 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2011 An Alternative Means of Assessing Climate Models Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5; 1053-1062 Bray, Dennis, 2010 The Scientific Consensus of Climate Change Revisited Environmental Science & Policy 13; 340-350 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2009 "Prediction" or "Projection?": The Nomenclature of Climate Science Science Communcation 30; 534 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999 Climate Science: An empirical example of postnormal science Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80; 439-455 Bray, Dennis, and Has von Storch, 1999. Climate Science and the transfer of knowledge to public and political realms In: H. von Storch and G. Flöser: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65033-4, 287-328 Selected Publications

Selected Publications von Storch, Hans, and Dennis Bray, 2017 Manifestation and Attribution - more than models. Meteorology Hydrology and Water Management 5, 47-52, DOI: 10.26491/mhwm/67388 Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2017: The Normative Orientations of Climate Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 23; 1351–1367; DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9605-1 Ratter, Beate M.W., Katharina H.I. Philipp and Hans. von Storch, 2012: Between hype and decline – recent trends in public perception of climate change. Environmental Science & Policy 18: 3 – 8 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2011 An Alternative Means of Assessing Climate Models Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5; 1053-1062 Bray, Dennis, 2010 The Scientific Consensus of Climate Change Revisited Environmental Science & Policy 13; 340-350 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2009 "Prediction" or "Projection?": The Nomenclature of Climate Science Science Communcation 30; 534 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999 Climate Science: An empirical example of postnormal science Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80; 439-455 Bray, Dennis, and Hans von Storch, 1999. Climate Science and the transfer of knowledge to public and political realms In: H. von Storch and G. Flöser: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65033-4, 287-328 Selected Publications

Data from a series of four climate scientists’ evaluations of elements of climate models and of climate change - with the first from 1996 and the last from 2013 indicate a strong increase in agreement concerning issues of manifestation and attribution of climate change while the evaluation of climate models has changed little in the past 20 years.

Conclusion Obviously the growing conviction of ongoing man-made climate change is based on a variety of explanations, with modelling not being the predominant line of evidence. We suggest that it may be the repeated assessments by the IPCC, based on paleoclimatic evidence and stringent statistical analysis of the instrumental record which have led lead to the growing consensus of the warming and its causation.

Selected Publications von Storch, Hans, and Dennis Bray, 2017 Manifestation and Attribution - more than models. Meteorology Hydrology and Water Management 5, 47-52, DOI: 10.26491/mhwm/67388 Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2017: The Normative Orientations of Climate Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 23; 1351–1367; DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9605-1 Ratter, Beate M.W., Katharina H.I. Philipp and Hans. von Storch, 2012: Between hype and decline – recent trends in public perception of climate change. Environmental Science & Policy 18: 3 – 8 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2011 An Alternative Means of Assessing Climate Models Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5; 1053-1062 Bray, Dennis, 2010 The Scientific Consensus of Climate Change Revisited Environmental Science & Policy 13; 340-350 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2009 "Prediction" or "Projection?": The Nomenclature of Climate Science Science Communcation 30; 534 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999 Climate Science: An empirical example of postnormal science Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80; 439-455 Bray, Dennis, and Hans von Storch, 1999. Climate Science and the transfer of knowledge to public and political realms In: H. von Storch and G. Flöser: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65033-4, 287-328 Selected Publications

The expert group behind the CSSP (2008)–assessment concludes that climate modeling has been steadily improving over the past several decades. A similar assessment is made by IPCC in its consecutive reports. (Climate Models: An assessment of strengths and limitations, A Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research, Department of Energy, Office of Biological and Environmental Research, Washington, D.C., USA, 2008, p. 124.) On the other hand, the survey among climate scientists does not reveal such an advancement, as exemplified by the previous example and another this exemplary issue – how well models would reasonable assess the effect of elevated Greenhouse gas:

Selected Publications von Storch, Hans, and Dennis Bray, 2017 Manifestation and Attribution - more than models. Meteorology Hydrology and Water Management 5, 47-52, DOI: 10.26491/mhwm/67388 Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2017: The Normative Orientations of Climate Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 23; 1351–1367; DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9605-1 Ratter, Beate M.W., Katharina H.I. Philipp and Hans. von Storch, 2012: Between hype and decline – recent trends in public perception of climate change. Environmental Science & Policy 18: 3 – 8 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2011 An Alternative Means of Assessing Climate Models Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5; 1053-1062 Bray, Dennis, 2010 The Scientific Consensus of Climate Change Revisited Environmental Science & Policy 13; 340-350 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2009 "Prediction" or "Projection?": The Nomenclature of Climate Science Science Communcation 30; 534 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999 Climate Science: An empirical example of postnormal science Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80; 439-455 Bray, Dennis, and Hans von Storch, 1999. Climate Science and the transfer of knowledge to public and political realms In: H. von Storch and G. Flöser: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65033-4, 287-328 Selected Publications

Conclusion: There is a growing consensus in science that climate change is real and can be explained only by attribution this change dominantly to human emission of greenhouse gases – at the same time, the media coverage has been intermittently very intense, but the public concern (in the US and in Hamburg) seems stationary.

Update

Selected Publications von Storch, Hans, and Dennis Bray, 2017 Manifestation and Attribution - more than models. Meteorology Hydrology and Water Management 5, 47-52, DOI: 10.26491/mhwm/67388 Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2017: The Normative Orientations of Climate Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 23; 1351–1367; DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9605-1 Ratter, Beate M.W., Katharina H.I. Philipp and Hans. von Storch, 2012: Between hype and decline – recent trends in public perception of climate change. Environmental Science & Policy 18: 3 – 8 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2011 An Alternative Means of Assessing Climate Models Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5; 1053-1062 Bray, Dennis, 2010 The Scientific Consensus of Climate Change Revisited Environmental Science & Policy 13; 340-350 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2009 "Prediction" or "Projection?": The Nomenclature of Climate Science Science Communcation 30; 534 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999 Climate Science: An empirical example of postnormal science Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80; 439-455 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999. Climate Science and the transfer of knowledge to public and political realms In: H. von Storch and G. Flöser: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65033-4, 287-328 Selected Publications

Norms of Science: CUDOS In 1942 Robert K. Merton suggested a structure of the normative system of science by specifying norms that characterized it. The norms were assigned the abbreviation CUDOs: Communality, Universalism, Disinterestedness, and Organized skepticism. Using the results of an the 2013 on-line survey of climate scientists concerning the norms of science, this paper explores the climate scientists’ subscription to these norms.

Communality Versus Solitariness Communality implies that research results should be the property of the entire scientific community. Scientific findings constitute a common heritage in which the equity of the individual producer is severely limited. Solitariness, the counter-norm of communality, implies that findings should be kept secret at least until publication.

Disinterestedness Versus Interestedness Disinterestedness implies that scientists should have no emotional or financial attachment to their work, be personally detached from truth claims, accept conclusions shaped only by evidence, and scientists should not campaign for a particular point of view or outcome. Disinterestedness also reflects the quality of perusing personal academic interests rather than the interests of funding agencies, policy priorities or institutional strategies. Interestedness means that the scientist has personal interests at stake in the reception of his or her results and work.

Conclusion: The data suggests that while Merton’s CUDOs remain the overall guiding moral principles, they are not fully endorsed or present in the conduct of climate scientists: there is a tendency to withhold results until publication, there is the intention of maintaining property rights, there is external influence defining research and the tendency to assign the significance of authored work according to the status of the author rather than content of the paper.

Selected Publications von Storch, Hans, and Dennis Bray, 2017 Manifestation and Attribution - more than models. Meteorology Hydrology and Water Management 5, 47-52, DOI: 10.26491/mhwm/67388 Bray, D., and H. von Storch, 2017: The Normative Orientations of Climate Scientists. Science and Engineering Ethics 23; 1351–1367; DOI 10.1007/s11948-014-9605-1 Ratter, Beate M.W., Katharina H.I. Philipp and Hans. von Storch, 2012: Between hype and decline – recent trends in public perception of climate change. Environmental Science & Policy 18: 3 – 8 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2011 An Alternative Means of Assessing Climate Models Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 5; 1053-1062 Bray, Dennis, 2010 The Scientific Consensus of Climate Change Revisited Environmental Science & Policy 13; 340-350 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 2009 "Prediction" or "Projection?": The Nomenclature of Climate Science Science Communcation 30; 534 Bray, Dennis and Hans von Storch, 1999 Climate Science: An empirical example of postnormal science Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 80; 439-455 Bray, Dennis, and Hans von Storch, 1999. Climate Science and the transfer of knowledge to public and political realms In: H. von Storch and G. Flöser: Anthropogenic Climate Change, Springer Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65033-4, 287-328 Selected Publications

Post-Normality Results from 1st survey, from 1996 Considering climate to be a natural resource implies the need for its governance similar to other natural resources, and implies a relationship with the economic well being of societies. On average, climate scientists answered in the 1996 survey the question “Climate should be considered a natural resource” with 2.0 - indicating that they tend to perceive the topic of their discipline to extend well beyond the expression of weather and its statistics. Results from 1st survey, from 1996

Self-assessments of scientists about climate policy Climate scientists were asked if they felt “There is enough uncertainty about the phenomenon of global warming that there is no need for immediate policy decisions”. Here there is undisputed support for immediate policy to be implemented with the overall mean response of 5.6.

