Scholarlink

<p>Not even ten&#xa0;years after its adoption in the Paris Agreement in 2015, the 1.5&#xa0;°C target has already been rendered moot as average global temperatures (at least temporarily) soared past the limit in 2024. In 2025, however, the target continues to be contested in its effects and its sustained use is debated: Has the 1.5&#xa0;°C target led to false hopes? Or does it continue to effectively mark the shortfalls of the present? This qualitative discourse analysis conceptualizes the 1.5&#xa0;°C target as a <i>numerical myth</i> that emerged after Paris to unpack the dual meanings the number carries. From 2015 through 2019, years marked by insufficient political action on the climate, the target shifted in its meanings from unrealistic, merely strategic concession to a possible, sensible, and imperative orientation for future climate action. In international newspapers, representations of the target became increasingly authoritative and yet unclear in their implications, emptying 1.5&#xa0;°C of its original intentions to promote climate justice and invoking new meanings of continued human control over the climate. This case shows how numbers elude hopes of developing a clearcut understanding of climate change, enabling continued contradictions to go unnoticed.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

From global target to numerical myth: shifting meanings of 1.5 °C in newspaper discourse

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2025年12月6日

查看全文
  • Olivia Steiert

摘要

Not even ten years after its adoption in the Paris Agreement in 2015, the 1.5 °C target has already been rendered moot as average global temperatures (at least temporarily) soared past the limit in 2024. In 2025, however, the target continues to be contested in its effects and its sustained use is debated: Has the 1.5 °C target led to false hopes? Or does it continue to effectively mark the shortfalls of the present? This qualitative discourse analysis conceptualizes the 1.5 °C target as a numerical myth that emerged after Paris to unpack the dual meanings the number carries. From 2015 through 2019, years marked by insufficient political action on the climate, the target shifted in its meanings from unrealistic, merely strategic concession to a possible, sensible, and imperative orientation for future climate action. In international newspapers, representations of the target became increasingly authoritative and yet unclear in their implications, emptying 1.5 °C of its original intentions to promote climate justice and invoking new meanings of continued human control over the climate. This case shows how numbers elude hopes of developing a clearcut understanding of climate change, enabling continued contradictions to go unnoticed.