We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Communicating the strengths and limitations of climate modeling to those outside the field of climate science is a formidable challenge. The nuances of scientific language can be lost in the translation to natural language when climate predictions are presented to a general audience. This loss in translation can lead to misinformation and disinformation that hampers a rational response to the climate crisis. Even simple terms like “model,” “data,” and “prediction” have many different meanings depending on the context. Anytime we talk about the future, we are using a model. In climate science, we might think we are dealing with data from the past, but often this is processed data that is produced by analysis models applied to raw data. The word “prediction” can mean a range of things, from unconditional prophecies to conditional projections.
This chapter summarizes the results and concludes by pointing out two limitations of the volume. Overall continuity has prevailed in the protest arena during the Great Recession. Neither during the shock period nor during the period of the Euro-crisis has this deep economic crisis led to a general return of economic protest across Europe, nor has it led to a transformation of the action repertoire of the protestors in the streets. Southern Europe has been different, because it experienced a double crisis – economic and political, which expressed itself in a tremendous wave of protest above all in Greece, but also in Spain and to a lesser extent in Portugal. In Italy, we saw more of the business as usual that characterized the protest arena in the rest of Europe. The main effect of the protest wave that swept through southern Europe has been the transformation of the party systems in the respective countries. New challenger parties rose up, party systems fragmented and coalition formation became difficult. The focus of the volume on protest in the streets is limited in two respects: On the one hand, with the rise of new challenger parties from the left and the right, protest politics are shifting into the electoral arena, which we have not analysed in this volume. On the other hand, protest politics may be increasingly influenced by the new opportunity structure provided by the information communication technologies (ICTs), which was not the focus of our study either.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.