LULA BURKE, News Editor–

The term “wicked problems” was first introduced in 1973 by theorists Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber to describe the complexities and challenges associated with complex social policy problems. These problems “lack clarity in both their aims and solutions” and require a multifaceted approach to solve in a way that doesn’t create subsequent problems: A prime example of this is human-induced climate exchange. The International Studies Department hosted a Climate Change Roundtable discussion Nov. 4 that featured members of five different departments in light of the August 2021 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report on climate science. 

The description for the event stated that it aimed to “bring these different perspectives into a productive dialogue to help foster a larger community discussion at Denison about how to engage these climate issues in our teaching and scholarship, and how to help students better understand and respond to one of the single greatest challenges facing the future of life on planet Earth.”

Speakers included Jonathan Maskit of the Philosophy Department, Erik Klemetti of the Department of Earth & Environmental Sciences, Sarah Supp of the Data Analytics Department, Quentin Duroy of the Economics Department and Chris Crews of the Department of International Studies. All gave their perspective on the issue through the lens of their own field of study, though all agreed that climate change is a pressing threat to our current way of life. 

The event was moderated by Sangeet Kumar, representing the International Studies and Communication Departments.

For example, Maskit presented on the societal implications of large personal changes (eating less meat, driving less) and how individual actions within such a big, overarching issue will be miniscule: The United States and other nations need to pursue group actions and political movements to ensure that future generations can live on a habitable planet. Next, Klemetti discussed the scientific side of the issue (extraction of hydrocarbons and the burning of fossil fuels, seeing climate change on a “human timescale”) and the personal side (can individual actions like recycling actually make a big change in a short amount of time?). 

The August 2021 release of the latest IPCC report once again confirmed what climate-change scholars and international commentators have been saying about the growing risks of uncontrolled global warming. As the Summary for Policymakers report notes, “The scale of recent changes across the climate system as a whole and the present state of many aspects of the climate system are unprecedented over many centuries to many thousands of years.” Despite these clear warnings from the scientific community, as well as the unified facts and statistics overwhelmingly supporting the idea that extreme climate fluctuations are caused by human processes, global action to address climate change remains ineffective. A prominent
climate meeting will be held in the UK in November to discuss the results of the August report. 

Daniel Gunther ‘23 is a geoscience major from New Paltz, NY. He said he decided to attend because he is close with panelist Klemetti, and that the interdisciplinary approach was one he was interested in hearing about. 

“I figured that 5 people with doctorates would have something useful to say and be able to give us some kind of cohesive direction to go, regarding the issue, moving forward,” he said. 

Gunther appreciated the scientific presentations most. 

“Personally, I thought that Erik and Dr. Supp were the most effective mainly because they were the two scientists of the five panelists. While bits and pieces of the other presentations were interesting, I thought that they, in some cases, were [confusing],” he said. 

Gunther said that the dire circumstances of the IPCC report, combined with the speeches from the educated presenters, made him feel especially worried about the increasing severity of global warming, waste management, population control and ecosystem wellbeing. 

“Honestly, coming out of it, I felt almost hopeless, since even the best and brightest phds that Denison has to offer pretty all came to the conclusion that there is no feasible solution to this problem, or rather that there is a way out, but there’s no chance a large percentage of people would be willing to dramatically change the way that they live,” he said. 

Though the situation is wicked, Gunther hopes that students of all disciplines can find some hope in approaching challenges and learning from their peers before they suffer the direct consequences of anthropogenic global warming and its byproducts. 

“I think that climate isn’t talked about enough as an issue. The thing is, other sociological problems can be solved at their boiling point. With climate, we need to address the crisis decisively before we reach a critical point and I don’t think it is in the nature of most to do anything until they start suffering.,” he said. 

“People are dying everyday because of our actions, but since we are unaffected, we lack the empathy to do anything about it. It’s really sad.”