Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis

R.S.J. Tol

doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.045

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis

R.S.J. Tol

Research output: Contribution to Journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported results are inconsistent and biased. The sample is not representative and contains many irrelevant papers. Overall, data quality is low. Cook's validation test shows that the data are invalid. Data disclosure is incomplete so that key results cannot be reproduced or tested. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	701-705
Journal	Energy Policy
Volume	73
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.045
Publication status	Published - 2014

Bibliographical note

PT: J; NR: 21; TC: 2; J9: ENERG POLICY; PG: 5; GA: AO6PN; UT: WOS:000341474100064

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 13 Climate Action

Access to Document

10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.045

Persistent URL (handle)

Persistent link

Cite this

@article{430dd4103c3447e99b2c0cb34732b25d,

title = "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis",

abstract = "A claim has been that 97\% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported results are inconsistent and biased. The sample is not representative and contains many irrelevant papers. Overall, data quality is low. Cook's validation test shows that the data are invalid. Data disclosure is incomplete so that key results cannot be reproduced or tested. {\textcopyright} 2014 Elsevier Ltd.",

author = "R.S.J. Tol",

note = "PT: J; NR: 21; TC: 2; J9: ENERG POLICY; PG: 5; GA: AO6PN; UT: WOS:000341474100064",

year = "2014",

doi = "10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.045",

language = "English",

volume = "73",

pages = "701--705",

journal = "Energy Policy",

issn = "0301-4215",

publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis

AU - Tol, R.S.J.

N1 - PT: J; NR: 21; TC: 2; J9: ENERG POLICY; PG: 5; GA: AO6PN; UT: WOS:000341474100064

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported results are inconsistent and biased. The sample is not representative and contains many irrelevant papers. Overall, data quality is low. Cook's validation test shows that the data are invalid. Data disclosure is incomplete so that key results cannot be reproduced or tested. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

AB - A claim has been that 97% of the scientific literature endorses anthropogenic climate change (Cook et al., 2013. Environ. Res. Lett. 8, 024024). This claim, frequently repeated in debates about climate policy, does not stand. A trend in composition is mistaken for a trend in endorsement. Reported results are inconsistent and biased. The sample is not representative and contains many irrelevant papers. Overall, data quality is low. Cook's validation test shows that the data are invalid. Data disclosure is incomplete so that key results cannot be reproduced or tested. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd.

U2 - 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.045

DO - 10.1016/j.enpol.2014.04.045

M3 - Article

SN - 0301-4215

VL - 73

SP - 701

EP - 705

JO - Energy Policy

JF - Energy Policy

ER -

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the literature: A re-analysis

Abstract

Bibliographical note

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Persistent URL (handle)

Fingerprint

Cite this