liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
Refine search result
1 - 27 of 27
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Rows per page
  • 5
  • 10
  • 20
  • 50
  • 100
  • 250
Sort
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
  • Standard (Relevance)
  • Author A-Ö
  • Author Ö-A
  • Title A-Ö
  • Title Ö-A
  • Publication type A-Ö
  • Publication type Ö-A
  • Issued (Oldest first)
  • Issued (Newest first)
  • Created (Oldest first)
  • Created (Newest first)
  • Last updated (Oldest first)
  • Last updated (Newest first)
  • Disputation date (earliest first)
  • Disputation date (latest first)
Select
The maximal number of hits you can export is 250. When you want to export more records please use the Create feeds function.
  • 1.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Battling Promethean dreams and Trojan horses: Revealing the critical discourses of geoengineering2014In: Energy Research & Social Science, ISSN 2214-6296, E-ISSN 2214-6326, Vol. 2, p. 135-144Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Geoengineering could counteract climate change by either altering the earth's global energy balance by reflecting sunlight or removing CO2 from the atmosphere. Geoengineering evokes various ethical and political challenges that are increasingly reflected in public debate and deliberation. Via a qualitative textual analysis of 1500 articles, we investigate discursive claims critical of geoengineering, considering what subjects are the most controversial, and what worldviews, values, and problematizations are shared by the actors subscribing to this discourse. We argue that the controversy about geoengineering differs, discursively, from other techno-political conflicts. Geoengineering proponents are described as reluctantly favouring research and deployment and displaying an unusual self-reflexivity, as they are well aware of and seriously consider all the technology's risks. Our analysis demonstrates that the discourse critical of geoengineering differs from and questions the dominant pro-geoengineering discourse in several profound ways with lasting implications for energy scholarship and analysis.

  • 2.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University. Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research .
    Climate change and the convergence between ENGOs and buisness: on the loss of utopian energies2011In: Environmental Values, ISSN 0963-2719, E-ISSN 1752-7015, Vol. 20, no 1, p. 75-94Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The conflicts permeating the environmental debate since the 1960s have mainly involved two actors: multinational companies and international environmental organizations (ENGOs). Today, there are signs that the antagonism is ending with regards to co-operation and strategy. We argue that this convergence is no longer limited to specific joint projects, but is also prevalent at the idea and policy levels. Both actors have begun describing problems in similar terms, articulating the same goals and recommending the same solutions. Such convergence offers advantages in efforts to counteract climate change but also some problems: declining citizen trust in ENGOs, risk of intellectually impoverished environmental and energy debates, and loss of alternate visions and values.

  • 3.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Climate change and the convergence between ENGOs and business2015In: Socio-technical perspectives on sustainable energy systems / [ed] Jonas Anshelm, Kajsa Ellegård, Jenny Palm, Harald Rohracher, Linköping: Linköping Unversity , 2015, p. 285-306Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 4.
    Bryngelsson, Mårten
    et al.
    KTH. Energiprocesser.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Energy policy on shaky ground?: A study of CCS scenarios2009In: Energy Procedia, ISSN 1876-6102, Vol. 1, no 1, p. 4673-4680Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Scenarios play an important role for the societal acceptance of CCS. This paper looks into influential reports containing CCS scenarios and analyses results, key assumptions and drivers for CCS' deployment. Significant uncertainties regarding CCS' development were in several cases excluded or marginalized. Despite these shortcomings, scenarios support a massive deployment of CCS and reflect an undivided optimism. If CCS would fail to meet the high expectations a backlash could follow. Indications were found that new scenarios including uncertainties are needed to balance this over-optimism. So-called unpleasant scenarios are often valuable in helping decision makers develop flexible strategies and policies.

