Climate Change: Perspectives on Research and Solutions

Alexa Wanamaker

Principles of Sociology, Fall 2024

Introduction

This analytic paper will focus on how symbolic interactionism, conflict theory, and

structural functionalism are portrayed in the event of climate change and the recent unusually

rapid temperature rise, displayed in the CNN news article, “The world has been warming faster

than expected. Scientists now think they know why” by Laura Paddison and the comic, “What’s

soil got to do with climate change?” by Dr. Asmeret Asefaw Berhe. It will outline the semantics

and definitions of these three sociological concepts, separate from their specific relation to the

news article and comic and event of climate change itself. This paper will explore structural

functionalism’s view of societal stability, conflict theory’s emphasis on power dynamics, and

symbolic interactionism’s focus on human-nature interactions, as portrayed in Paddison’s article

and Dr. Berhe’s comic. This analytical viewpoint will offer a comprehensive synopsis of the

relevant excerpts from the news article and comic. It will also describe details of how the event

is applicable to the greater sociological themes present throughout the topic of climate change.

This paper is not argumentative, meaning it will not take positions on the sociological

ideas mentioned nor their relationships/applications to the overall text. There will be a heavy

emphasis on the analytical inner workings of the various ideas presented in this news event

applying critical theories and frameworks. Three well-researched academic sources are included

that help break down jargon associated with these complex premises, making them more

accessible for the reader. It will then be concluded by a thoughtful correlation back to the
1
original thesis and focus of this paper. The conclusion will reiterate the significance of these

sociological perspectives in understanding the intricate dynamics of the disposition of the article

and comic, beginning with structural functionalism.

Theories

Structural functionalism is a sociological theory that focuses on how civilization interacts

with each other and their surroundings to create and sustain society. Harper suggests that August

Comte, an early sociologist with positivism and scientific ethos, proposed his theory known as

the Hierarchy of Sciences to suggest that the sciences follow “an evolutionary pattern”

emanating from biology. Comte presented that “the way an organism relates to its environment”

can serve as a model for the study of society by showing “the interrelatedness of parts within its

overall system,” as well as how it goes about maintaining its overall system when balance is

disturbed (Harper, 2011). Harper also examines Emile Durkheim's doctoral thesis titled, “The

Division of Labour” by summarizing that he observed how small communities were

disintegrating and that “urbanization was beginning to influence the traditional way of living” in

the 1890s. Structural functionalism developed to approach the study of society with an

orientation towards explanation of order and stability. Each element of society, including social

institutions, exists because it fulfills a function. These institutions maintain stability in the face

of constant social change. Sometimes, these institutions evolve and interrupt stability to create

new conditions through the concept of conflict.

Conflict theory is a sociological perspective emphasizing the role of power, inequality

and competition in shaping society. It argues that social structures and relationships are

primarily shaped by conflicts between groups with opposing interests, of those who hold power

and those who are marginalized or disadvantaged. Prayogi suggests that conflict theory is

2
constantly evolving due to the things behind the occurrence of conflict changing from situation

to situation (Prayogi, 2023). Conflict theory emerged as a response to the birth of

industrialization “as a result of conflicts that result in compromises that are different from the

original conditions.” Conflict theorists believe that the phenomenon of conflict is a normal

social phenomenon that comes about when the human population needs to make changes. A

change sometimes must be forced to happen instead of waiting for society to act upon it based on

mutual agreement. Scarce resources lead to conflict as distinct groups compete for these limited

resources leading to ongoing struggles for wealth, power, and status. Conflict theory is the

result, unavoidably and avoidably, of groups striving to maximize their profits in society.

Historically, conflict theory rests upon the base vs. superstructure with every socioeconomic

class having its own interests. During the evolution of these interests, society designates

symbols to modern conflicts.

Symbolic interactionism is another sociological theory that focuses on how individuals

interact through symbols and develop shared meanings in society. Denzin suggests that the term

symbolic, in the phrase symbolic interactionism, refers to the “underlying relations of human

group life” as the term interaction refers to the fact that “humans interact with each other”

(Denzin, 2004). It involves the study and analysis of the developmental course of action that

exists when people (agents) with reflexivity (agency) join individual lines of action into joint

action. Symbolic interactionism rests upon eight main root assumptions. The first suggests that

humans act towards things based on meaning. The second states that these meanings arise from

social interaction. The third explains that these meanings are modernized through an interpretive

modification process. The fourth highlights that humans, in the worlds that they live in, create

worlds of experience. The fifth portrays that the meanings of these worlds stem from interaction,

shaped by the self-reflections of humans. The sixth adds that self-interaction is unavoidably

3
influential and interwoven with social interaction. The seventh discusses that joint acts are what

society consists of. Lastly, the final assumption assumes that a complex interpretive process

shapes the meanings things have for humans. Society interprets symbols, evoking emotional

responses, to help simplify complex issues such as climate change which makes them more

relatable. A shared interpretation influences the urgency or apathy with which societies respond.

