From Princeton University (with help from Berkeley)
Cool heads likely won’t prevail in a hotter, wetter world
Should climate change trigger the upsurge in heat and rainfall that scientists predict, people may face a threat just as perilous and volatile as extreme weather — each other.
Researchers from Princeton University and the University of California-Berkeley report in the journal Science that even slight spikes in temperature and precipitation have greatly increased the risk of personal violence and social upheaval throughout human history. Projected onto an Earth that is expected to warm by 2 degrees Celsius by 2050, the authors suggest that more human conflict is a likely outcome of climate change.

The researchers analyzed 60 studies from a number of disciplines — including archaeology, criminology, economics and psychology — that have explored the connection between weather and violence in various parts of the world from about 10,000 BCE to the present day. During an 18-month period, the Princeton-Berkeley researchers reviewed those studies’ data — and often re-crunched raw numbers — to calculate the risk that violence would rise under hotter and wetter conditions.
They found that while climate is not the sole or primary cause of violence, it undeniably exacerbates existing social and interpersonal tension in all societies, regardless of wealth or stability. They found that 1 standard-deviation shift — the amount of change from the local norm — in heat or rainfall boosts the risk of a riot, civil war or ethnic conflict by an average of 14 percent. There is a 4 percent chance of a similarly sized upward creep in heat or rain sparking person-on-person violence such as rape, murder and assault. The researchers report that climate-change models predict an average of 2 to 4 standard-deviation shifts in global climate conditions by 2050.
Establishing a correlation between violence and climate change now allows policymakers and researchers to examine what causes it and how to intervene, said lead author Solomon Hsiang, who conducted the work as a postdoctoral research associate in the Program in Science, Technology and Environmental Policy in Princeton’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs.
![]() |
||||
“We think that by collecting all the research together now, we’re pretty clearly establishing that there is a causal relationship between the climate and human conflict,” Hsiang said. “People have been skeptical up to now of an individual study here or there. But considering the body of work together, we can now show that these patterns are extremely general. It’s more of the rule than the exception.
“Whether there is a relationship between climate and conflict is not the question anymore. We now want to understand what’s causing it,” Hsiang said. “Once we understand what causes this correlation we can think about designing effective policies or institutions to manage or interrupt the link between climate and conflict.”
The existing research had essentially shown an overall link between climate conditions and these conflicts, but that link needed to be extracted from reams of figures from various disciplines in order for the research to reach general conclusions, Hsiang said. Hsiang, who is now an assistant professor at Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy, worked with co-first author Marshall Burke, a doctoral candidate in Berkeley’s Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics, and Edward Miguel, the Oxfam Professor of Environmental and Resource Economics at Berkeley.
“We attained a huge amount of the data that was available and we used the same method on all of the data so that we could directly compare studies,” Hsiang said. “Once we did that, we saw that all of the results were actually highly consistent — previously they just weren’t being analyzed in a consistent way.”
The researchers examined three categories of conflict: “personal violence and crime,” which includes murder, assault, rape and domestic violence; “intergroup violence and political instability,” such as civil wars, riots, ethnic violence and land invasions; and “institutional breakdowns,” which are abrupt and major changes in governing institutions or, in extreme cases, the collapse of entire civilizations.
Extreme climatic conditions amplified violence in all three categories, regardless of geography, societal wealth or the time in history. An aberrant climate coincided with incidents including spikes in domestic violence in India and Australia; increased assaults and murders in the United States and Tanzania; ethnic violence in Europe and South Asia; land invasions in Brazil; police using force in the Netherlands; civil conflicts throughout the tropics; the collapse of ancient empires; and wars and displacement in Middle-Ages Europe.
“We find the same pattern over and over again, regardless of whether we look at data from Brazil, Somalia, China or the United States,” Miguel said. “We often think of modern society as largely independent of the environment, due to technological advances, but our findings challenge that notion. The climate appears to be a critical factor sustaining peace and wellbeing across human societies.”
And the climate does not have to deviate much to upset that peace and wellbeing, Burke said. The 1 standard-deviation shift he and his co-authors uncovered equates to a seemingly paltry change in weather: it’s roughly equal to warming an African country by 0.35°C, or by 0.63°F, for an entire year, or warming a county in the United States by 2.9°C, or by 5.2°F, for a given month.
“These are pretty moderate changes, but they have a sizable impact on those societies,” Burke said. Many global climate models project global temperature increases of at least 2 degrees Celsius over the next several decades, which, when combined with the Princeton-Berkeley findings, suggest that warming at that level could increase the risk of civil war in many countries by more than 50 percent, the researchers said.
