Interesting question! Following answers.

ليس كل الابحاث تعتمد الجودة بحيث توجد الكثير من البحوث نظرية فقط وليس لها اي فائدة

ليس كل بحوث تعتمد على الجودة الكثير من البحوث نظرية فقط بدون تطبيق

Thanks Joshua O. Ighalo Hassan Izzeddin Sarsak Kawther Abbood Neamah

Dear Joshua O. Ighalo the database i used to generate the graph is from a very reliable source and all are peer-reviewed.

Dear Kawther Abbood Neamah I am sorry to inform that I cannot understand Arabic, if possible, can you please also write an English version

I think not the results he has obtained from climate change issues at the required level.

Dear Al-Zubaidi Ali Hassen Thanks for your input... i cannot get the point clearly...can you please write again

The quality of the research lies in the type of journals published, the scientific sensitivity of the journal, the number of quotations and the coefficient of influence for each journal indicating the quality of published research.

climate change is a reality

very good question

I think we use Climate change to sell research, by the gouvernment and politics

but researcher in some specific topics trust that the effort is made to solve problems of climate changes

Looking your graph it seems climate change less researched but more published, if not so we might have got some per cent of solution. Its also trendy to talk, discusses and write on climate change mainly by social scientist rather basic research by proper data set. All sorts of global problem now directed to climate change, so its more to sell the research

In response to the question " Are we doing research on climate change or using climate change to sell our research?" I would say it goes both ways, sometimes together. When certain subject areas offer more funding opportunities scientists will look to those to see whether their research program meets those needs. So it is possible that scientists are investigating a particular field that is relevant to understanding climate change even though that research was not originally explored with that in mind. Also, climate change implications might be incidental. For example, a taxonomist might be compiling distribution and historical records of an organism for taxonomic purposes and then incidentally find a certain pattern of geographic or historical occurrence that is consistent with climate change patterns.

As for quality, as with all science it lies in the data and analysis. The amount of prestige attributed to the journal has no necessary relationship to quality (there really is no such thing as a prestigious science journal other than as an arbitrary social convention and such journals can potentially publish junk science as well as any other - just think about some of the medical scams in recent years). Some journals such as Science and Nature act as a 'newsstand' and so often sought after to publish and to read (but perhaps less so these days with electronic ability to make one's research visible) but this does not automatically make them prestigious.

Actually we are doing both.

Its impossible to get fund without marketing

Whichever is applicable! One cannot go without the other. The objective is climate change but you have to convince people that you can achieve your objective. But how? It is called marketing. So you sell yourself and your potentials (researches) and you get called upon to help solve a problem. I don't see what is bad about that.

I would agree with Maurice Ekpenyong - marketing of one kind or another is essential for any 'competitive' funding (or any discretionary funding). That marketing may take many forms, from formal research proposals to other promotional activities. Of course it might mean that the best marketed projects rather than the best research gets funded, but that's life and it occurs even with entirely 'academic' issues. So where positions are obtained or maintained on the basis of funding one has to be a good propagandist and well as researcher. University positions, at least in the US, are based as much if not more on the money grabbing ability of candidates as it does on their research capability or interest.

Dear John Grehan Maurice Ekpenyong Abhijit Mitra Thanks for your valuable inputs.

I do agree, we need funding. Funding for research. First of all we need to understand the value of the research filed and gaps for further progress. The main objective of a proposal must not be aimed for hunting fund. Me must search fund for a research and try to convince donors with facts. We must not compromise our research ethics. If earning money is the main target, there are numerous ways for that.

Tersely sharing my views

I feel the awareness has led to increase in the research paper counts. Everyone is trying hard for making the global atmosphere amicable for the future; keeping in mind the predicted deleterious impact of the climate issued mostly under the umbrella of the IPCC. I recall my interview, which got published in the leading newspaper DNA during 2009 when I took the initiative to aware the society about the climate change and its consequences based on the International climate change authorities’ corollary on climate change.

https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-aug-was-hottest-month-in-over-100-yrs-1316614

The Earth’s surface temperature has warmed in the last 100 years, and there is no credible hypothesis for this, other than the net effect of greenhouse gases (especially CO2). And the global average temperature is still showing an increase. There are many environmental problems coming from the increase concentration of greenhouse gases in Earth's atmosphere (for example: increased water vapor in the atmosphere, glaciers and polar ice caps appear to be melting, floods and droughts are becoming more severe, and sea levels have risen, on average, between 4 and 10 inches since 1990). In the line of research, understanding and awareness toward the climate change is in action.

Dear Bakshi Hardeep Vaid , thanks a lot for your valuable inputs. And I like to agree " the awareness has led to increase in the research paper counts. Everyone is trying hard for making the global atmosphere amicable for the future "

surely, level of awareness is very high, awareness leading researchers to solve the issues, there are ample of journal articles as a result, journal articles possible scientific solution of the problem... and hope all these bundles of articles will truly contribute in solving the issue

overwhelming awareness, overwhelming efforts, overwhelming research and articles must lead us to an overwhelming solution

Yes, very rightly said, dear Shahab Uddin. Righteous attitude towards the topic can support us to make the Earth evergreen.

Cheers!

Fine question. The physical challenge of climate change has created an industry. Now, Africa knows such propagation well. Poverty did the same. So did the giant called development. In each case, scholarship becomes more difficult. Commerce muddles the space. Where is the rescue?

Dear Shahab, this is a fine question. Climate Change is the top and most exciting science of our day, together, perhaps, with cancer research. The science is far from being settled. If it were, we would not be seeing new research increasing at such high rates. There is still a lot of work to be done as climate models appear to be incomplete, with many important forcing functions still not accounted for. In short, I believe the answer to your question is that a great deal of climate research today is scientifically genuine.

Yes, the amount of articles about climate change is increasing because the problem is serious. Climate change is progressing faster and faster. The emission of greenhouse gases increases, the average temperature on the surface of the Earth increases year by year, the global warming process is progressing faster, the number of climatic disasters and weather anomalies increases. The problem is getting more serious.

This is probably the most important problem to explore and solve in the 21st century. Unfortunately, many people, including politicians and entrepreneurs managing large industrial corporations ignore the seriousness of this problem. It is necessary to develop research in this area, in the matter of examining the determinants of climate change, global warming, rising average temperature on the Earth, progressing greenhouse effect on Earth. These problems must be publicized in the mass media. While it is not too late, while this unfavorable process can be partially reversed. Or maybe we can not reverse this process anymore? Maybe it's too late? What then, will we be able to protect, at least partially, the biosphere, natural ecosystems due to these adverse climate changes, anomalies and climatic cataclysms, from drought in many areas currently agricultural or possessing a rich biosphere? Research on these topics needs to be developed, publicized, and published. Perhaps, finally, politicians and owners of industrial corporations will change their approach to more pro-ecological. This is probably the most important question for the 21st century: Will we be able to stop adverse climate changes, including the progressing greenhouse effect on Earth?

At present, it should no longer be asked whether global warming generates an increase in natural disasters only what rate of growth will be recorded in the future? So many data, research centers confirms the progressing process of global warming, that the problem is unquestionable.

More and more data points to the growing risk of climate change, unfavorable for human and life on the Earth, increase of climate disasters, climatic and weather anomalies, which are the result of global warming, rising average annual temperature near the Earth's surface.

Now we should just ask: How can these adverse processes be counteracted? What ecological technologies, renewable energy sources, how to help natural environments, how to rebuild them, such as afforestation, to build natural ecosystems absorbing greenhouse gases?

How to develop ecological business ventures? How to create financing systems for this type of pro-ecological projects? How to dispel international cooperation in this matter? What actions should be taken to move towards the development of a new ecological green economy?

More and more research centers operating in different countries and investigating climate change state that the progressing greenhouse effect on Earth is already a fact. As a result, the risk of increasingly frequent and increasingly dramatic climate disasters is increasing. Man has less and less time to counteract these negative processes.

It is necessary to change the development strategy based on intensifying the exploitation of the Earth's resources on the sustainable development strategy. It is necessary to develop new energy technologies based on renewable energy sources to slow down the progressing greenhouse effect of the Earth in order to reduce the risk of dramatic natural cataclysms. It is necessary to develop ecological innovations, while it may not be too late. It is necessary to save the Earth through destruction for future generations.

According to the published and presented results of climatologists' research during the recent UN Climate Summits and Conferences on the problem of progressing global warming process, unless by 2030 at the latest the world will not show the classic energy based on the burning of minerals for renewable energy sources and motorization for electromobility and there will be no appropriate improvement of segregation waste and recycling, by the end of the 21st century, the average temperature at the Earth's surface will increase by 3-4 degrees Celsius globally, and the scale of climate cataclysms and weather anomalies will increase many times in relation to the current state.

Since the beginning of the 20th century, the average temperature on the Earth has increased by 1 ° C

Therefore, the greenhouse effect of the Earth has already begun.

Greenhouse gas emissions have increased in recent decades.

As a result, the global warming process accelerates.

The climate is warming, and therefore more and more climatic cataclysms are emerging.

Droughts and declining areas of agricultural crops are a serious threat.

Will these adverse climate changes be deepened?

In connection with the above, it is particularly important to answer the question: How many degrees ° C the will increase the average temperature on the Earth by the end of the 21st century?

There has been an increase in genuine and excellent climate change research. However, there are always opportunistic people/firms who take advantage of a situation and jump on the bandwagon to get credit for work done in a growing research area. You have to watch out for them because just like fads (example as in diets) they come and go like soup du jour.

I think the two issues start and end at the same point.

Both we are following...