Cosmopolitan Relational Loops of Interconnectivity

  • Ingrid Volkmer
  • Kasim Sharif
Part of the The Palgrave Macmillan Series in International Political Communication book series (PIPC)


Climate change can no longer be considered as just an ‘issue’ but it is today an increasingly politicized globally interdependent crisis. Within this spectrum, climate change journalism—or, we argue, ‘risk journalism’—has new responsibilities to communicate the interdependence of globalized crisis dimensions within a world community.


  1. Anderson, A. (2015a). Reflections on environmental communication and the challenges of a new research agenda. Environmental Communication, 9(3), 379–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Anderson, A. (2015b). News organization(s) and the production of environmental news. In A. Hansen & J. Cox (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of environment and communication (pp. 176–182). Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (2008). The cosmopolitan vision. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Billett, S. (2009). Dividing climate change: Global warming in the Indian mass media. Climatic Change, 99(1), 1–16.Google Scholar
  5. Boykoff, M. T. (2008a). Lost in translation? United States television news coverage of anthropogenic climate change, 1995–2004. Climate Change, 86(1–2), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boykoff, M. T. (2008b). The social construction of climate change: Power, knowledge, norms, discourses. Environmental Conservation, 35(1), 88–89. Scholar
  7. Boykoff, M. T. (2008c). The cultural politics of climate change discourse in UK tabloids. Political Geography, 27, 549–569. Scholar
  8. Boykoff, M. T. (2010a). U.S. climate coverage in the ‘00s. Extra! 23(2), 9–10.Google Scholar
  9. Boykoff, M. T. (Ed.). (2010b). The politics of climate change: A survey. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Carvalho, A., & Burgess, J. (2005). Cultural circuits of climate change in UK broadsheet newspapers, 1985–2003. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 25(6), 1457–1469.Google Scholar
  11. Castells, M. (2009). Communication power. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cottle, S. (2009). Series Editor’s Preface: Global crises and the media. In T. Boyce & J. Lewis (Eds.), Climate change and the media (pp. viii–xii). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  13. Cottle, S. (2013). Environmental conflict in a global, media age: Beyond dualisms. In L. Lester & B. Hutchins (Eds.), Environmental conflict and the media. Global crises and the media (pp. 13–28). Oxford: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  14. Cox, J. R. (2015). Scale, complexity, and communicative systems. Environmental Communication, 9(3), 370–378. Scholar
  15. Crossley, N. (2011). Towards relational sociology. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Djerf-Pierre, M. (2012a). The crowding-out effect. Journalism Studies, 13(4), 499–516. Scholar
  17. Djerf-Pierre, M. (2012b). When attention drives attention: Issue dynamics in environmental news reporting over five decades. European Journal of Communication, 291.
  18. Edwards, G. (2010). Mixed-method approaches to social network analysis. ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Paper NCRM/015. Retrieved from NCRM website:
  19. Giddens, A. (1991). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  20. Hansen, A. (2010). Environment, media and communication. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Hansen, A. (2011). Communication, media and environment: Towards reconnecting research on the production, content and social implications of environmental communication. The International Communication Gazette, 73(1–2), 7–25.Google Scholar
  22. Hansen, A. (2015a). Promising directions for environmental communication research. Environmental Communication, 9(3), 384–391. Scholar
  23. Hansen, A. (2015b). News coverage of the environment: A longitudinal perspective. In A. Hansen & R. Cox (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of environment and communication (pp. 209–220). Abingdon, Oxon and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  24. Hansen, A., & Cox, J. R. (2015). The Routledge handbook of environment and communication. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Harvey, D. (1990). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  26. Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J. (1999). Globalization. London: The Foreign Policy Centre.Google Scholar
  27. Herod, A. (2010). Scale. Hoboken: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  28. Hilgartner, S., & Bosk, C. L. (1988). The rise and fall of social problems: A public arenas model. American Journal of Sociology, 94(1), 53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multilevel governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243.Google Scholar
  30. Kissinger, M., & Rees, W. E. (2010). An interregional ecological approach for modelling sustainability in a globalizing world: Reviewing existing approaches and emerging directions. Ecological Modelling, 221(21), 2615–2623. Scholar
  31. Knoke, D., Yang, S., & Knoke, D. (2008). Social network analysis. Los Angeles: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale Welt, 47, 369–381.Google Scholar
  33. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lenschow, A., Newig, J., & Challies, E. (2016). Globalization’s limits to the environmental state? Integrating telecoupling into global environmental governance. Environmental Politics, 25(1), 136–159. Scholar
  35. Liu, J., Hull, V., Batistella, M., DeFries, R., Dietz, T., Fu, F., et al. (2013). Framing sustainability in a telecoupled world. Ecology and Society, 18(2), 26. Scholar
  36. Liu, J., Mooney, H., Hull, V., Davis, S. J., Gaskell, J., Hertel, T., et al. (2015). Systems integration for global sustainability. Science, 347(6225), 963–972. Scholar
  37. McGrew, A. (1997). Democracy beyond borders? Globalization and the reconstruction of democratic theory and practice. In The transformation of democracy: Globalization and territorial democracy (pp. 231–266). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  38. Olausson, U., & Berglez, P. (2014a). Media and climate change: Four long- standing research challenges revisited. Environmental Communication, 8(2), 249–265.
  39. Olausson, U., & Berglez, P. (2014b). Media research on climate change: Where have we been and where are we heading? Environmental Communication, 8(2), 139–141.
  40. Ritzer, G. (2001). Explorations in social theory: From metatheorizing to rationalization. London and Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  41. Sassen, S. (2008). Neither global nor national: Novel assemblages of territory, authority and rights. Ethics and Global Politics, 1(1–2), 61–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sassen, S. (2010). Inside the national: A research agenda for sociology. Sociopedia.isa Retrieved October 17, 2017, from
  43. Schäfer, M. S., & Schlichting, I. (2014). Media representations of climate change: A meta-analysis of the research field. Environmental Communication, 8(2), 142–160. Scholar
  44. Schmidt, A., Ivanova, A., & Schäfer, M. S. (2013). Media attention for climate change around the world: A comparative analysis of newspaper coverage in 27 countries. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1233–1248. Scholar
  45. Scott, J. (2013). Social network analysis. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  46. Tolan, S. (2007). Coverage of climate change in Chinese media (Human Development Report 2007/2008 Occasional Paper). Retrieved October 15, 2017, from
  47. Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  48. Volkmer, I. (2012). Deconstructing the “Methodological Paradox”: Comparative research between national centrality and networked spaces. In I. Volkmer (Ed.), The handbook of global media research (pp. 110–122). London: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Volkmer, I. (2014). The global public sphere: Public communication in the age of reflective interdependence. Cambridge, UK and Malden, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations