Climate concepts are crucial to understand the effects of human activity on the climate system scientifically, and to formulate and pursue policies to mitigate and adapt to these effects. Yet, scientists, policymakers, and activists often use different terms such as “global warming,” “climate change,” “climate crisis,” or “climate emergency.” This advanced review investigates which climate concept is most suitable when we pursue mitigation and adaptation goals in a scientifically informed manner. It first discusses how survey experiments and social science reviews on climate frames draw normative recommendations about which terms to use for public climate communication. It is suggested that such normative claims can be refined by including the scientific alongside lay uses of a climate concept, and by using explicit assessment conditions to evaluate how suitable a concept is for formulating mitigation and adaptation goals. Drawing on philosophical theories of conceptual change in science and conceptual engineering, a novel framework with two assessment conditions is introduced and then applied to “global warming,” “climate change,” “climate emergency,” and “climate crisis.” The assessment suggests that currently, “climate crisis” is most suitable to formulate and pursue climate mitigation and adaptation goals. Using this concept promotes the epistemic goals of climate science to a high degree, bridges scientific, political, and activist discourse, and fosters for democratic participation when articulating climate policies.This article is categorized under: The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Climate Science and Decision Making The Social Status of Climate Change Knowledge > Knowledge and Practice Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Communication

中文翻译：

---

支持缓解和适应政治目标的气候概念：“气候危机”的案例


气候概念对于科学地了解人类活动对气候系统的影响以及制定和推行减轻和适应这些影响的政策至关重要。然而，科学家、政策制定者和活动家经常使用不同的术语，例如“全球变暖”、“气候变化”、“气候危机”或“气候紧急情况”。这项高级审查调查了当我们以科学的方式追求缓解和适应目标时，哪种气候概念最合适。它首先讨论了气候框架的调查实验和社会科学评论如何就公共气候交流中使用哪些术语提出规范性建议。建议通过将气候概念的科学性和普通用途纳入其中，并使用明确的评估条件来评估概念对于制定缓解和适应目标的适合程度，来完善此类规范性主张。借鉴科学和概念工程中概念转变的哲学理论，引入了一种具有两种评估条件的新颖框架，并将其应用于“全球变暖”、“气候变化”、“气候紧急情况”和“气候危机”。评估认为，当前，“气候危机”最适合制定和追求气候减缓和适应目标。使用这一概念可以在很大程度上促进气候科学的认知目标，架起科学、政治和活动家话语的桥梁，并在阐明气候政策时促进民主参与。本文分类为：气候变化知识的社会地位 > 气候科学与决策 气候变化知识的社会地位 > 知识与实践 气候变化的认知、行为和传播 > 传播