The factors that interact with climate to produce chaos and discord are varied. A popular theory is that drought and flooding cripple an economy, especially one based on agriculture or that is already weak. When people look for someone to blame, governmental leaders have a target on their backs, as do any people with whom there is existing tension, such as an ethnic minority or a migrant group from stricken hinterlands.
But sometimes heat just makes people more aggressive. The researchers found that personal violence was far more influenced by a leap in temperature. Hsiang and his colleagues cite studies that equate excessive heat with spikes of violence in the United States and other stable, wealthy countries. For example, a 1994 study found that two groups of police officers undergoing the exact same simulation training were more likely to draw their weapons if the room was uncomfortably warm.
“There’s a large amount of evidence that environmental conditions actually change a person’s perception of their own condition, or they also can change the likelihood of people using violence or aggressive action to accomplish some goal,” Hsiang said.
“Our study is not saying that climate is the only cause of conflict, and there’s no conflict that we think should be wholly attributed to some specific climatic event,” he said. “Every conflict has roots in interpersonal and intergroup relations. What we’re trying to point out is that climate is one of the critical factors the affect how things escalate, and if they escalate to the point of violence.”
The paper, “Quantifying the influence of climate on human conflict,” was published in Science Aug. 1. The study was funded by a Princeton University postdoctoral fellowship in science, technology and environmental policy, a Graduate Research Fellowship from the National Science Foundation, and the Oxfam Faculty Chair in Environmental and Resource Economics at Berkeley.

That is genuinely funny!
IF you take it as read that there will be a 2C average rise, and IF you take it as read that people get all Marvin The Martian when it’s hot, it still doesn’t matter.
Tropical and summer temperatures will hardly change, according to the models predicting 2C change – it’s winter temperatures in temperate and polar areas that will really rise, apparently.
So where does that leave this ‘report’ from two eminent universities? In the cylindrical filing cabinet…
Jesse G. says:
August 1, 2013 at 3:28 pm
I don’t post here often because I’m not qualified….
>>>>>
You just got qualified, Jesse!
higley7 says:
August 1, 2013 at 2:47 pm
What you said goes double for the Dark Ages or Migrations Cold Period. Also for the CP between the Minoan & Roman Warm Periods.
Tom in hot hot hot Florida, LAUGH – OUT – LOUD. #[:)]
Some people can get angry on purpose…
Look at how violent the Mediterranean and tropical parts of the world are. Siestas are surely only for cooling off one’s violent rages resulting from the warm, balmy temperatures, and Poly/Micronesians are well-known for flying off the handle at a mere insult.
I’d write more but it’s too warm, I’m going to take a nap.
Jimbo says:
………, jai mitchell informs ……………..
sorry , but … roflmao !!
Jesse, I second Geran. If I can find threads to post on (where I am not completely ignorant of the subject matter), YOU certainly can. Glad you piped up, today. KEEP ON POSTING!
Latitude says:
“and that is why the Eskimos invented the siesta……..”
A classic.. thank you, L ! :-))))
I’ve changed my mind – I want to be a climate seantist.
Look at the advantages – governments shower money on you, sometimes without you even asking (Several climate seantists got showered with money from Obama’s stimulus fund). You get to hang out in college bars drinking and picking up pretty, enthusiastic hippy chicks. Every so often you get to fly off to an exotic holiday destination, tax deductible, expenses paid. And when someone actually demands you produce the report you were allegedly paid to create, you spend a few days making stuff up – or more likely, getting one of your graduate students to make stuff up.
No wonder they don’t want to let this nonsense go.
And lets not forget that when you speak, governments feel the need to make statements apologising for their climate crimes, and promising to do better in future.
Its like being dictator of the world, without all the paperwork.
It is amazing the fortune telling Climate Scientist and their clams. Angry people now, what is next Angry Cats and Dog?
Princeton University, Hmmm that is https://twitter.com/HeidiCullen neck of the woods and so is her site, COULD and IF one http://www.climatecentral.org/
I encountered a long term study in criminology that during winter when the day is short, the weather is cold and dreary there are more suicides, self harm and violent crimes than in warm and sunny days. Cold, dreary and short days could tip the balance in what would be sound mind.( what is in the mind of a criminal is one of the main issue to analyze in criminal law or intent) Does anybody have by chance encountered that study ? Maybe this could be a new field of crimatology. Is the researcher and adviser criminologists or are they railway engineers cum novelists?
Liberals migrate from cold to warm states
U.S. Population Shift Accelerates to South, West States, 2010 Census Shows
Average Mean Temperature . . .by state based on climate division data: 1971-2000
New York 45.35 deg F
Texas 64.83 deg F
Texas is 19.48 deg F or 10.82 deg C. warmer than New York.
Compare 0.7 deg C global warming over 1900 to 2000.
By such empirical evidence, cold northeast liberals pragmatically prefer moving to conservative southern States even though they are 10 C warmer, compared to the IPCC’s alarmist warnings of 2 C warming by 2050 (compared to 0.7C warming from 1900 to 2000).
Compare Einstein’s Razor: Compare Einstein’s Razor: Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.
The researcher’s model is “simple”, but it may be TOO simple, by not accounting for preferences to move to warmer climates, and thus violate Einstein’s Razor.
Is science not wonderful? Murder rate must be one of the best proxies for average temperature. Even the deleterious effect of mid 1990s warming can be seen clearly. Oh, wait, is it upside down? Needs adjustment, obviously.
http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/images/murderrate.png
Latitude said on August 1, 2013 at 3:16 pm:
It is important to rest and conserve your energy when running from polar bears.
PETA objects to feeding them meat tainted with unnecessary fatigue poisons.
===
From JamesS on August 1, 2013 at 3:38 pm:
Strange, Willis Eschenbach has a long and sordid history of hanging out in warmer parts of the world such as Pacific tropics, and has been known to have a powerful erupting temper.
Is this another case of mistaking correlation for causation, those warmer climes merely attract unstable undesirables? Miami Vice convinced me long ago that area attracts explosive sociopaths, and CSI: Miami has done nothing but confirm it.
It’s just a rehash of the old theory that folks in the northern hemisphere are racially superior.
So the solution to climate change is anger management?
Politicians who increase the price of electricity to make us conserve make me mad; Politicians who tax us more to stop global warming make me madder and people like this %$& above who write &#% for grant money make me homicidal. But that is because I am in Canada for the summer (Brrr). I will be better when I am back am the Bahamas.
“… what is next… ?” [New Jersey Snow Fan]
Whatever happens!
Old building falls over — HCCC (Human CO2 Climate Change)
Teen-agers throw toilets off bridge — HCCC
Dog runs into water to fetch stick — HCCC
Cat eats lettuce — HCCC
Popsicles melt — HCCC
Turtles take a long time to get anywhere (.04 seconds longer, mm, hm) — HCCC
Kind of pathetic, journalism, these days, really. Used to be “Dog Bites Man,” is not news, “Man Bites Dog” is. Now (per the party line), any old boring ordinary happening has to be spun and twisted and whirled and twirled into SOMETHING. Hence, the screaming, “Climate Change is REAL!!!!!!!
LOL
Hey, K.D.!! GOOD to see you are back. Hope all is well. You were missed.
And we’ll stay angry forever, even after we’ve got used to the heat. We couldn’t possibly adapt, could we. Every summer I get used to 40 degrees C and every winter I get used to 12 degrees C. So does everyone else around me. We don’t get angry with each other – as a matter of fact in winter we hibernate a bit and in summer we get out and get sociable. Statistically I guess there is more chance we will get angry with each other when it it is warm just because of exposure time.
Robert Wille says:
People fight over resources. Changes in climate change the quantity and distribution of resources. That’s what causes conflict.
———————————————-
That’s what we’re told… How is that global mean average temperature increasing by a purported 2 degrees C (We have less than 40 years to achieve this incredible change) result in less “resources.” Believing this garbage takes a couple of big leaps of faith.
Txomin said on August 1, 2013 at 4:08 pm:
Because the “whiter, colder” North Hemisphere will be less violent than the “darker, warmer” South Hemisphere?
“Global Warming” has pretty much been concentrated in the North Hemisphere, which is more dominated with land, larger diurnal temperature swings, and greater chances for UHI and other contamination/manipulation of the thermometer temperature record. The South Hemisphere, far more dominated by ocean temperatures, practically speaking hasn’t seen the “Global” warming.
Which blows away what I think was your comment. Feel free to elucidate what you really meant.
Puhleez my American friends, vote this dangerous nuttiness out next time. Working with the Geological Survey of Nigeria in the 1960s, I had two clinical thermometers blow up in my luggage on a field trip to Yelwa on the Niger River in Sokoto Province (a day’s boat trip north to Timbuktu). The thermometers had already survived 40 plus on several occasions. I remember it made me want to do battle with a Fulani warrior:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Framed-masked-character-warrior-ArcticPhoto/dp/B002OO4KJM
I am an historian, and from my studies of climate change throughout history, the exact opposite is what I have found. During times of cooling (stadials), migrations commence which has caused great conflicts, wars and destruction, even to the extent of the fall of empires. However, when it is warmer (interstadials), there is great prosperity, growth and innovation. But what do I know, eh? I am just an historian.