Climate change narratives resonate differently across cultural contexts such as looking through a

lens of spiritual responsibility or as an economic challenge. Shared meanings establish what is

considered “normal” or “appropriate” creating a social expectation for individuals and

corporations to act. By shaping perceptions, values, and priorities, shared meanings and symbols

not only influence actions but also collective societal strategies to address climate change. All

three sociological concepts can be applied to modern day issues in societal interactions.

Summary of Climate Change

Laura Paddison's article, “The world has been warming faster than expected. Scientists

now think they know why” portrays new research that has been recently unveiled as a key piece

of why climate change has been becoming worse in the present day. Paddison is a senior climate

writer for CNN who focuses on topics revolving around the climate environment, and social

inequality.

She reflects upon new research from national scientists and satellite data from NASA,

concluding from this research that clouds are a key finding of one of the reasons for climate

change. She refers to the phenomenon called albedo which is defined as the ability of surfaces to

reflect the sun’s energy back into space (Paddison, 2024). In the context of climate change,

fewer bright, low clouds mean that the planet “has darkened” allowing it to absorb more

sunlight. The albedo of the earth has been on decline since the 1970s due to the melting of light-

4
colored snow and sea ice, exposing darker land and water that absorb more light, heat, and

energy from the sun. Paddison also reflects upon the fact that even new research, such as this

study dealing with clouds, still cannot explain why climate change is taking place on earth. This

presents itself as a common theme where many researchers present their research to solve

climate change. What they commonly miss is the reasoning as to why this is happening to back

up their studies. In relation to this article, Dr. Asmeret Asefaw Berhe presents a solution to

climate change with an actual explanation behind her research, giving the reader an answer as to

why her studies have this relation.

In the comic, “What’s soil got to do with climate change?” Dr. Asmeret Asefaw Berhe

explores the idea of increasing the carbon content in soil to solve the issue of climate change.

Dr. Berhe’s proposal compelling in the fact that increasing the amount of carbon by just 0.4%

every year “could offset one-third of all global emissions of CO2” over time (Berhe, 2021). The

term soil can be defined as SOM which stands for soil organic matter. This term includes

physical, chemical, and biological aspects of what is commonly referred to by most people as

dirt. There is a profound impact that carbon levels in the atmosphere have on climate change.

Dr. Berhe begins in her comic with common symbols that society associates with climate change

such as “the polar ice sheets melting in antarctica.” She presents carbon sequestration is the

process of some of the carbon on earth being stored in the seas and soils. At a societal level, the

intention of carbon conservation in the soil can begin with a singular person. At this level, any

contribution can seem like it will not make a substantial difference. Increasing the carbon in soil

in any form will positively impact the environment.

Dr. Berhe presents an important fact that global carbon dioxide levels have increased

from around 277 ppm in 1750 to 422.5 ppm in the present day. There is more carbon in the soil

than in vegetation and the atmosphere combined. This issue lies with how much carbon is

5
released into the atmosphere; not how much carbon is present on earth. Dr. Berhe presents that

carbon dioxide is the main greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere. Carbon has been

stored in the soil for thousands of years. She found research showing there is unaccounted

carbon stored in deep weathered bedrock and more carbon in unaccounted deeper soil deposits.

Sustainability efforts are the solutions to reducing carbon emissions into the atmosphere and

creating a climate smart ecosystem management system for carbon dioxide removal. She

explains that climate mitigation begins with sustainability efforts to restore the excess of carbon

in the atmosphere back into the soil. This can be physically implemented through reforestation,

cropland management, and “adopting more efficient use of agricultural chemicals” which can all

be done individually and collectively by society as solutions. By understanding climate change

and some reasoning behind this process, it can be further analyzed in a societal context through

the three main sociological and theoretical concepts.

Analysis

“The world has been warming faster than expected. Scientists now think they know why”

and “What’s soil got to do with climate change?” explain why climate change is so prevalent

with constant new research being offered to explain the current phenomenon. By applying

sociological perspectives, we can gain a deeper understanding of the themes and dynamics at

play in the topic of climate change.