  • 5.
    Bryngelsson, Mårten
    et al.
    KTH, Energiprocesser.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hektor, Erik
    Chalmers, VoM.
    Holmberg, Rurik
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Med fokus på koldioxidproblematiken –Tre systemperspektiv på koldioxidavskiljning och flexibla mekanismer2005Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Focusing on carbon dioxide – Three system approaches on carbon dioxide capture and storage and flexible mechanisms

    This work is based on the assumption that solutions to the present day problem with carbon dioxide and climate change can be either major changes in behavioral patterns or technical and economical methods. We have decided to analyze the possibilities and weaknesses in the two latter options. The work is divided into three major parts. Part 1 deals with the issue how carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) – a technology being developed at present – is perceived by various actors in the Swedish society. CCS can be seen as a continuation of the present path-dependence. A common view is that the market mechanism should be left to make the final decision on the future of CCS. Part 2 is a study on possibilities of CCS in the pulp industry in Sweden. At present there is no powerful enough mechanism in place to reward such drastic carbon dioxide reducing measures. With relatively small overall emissions in Sweden, further reduction potential could however be found in the pulp industry. The question is who will foot the bill. Part 3 is focused on an economic means of addressing carbon dioxide emissions, Joint Implementation (JI), and how it might encounter transaction costs of a discouraging magnitude. To a large extent, transaction costs tend to be country specific, with the highest costs where JI otherwise would have most impact on reductions.

  • 6.
    Buhr, Katarina
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research. IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute, Box 210 60, SE-100 31 Stockholm, Sweden.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Capturing the Stories of Corporations: A comparison of media debates on carbon capture and storage in Norway and Sweden2011In: Global Environmental Change, ISSN 0959-3780, E-ISSN 1872-9495, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 336-345Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The development and deployment of carbon capture and storage (CCS) are sensitive to public debates that socially frame the technology. This study examines the evolving CCS debates, focusing on the media's framing of firms. Corporations are central CCS actors, and we analyze them in light of the nation-state, which has been emphasized in previous research as the primary context of CCS politics. Empirically, we compare framings of Statoil and Vattenfall in the Norwegian and Swedish media, drawing on a qualitative dataset of news media articles published between 2005 and 2009. We conclude that firms make regular media statements either to foster legitimacy or to respond to criticism of CCS. We also conclude that framing is not necessarily linked to technological success or failure and that interpretations of the technology have different forms depending on whether the related activity occurs in domestic or foreign markets. Finally, we explain the media framings based on the domestic energy situation and politics.

  • 7.
    Galis, Vasilis
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Partisan Scholarship in Technoscientific Controversies: Reflections on Research Experience2012In: Science as Culture, ISSN 0950-5431, E-ISSN 1470-1189, Vol. 21, no 3, p. 335-364Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Several academic traditions have addressed epistemological objectivity and/or partisanship in the study of technoscientific controversies. On the one hand, positivist andrelativist scholars agree that the political commitments of the social researcher should notimpinge on scientific enquiry, while on the other hand, feminist and Marxist scholars notonly take stands in diverse technoscientific debates, but even claim their agendas to bemore credible than those of orthodox scientists. Such perspectives stress that all researchis partisan in one way or another because it involves questions of who controls,manipulates, and establishes decisions, facts, and knowledge. With this in mind, it ispossible to identify different forms of partisan research including capture byparticipants, de facto and overt partisanship, and mercenary scholarship. These differentforms of partisan scholarship are characterised by differences in the motives underlyingepistemological choices of research topic and method, personal commitments to thefields studied, use of research findings in controversies, and positioning of results inwider debates. Two examples help to illustrate partisan scholarship: first, a study of newtechnologies for managing climate change (carbon dioxide capture and storage); andsecond, the construction of the new underground metro system in Athens and itsaccommodation of accessibility standards. Both cases entail partisan positions and raisesimilar concerns about the orthodox epistemological assumptions underpinningsociotechnical systems, especially when it comes to technoscientific controversies.Supporting STS partisan scholarship, therefore, enables greater social and democraticengagement with technoscientific development.

  • 8.
    Haikola, Simon
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    From polarization to reluctant acceptance: Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS) and the post-normalization of the climate debate2019In: Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, ISSN 1943-815X, E-ISSN 1943-8168, Vol. 16, no 1, p. 45-69Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The paper covers the public debate on BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) between 2008 and 2018. Through a qualitative analysis of around 800 feature articles, editorials, and opinion pieces published in English, German, Swedish, Danish, and Norwegian in news media and debates sections of scientific media, we highlight conspicuous aspects of the debate and relate them to the theoretical concept of post-normal science. We find that the debate is characterized by an emphasis on values, scientific uncertainty and the integrity of science, premised on a pervading sense of urgency. To a significant extent, the debate can be understood as a “normal” view of science questioning what it perceives to be unscientific model-based climate scenarios, and the scenarios, in turn, can be seen as a response to post-normal circumstances. The urgency permeating the debate provides conditions for open debate about ethical and epistemological uncertainty. The debate goes through a period of polarization – corroborating findings from previous studies on the climate science debate after COP21 – between an intense critique of BECCS inclusion in climate scenarios and reluctant acceptance thereof. Towards the end of the studied period, emphasis shifts towards reluctant acceptance, indicating that post-normal debate may only occur as a temporary state always tending towards new consensus.

  • 9.
    Haikola, Simon
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Fridahl, Mathias
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Views of BECCS among modelers and policymakers2018In: Bioenergy with carbon capture and storage: From global potentials to domestic realities / [ed] Mathias Fridahl, Brussels: Liberal European Forum , 2018, p. 17-31Chapter in book (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Chapter 3 (“Views of BECCS Among Modelers and Policymakers”) moves from exploring the magnitude of BECCS deployment in climate scenarios to outlining caveats raised by modelers themselves. The chapter addresses how modelers navigate the landscape of political and academic pressures to deliver timely, insightful, and relevant policy advice despite inherent and crucial uncerttainties and increasing model complexity. Based on interviews with modelers, the chapter discusses perspectives on uncertainty, the communication of IAM results, and the models’ relationship to reality. The chapter also discuss views of BECCS among policymakers whom generally want to give relatively low priority to investments in BECCS. Failing to invest in the future delivery of BECCS, combined with today’s lack of mitigation ambition, limits future generations’ maneuvering room to resolve the climate crisis.

  • 10.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Ambivalence in calculating the future: the case of re-engineering the world2014In: Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences, ISSN 1943-815X, E-ISSN 1943-8168, ISSN 1943-815X, Vol. 11, no 2, p. 125-142Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Recently, climate engineering and particularly sulphur aerosol injection (SAI) have entered the arena of international climate change politics. The idea behind SAI is very simple: to reflect sunlight and heat back into space by injecting particles into the stratosphere. SAI has the theoretical potential to moderate anthropogenic climate change in a timely fashion and at very low costs but may also cause major environmental harm. Determining the future of SAI will entail dealing with many major uncertainties such as assessing risks, costs and benefits. This paper critically investigates scientific knowledge production under conditions of major uncertainty. It discusses how uncertainty, ethics and social considerations are treated in the SAI literature, which applies techno-economic models. In the simplest studies, important uncertainties are excluded from the models, but the more complex studies include many uncertainties, which may have considerable influence on the results and recommendations. In some cases the modelled results are overshadowed or strengthened by ethical discussions or methodological reflexivity that emphasize uncertainties and model limitations. There seems to be ambivalence between constructing certainty, on one hand, and an awareness of methodological limitations, on the other. Finally, the value of these papers for decision-makers and other concerned groups is discussed.

  • 11.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Colonising the future: the case of carbon capture and storage2015In: Socio-technical perspectives on sustainable energy systems / [ed] Jonas Anshelm, Kajsa Ellegård, Jenny Palm, Harald Rohracher, Linköping: Linköping University , 2015, p. 217-237Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 12.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Colonising the future: The case of carbon capture and storage2012In: The Social Dynamics of Carbon Capture and Storage: : Understanding CCS Representations, Governance and Innovation / [ed] Nils Markusson, Simon Shackley and Benjamin Evar, London & New York, USA: Routledge, 2012, 1, p. 74-90Chapter in book (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Carbon capture and storage (CCS) has rapidly emerged as a crucial technological option for decarbonising electricity supply and hence mitigating climate change. This book sheds light on this potentially vital technology and its future

  • 13.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Kolets återkomst: Koldioxidavskiljning och lagring i vetenskap och politik2008Doctoral thesis, monograph (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    In this dissertation an emerging technology to manage climate change is studied. The technology is carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS) and was reviewed by the IPCC in 2005. IPCC claims that CCS could contribute 15–55% to the cumulative mitigation effort worldwide until 2100 and reduce the costs of stabilizing CO2 concentrations by 30%. The EU promotes CCS and believes that climate change cannot be managed unless CCS is promptly implemented. In this context CCS is labelled as a sustainable technology. However CCS deals with long-term waste disposal, a significant technological complexity and is meant to be installed mainly in coal-fired power plants. Large scale implementation of CCS might lead to a rise in coal usage and concerns are raised this will impede the development of renewable energy.

    The aim of this dissertation is to analyze the scientific and political efforts to show that CCS is a rational and viable solution to the climate change problems. The study is conducted from the perspective of ecological modernization and is undertaken through a review of scientific reports, mass media articles, political documents and interviews. Scenarios and prognoses have a central position in making a future of large-scale CCS implementation plausible: through the scenarios, a linear development trend is visualized in which technological and scientific problems are assumed to be solved as CCS is implemented. CCS is described as a technology with substantial potential and is in the mass media often pictured as indispensable. A more nuanced picture appears when analyzing interviews with CCS-experts. The understanding of why this technology is supported by several influential actors is deepened. The dominating description of CCS and impact on the energy systems is compatible to the characteristics of ecological modernization and thus also to the predominating way of practising energy and climate politics today.

  • 14.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Has the grand idea of geoengineering as Plan B run out of steam?2016In: The Anthropocene Review, ISSN 2053-0196, E-ISSN 2053-020X, Vol. 3, no 1, p. 64-74Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Paul Crutzen’s 2006 call for geoengineering research triggered public debate in the mass media of several countries. Since then, a common belief among numerous involved scientists has been that more geoengineering experimentation or research is needed and that geoengineering should be carefully considered in a precautionary way as an emergency option or ‘Plan B’. Despite the controversial potential of geoengineering in terms of mega-risks, ethical dilemmas and governance challenges, public geoengineering debate in the daily press from 2006 to 2013 was heavily dominated by accounts of scientists’ arguments for more geoengineering research or even deployment, only about 8% of mass media articles expressing criticism of geoengineering. However, based on a reading of 700 articles published worldwide in 2014 and 2015, we demonstrate a gradual shift in the coverage, and the daily press now primarily reports critical views of geoengineering technologies. The patterns outlined here point in the same direction: It seems as though the grand idea of geoengineering as Plan B is fading.

  • 15.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    The Last Chance to Save the Planet?: An Analysis of the Geoengineering Advocacy Discourse in the Public Debate2014In: Environmental humanities, ISSN 2201-1919, E-ISSN 2201-1919, Vol. 5, p. 101-123Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Geoengineering, i.e., the deliberate manipulation of the global climate using grand-scale technologies, poses new challenges in terms of environmental risks and human–nature relationships. Until recently, these technologies were considered science fiction, but they are now being reconsidered by researchers, leading to an emerging public debate. Our aim is to improve our understanding of the public discourse on geoengineering in mass media. We analyze 1500 articles published from 2005 to 2013, constructing four coherent storylines that represent most of the geoengineering advocacy in the public discourse in mass media. We scrutinize inconsistencies in this discourse and argue that geoengineering may be the first example of a grand-scale technology that in some important respects has clear postmodern tendencies: geoengineering advocacy, for example, is not based on objective truth claims of the natural sciences and does not promise a better world

  • 16.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Bryngelsson, Mårten
    Kungliga tekniska högskolan - Kemiteknik.
    Expert opinions on carbon dioxide capture and storage: A framing of uncertainties and possibilities2009In: Energy Policy, ISSN 0301-4215, E-ISSN 1873-6777, Vol. 37, no 6, p. 2273-2282Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    There are many uncertainties and knowledge gaps regarding the development of carbon dioxide capture and storage (CCS)—e.g., when it comes to costs, life-cycle effects, storage capacity and permanence. In spite of these uncertainties and barriers, the CCS research community is generally very optimistic regarding CCS’ development. The discrepancy between the uncertainties and the optimism is the point of departure in this study, which is based on interviews with 24 CCS experts. The aim is to analyse experts’ framings of CCS with focus on two key aspects: (i) the function and potential of CCS and (ii) uncertainties. The optimism among the CCS experts is tentatively explained. The interpretative flexibility of CCS is claimed to be an essential explanation for the optimism. CCS is promoted from a wide variety of perspectives, e.g., solidarity and peace, bridge to a sustainable energy system, sustaining the modern lifestyle and compatibility with the fossil fuel lock-in. Awareness of the uncertainties and potential over-optimism is warranted within policy and decision making as they often rely on scientific forecasts and experts’ judgements.

