Prof FRSC Nico Stehr | University of Lethbridge, Alberta (Kanada)

The focus in this paper is with what is seen as an “inconvenient democracy” in the field of climate change science because there is a gap between knowledge and action in actual climate change policies. The gap gives rise to a couple of assertions that, in the end, converge in the diagnosis of an “inconvenient democracy.” On the one hand, the opposition between advances of specialized knowledge and the commitment of individuals to change their behavior leads to the diagnosis of an “inconvenient mind.” The failure of large social institutions to respond in a timely fashion to the advances of climate change knowledge amounts to the diagnosis of “inconvenient social institutions.” It follows that the dual gap between knowledge and action -- at the individual and collective level – implies an “inconvenient democracy.” That is, climate scientists and other scholars may be convinced that curtailing democratic liberties are the appropriate political frame within which climate change policies have to be enacted.

Moderator: Susan McDaniel Ph.D., FRSC Director, Prentice Institute & Canada Research Chair in Global Population & Life Course, Prentice Research Chair & Professor of Sociology