Raising public consciousness even if it means taking some liberties with scientific rigor? This approach is postulated by Sandrine Rousseau, deputy ecologist in Paris. ” It’s 60 degrees in Spain. 60 degrees I tweeted last Thursday. Several scientists, including agroclimatologist Serge Zacca, criticized him for not stating in his tweet that this measurement corresponds to the temperature of the Earth, not the temperature of the air.
It’s 60 degrees in Spain.
60 degrees.sequel after announcement
– Sandrine Rousseau (@sandrousseau) July 13, 2023
Twitter – Sandrine Rousseau on Twitter
On Monday, July 17, on BFM TV, Sandrine Russo made her point, of the need to ” wake people up ” on “ The seriousness and extent of this global warming “.
” How do we raise awareness and create climate action? the deputy asked again. Before introducing its strategy: creation wake-up effect On the subject. In other words: stick to a troubling rhetoric, perhaps by liberating oneself from purely scientific criteria, to better raise public awareness. Is this method effective? Lopes posed the question to Gauthier Simon, a PhD student and teacher in political science, Works on environmental transformation and politicization process.
“more political than scientific discourse”
Sandrine Rousseau’s approach is in fact a classic rhetorical strategy in political discourse, both left and right. According to Simon Gauthier, this shocking sentence method is associated with the concept of ” overtone window That is, in the vicinity of what can be said and discussed within a democracy. The discourse of the political figure tends to take advantage of this window as much as possible, in order to confirm his themes in the public space, as the researcher analyzes.
Sandrine Rousseau expresses herself in a discourse that is more political than scientific. It seeks to move the Overton Window on the climate issue. This discourse consists of placing an expression, idea or concept that is unusual in collective representations in the public space, to make it a piecemeal discussion item. »
Sandrine Rousseau, Permanent Enhancer
as it happens,” The figure of 60 degrees is symbolic, because public opinion is more or less accustomed to the trajectory of 40 or 50 degrees, when it hears of global warming. It is a matter of shocking the population by bringing out a new element and instilling fear. Even if you do not respect all standards of scientific validity.
This record of emotion, if it can be called upon in other subjects, is particularly mustered by climate activists, Gauthier-Simon notes. Frightening and existential, the climate crisis is affecting our impact. They become more important with time and the possibility of taking action to change the situation narrows.
sequel after announcement
Can negative feelings be turned into positive action for the environment?
Double-edged strategy
The question is more important since then In terms of climate, political judgments tend to become pro-environmental, but practices do not yet follow judgments. Professor of political science confirms.
gold, ” Empirically, the impact of disastrous rhetoric on citizen mobilization has yet to be determined. And he warns. So Sandrine Rousseau’s strategy could prove to be a double-edged sword.
Some studies show that cautionary rhetoric can have the effect of mobilizing citizens: action becomes a positive way to compensate for anxiety. Other studies show that, on the contrary, they create the phenomenon of habituation of the population. By hearing bad climate news, the citizen ends up being drawn into a feeling of helplessness that can be a trigger for depoliticization and demobilization. »
” wake-up effect Sandrine Rousseau therefore still researched the topic of research in political science.
sequel after announcement
However, from the point of view of the media, Simon Gauthier notes that ” Most of the articles, since Sandrine Rousseau’s tweet, have focused on the scientific inaccuracy of her observations, rather than the topic of heat in Spain. “.
In Sainte-Soline, Chronicle of War Declared
Form over substance? According to the researcher in political science, the danger, with these horrific speeches, is also the production of ” The debate deported, from environmental issues, to related ones, as happened in Sainte-Solline, where in the end there was more talk of violence than of the problems posed by the huge ponds.
Danger of eroding scientific legitimacy?
A part of the scientific community also condemned Sandrine Rousseau’s tweet. ” We must be careful with these discourses that are a bit disastrous, taken out of context, and above all without source. Serge Zacca, Doctor of Agroclimatology announced on BFM TV.
No wonder, for Simon Gauthier, who has also studied the relationship between scientists and politicians on the issue of climate change. ” Some scientists are calling for more involvement in the political sphere, regarding the topic of climate change. But the majority of researchers in the hard sciences, unlike those in the social sciences, are wary of the political realm, viewing participation as an impediment to impartiality. “, sums up.
sequel after announcement
Climate skepticism: How the reactionary camp fuels climate denial
in the last, There is a fear that scientific legitimacy, already damaged in the eyes of the population since the health crisis, will further erode the climate issue. “.
Can a political discourse loosely tied to scientific fact highlight the already existing distrust of science in a part of the population? In any case, it can lead to backlash Towards climate-sceptic rhetoric, Gauthier warns Simon.
