Reply to the ‘Comment on “The effects on human health from stratospheric ozone depletion and its interactions with climate change”’ by W. B. Grant, J. Moan and J. Reichrath, Photochem. Photobiol. Sci., 2007, 6, DOI: 10.1039/b705482c

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. 916 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Norval ◽  
Frank R. de Gruijl
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Ozone Depletion ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

The effects on human health from stratospheric ozone depletion and its interactions with climate change

2007 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 232 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Norval ◽  
A. P. Cullen ◽  
F. R. de Gruijl ◽  
J. Longstreth ◽  
Y. Takizawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Health ◽  
Ozone Depletion ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

scholarly journals Turning science into policy: challenges and experiences from the science–policy interface

2005 ◽  
Vol 360 (1454) ◽  
pp. 471-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert T Watson
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Ozone Depletion ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone ◽  
Critical Role ◽  
Global Environmental Change ◽  
Environmental Issues ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion ◽  
Global Environmental ◽  
Science Policy Interface

This paper discusses key issues in the science–policy interface. It stresses the importance of linking the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity to the Millennium Development Goals and to issues of immediate concern to policy-makers such as the economy, security and human health. It briefly discusses the process of decision-making and how the scientific and policy communities have successfully worked together on global environmental issues such as stratospheric ozone depletion and climate change, and the critical role of international assessments in providing the scientific basis for informed policy at the national and international level. The paper also discusses the drivers of global environmental change, the importance of constructing plausible futures, indicators of change, the biodiversity 2010 target and how environmental issues such as loss of biodiversity, stratospheric ozone depletion, land degradation, water pollution and climate change cannot be addressed in isolation because they are strongly interconnected and there are synergies and trade-offs among the policies, practices and technologies that are used to address these issues individually.

scholarly journals Effects of stratospheric ozone depletion, solar UV radiation, and climate change on biogeochemical cycling: interactions and feedbacks

2015 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
David J. Erickson III ◽  
Barbara Sulzberger ◽  
Richard G. Zepp ◽  
Amy T. Austin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Uv Radiation ◽  
Environmental Conditions ◽  
Ozone Depletion ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone ◽  
Biogeochemical Cycling ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion ◽  
Solar Uv Radiation ◽  
Solar Uv

Solar UV radiation and climate change interact to influence and determine the environmental conditions for humans on planet Earth.

Mental Models and Risk Perceptions Related to Climate Change

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ann Bostrom
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Air Pollution ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
Mental Models ◽  
Ozone Depletion ◽  
Mental Model ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone ◽  
Stratospheric Ozone Depletion

Mental models are the sets of causal beliefs we “run” in our minds to infer what will happen in a given event or situation. Mental models, like other models, are useful simplifications most of the time. They can, however, lead to mistaken or misleading inferences, for example, if the analogies that inform them are misleading in some regard. The coherence and consistency of mental models a person employs to solve a given problem are a function of that person’s expertise. The less familiar and central a problem is, the less coherent and consistent the mental models brought to bear on that problem are likely to be. For problems such as those posed by anthropogenic climate change, most people are likely to recruit multiple mental models to make judgments and decisions. Common types of mental models of climate change and global warming include: (a) a carbon emissions model, in which global warming is a result of burning fossil fuels thereby emitting CO2, and of deforestation, which both releases sequestered CO2 and decreases the possible sinks that might take CO2 out of the atmosphere; (b) a stratospheric ozone depletion mental model, which conflates stratospheric ozone depletion with global warming; (c) an air pollution mental model, in which global warming is viewed as air pollution; and (d) a weather change model, in which weather and climate are conflated. As social discourse around global warming and climate change has increased, mental models of climate change have become more complex, although not always more coherent. One such complexity is the belief that climate changes according to natural cycles and due to factors beyond human control, in addition to changes resulting from human activities such as burning fossil fuels and releasing other greenhouse gases. As our inference engines, mental models play a central role in problem solving and subjective projections and are hence at the heart of risk perceptions and risk decision-making. However, both perceiving and making decisions about climate change and the risks thereof are affective and social processes foremost.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document