Bjørn Lomborg

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Bjørn Lomborg (before 2007)

Bjørn Lomborg (born January 6, 1965 in Frederiksberg ) is a Danish political scientist , lecturer , statistician and author . Lomborg is controversial because of its provocative appearance, its handling of statistics and the results of its books, which are criticized as one-sided.

Lomborg has a strong presence in the public media. So far, he has almost exclusively published comments and opinion articles in scientific journals. He stood and also communicates with many conservative and libertarian think tanks such as the Competitive Enterprise Institute , the Hoover Institution , the Heartland Institute , the Environmental Assessment Institute , the Cooler Heads Coalition and the Fraser Institute , which targeted among other things, climate change denial ahead .

He runs a website under the name “Copenhagen Consensus Center” on which he advertises his books. The Environmental Assessment Institute, now part of the Ministry of Economic Affairs in Copenhagen , was set up for him at the beginning of the liberal-conservative government of Anders Fogh Rasmussen I. Lomborg became known worldwide with the controversially discussed bestseller The Skeptical Environmentalist (Eng. Apocalypse No! How the foundations of human life are really developing) and the Copenhagen Consensus, which was drawn up in 2002 with the collaboration of several winners of the Alfred Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics , on setting priorities in the world Development policy.

Live and act

Bjørn Lomborg comes from Frederiksberg north of Copenhagen and graduated in 1991 with a degree in political science from Aarhus University . He then took up a doctoral position at the University of Copenhagen , where he received his PhD in 1994. phil. received his doctorate. He then returned to the Institute for Political Science ( Institut for Statskundskab ) at Aarhus University, where he mainly taught statistics . In 1997 he was promoted to lecturer and achieved professor status .

Lomborg became known worldwide when he wrote his book Verdens sande tilstand ( The world true state ; 2001 also in English under the title: The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World and in 2002 in German: Apocalypse No! Wie sich die Menschen Really developing livelihoods appeared, see below) published. In addition to global warming , many components play a role in this: overpopulation , depletion of energy resources, disproportionate deforestation , loss of animal and plant species , increasing water shortage, etc. - possible causes such as the consequences of climate change . The basis for this was the study of Julian L. Simons' theses and a Wired interview with the same.

Lomborg became popular with opponents of conventional environmental policy. In 2002, for example, the conservative Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen appointed him director of the newly established Danish Institute for Miljøvurdering ( Institute for Environmental Assessment ). In April 2004, Time Magazine named him one of the "100 Most Influential People in the World". At the end of 2005 he was voted 14th among the “20 most important intellectuals in the world” by 20,000 readers of the political magazines Foreign Policy and Prospect . He returned to Aarhus in 2004 and took a position at Copenhagen Business School the following year.

In his book The Skeptical Environmentalist (dt. Apocalypse No! How can the human livelihoods really develop , 2002) Lomborg attacked the view of the general state of the environment is deteriorating more and more. On the basis of statistical material, he tried to prove that the state of the environment had improved, and therefore called for less government money to be used for climate policy, for example. It met with a great response in the media and especially with opponents of conventional environmental protection policy , while the book was sharply criticized by scientists because of the large number of errors in content and incorrect conclusions. Praise came mainly from the journalistic side, while the book was mainly received critically by scientists and environmental protection associations and in some cases very sharp criticism was also expressed.

In his 2007 book Cool It! he criticized the exaggerated representation of the consequences of climate change, as he sees it in Al Gore , George Monbiot and Nicholas Stern and in organizations such as the IPCC and NGOs such as Greenpeace , as well as by various media and politicians. The primary aim of his criticism was to stick to the goals of the Kyoto Protocol , since even its full implementation would only delay warming by five years. In Lomborg's opinion, the financial outlay made for the Kyoto Protocol should be used more efficiently in the measures proposed by him in the organized “ Copenhagen Consensus ” for the more urgent human problems listed there . These included u. a. fighting disease and malnutrition and improving water supplies and hygiene standards in underdeveloped countries.

He also said that the possible consequences of warming could be countered with measures against hurricanes and floods at a fraction of the cost and thus would bring more benefits than the reduction of current CO 2 emissions and would therefore be much more sustainable .

However, Lomborg caused a surprise in August 2010 when he admitted that US $ 100 billion a year would be needed to combat climate change. The fact is that there is global warming, that it is caused by humans and that something needs to be done about it. These Lomborg suggested the introduction of a tax on CO 2 - emissions before. According to Lomborg's ideas, the US $ 100 billion should be invested in research into climate-friendly energies such as wind , wave , nuclear and solar energy . Lomborg also recommends expanding research into so-called geo-engineering , although he admits that geo-engineering is fraught with risks. Lomborg justified the re-evaluation of the proposals of the Copenhagen Consensus with a more recent analysis from 2008, which included new ideas for combating global warming.

In 2010 he published the book Smart Solutions to Climate Change with suggestions for combating climate change and called for billions to be invested in researching climate-friendly energy sources. Regardless of this, he sees more benefit than harm from moderate warming. Furthermore - in connection with Julian Lincoln Simon - the future of the earth is by no means bleak. According to Lomborg, the main indicators have changed for the better since 1900 and more resources than ever are available to solve the problems.

In 2012, the Copenhagen Consensus Center was withdrawn from state funding by the new, social democratic government Helle Thorning-Schmidt I. Regardless of this, the project will continue. In 2012, nutritional supplements were given the highest priority.

reception

In 2003 the Danish Committee for Dishonest Conduct in Science reprimanded Lomborg for its book The Skeptical Environmentalist . The starting point was complaints from recognized international researchers such as B. Edward O. Wilson . Among other things, this stated that Lomborg in his book a. a. had used fabricated data, selectively sorted out undesirable results and deliberately applied misleading statistical methods, committed plagiarism and deliberately misinterpreted the results of other researchers. Overall, the Danish biologist Kare Fog found 110 clear errors and 208 deficiencies in content, i.e. about one error per page. The book has also been called "a textbook example of the misuse of statistics".

The Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation finally acquitted him after a review of the charge of scientific unfairness, as it could not be proven that the book was a scientific work at all.

"Objectively speaking, the publication of the work under consideration is deemed to fall within the concept of scientific dishonesty. [...] In view of the subjective requirements made in terms of intent or gross negligence, however Bjørn Lomborg's publication cannot fall within the bounds of this characterization. Conversely, the publication is deemed clearly contrary to the standards of good scientific practice. "

“Objectively speaking, the publication of the work in question falls under the concept of scientific dishonesty. [...] In view of the subjective demands on intent or gross negligence, Bjørn Lomborg's publication cannot fall within the scope of this characterization. Conversely, the publication is viewed as clearly violating the standards of good scientific practice. "

Following a petition from social scientists accusing the committee of procedural errors and incorrect methods in assessing the scientific quality of Lomborg's book, as well as a complaint from Lomborg, the ministry annulled the committee's decision and asked it to reconsider the case. Since the committee explicitly criticized the book in its original decision and did not accuse Lomborg of deliberate scientific dishonesty (with reference to its lack of expertise in the relevant fields), it decided in 2004 not to open a new procedure.

In a book review in Nature , Stuart L. Pimm and Jeff Harvey wrote that the book reads like "a compilation of assignments in one of those hellish courses that will fail all students." It is "a mass of poorly digested material, seriously flawed in its selection of examples and analyzes". In the meantime an entire industry has emerged that refutes the book chapter by chapter. Among other things, Pimm and Harvey criticized the selection of documents. Like many bad papers, it is based in large part on secondary literature, 30% of which is downloaded from the Internet. There is a clear tendency towards non-peer-reviewed work, while Lomborg often fails to cite the key scientific literature. They also criticized the way Lomborg used statistics: for example, he presented the fact that the number of starving people in sub-Saharan Africa had fallen from 38% in 1970 to 33% in 1996 as something very positive. However, he does not mention that the population there has roughly doubled over the same period and the absolute number of those who are hungry has thus risen sharply. It is questionable how Cambridge University Press was able to publish such a book that contradicts the consensus in research on complex scientific questions and too often uses journalistic media instead of scientific literature as evidence. Extraordinary claims required extraordinary scrutiny. This seems to be missing here.

Kare Fog also criticized Lomborg for not admitting mistakes. He initially responded to the criticism by demanding that his critics first document his mistakes and then, when that happened, simply ignore the facts. In addition, it is impossible to judge a book from Lomborg simply by reading and reflecting on it. Instead, one has to check every single piece of information in his books for both its truthfulness and a balanced presentation. In principle, it is only possible to judge your books if you have checked all footnotes, read all sources and consulted alternative sources.

Lomborg's comments on climate change in both Apocalypse No! as well as cool it! were the target of considerable criticism. Lomborg's interpretation of IPCC data has been criticized , among other things, for its selection of an average value for climate sensitivity . The American economist Frank Ackerman devoted an entire chapter of his book Can We Afford the Future? from 2010's review of Lomborg's Cool It! . In it, he accused Lomborg of a lack of expertise in the field of economics, a one-sided selection of literature and sources (both in relation to economics and climatology ) and an overemphasis on cost-benefit analyzes . Lomborg, on the other hand, was defended by business newspapers such as the Financial Times , the Wall Street Journal , the Economist and representatives of the laissez-faire economy.

Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker accused Lomborg of playing down social and ecological problems with the help of inappropriate comparisons and misleading figures. In August 2013, science journalist John Rennie criticized Lomborg for quoting climate scientist Stephen Schneider as creating the false impression that Schneider was in favor of lying to the public about the results of climate science. In response to an objection from Lomborg, Rennie published a detailed statement on the matter. The most comprehensive criticism of Lomborg's scientific work was presented by Howard Friel. In a publication by Yale University Press , he analyzed passages from Lomborg's books The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It . Friel came to the conclusion that Lomborg repeatedly cited incorrectly or selectively and systematically falsified the scientific state of research on global warming.

Bjørn Lomborg's publications in newspapers such as The Wall Street Journal and The Telegraph have been repeatedly reviewed by Climate Feedback , a global scientific network that studies the credibility of media coverage on climate change. In all cases, the scientific credibility ranged between "low" and "very low". The Climate Feedback reviewers came to the conclusion that Lomborg "is cherry-picking ", that it "misinterprets the results of existing studies", "its article blatantly contradicts the scientific evidence" and "it misinterprets the Paris Agreement in order to reduce its potential Downplaying climate change mitigation ".

Private

Lomborg is gay and has a vegetarian diet . As a prominent Danish gay man, he has also taken part in information and image campaigns on the subject of homosexuality in Denmark and sees this as his civic duty to reduce prejudice. Lomborg also appears in jeans and a T-shirt on formal occasions.

Awards

Lomborg was named "Global Leader for Tomorrow" at the World Economic Forum in November 2001 and was mentioned as an agenda setter at BusinessWeek in 2002 . TIME magazine listed him among the 100 most influential people in the world in 2004, as well as the American journal for international politics Foreign Policy and Prospect magazine in 2008, and in 2012 he was again listed among the top 100 of the world's most important intellectuals in Foreign Policy. The Guardian also named him a major environmentalist in 2009.

Publications

as an author
  • Verdens sands tilstand . Centrum, Viby (Jutland) 1998, ISBN 87-583-1114-9 .
  • The Skeptical Environmentalist . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge & New York 2001, ISBN 0-521-01068-3 . German: Apocalypse no! How the foundations of human life are really developing . To Klampen, Lüneburg 2002, ISBN 3-934920-18-7 .
  • Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming . Alfred A. Knopf Publishing Group, New York 2007, ISBN 0-307-26692-3 . German: Cool it! Why we should keep a cool head despite climate change . DVA, Munich 2008, ISBN 3-421-04353-1 .
as editor
  • Global Crises, Global Solutions . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge & New York 2004, ISBN 0-521-60614-4 .
  • How to Spend $ 50 Billion to Make the World a Better Place . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge & New York 2006, ISBN 0-521-68571-0 .
  • Smart Solutions to Climate Change: Comparing Costs and Benefits . Cambridge University Press, Cambridge & New York 2010.
  • How Much have Global Problems Cost the World ?: A Scorecard From 1900 To 2050 . Cambridge University Press, New York 2013

Literature on Lomborg

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Bjørn Lomborg, just a scientist with a different opinion? . In: RealClimate , August 31, 2015. Accessed June 7, 2017.
  2. ↑ a b Naomi Oreskes , Erik M. Conway , The Machiavellis of Science. Weinheim 2014, p. 330.
  3. ^ Peter J. Jacques et al .: The organization of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism . In: Environmental Politics . tape 17 , no. 3 , 2008, p. 349-385 , doi : 10.1080 / 09644010802055576 .
  4. ^ Ed Regis: The Doomslayer . In: Wired (Issue 5.02) . tape 5 , no. February 2 , 1997.
  5. ^ A b A critic in Germany was Ernst Ulrich von Weizsäcker . See EU v. Weizsäcker: Björn or optimism. We live in the best of all environments, writes the Danish statistician Björn Lomborg. His figures are misleading. In: Berliner Zeitung, August 26, 2002.
  6. ↑ a b c Jeroen van den Bergh: An assessment of Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist and the ensuing debate . In: Journal of Integrative Environmental Sciences . tape 7 , no. 1 , 2010, p. 23-52 , doi : 10.1080 / 19438150903533730 .
  7. ↑ Kyoto costs a lot and brings almost nothing. Die Presse, March 11, 2006, accessed on August 31, 2010 (interview with Lomborg).
  8. ↑ a b c Bjørn Lomborg: $ 100bn a year needed to fight climate change. August 30, 2010, accessed August 31, 2010 .
  9. ↑ Interview with Bjørn Lomborg in the period 14 October, 2010.
  10. ^ Efficient climate protection , 3sat.de , May 27, 2013
  11. ↑ Global change Our world has gotten much better since 1900 By Björn Lomborg, Die Welt of October 18, 2013
  12. ↑ Bjorn Lomborg's climate skeptic thinktank to close on Guardian.co.uk (accessed February 1, 2013).
  13. ↑ CC12 outcome . Retrieved April 2, 2014.
  14. ↑ James Hoggan, Richard Littlemore: Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming . Greystone Books 2009, p. 120. See also Haydn Washington, John Cook: Climate Change Denial. Heads in the sand . Earthscan 2011, p. 73.
  15. ↑ James Lawrence Powell: The Inquisition of Climate Science . New York 2012, p. 85.
  16. ↑ Naomi Oreskes , Erik M. Conway , The Machiavellis of Science. Weinheim 2014, p. 328.
  17. ↑ Naomi Oreskes , Erik M. Conway , The Machiavellis of Science. Weinheim 2014, p. 328f.
  18. ↑ Danish Comittees on Scientific Dishonesty, quoted from: James Hoggan, Richard Littlemore: Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming . Greystone Books 2009, p. 120.
  19. ^ Stuart Pimm & Jeff Harvey: No need to worry about the future . In: Nature . tape 414 , 2011, pp. 149-150 , doi : 10.1038 / 35102629 .
  20. ↑ Quoted from: James Hoggan, Richard Littlemore: Climate Cover-Up: The Crusade to Deny Global Warming . Greystone Books 2009, pp. 120f.
  21. ↑ UCS Examines 'The Skeptical Environmentalist' ( Memento of the original from April 1, 2010 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. (accessed February 1, 2013).  @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.ucsusa.org
  22. ^ Brian O'Neill: Review of "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming . In: Population and Development Review . Volume 34 , no. 2 , 2008, p. 359–362 ( accessible online [PDF]).
  23. ^ Frank Ackerman: Can We Afford the Future? The Economics of a Warming World . Zed Press, London / New York 2010, ISBN 978-1-84813-038-8 , pp. 70-81 .
  24. ^ John Rennie: The inevitable politics of climate science (part 1) . In: PLoS Blogs , August 9, 2013, accessed November 1, 2013.
  25. ^ John Rennie: A correction on Lomborg and Schneider's quotation. In: PLoS Blogs , August 13, 2013, accessed November 1, 2013.
  26. ^ A b Howard Friel: The Lomborg Deception: Setting the Record Straight about Global Warming. Yale University Press, 2010.
  27. ↑ https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/wall-street-journal-bjorn-lomborg-alarming-thing-climate-alarmism/ in the original: "practices cherry-picking"
  28. ↑ https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/bjorn-lomborg-overheated-climate-alarm-wall-street-journal/ in the original: "misrepresenting the results of existing studies"
  29. ↑ https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/the-telegraph-bjorn-lomborg-in-many-ways-global-warming-will-be-good-thing/ in the original: "[his] article [is in] blatant disagreement with available scientific evidence "
  30. ↑ https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/sea-level-rise-those-non-disappearing-pacific-islands-bjorn-lomborg-wall-street-journal/ in the original: "He also misrepresents the Paris Agreement to downplay its potential to curb future climate change. "
  31. ↑ Jason Cowley: The man who demanded a recount . New Statesman . June 30, 2003. Archived from the original on September 27, 2007. Retrieved July 24, 2007.
  32. ^ The Stars of Europe - Agenda Setters - Bjorn Lomborg . BusinessWeek Online, June 17, 2002. Retrieved February 26, 2006.
  33. ^ Intellectuals - the results . In: Prospect , July 26th, 2008. Archived from the original on September 30th, 2009 Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. . Retrieved December 5, 2009. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.prospectmagazine.co.uk 
  34. ↑ Prospect / FP Top 100 Public Intellectuals Results . In: Foreign Policy , October 2005. Retrieved December 5, 2009. 
  35. ^ The FP Top 100 Global Thinkers . In: Foreign Policy . November 26th, 2012. Archived from the original on November 28th, 2012. Info: The archive link was automatically inserted and not yet checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Retrieved November 28, 2012. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.foreignpolicy.com
  36. ↑ 50 people who could save the planet . In: The Guardian , January 5, 2008. Retrieved December 5, 2009. 
personal data
SURNAME Lomborg, Bjørn
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Danish political scientist, statistician and climate critic
DATE OF BIRTH January 6, 1965
PLACE OF BIRTH Frederiksberg