Self-assessments of scientists about climate policy When asked “To what degree do you think it would be possible for most societies to adapt to climate change without having to make substantial changes to current social practices?”, the majority of scientists tended to agree to some extent that there is a need for many changes. The estimation of the risk may be considered a mostly natural science activity but the acceptability of the risk is a political issue.

Conclusion Climate scientists .. transgress into policy-prescribing regularly so, uniformly (same direction) so. Typical pattern of a science in postnormal conditions (high inherent uncertaintry; high stake, urgend decisions, values in dispute). Climate science is in a post-normal phase (Funtovicz and Ravetz)

Part II: Surveys among young scientists in Qingdao and Hamburg Among environmental students in Qingdao: at the Ocean University of China (OUC) in two periods from May 1 to December 31, 2015 and from September 1 to 30 2016. The respondents were recruited both from the undergraduates and from the post-graduates (master level and PhD level). About 200 Chinese students were informed about the research project through a telephone request or through social network. A total of 87 undergraduates and post-graduates completed the online survey, which was drawn up both in English and in Chinese. Among climate science students in Hamburg at the Cluster of Excellence “Integrated Climate System Analysis and Prediction” (CliSAP) at the Universität Hamburg from June 1 to June 26, 2017. The respondents were recruited from both the graduate school „School of Integrated Climate System Science“ (SICSS) and the CliSAP master's course. 42% were German nationals, 5% from Brazil and fewer from 24 other countries. A total of 116 graduates and post-graduates were contacted via email and invited to participate in the online survey. 72 individuals finished the survey leading to an overall response rate of 62 percent. The questions in the two surveys among students were identical. Work done by Hans von Storch, Chen Xueen (陈学恩), Birgit Pfau-Effinger, Dennis Bray und Andreas Ullmann

Summary We have run surveys among Qingdao and Hamburg students, featuring a set of identical questions, which have also been used in a series of five „Bray and von Storch“ surveys among climate researchers since 1996. We do not claim that your results would be representative for Chinese or German students; however, we propose a number of hypotheses, which need independent confirmation. There is high confidence among Hamburg that climate change is real, and that the driving case is anthropogenic; this confidence is considerably smaller in Qingdao. In Qingdao the dominant task of science is disentangling causes and effects, while in Hamburg it is „the motivation of people to act“. The simulation of clouds and precipitation is not considered good, but hydrodynamics and radiation are considered much better. Hamburg students have more confidence in models than in the other two samples.

The surveys provide an interesting data base About the changing positions held by climate scientists about the state of climate science knowledge, specifically about climate models, but also about the role of science and scientists in the public and in informing policymaking. which covers the time 1996-2013 (corresponding to IPCC SAR to AR5) Which may be extended, with so far last survey in 2015 – but others may want to continue which is available to interested scientists.

We invite you to use our data

Bray-and von Storch surveys Material and reports available on http://www.academia.edu  No. 1 and 2 from 1996 and 2003: https://www.academia.edu/4484361/The_Bray_and_von_Storch-surveys_of_the_perceptions_of_climate_scientists_1996_2003_report_codebooks_and_XLS_data No. 3 from 2008: https://www.academia.edu/2365610/The_Bray-and-von_Storch_Surveys_on_the_perceptions_of_climate_scientists_2008_3_report_codebook_and_XLS_data No. 4 from 2013: https://www.academia.edu/5211187/The_Bray-and-von_Storch_Surveys_A_survey_of_the_perceptions_of_climate_scientists_2013_report_codebook_and_XLS_data No. 5 from 2015/16 https://www.academia.edu/26328070/The_Bray-and-von_Storch_5th_International_Survey_of_Climate_Scientists_2015_2016_Report_codebook_and_XLS_data

Qingdao and Hamburg surveys For the Hamburg survey, the original data are available, but for the Qingdao survey only the frequency tables. The data are not made public as we are working with a publication. When this has been done, the data will be made public. Upon personal request, we will make the data available.