  • 17.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Chubarenko, Boris
    1Atlantic Branch of P.P Shirhov Institute of Oceanology of Russian Academy of Sciences, Kaliningrad, Russia.
    Attitudes to climate changes in everyday management practice at the level of Kalingrad region municipalities: Interim Report on the ECOSUPPORT BONUS+ project "Advanced modeling tool for scenarios of the Baltic Sea ECOsystem to SUPPORT decision making" and RFBR Project No 08-05-924212010Report (Other academic)
  • 18.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Mårten, Lind
    Kungliga tekniska högskolan, Kemiteknik.
    Lagring av koldioxid: lösning eller dimridå?2009In: Osäkrat klimat - laddad utmaning / [ed] Birgitta Johansson, Stockholm: Formas , 2009, p. 343-357Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 19.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Rayner, Steve
    University of Oxford, United Kingdom.
    Wibeck, Victoria
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Climate engineering2015In: Research handbook on climate governance / [ed] Karin Bäckstrand, Eva Lövbrand, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2015, 1, p. 411-422Chapter in book (Other academic)
  • 20.
    Hansson, Anders
    et al.
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Wibeck, Victoria
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Department of Water and Environmental Studies. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    The social researcher, the public and climate change research2009Report (Other academic)
  • 21.
    Meier, Marcus
    et al.
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Andersson, Helen
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Arheimer, Berit
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Blenckner, Thorsten
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Chubarenko, Boris
    Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia.
    Donnelly, Chantal
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Eilola, Kari
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Gustafsson, Bo
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research.
    Höglund, Anders
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Kuznetsov, Ivan
    SMHI, Sweden.
    MacKenzie, Brian
    Technical University of Denmark, Denmark.
    Müller-Karulis, Bärbel
    Stockholm University.
    Neumann, Thomas
    Leibniz-Institut fur Ostseeforschung, Germany.
    Niiranen, Susa
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Piwowarczyk, Joanna
    Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland.
    Raudsepp, Urmas
    Tallinn University of Technology, Estonia.
    Reckermann, Marcus
    International BALTEX Secretariat, Germany.
    Ruoho-Airola, Tuija
    Finnish Meteorological Institute, Finland.
    Savchuk, Oleg
    Stockholm University, Sweden.
    Schenk, Fredrik
    Institute for Coastal Research, Germany.
    Schimanke, Semjon
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Väli, Germo
    SMHI, Sweden.
    Weslawski, Jan-Marcin
    Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland.
    Zorita, Eduardo
    Institute for Coastal Research, Germany.
    Comparing reconstructed past variations and future projections of the Baltic Sea ecosystem: First results from multi-model ensemble simulations2012In: Environmental Research Letters, ISSN 1748-9326, E-ISSN 1748-9326, Vol. 7, no 3, p. 034005-Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Multi-model ensemble simulations for the marine biogeochemistry and food web of the Baltic Sea were performed for the period 1850–2098, and projected changes in the future climate were compared with the past climate environment. For the past period 1850–2006, atmospheric, hydrological and nutrient forcings were reconstructed, based on historical measurements. For the future period 1961–2098, scenario simulations were driven by regionalized global general circulation model (GCM) data and forced by various future greenhouse gas emission and air- and riverborne nutrient load scenarios (ranging from a pessimistic 'business-as-usual' to the most optimistic case). To estimate uncertainties, different models for the various parts of the Earth system were applied. Assuming the IPCC greenhouse gas emission scenarios A1B or A2, we found that water temperatures at the end of this century may be higher and salinities and oxygen concentrations may be lower than ever measured since 1850. There is also a tendency of increased eutrophication in the future, depending on the nutrient load scenario. Although cod biomass is mainly controlled by fishing mortality, climate change together with eutrophication may result in a biomass decline during the latter part of this century, even when combined with lower fishing pressure. Despite considerable shortcomings of state-of-the-art models, this study suggests that the future Baltic Sea ecosystem may unprecedentedly change compared to the past 150 yr. As stakeholders today pay only little attention to adaptation and mitigation strategies, more information is needed to raise public awareness of the possible impacts of climate change on marine ecosystems.

  • 22.
    Piwowarczyk, Joanna
    et al.
    Institute of Oceanology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Poland.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hjerpe, Mattias
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Department of Water and Environmental Studies. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Chubarenko, Boris
    Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia.
    Karmanov, Konstantin
    Shirshov Institute of Oceanology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia.
    Climate change in the baltic sea region: A cross-country analysis of institutional stakeholder perceptions2012In: Ambio, ISSN 0044-7447, E-ISSN 1654-7209, Vol. 41, no 6, p. 645-655Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Before climate change is considered in long-term coastal management, it is necessary to investigate how institutional stakeholders in coastal management conceptualize climate change, as their awareness will ultimately affect their actions. Using questionnaires in eight Baltic Sea riparian countries, this study examines environmental managers’ awareness of climate change. Our results indicate that problems related to global warming are deemed secondary to short-term social and economic issues. Respondents agree that problems caused by global warming will become increasingly important, but pay little attention to adaptation and mitigation strategies. Current environmental problems are expected to continue to be urgent in the future. We conclude that an apparent gap exists between decision making, public concerns, and scientific consensus, resulting in a situation in which the latest evidence rarely influences commonly held opinions.

  • 23.
    Stephens, Jennie C
    et al.
    Clark University, Worcester, USA.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Liu, Yue
    Clark University, USA.
    de Coninck, Heleen
    Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
    Vajjhala, Shalini
    Resources for the Future (RFF), USA.
    Characterizing the International Carbon Capture and Storage Community2011In: Global Environmental Change, ISSN 0959-3780, E-ISSN 1872-9495, ISSN 0959-3780, Vol. 21, no 2, p. 379-390Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a controversial climate change mitigation technology that has been receiving increased public and private investment over the past decade in several countries. During this time, a diverse international network of professionals focused on the advancement of CCS technology has emerged. Within this international CCS community, a shared perception of the value of advancing CCS technology is generally assumed, and this community has been influential in lobbying for increased support for the development of CCS in many countries and at the international level. The phenomenon of an apparently shared perspective within a specific community relates to Haas’ (1992a) description of the evolution of an epistemic community, or a knowledge-based network of recognized experts who “not only hold in common a set of principled and causal beliefs but also have shared notions of validity and a shared policy enterprise”. Understanding the extent to which a given community can be characterized as an epistemic community can provide insights about the effectiveness of its policy intervention, its association with the broader public, and the success of communicating the messages that it wants to convey. The goal of this research is to begin to explore the nature of the CCS community; to provide a preliminary characterization of the community, and to consider whether and in what ways the community might be considered to be an epistemic community or a compilation of multiple different epistemic communities. This characterization suggests that although the CCS community may be influencing decision-makers and successfully garnering political support for advancing CCS technology, a potential disconnect with the concerns of a broader public is deserving of more attention and social science research.

  • 24.
    Stigson, Peter
    et al.
    Mälardalen University, IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet.
    Haikola, Simon
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Buhr, Katarina
    IVL Svenska Miljöinstitutet.
    Prospects for Swedish acceptance of carbon dioxide storage in the Baltic Sea: Learning from other energy projects2016In: Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology, E-ISSN 2152-3878, Vol. 6, no 2, p. 188-196Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    As initiatives are taken in Sweden to evaluate the geological potential for carbon dioxide storage in the adjacent Baltic Sea, experiences from elsewhere may provide lessons about perceptions of and potential opposition toward carbon capture and storage (CCS). A comprehensive analysis of storage feasibility needs to include the issue of social acceptance. The knowledge of CCS is low in Sweden however and there are no Swedish CCS projects to learn from. This paper therefore draws on lessons from other large-scale energy projects that are embedded in similar Baltic Sea contexts to complement lessons on CCS acceptance provided in the literature. The aim of this study is to facilitate an understanding of acceptance of potential future CO2 storage initiatives in the Swedish Baltic Sea region and to analyze what contextual factors are likely to be determinative of the outcome of these and similar projects. The study identifies climate change as one such key contextual factor, which can often be used both to support and oppose a large-scale energy project. Furthermore, the study finds that there are perceptions of uncertainties regarding the regulatory framework that need to be ad-ressed in order to facilitate the planning of CCS projects in the region.

