Dietz, W. H. (2020). Climate change and malnutrition: We need to act now. The Journal of Clinical Investigation, 130(2), 556-558. Web.
Dietz’s article describes the two most critical current environmental threats: climate change and malnutrition. The author encourages the human population to revaluate our habits and needs in terms of food consumption, agriculture, land, and transportation use, as they directly affect the planet’s future. The strong point of Dietz’s research is that it provides plenty of data on the increase of GHG around the world, including a graphic example. I consider this article extremely relevant as it urges to act immediately, uncovers how our unhealthy and irresponsible habits are adding to the climatic change, and explains what consequences that may have. Currently, Dr. William H. Dietz is the head of the Division of Nutrition and Physical Activity at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.
It appears that pediatric obesity is his main field of study, which logically explains why the article has many mentions of obesity and other diseases. In his article, Dietz remains realistic as he forecasts the future of the planet, which I find convincing and motivational. Nevertheless, I think that the article would be perceived better if Dietz used more illustrations instead of solely statistical data. All the projections and warnings not only make me want to reconsider my diet and start making sustainable choices and purchases in general.
O’Neill, B.C., Carter, T.R., Ebi, K. et al. (2020). Achievements and needs for the climate change scenario framework. Nature Climate Change, 10, 1074-1084. Web.
In their article, O’Neill et al. research climate change scenarios and estimate how successful a particular scenario framework is. The authors come from all over the world; some studied in Environment Institutes and Centers for Climate research, others pursued careers in Research and Economics, but their expertise is combined in this study. The researchers offer a new approach on how the framework mentioned above could be used and developed more effectively.
The framework’s goals are all aimed at supporting and spreading climate-related research within and outside research communities while taking into account the unpredictability of future climatic and societal futures. The authors include a detailed description of the SSP-RCP framework, which is accompanied by pictures and schemes throughout the article. Despite the framework being successful and showing progress, O’Neill et al. state that there are aspects in which it can be improved. This paper is important for my field of study as it highlights the importance of the research community. It is also highly informative; every section contains illustrations, graphs, and plenty of examples.
The researchers conclude that both the society and the research community can help prevent climatic change in case the SSP–RCP framework and the societal integration, regional applicability, policy research, and its relevancy get improved. I wish every article were as thorough and elaborative as this one. The authors’ in-depth analysis and well-argued and well-presented recommendations make this article stand out compared to other scientific works I have read. The paper constitutes a detailed, well-structured breakdown and covers all aspects of the issue, so I cannot identify any weak points as such.
Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., Girardin, C.A.J., Smith, A., Turner, B. (2020). Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 375, 1-12. Web.
The authors’ main fields of study are environmental change, ecology, and social sciences. Seddon et al.’s subject of research is the rise of nature-based solutions (NbS) and how beneficial they are for the planet and climate change prevention. The authors address the challenges of NbS along with NbS’ potential to treat both climate and biodiversity crises while contributing to sustainable development. The article provides topic-related background and definitions and tables showing NbS’s relevancy for climate change adaptation and mitigation in the context of the dimension of socioeconomic vulnerability. What appeals to me about this article is that it mentions both the successful aspects of NbS and the concerning and deficient factors that need to be worked on, which exposes all sides of the issue.
Nature-based solutions are crucial for the topic I am researching as it is an evolving approach that can play a significant role in enabling sustainable development within nature’s recourses and boundaries. The article concludes that fixing the barriers such as the lack of financial support and overcoming the research challenges of NbS can be truly rewarding for the planet. I feel that the article does not have any serious weaknesses since it is wisely divided into paragraphs and sub-paragraphs, which contain useful insights and forecasts. It is also important to note that all authors were involved in designing this research’s conceptual framework.
Sippel, S., Meinshausen, N., Fischer, E.M. et al. (2020). Climate change is now detectable from any single day of weather a global scale. Nat. Clim. Chang., 10, 35-41. Web.
This article emphasizes distinguishing changes in weather and global climate. Sippel and his colleagues are united by a research that relies on atmospheric and climate science. Sippel et al. offer a detection approach based on statistical learning, climate models that signify the relation between temperature and humidity patterns, the planet’s energy indicators, etc. The authors provide examples that depict the difference in local and global warming using key climatic metrics’ fingerprints. The examples also include the fingerprint of external forcing, AGMT estimates, the emergence of externally forced global climate change, etc.
Due to these illustrations and graphs, it is apparent that global weather carries crucial climate information that can be used for Detection & Attribution studies and improve the research of climatic trends in general. This article is extremely helpful in the context of global climate change because it outlines the possibility of predicting weather patterns and changes in the foreseeable and distant future. The final point indicates that the Earth’s energy pattern recorded over the past decade will continue to influence climate change in the near future. The article contains extended data figures which enhance the research even more. The paper seems to be written within the scope of the authors’ expertise, thereby, I cannot claim that it is inaccurate, insufficient, or has any weak points.
Skeie, R.B., Peters, G.P., Fuglestvedt, J., Fuglestvedt, J., & Andrew, R. (2021). A future perspective of historical contributions to climate change. Climatic Change, 164(24), 1-13. Web.
This article is different from the ones I reviewed previously as it is based on a historical approach. Skeie et al. outline the historical and regional contributions to emissions and global warming. The introduction references Skeie’s older research on climate sensitivity, which indicates that he and his colleagues have been exploring the subject of climate change for years. The authors shed light on the Paris Agreement, an important event in international climate negotiations, and proceed to estimate regional and national historical contributions to global warming have evolved significantly over the past few decades. To predict potential future historical contributions to global temperature change, shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) as well as climate models and setups are used. The research is full of estimates, calculations, and figures demonstrating the contribution to the GMST change over the years.
The approach used in this article is fascinating yet valuable as it makes the reader analyze climate change from a historical viewpoint as well as establish the possible origins and future scenarios. The authors claim that the period 1850 to 2015 was most important for future climatic contributions, while, surprisingly, from 2015 to 2100, there is little to no regional contributions to GMST change. Although the paper was interesting to read, in my opinion, the predictions made by the authors are difficult to assess and trust since our planet and its processes are ever-changing.