User:ClareParlett/sandbox/Approaches to Knowledge/Seminar Group 10/Geography and Truth

This is for the UCL BASc Approaches to Knowledge Course: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/basc/current/core/atk.

This page is for one team in Seminar 11 to work on their content for the UCL Wiki book for the end of the term and will be populated over the period 19/11/2018 - 17/12/2018.

It has been created by Clare Lewis who is the seminar leader. See https://www.ucl.ac.uk/basc/people/academic-staff/clare-lewis. Please do not delete this page.

Contents under construction here:

Evidence in geography
Because geography is the science that 'explore[s] both the physical properties of Earth’s surface and the human societies spread across it', evidence holds a very important role as this discipline cannot be without evidence. Representing the spheric earth on a flat surface, thus creating a map is an ongoing challenge. Reading a map must be enlightened by reason and critical thinking because the map is also an effective instrument for creating representations which then evolve. For instance, the chosen projection alters the map's appearance: distortions of distance, direction and scale, hence questioning the importance of evidence in representing the world. Because there is so much evidence, thanks to satellites, and because maps are difficult to create, choices must be made. Indeed, the mapmaker may use different evidence than another maker as the map is the product of his choices. Two types of evidence exist in geography : evidence from quantitative research and evidence from qualitative research. Qualitative evidence uses observations, attitudes, beliefs and opinions; unnumbered evidence, as a support. Quantitative evidence is informed by numbers, surveys and statistical information. For instance, the Amazon rainforest is a huge forest, as we can perceive with the help of borders on a basic South American map: this is qualitative evidence. A quantitative evidence would inform geography by stating that the forest is approximately 550 million hectares.

Evidence in Economics
In Economics, the question of how reliable theories are, and whether the evidence that is being used to establish these theories, is reliable, raises. Economics can be described as either a social science or a natural science, however in the social sciences, evidence is often acquired through anecdotal evidence or testimonial evidence which are both rather subjective, hence the findings may be considered as less reliable by one. If, however, economics is seen as a natural science, scientific evidence is being used to make assumptions. One issue that arises in economics is that often the evidence that exists does correspond with the theory behind it, per contra a further link between evidence and real life is difficult to establish.

Economics of Climate Change
According to economists, climate change is an outcome of greenhouse-gas emissions that lead to negative externalities of production hence it creates costs that are not paid for by those who generate the emanations. Climate change is also considered as the greatest example of market failure ever seen. The Kyoto Protocol (1997) which was aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emission and developing country responsibility soon received feedback that it would harm economic growth. Connaughton argues that the protocol would reduce output by up to $400 billion in 2010, which is close to the calculations of the EIA from 1998, expecting a decrease in economic output by $397 billion. By analysing this data it appears that over a time period of 12 years, economic researchers were able to interpret data similarly and come to the same conclusions. The scientific study of economics may therefore be considered as rather reliable, as evidence shows that even when acquiring it at different times, the outcome is interchangeable.

Cultural differences in the acquisition of evidence
However, one issue that arises is cultural differences. In economics, different international viewpoints are considered and discussed when examining and evaluating the impacts of climate change, hence evidence can be interpreted and appraised differently across culture; working together is essential as it is a worldwide issue. Cultural differences influencing evidence also appear in the natural sciences; one study carried out by Luncz, Mundry and Boesch, investigating behaviour of Chimpanzees across cultures, emphasises the existence of varying evidence across cultures. When referring this back to the real world, cultural differences lead to differences in evidence, which suggests different approaches towards policy making in the scientific study of economics.

Geography in climate change
Largely caused by humans in the burning of fossil fuels, climate change has many impacts on the outline of our world today, modifiying our landscapes. Because geography is wide and resourceful with sub-disciplines, its implications in the understanding of climate change is crucial. Geography offers new understandings of the issue, varying from perceiving spatial dimensions of climate change to grasping its consequential urban changes. Generating global warming, climate change covers transformations like rising seas and extreme weather events which have consequences on the geographic world. Climatology (itself classified within physical geography) addresses the issue through its focus on dynamic and statistical climatology. Geography also aids in understanding the effects of climate change on environmental systems and societies. K. O’Brien and R. Leichenko suggest that there are winners and losers of climate change. They are divided regarding their geographical position: winners ‘will include the middle- and high- latitude regions, whereas losers will include marginal lands in Africa and countries with low-lying coastal zones’, hence showing how geography adds to the economic study and offers different perspectives.

This last century, the world temperature has increased of 1°C and could rise of 4°C more the next century. In response to that, humans are trying to slow down this effect by organizing summits, conferences and setting common goals such as during COP21, many states gathered in the name of the fight against climate change and set the goal for the global temperature not to exceed 2°C by the end of the century. Although states and entities are trying to minimize the disaster, climate change’s consequences are constantly rising.

Case study: the Quelccaya Ice Cap
Climate change has had many impacts on the outlines of our glaciers landscapes today, like in Tibet, in the Andes, in Greenland or in the Himalaya were ice land has been retreated over the last few decades. To link evidence to this geographical modifications due to climate change, we will concentrate of the Quelccaya Ice Cap (QIC) situated in the Andes, in Perù. 99% of Tropical Glaciers are located in the Andes, the QIC being the largest ice mass in the Tropics (55 km2) , with a summit reaching 5,680 m above sea level. The QIC has faced some major changes in its amount of ice, disturbing the site of the ice mass. Studies claim that minor changes in climate change are importantly linked to the changes in the ice cap’s mass balance : important precipitations could have an impact on this phenomenon as well, but no significant modifications in precipitation have occurred the last 50 years. This ice mass loss can be supported with our two types of geographical evidence.

Firstly, we can observe that the landscape of the QIC has dramatically changed since 1978 (Fig. 1).

These changes are due to the retreat of the largest glacier of the QIC, the Qori Kalis, that has been reatreating 10 times faster between 1991 and 2005 (60 m.year) than between 1963 to 1978 (6 m.year). This reatreat is due to an important rise of the Freezing Level Hight (FLH), that has approximately increased of 160m the past six decades, this increase due itself to global warming in the Andes.

We can see on a map, that the outline of the Andes have dramatically changed since the last century. (Fig. 2)

These qualititative evidence are proof of the changes in the world’s geography.

Quantitative evidence can here support these variations due to climate change as well. Evidence such as the Sea Surface Temperatures (SST) and air temperature records on land (Ta). SSTs anomalies studied in the Pacific Ocean have appeared to have an influence on the freezing level hight (FLH) fluctuations of the QIC. To realize this experiment, 10 radiosonde stations in South America have recorded the annual FLH, and they have been associated with the SST, arising mostly from changes of temperature in the tropical Pacific Ocean. (Fig. 3)

Studies agree that the rise of the Freezing Level Hight is closely linked to the rise of the sea surface temperatures. This rise of SST is agreed to reflect a response to greenhouse gases emissions in the atmosphere.

Moreover, with the help of specific data methods, experiments have measured the temperature of the atmosphere (Ta) at the QIC summit. The research has been prepared under specific circumstances: the measurements were made under a lapse rate situated between 400 and 500 hPa levels. These studies have highlighted a Ta warming rate of 0.14 °C/decade over the periods 1950–2005 and 1979–2016. This rise of temperature, leads to a loss of ice mass in the QIC: climate change again has effects on the frame of the QIC. (Fig. 4)

The example of the Quelccaya Ice Cap illustrate that the issue of climate change can be supported by geographic and economic evidence.

Conclusion
Economics and geography work hand in hand in order to understand climate change. Geography, with its sub-disciplines, brings the basis of the scientific work in order to fully grasp the issue while economics focuses on its impacts and future and how it is apprehended by society. Various types of evidence used by both disciplines aid in the global understanding of climate change. Both disciplines are crucial in order to comprehend the issue and be able to live with it, and, to a certain extent fight it.