Date of publication
Oct 12, 2026
Category:
Article
From barriers to boundaries: internal differentiation in scientists' public-role orientations on climate change
Why do scientists differ in the public roles they consider appropriate on climate change? Existing research documents variation in engagement behaviours and barriers. Less is known about how scientists combine judgements about who should act publicly and which forms of engagement are legitimate. Using an international survey of scientists (N = 9,220), we construct a four-category typology that crosses the scope of the public mandate with the repertoire of legitimate action. Political self-placement and activist-network proximity are associated mainly with protest-inclusive configurations, whereas climate-research proximity is associated mainly with whether the mandate extends beyond climate-related specialists. Role-boundary orientations are only partly aligned with retrospective self-reported behaviour. The findings distinguish normative judgements about public roles from engagement intensity and show that the scope and repertoire dimensions have different correlates.