LAUSR

Scientific knowledge is at the heart of discussions about climate change. However, it has been proposed that the apparent predominance of climate science in the societal debate should be reconsidered and that a more inclusive approach is warranted. Further, the introduction of new communication technology has made the information environment more fragmented, possibly endangering the quality of societal deliberation on climate change concerns. Using focus group methodology, this paper explores how climate scientists, climate journalists, and citizens perceive scientific experts’ mandate when they communicate publicly, the role of experiential knowledge in discussions of climate-related issues, and who the three actors prefer to guard the quality of the climate information exchanged in the public sphere. The findings show that scientific experts are perceived to carry a high degree of legitimacy, but only within their own narrow specialty, while experiential knowledge was seen as more useful in applied domains of science than in arcane research fields. In the new media landscape, journalists are still generally preferred as gatekeepers by all three actor types.