Structural functionalism posits that society is a system of interconnected parts, each with

a specific function based upon institutions to maintain equilibrium. Structural functionalism

explains climate change by examining how various parts of society contribute to or are impacted

by the issue, and how society attempts to maintain stability and balance in response to

6
environmental challenges. This sociological perspective views society as a system of

interconnected parts working together to promote order and stability.

Economic institutions contribute to industrialization, economic growth, and consumption

practices which have contributed to greenhouse gas emissions. These activities, while

supporting societal development and job creation, also disrupt environmental equilibrium.

Economic institutions play a critical role in contributing to economic balance by shaping how

resources are allocated, managed, and utilized. They can either drive sustainability or exacerbate

environmental degradation, depending on their policies, practices, and priorities. Economic

institutions fund and promote sustainable technologies in the practices of renewable energy,

electric vehicles, and energy-efficient infrastructure that may not always have a major impact on

reversing climate change, only disrupting equilibrium. Governments play a role in addressing

climate change by creating regulations, also promoting renewable energy, and coordinating

international agreements such as the Paris Accord to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Schools

and universities as institutions spread awareness about climate science, sustainability, and the

consequences of environmental degradation by viewing climate change as a disruption to societal

stability. For example, extreme weather events such as elevated temperatures and rising sea

levels along with resource scarcity are all challenges to all existing social systems. In response,

society develops mechanisms to adapt to the disruption of equilibrium that institutions create

with solutions to climate change. Scientific research bodies and global treaties disrupt

equilibrium by introducing latest information, norms, and practices of climate change that

challenge existing systems, behaviors, and power structures. Society adapts through

technological innovations of renewable energy and carbon capture with relation to institutional

reforms of climate policies and disaster response systems. While structural functionalism

highlights the roles of institutions in managing climate change, it may underemphasize power

7
dynamics and conflicts. Conflict theory builds upon structural functionalism by providing the

institutions present in the disruption of equilibrium in society created by the issue of climate

change.

Conflict theory exposes how conflict within these institutions on climate change fortify

control and social inequality. It suggests that the role of power, inequality, and competing

interests contributes to the causes, consequences, and responses to environmental issues.

Conflict theory focuses on how diverse groups, those with unequal power and resources, interact

in ways that can contribute to or attempt to address climate change.

Economic inequality and environmental exploitation highlight that climate change is

driven by capitalist systems prioritizing profit over environmental sustainability. Industries and

corporations exploit natural resources and emit greenhouse gases to maximize wealth while

disregarding long-term environmental consequences. Wealthier nations and corporations benefit

disproportionately from resource exploitation while poorer nations and communities withstand

the worst of environmental degradation without the proper resources and information needed to

help sustain the environment at a personal level. Policies are often shaped by powerful interest

groups like fossil fuel industries that resist regulations to protect their profits. Governments and

international organizations therefore struggle to enact meaningful reforms due to the lobbying of

these powerful groups creating the conflict between economic interests and environmental

protection. Marginalized communities, especially those in developing countries, experience

perpetuating inequality by being more vulnerable to the effects of climate change through

instances of droughts, flooding, and food insecurity. These communities often lack the resources

to adapt and recover from these disasters caused by the constantly changing climate. Social

movements have become a norm to create social change and resistance such as youth-led climate

strikes and environmental advocacy, challenging the systems and institutions responsible for

8
environmental harm. These movements portray a class/group struggle aiming to redistribute

power and resources toward more sustainable and equitable practices. These struggles are all

indirect impacts of social institutions whose ideas to create environmental equilibrium only

disrupt individuals in society who are not all equipped with the resources to implement

environmental change. While conflict theory effectively highlights the inequalities and power

dynamics underlying climate change, symbols resemble the roles of individual behaviors and

collaborative efforts to combat climate change. Symbolic interactionism presents symbols that

society commonly attributes to climate change amidst the conflict that social institutions create.

Symbolic interactionism focuses on the meanings that individuals attach to symbols and

interactions. Climate change is understood and interpreted differently depending on individual

and cultural contexts. For example, the terms global warming, carbon footprint, and climate

crisis carry different connotations that influence how people perceive the urgency of the issue at

hand. Symbols commonly associated with climate change include polar bears pictured on

melting glaciers, or renewable energy sources like wind turbines which are used to represent

climate change in public discourse. This makes the abstract problem more tangible and

picturable for most of the population. Green labels and recycling logos act as symbolic markers

of environmentally conscious behavior, guiding consumer and corporate practices.

Interactionism examines how people adopt environmentally friendly behaviors such as recycling

as part of their social identity.

Being conscious of the environment and being environmentally safe can become a

symbol of status and morality in some societies. Peer pressure and group norms can encourage

or discourage individuals from participating in sustainable actions of reducing energy

consumption or participating in climate protests. How climate change is framed in conversation

influences the public understanding and behavior in response to the topic. A symbolically

9
apocalyptic framework highlights catastrophic outcomes that may incite fear but also could

create denial or disengagement from the general population. A hopeful framing instead focuses

on solutions and collective action that fosters empowerment and participation. Symbolic

interactionism remains as a valuable lens for understanding how people interpret and respond to

environmental challenges on a micro level.

Conclusion

In conclusion, through these sociological frameworks, “The world has been warming

faster than expected. Scientists now think they know why” and “What’s soil got to do with

climate change?” supplies as perceptions of the many solutions that attempt to solve climate

change not accounting for larger systemic and structural causes of the issue.

Structural functionalism portrays how swiftly equilibrium can collapse when key

institutions fail. In the greater context of climate change structural functionalism tends to fucus

on maintaining stability, which can sometimes overlook the need for radical changes to existing

systems that perpetuate environmental harm. It may also undermine power dynamics and

conflicts such as the influence of corporations or inequalities in climate change impacts, which

are central to conflict theory.

Conflict theory emphasizes the inevitable struggles for power. By providing a powerful

lens for addressing the systemic inequalities and injustices tied to climate change, conflict theory

emphasizes the need for structural reform and inclusive policymaking. It must be noted that it

may overemphasize conflict and power struggles while underappreciating collaborative efforts

and technological innovations that also contribute to climate solutions. Conflict theory

advocates for solutions that not only mitigate environmental harm but also create a more fair and

equitable global society.

10
 Symbolic interactionism presents the fluidity and meaning of identity. Its strengths focus

on how individuals and small groups influence and are influenced by climate change discourse

and behavior. The importance of communication, framing, and symbols in creating and driving

societal change can be useful. Symbolic interactionism may also underemphasize the systemic

and structural causes of climate change, better addressed by the macro-level theories of structural

functionalism and conflict theory. Overall, they emphasize Paddison and Berhe’s views that

urgency and resolution are needed by the collective population to better our environment.

Together, these theories illuminate the interwoven social, economic, and cultural

dimensions of climate change, offering a comprehensive understanding of its causes, impacts,

and pathways for resolution. Structural functionalism, conflict theory, and symbolic

interactionism offer valuable frameworks for informing public awareness of complex issues like

climate change. Structural functionalism emphasizes the interconnectedness of societal systems,

highlighting the cascading impacts of environmental disruptions and the need for cohesive

action. Conflict theory underscores the inequities in climate change’s causes and effects,

fostering awareness of justice and advocacy for systemic change. Symbolic interactionism sheds

light on how shared meanings and symbols influence individual and collective perceptions,

making it crucial for crafting effective communication strategies. These perspectives deepen

public understanding, inspire empathy, and encourage more informed, equitable, and unified

responses to global challenges.

11
 Works Cited

Berhe, Asmeret Asefaw. “What’s Soil Got to Do with Climate Change?” Dr. Asmeret Asefaw

Berhe: What’s Soil Got to Do with Climate Change? | Jasper Ridge Biological Preserve,

jrbp.stanford.edu/news/dr-asmeret-asefaw-berhe-what%E2%80%99s-soil-got-do-climate-

change.

Denzin, Normin K. “Symbolic Interactionism.” Social Science, SAGE, 2004, pp. 81–82.

Harper, Donald W. “Structural-Functionalism: Grand Theory or Methodology?” Academia.Edu,

7 June 2014,

www.academia.edu/1973019/STRUCTURAL_FUNCTIONALISM_GRAND_THEORY_

OR_METHODOLOGY.

Paddison, Laura. “The World Has Been Warming Faster than Expected. Scientists Now Think

They Know Why.” CNNClimate, https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/05/climate/global-

warming-clouds/index.html.

Prayogi, Arditya. “Social Change in conflict theory: A descriptive study.” ARRUS Journal of

Social Sciences and Humanities, vol. 3, no. 1, 11 Apr. 2023, pp. 37–42,

https://doi.org/10.35877/soshum1652.

12