  • 25.
    Stigson, Peter
    et al.
    IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute Ltd, Stockholm, Sweden .
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, The Tema Institute, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research . Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Lind, Mårten
    ZeroMission, Stockholm, Sweden .
    Obstacles for CCS deployment: An analysis of discrepancies of perceptions2012In: Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, ISSN 1381-2386, E-ISSN 1573-1596, Vol. 17, no 6, p. 601-619Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    The potential for CO2 emission reductions through carbon capture and storage (CCS)is depending on investments that can bring the technology from the current R&D through tocommercial applications. The intermediate step in this development is demonstration plants thatcan prove the technical, economic, social, and ecological feasibility of CCS technologies. Basedon a CCS stakeholder questionnaire survey and a literature review, we critically analysediscrepancies regarding perceptions of deployment obstacles and experiences from early demonstrationplants. The analysis identifies discrepancies between CCS policies versus importantdeployment considerations and CCS stakeholder policy demands. The discrepancy gap isemphasised by lessons from restructured, postponed, and cancelled CCS projects. To bridgethis cognitive gap towards proving CCS through demonstration activities, the article highlightspolicy implications of establishing a broad understanding of deployment obstacles. Attention tothese obstacles is important for policymakers and industry in channelling efforts to demonstratingCCS, hence validating the current focus on CCS as a key abatement potential. Under presentconditions, the findings question the robustness of current CCS abatement potential estimatesand deployment goals as established by policymakers and in scenarios.

  • 26.
    Wibeck, Victoria
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies.
    Questioning the technological fix to climate change: Lay sense-making of geoengineering in Sweden2015In: Energy Research & Social Science, ISSN 2214-6296, Vol. 7, no May, p. 23-30Article in journal (Refereed)
    Abstract [en]

    This paper explores how Swedish laypeople make sense of emerging ideas of the large-scale deliberate technical manipulation of the global climate, known as geoengineering (GE). The paper is based on semi-structured focus group interviews with open-ended questions, allowing participants to express their spontaneous thoughts about GE. Although the focus group participants expressed great concern about climate change, GE was largely met with a sceptical, negative response. Participants perceived GE to: have negative environmental side-effects, address the symptoms rather than causes of climate change, create moral hazard and give rise to various governance challenges. Participants did not just reject the idea of GE outright; rather, social representations started to form in the focus groups through testing and negotiating arguments both pro and contra GE research and deployment.

  • 27.
    Wibeck, Victoria
    et al.
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Hansson, Anders
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Himmelsbach, Raffael
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Fridahl, Mathias
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Linnér, Björn-Ola
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Tema Environmental Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Linköping University, Centre for Climate Science and Policy Research, CSPR.
    Anshelm, Jonas
    Linköping University, Department of Thematic Studies, Technology and Social Change. Linköping University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences.
    Policy brief on climate engineering2016Report (Other academic)
    Abstract [en]

    Climate engineering (geoengineering) has been widely discussed as a potential instrument for curbing global warming if politics fails to deliver green house gas emission reductions. This debate has lost momentum over the last couple of years, but is now being renewed in the wake of the December 2015 Paris climate change agreement. Resurgent interest primarily stems from two elements of the Paris agreement. First, by defining the long term goal as “achiev[ing] a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases” instead of decarbonization, the agreement can be interpreted as providing leeway for climate engineering proposals. Second, the agreement formulated a temperature goal of “well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C”. In response, several scientists argued that these goals may require climate engineering.

    As these discussions will affect the forthcoming review of pathways toward 1.5°C warming, this policy brief takes stock of climate engineering. It draws on the expertise of Linköping University’s Climate Engineering (LUCE) interdisciplinary research programme. The brief provides an overview of the status of academic debate on climate engineering regarding bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS);  stratospheric aerosol injection; and mass media reporting and public engagement.

1 - 27 of 27
CiteExportLink to result list
Permanent link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf