pp 1–24 | Cite as

What does robustness teach us in climate science: a re-appraisal

  • Eric WinsbergEmail author
S.I. : Modeling and Representation


In the philosophy of climate science, debate surrounding the issue of variety of evidence has mostly taken the form of attempting to connect these issues in climate science and climate modeling with philosophical accounts of what has come to be known as “robustness analysis.” I argue that an “explanatory” conception of robustness is the best candidate for understanding variety of evidence in climate science. I apply the analysis to both examples of model agreement, as well at to the convergence of evidence from both model and non-model sources.


Climate science Climate models Robustness Explanation Emergent constraints 


  1. Calcott, B. (2011). Wimsatt and the robustness family: Review of Wimsatt’s re-engineering philosophy for limited beings. Biology and Philosophy, 26, 281–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Kirtman, B., Power, S. B., Adedoyin, J. A., Boer, G. J., Bojariu, R., Camilloni, I., et al. (2013). Near-term climate change: Projections and predictability. In T. F. Stocker, D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S. K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex, & P. M. Midgley (Eds.), Climate change 2013: The physical science basis. Contribution of working group I to the fifth assessment report of the intergovernmental panel on climate change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Klein, S. A., & Hall, A. (2015). Emergent constraints for cloud feedbacks. Current Climate Change Reports, 1, 276–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Knutti, R., & Hegerl, G. C. (2008). The equilibrium sensitivity of the Earth’s temperature to radiation changes. Nature Geosciences., 1, 735–743.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Levins, R. (1966). The strategy of model building in population biology. In E. Sober (Ed.), Conceptual issues in evolutionary biology (1st ed., pp. 18–27). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  6. Lloyd, E. A. (2009). Varieties of support and confirmation of climate models. In Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society (Supplementary Vol. LXXXIII, pp. 217–236).Google Scholar
  7. Lloyd, E. A. (2010). Confirmation and robustness of climate models. Philosophy of Science, 77, 971–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lloyd, E. A. (2015). Model robustness as a confirmatory virtue: The case of climate science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 49, 58–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Mastrandrea, M. D., Field, C. B., Stocker, T. F., Edenhofer, O., Ebi, K. L., Frame, D. J., et al. (2010). Guidance note for lead authors of the IPCC fifth assessment report on consistent treatment of uncertainties. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Available at <>.
  10. Orzack, S. H., & Sober, E. (1993). A critical assessment of Levins’s ‘The strategy of model building in population biology’ (1966). Quarterly Review of Biology, 68(4), 533–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Parker, W. S. (2011). When climate models agree: The significance of robust model predictions. Philosophy of Science, 78, 579–600.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pirtle, Z., Meyer, R., & Hamilton, A. (2010). What does it mean when climate models agree? A case for assessing independence among general circulation models. Environmental Science & Policy, 13(5), 351–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Schupbach, J. N. (2016). Robustness analysis as explanatory reasoning. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science. Scholar
  14. Weisberg, M. (2006). Robustness analysis. Philosophy of Science, 73, 730–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wimsatt, W. C. (1994). The ontology of complex systems: Levels of organization, perspectives, and causal thickets. In W. C. Wimsatt (Ed.), Re-engineering philosophy for limited beings (pp. 193–240). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Wimsatt, W. C. (2011). Robust re-engineering: A philosophical account? Biology and Philosophy, 26, 295–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Woodward, J. (2006). Some varieties of robustness. Journal of Economic Methodology, 13, 219–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations