Sociology is about to embark on a modernist voyage globally (Biswas, 2008). In Bangladesh, sociology has been a distinct academic field at the university level for almost 70 years (Kais, 2010, 2020). From primary to tertiary levels, contemporary curricula incorporate long-term thinking and strategic planning (Chavez, 2023; Krueger & Lindahl, 2001). The fundamental policies of curriculum development aim to ensure the comprehensiveness, relevance, and effectiveness of educational programs. To prepare students for the challenges of real life, they promote meaningful and dynamic learning experiences, which balance academic, social, and cultural needs. Specific learning objectives shape the foundation of a modern curriculum, which is the documentary representation of a particular field (Khan, 2016). University sociology programs are no exception to these principles.

Climate change is now an intractable existential crisis¹ (Obach, 2023), resulting from two centuries of excessive greenhouse gas emissions due to fossil fuel combustion in energy production, transportation, industry, deforestation, and intensive agriculture (IPCC, 2023; Williams & Rota, 2011). Every year, global fossil fuel burning increases, and if this trend continues, it will have a significant impact on both natural ecosystems and human societies. Climate-sensitive areas, communities, and industries, as well as those that are geographically and socially vulnerable, will be most affected by global warming (Baer, 2021; Kais, 2017; Kais & Islam, 2018). The ramifications of climate change on ecological, physical, and social systems and groups are profound and disconcerting. Climate change affects human groups in several ways, most of which are complex, indirect, and unclear (Pelling, 2011), rendering scientific investigation of the overall dynamics challenging. Although a few scholars, including Ulrich Beck (2015), points to a few “positive side effects of bads” in the form of “emancipatory catastrophism,” the scientific community now cautions that global climate change yields/will yield unparalleled negative consequences for the Earth's natural environment, biodiversity, and human existence and activities (Islam, 2013; McKinnon, 2012; UNEP, 2010; World Bank, 2013).

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) expresses concern that, despite scientific consensus on the causes and consequences of anthropogenic global warming—demonstrated by recurrent droughts, cyclones, wildfires, floods, and other extreme meteorological phenomena—international efforts to address the problem are insufficient. Current assessments suggest we are failing to avert impending disasters (IPCC, 2021). A central component of the whole climate change picture is the human factor, the sociological aspect of society-climate interactions around the globe, which is so far disregarded and less understood. In the same way, recent calls to prioritize the climate crisis as an essential disciplinary issue indicate that the changing climate significantly impacts several branches of sociology that have hitherto overlooked this topic (Elliott, 2018; Klinenberg et al., 2020; Koehrsen et al., 2020; Lever-Tracy, 2008). Although a shift in its viewpoint is imminent, sociology has, with rare exceptions, largely remained silent in response to the climate crisis (Scoville & McCumber, 2023). Similarly, as climate change and global warming have become “grand narratives” for science, politics, and the public (Neverla et al., 2012), so too has climate change become a well-established policy discourse in Bangladesh. Most people in Bangladesh are fairly conscious about it (Kais & Islam, 2019). However, Bangladeshi sociologists seem indifferent to this pressing issue.

Against the above backdrop, this article aims to uncover the level of importance placed on climate change within sociology departments in universities in Bangladesh. The paper seeks to deliver a diagnostic overview of disciplinary dynamics and to propose preliminary ways for university departments to integrate climate change into the sociological mainstream. Following this brief introduction, the subsequent Theories section examines the interplay between climate change and sociology conceptually. The Methods section delineates the materials and methods employed in this study. In the Results section, I reveal the status of climate change education in sociology departments at Bangladeshi public universities. I identify the issues contributing to the inadequate emphasis on climate change. I also propose some strategies for incorporating climate change research into mainstream sociology courses. Finally, this paper concludes by summarizing the key findings.

The majority of important climate statements contain only minimal social scientific knowledge (Bjurström & Polk, 2011; Norgaard, 2018), despite calls to acknowledge the significance of social science insights on climate change (UNESCO & ISSC, 2013). In particular, only a limited number of sociologists participate in dialogues about the origins, consequences, and responses to climate disasters. Similarly, sociologists are underrepresented in key institutions such as the IPCC (Lockie, 2013; Nagel et al., 2010). Sociology holds a unique position among the social sciences in providing crucial perspectives on climate change, since it focuses on how individuals, socio-cultural systems, and the economy jointly contribute to the production of social order (Dunlap & Brulle, 2015). However, sociologists contribute to only 3% of climate change publications (UNESCO & ISSC, 2013).

The above narratives contradict the fact that, to a degree, sociological understandings led to the shift in terminological focus from “global warming” to “climate change” (Gines, 2012). Since global warming is often portrayed as an increase in atmospheric temperature, the public may not connect extreme cold, cyclones, or floods with it. Consequently, scientists adopted the term climate change to make it clear that the phenomenon encompassed multiple factors beyond rising temperatures. This terminological shift accelerated the emergence of a unified field known as Earth Systems science (Brulle & Dunlap, 2015; Mooney et al., 2013), which calls for integrating multiple sciences. Thus, the body of knowledge surrounding climate change is beautiful, sturdy, and complex (Latour, 2011). Nonetheless, since sociology has played an insignificant role to date in this new integrated field, crucial knowledge gaps remain in our understanding of the various dimensions of climate change. Current interdisciplinary discussions about climate change may be referred to as “scientific imperialism” (Norgaard, 2018) because they primarily emphasize perspectives from the natural sciences while neglecting the interplay of individual, social, cultural, economic, and political facets of societal structure.

Norgaard (2018) contends that interdisciplinary scholars and the public alike require two forms of imagination to grasp climate dynamics in the Anthropocene.² The first is ecological imagination, the intellectual capacity to recognize the connections between human actions and their effects on Earth’s biophysical systems. The second is sociological imagination³, which involves the ability to comprehend the societal relationships that create an environmentally unsustainable social structure. While natural and environmental scientists have significantly contributed to the ecological imagination over the last decades by progressively assessing the grim picture of how a changing climate alters the biophysical world around human social systems, social scientists (especially sociologists) are the key actors in bringing in the sociological imagination by examining how social factors contribute to the origin, impacts, and responses to anthropogenic climate emergencies.

Two forms of impetus can be identified as contributing factors to the marginality of climate change sociology: internal and external dynamics (Davidson, 2022; Koehrsen et al., 2020). Internal dynamics involve sociologists reflecting on the underrepresentation within their field. This phase, which peaked in 2008/2009, was sparked by the influential publication by Lever-Tracy (2008). Self-reflexive sociologists engaged in theoretical debates about the discipline's shortcomings. Specifically, the core of the field has been hesitant to acknowledge the climate crisis as a significant area of concern (Klinenberg et al., 2020; Liu & Szasz, 2019; Norgaard, 2018). As a result, climate change sociologists often do not receive adequate career recognition within their own discipline, leading them to publish from outside of the major sociology journals (Koehrsen et al., 2020). Consequently, this has hindered the growth of the subfield within sociology. External dynamics reflect challenges that extend beyond the discipline itself. This phase, which peaked around 2015, shifted the focus from internal theoretical discussions to the economic, political, and media aspects of climate change (Koehrsen et al., 2020).

Beyond the above autopsies, it can be asserted that, despite its current marginal position in global climate research, sociology possesses considerable potential to elucidate the social drivers, social impacts, and policy responses to climate change. The “most extensive set of sociological contributions” (Davidson, 2022) that sociologists have provided to date pertains to the area of drivers of climate change, which delineate various social factors and their respective significance. Sociologists highlight, among other factors, an enhanced comprehension of the effects of social structure and political economy on national greenhouse gas emissions, the interplay between power and politics in both corporate environments and policy initiatives, temporal differences in the effects of urbanization across regions, and the social determinants influencing citizen and consumer behaviors (Dietz et al., 2020; Jorgenson et al., 2019). Other social sciences, such as economics and psychology, primarily provide technical explanations of global warming (e.g., sectoral emissions). They utilize the individual as their unit of study, regarding human beings as rational or biological entities. Conversely, macro perspectives in sociology situate individual behavior and cognition within social contexts, highlighting the significance of culture and social structure concerning climate change (Norgaard, 2018). Sociologists utilize the sociological imagination to analyze the influence of political institutions, institutional interests, cultural systems, the military, and economic systems on climate change. Sociologists examine the intricate connections between fossil fuel combustion and the economic development of nation-states (Norgaard, 2018).

Sociology underscores that the impacts of climate change are complex and multifaceted. Since societies are not uniform, various communities experience the effects of changing climatic conditions differently, particularly from a social justice perspective (Nagel, 2015). Therefore, ecological changes that overlook social dynamics tend to reproduce inequalities and vulnerabilities across gender, social class, race, and ethnicity in intricate ways. The consequences of climate change also manifest at the convergence of tangible effects and their cultural interpretations. At the material level, climate anomalies exert diverse effects on human security and contribute to the spread of diseases. From a societal perspective, sociology highlights the importance of social solidarity and cultural attachment in shaping these impacts (Bates, 2016; Klinenberg, 2015). It also examines the indirect impact of climate change on democratic political frameworks, as firms that profit from high-emission conditions frequently seek to sway policy decisions and public sentiment (Brulle et al., 2012). Sociology also investigates how climate change imperils a community's collective identity and the meaning structures that unite them (Norgaard, 2011).

Responses to climate change are predominantly shaped by power dynamics and political considerations rather than technological advancements and economic factors. Sociology calls for substantial structural changes in economic, political, and cultural institutions to address climate concerns through both mitigation and adaptation strategies (Norgaard, 2018).

In this research, I adopted a qualitative approach and utilized a combination of data collection methods. Methodological nationalism, taking Bangladesh’s higher education as the case studied, informs the article’s broader methodological philosophy. To examine the status of climate change in sociology curricula, I conducted a content analysis of the Bachelor of Social Sciences (Honors) and Master of Social Sciences curricula at the top six public universities in Bangladesh. I selected these universities purposively because they are the leading institutions offering a major in sociology. To assess the emphasis the department places on climate change sociology, a search was conducted for three climate change-related terms in the curricula: (a) climate, (b) climate change, and (c) global warming. To understand the specializations, areas of interest, and publications of sociology faculty, I reviewed their profiles on university websites, Google Scholar, and ResearchGate. Additionally, to gain an insider's perspective on the dynamics of the field, I interviewed 18 professors from sociology departments at the six public universities, whom I considered important stakeholders. The interviewees were asked two main questions: What factors do you consider when designing a course in your department? And what reasons do you believe contribute to the underrepresentation of climate and climate change topics in your curricula? After collecting and processing the data, I conducted a qualitative analysis by identifying patterns and themes.

Situated in a “double-risk society”⁴ (Islam, 2013), Bangladesh is especially vulnerable to climatic variabilities and extremes. A range of geomorphological and socio-economic factors exacerbates the climate vulnerability of the nation and its populace. The factors include the country’s location between the Himalayas and the Bay of Bengal, the inverted-funnel configuration of the Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) estuary, low and flat topography, heightened sensitivity⁵ and exposure⁶ to climate risks, lower level of adaptive capacity⁷, high density of population, poverty, inadequate institutional capability, and people’s higher dependency on the natural resources (for a detailed account, see Kais & Islam, 2018, 2019). These vulnerability factors render Bangladesh one of the most disaster-prone nations globally, establishing it as a “climate hotspot” historically (World Bank, 2013).

Although Bangladesh is among the most severely affected nations, the academic sociology curriculum has not adequately addressed this existential concern. An examination of leading sociology curricula indicates a notable deficiency of courses focused on climate change. Of the six leading sociology departments, only Khulna University (KU) has been conducting a specialized climate change course at the MSS level since 2011. The University of Rajshahi (RU) has just established a distinct climate change course for the MSS program, set to commence in July 2026. Table 1 presents a brief overview of climate change education within sociology curricula at leading public universities in Bangladesh.

Five universities, excluding KU, provide a separate course on environmental sociology. Nevertheless, a standard environmental sociology course in Bangladesh addresses climate issues only marginally in a single chapter. In other relevant courses, climate, climate change, and global warming are addressed even more marginally, tagged with other, more focused topics. For example, in the course “Medieval Social Thought” at RU, the term “climate” is referenced in the chapter “C.L. Montesquieu” as follows: “Impact of Climate on Social Thought and Social Life.” Likewise, while the University of Dhaka (DU) incorporates any of the three search items in 10 courses, many of these courses assign minimal significance to climate change. During the interview, several academics from different universities stated that, in many cases, course teachers do not highlight climate-related topics in class, even though they are included in the course outline. The aforementioned facts illustrate an underrepresentation of climate-society interactions in mainstream sociology courses at the universities in Bangladesh, pushing climate change to the border.

Globally, the “status structure” (Lever-Tracy, 2008) of sociology contributes to the perception that climate dynamics are of little interest. Most scholarship on this topic emerges from environmental sociology, which has its roots in rural sociology. However, since classical sociology primarily focuses on urbanization and its associated social transformations, rural sociology is often marginalized in prestigious journals and academic programs (Lever-Tracy, 2008). As a distinct academic discipline, sociology developed through what is known as the “organic model” (Khan, 2008). This model posits that sociology emerged in 19th-century Western Europe during the transition from an agricultural to an industrial base (Connell, 2007; Grundmann & Stehr, 2010). The theories and methods of sociology are particularly suited for explaining social phenomena in industrialized countries, positioning sociology as “a science of the new industrial society” (Bottomore, 1971, p. 20). The transition in the mode of production in Western societies “led to enormous shifts in social structure and cultural values” (Grundmann & Stehr, 2010, p. 900), which have been central to sociology’s core program to date.

Sociologists generally tend to be skeptical of naturalistic explanations for social facts (Lever-Tracy, 2008). To establish sociology as a distinct branch of knowledge, classical sociologists sought to separate it from the physical and biological sciences (Gould & Lewis, 2009). Since then, sociologists have focused on studying social processes while distancing themselves from natural sciences. With an emphasis on social constructivism, they express skepticism toward "ecological determinism, including climatic determinism" (Grundmann & Stehr, 2010) and often challenge or undermine the authority of natural scientists, even within their (natural scientists’) own fields (Lever-Tracy, 2008). Climate change is typically perceived as a domain for natural scientists, leaving sociologists feeling it does not pertain to their studies. Additionally, drawing on the ideas of classical theorists such as Marx, Weber, and Durkheim, sociologists tend to view nature as relatively constant, unchanging, and unproblematic—something understood and controlled by science and technology (Lever-Tracy, 2008). In essence, sociologists believe they need not concern themselves with changes outside the scope of society and social facts. Drawing on the above-mentioned characteristics of sociology, Lever-Tracy (2008) concluded—

Sociologists have … described at length how contemporary society has turned its eyes away from the future, its people focusing on immediate consumption and ephemeral fashions, its politicians on the next election and its industrial leaders on the next annual report. To take global warming seriously involves asking the kinds of questions about future directions that most sociologists believe they have now put behind them. Preoccupied with analysing these ‘social facts’, sociologists are unwilling to be disturbed by the voices of natural scientists, reporting from inaccessible upper atmospheres, ancient ice cores or deep oceans, where no social facts exist. Unable themselves to judge the validity of the evidence, and increasingly uncomfortable with predictions and teleologies, they prefer to avoid the subject (p. 454).

Similarly, we can identify several reasons for the indifferent, marginal, reluctant, and non-alarmist responses to climate change found in mainstream sociology in Bangladesh. First, sociologists in Bangladesh, like their counterparts elsewhere, often aim to distinguish their discipline from the natural sciences by focusing solely on social structures and social explanations. As a result, sociology curricula have largely bypassed the topic of global warming due to its perceived 'natural' characteristics. Sociologists in Bangladesh tend to be simultaneously biophobic⁸ and naturophobic⁹. A professor from RU stated, “When introducing a topic in our syllabus, we must consider the social embeddedness of it; we should not whimsically incorporate any alien idea into our courses.” It is noteworthy that the professor here refers to ‘climate change’ as an ‘alien idea’ to sociology.

Second, Bangladeshi sociologists consider sociology as a theoretical subject and climate change events as practical issues. For this, they usually show little interest in climate change-related events. A professor from JnU opined, “In our department, the structural procedure of making decisions about which courses should be introduced is totally obsessed with the theoretical aspects of the proposed courses. Climate change is an action-oriented topic; that’s why it is left out of our curricula.”

Third, there is an implicit tendency among Bangladeshi sociologists to be skeptical of teleology, mirroring the broader societal indifference towards the future. This suspicion of teleology is characteristic of modernity; people increasingly prioritize immediate gratification and focus solely on the present, as if they lived in a "permanent present" (Lever-Tracy, 2008). In this mindset, they disregard the past and pay little attention to what the future may hold. Concerns about future events seem irrelevant to them. Giddens also highlighted the "dissolution of evolutionism" and the "disappearance of teleology" as two key features of reflexive modernity (Giddens, 1990). Similarly, Bangladeshi sociologists tend to adopt a shortsighted perspective, addressing only immediate social issues while maintaining a ‘safe distance’ from climate threats, which they perceive as future concerns.

Fourth, a general lack of expertise among Bangladeshi sociologists about the climate crisis is obstructing the incorporation of climate change courses into university curricula. A professor from Dhaka University expressed concerns, stating, “While it could be beneficial to offer a course on the sociology of climate change in the department, I have serious doubts about the teachers' ability to conduct such a course. Additionally, it raises the question of how aware our department is of the urgency of this issue.” As shown in Table 2, sociology faculties lack specialization in climate change studies. Among the six public universities surveyed, only two institutions have a total of three academics—accounting for only 2.27% of sociology faculty—who have earned advanced degrees in climate change sociology. The remaining four sociology programs do not have any specialists in climate sociology.

Fifth, social science departments in universities in Bangladesh lack a clear framework for integrating utilitarian and anti-utilitarian perspectives (Kerr, 1963). This absence allows for academic flexibility in developing curricula, which can lead to "opportunism." Personal interests, consultancy preferences, and the vested group interests of faculty members significantly influence the introduction of new courses and the development of course content (Khan, 2016). In sociology programs, this opportunism is evident, as teachers often propose new courses based solely on their own expertise and interests, disregarding the country’s societal and contextual needs. A professor from CU explained the process of introducing courses in his department: "We don't have a fixed principle for developing courses for undergraduate and graduate programs. There is no collective effort to create a course outline. Instead, any teacher can propose a new course, and the curriculum committee typically endorses it after some discussion and modifications. New courses are introduced based on the personal interests of individual academics. When a teacher returns after attaining an overseas degree, they propose a course related to their area of expertise."

A professor from SUST shared a similar perspective: “Faculty members who earn advanced degrees from Northern universities gain fresh insights from their experiences. They often develop new courses inspired by these ideas. Additionally, they have a better understanding of market signals and the latest trends in global sociology.” In a similar vein, another teacher from KU noted, “To uphold a global standard for our curricula, we encourage our colleagues who have obtained a PhD from universities in the global North to propose new courses based on their specializations. This way, our students have the opportunity to learn new concepts, and our faculty members can share their knowledge.” These statements clarify why independent climate sociology courses are not offered at these universities. Teachers’ lack of expertise in climate sociology leads to the absence of specialized courses.

Finally, the indirect cause of this issue stems from the academic dependency of the social sciences in Bangladesh. Sociology in Bangladesh is a discipline imported from the Global North (Kais, 2010; Khan, 2008). As an academic field in a peripheral nation (Wallerstein, 2011) that demonstrates the characteristics of colonized knowledge (Alatas, 2024; Hossen, 2023; Quijano, 2007), sociology in Bangladesh depends on theories, methods, and ideas developed in core countries. Since climate change occupies a marginal position in mainstream sociology in Northern nations to date (Davidson, 2022; Elliot, 2018; Koehrsen et al., 2020), sociologists in Bangladesh are hesitant to introduce new ideas and courses that extend beyond Northern paradigms, even when local realities suggest the need for fresh perspectives. Several academics have noted this phenomenon.

Situated in a climate hotspot that grabs attention from global scientists and media, sociology programs in Bangladesh need to mainstream climate-society interactions. Sociology should prioritize climate change rather than treating it as a "subfield of a subfield" (Liu & Szasz, 2019). The framework for contextualizing curricula can serve as a helpful tool. Curricular contextualization refers to “a didactical–pedagogical strategy that aims to promote the students’ school success and the improvement of their learning. This can be done by adapting curricular contents in order to bring them closer to students and to the environment where teaching and learning occurs and, therefore, as a result, making them more significant and understandable” (Fernandes et al., 2013, p. 422, italics in the original text). Curriculum contextualization focuses on five key areas: place, student, pedagogical practice, cultural diversity, and disciplinary context. When shaping the educational process, the location where teaching and learning take place is a crucial aspect. This aspect allows for a curriculum that helps establish self-reliant (Kais, 2010) and decolonized disciplines (Hossen, 2023), aligning with students’ real-life experiences and enabling course content to connect with real-world situations and enhancing learners’ understanding of important issues (Fernandes et al., 2013; Kemp, 2006; Kitchens, 2009). In Bangladesh, people frequently face climatic disasters, including floods, heatwaves, and cyclones. These place-based experiences underscore the need for a stronger academic emphasis on climate hazards, including sociological perspectives relevant to them.

To integrate global warming into sociology curricula, we can identify, drawing from study interviews and secondary sources, several courses that could place greater emphasis on climate issues.

As climate change has transitioned from a scientific issue to a major global policy concern, mainstream sociologists have largely been absent from professional, public, and policy discussions surrounding global warming. This unusual silence indicates a complicated and often uneasy relationship with the topic. In Bangladesh, the situation is similar; climate change is rarely examined by sociologists, despite the fact that it poses threats to social life here, as do other social problems.

As a diagnostic, this study identified several structural and institutional factors, as well as agency-related issues, that hinder the effective integration of climate change into sociology programs. As prescriptive, the study pinpointed certain subfields within sociology that can effectively address the climate-related questions. Climate change represents a paramount challenge to modern human existence and must be addressed across the curriculum. To make a meaningful impact on policy discussions regarding the socio-cultural aspects of climate change mitigation, adaptation, and resilience, sociology departments should actively incorporate climate change topics directly into their curricula. A focus on the place dimension of contextualizing curriculum and other insights from this study provide a roadmap of the current state of climate sociology in Bangladesh and can help understand and analyze the role of sociology in other climate change-affected countries around the world.

Notes

REFERENCES

• Adger, W. N. (2006). Vulnerability. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 268–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.006
  Article
• Alatas, S. F. (2024). The coloniality of knowledge and the autonomous knowledge tradition. Sociology Compass, 18(8), e13256. https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.13256
  Article
• Baer, H. A. (2021). Global capitalism and climate change: The need for an alternative world system (2nd ed.). Lexington Books.
• Bates, D. C. (2016). Superstorm Sandy: The inevitable destruction and reconstruction of the Jersey Shore. Rutgers University Press.
• Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. SAGE Publications.
• Beck, U. (1999). World risk society. Polity Press.
• Beck, U. (2006). Living in the world risk society. Economy and Society, 35(3), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140600844902
  Article
• Beck, U. (2015). Emancipatory catastrophism: What does it mean to climate change and risk society?. Current Sociology, 63(1), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392114559951
  Article
• Biswas, S. (2008). Challenges and promises of sociology in the twenty-first century: A West Bengal experience. Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology, 5(2), 41–50.
• Bjurström, A., & Polk, M. (2011). Physical and economic bias in climate change research: A scientometric study of IPCC Third Assessment Report. Climatic Change, 108(1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0018-8
  Article
• Black, R., Adger, W. N., Arnell, N. W., Dercon, S., Geddes, A., & Thomas, D. (2011). Migration and global environmental change. Global Environmental Change, 21(S1), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.10.005
  Article

  PubMed

  PMC
• Bottomore, T. B. (1971). Sociology: A guide to problems and literature. Blackie & Son.
• Brulle, R. J., Carmichael, J., & Jenkins, J. C. (2012). Shifting public opinion on climate change: An empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the US, 2002-2010. Climatic Change, 114(2), 169–188.
  Article

  PDF
• Brulle, R. J., & Dunlap, R. E. (2015). In R. E. Dunlap & R. J. Brulle (Eds.), Climate change and society: Sociological perspectives (pp. 1–31). Oxford University Press.
• Cannon, T. (2002). Gender and climate hazards in Bangladesh. Gender & Development, 10(2), 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552070215906
  Article
• Chavez, A. C. (2023). The principles of curriculum development. Society Publishing.
• Connell, R. (2007). Southern theory: The global dynamics of knowledge in social science. Allen & Unwin.
• Crutzen, P. J., Stoermer, E. F., & Steffen, W. (2000). The Anthropocene. In L. Robin S. Sörlin & P. Warde (Eds.), The Future of Nature Yale University Press.
• Davidson, D. J. (2022). Climate change sociology: Past contributions and future research needs. PLOS Climate, 1(7), e0000055. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000055
  Article
• Dietz, T., Shwom, R. L., & Whitley, C. T. (2020). Climate change and society. Annual Review of Sociology, 46(1), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054614
  Article
• Dunlap, R. E., & Brulle, R. J. (Eds.). (2015). Climate change and society: Sociological perspectives. Oxford University Press.
• Elliott, R. (2018). The sociology of climate change as a sociology of loss. European Journal of Sociology, 59(3), 301–337. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003975618000152
  Article
• Ellis, L. (1996). A discipline in peril: Sociology’s future hinges on curing biophobia. The American Sociologist, 27(2), 21–41. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02692016
  Article
• Eriksen, S. H., Grøndahl, R., & Sæbønes, A. M. (2021). On CRDPs and CRPD: Why the rights of people with disabilities are crucial for understanding climate-resilient development pathways. The Lancet Planet Health, 5(12), e929–e939. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00233-3
  Article

  PubMed
• Fernandes, P., Leite, P., Mouraz, A., & Figueiredo, C. (2013). Curricular contextualization: Tracking the meanings of a concept. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 22(4), 417–425. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40299-012-0041-1
  Article
• Gallopin, G. C. (2006). Linkages between vulnerability, resilience, and adaptive capacity. Global Environmental Change, 16(3), 293–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.02.004
  Article
• Garai, J. (2025). Impacts of climate change and environmental degradation on indigenous people in Bangladesh: An ethnographic study. Wild, 2(2), 13. https://doi.org/10.3390/wild2020013
  Article
• Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Polity Press.
• Gines, J. K. (2012). Climate management issues: Economics, sociology, and politics. CRC Press.
• Görgens, T., & Ziervogel, G. (2019). From no one left behind to putting the last first: Centering the voices of disabled people in resilience work. In B. Watermeyer J. Mackenzie & L. Swartz (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of disability and citizenship in the global South (pp. 85–102). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Gould, K. A., & Lewis, T. L. (Eds.). (2009). Twenty lessons in environmental sociology. Oxford University Press.
• Greenebaum, J., & Dexter, B. (2017). Vegan men and hybrid masculinity. Journal of Gender Studies, 27(6), 637–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2017.1287064
  Article
• Grundmann, R., & Stehr, N. (2010). Climate change: What role for sociology? A response to Constance Lever-Tracy. Current Sociology, 58(6), 897–910. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392110376031
  Article
• Hay, W. W. (2016). Experimenting on a small planet: A history of scientific discoveries, a future of climate change and global warming (2nd ed.). Springer.
• Hossen, M. A. (2023). Decolonizing sociology for social justice in Bangladesh: Delta scholarship matters. Critical Sociology, 49(3), 545–561. https://doi.org/10.1177/08969205221085687
  Article
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2001). Climate change 2001: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. [Technical summary]. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/wg2ts-1.pdf
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2021). Climate change 2021: The physical science basis (Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157896
  Article
• Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2023). Climate change 2023: Synthesis report. (Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). https://doi.org/10.59327/IPCC/AR6-9789291691647
  Article
• Islam, M. S. (2012). Old philosophy, new movement: The rise of the Islamic ecological paradigm in the discourse of environmentalism. Nature and Culture, 7(1), 72–94. https://doi.org/10.3167/nc.2012.070105
  Article
• Islam, M. S. (2013). Development, power, and the environment: Neoliberal paradox in the age of vulnerability. Routledge.
• Jorgenson, A. K., Fiske, S., Hubacek, K., Li, J., McGovern, T., Rick, T., Schor, J. B., Solecki, W., York, R., & Zycherman, A. (2019). Social science perspectives on drivers of and responses to global climate change. Wiley Interdisciplinary Review of Climate Change, 10(1), e554. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.554
  Article
• Kais, S. M. (2010). Fifty years of Bangladesh sociology: Towards a hybrid sociology?. In M. Burawoy M. Chang & M. F. Hsieh (Eds.), Facing an unequal world: Challenges for a global sociology (Vol. 2, pp. 326-356). Academia Sinica & International Sociological Association.
• Kais, S. M. (2017). Climate change: Vulnerability and resilience in commercial shrimp aquaculture in Bangladesh. Ganpat, W., & Isaac, W.Environmental sustainability and climate change adaptation strategies. 162187). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-1607-1.ch006
  Article
• Kais, S. M. (2020). Crisis of unplanned expansion of sociology in the global south: Problems and prospects of sociological education in Bangladesh. Hanafi, S., & Yi, C.-C.Sociologies in dialogue. 339356). SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781529738919.n23
  Article
• Kais, S. M., & Islam, M. S. (2018). Impacts of and resilience to climate change at the bottom of the shrimp commodity chain in Bangladesh: A preliminary investigation. Aquaculture, 493, 406–415. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquaculture.2017.05.024
  Article
• Kais, S. M., & Islam, M. S. (2019). Perception of climate change in shrimp-farming communities in Bangladesh: A critical assessment. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(4), 672. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16040672
  Article

  PubMed

  PMC
• Kemp, A. T. (2006). Engaging the environment: A case for a place-based curriculum. In B. S. Stern (Ed.), Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue (pp. 125–142). Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-60752-800-520251012
  Article
• Kerr, C. (1963). The uses of the university. Harvard University Press.
• Khan, M. I. (2008). Process of institutionalization of sociology in Bangladesh: Can it be theoretically addressed?. Bangladesh e-Journal of Sociology, 5(2), 27–40.
• Khan, M. T. (2016). Contextualizing the liberal arts and social sciences curriculum. In I. Ahmed & I. Iqbal (Eds.), University of Dhaka: Making, unmaking, remaking (pp. 139–160). Prothoma Prokashan.
• Kitchens, J. (2009). Situated pedagogy and the situationist international: Countering a pedagogy of placelessness. Educational Studies, 45(3), 240–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131940902910958
  Article
• Klinenberg, E. (2015). Heat wave: A social autopsy of disaster in Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
• Klinenberg, E., Araos, M., & Koslov, L. (2020). Sociology and the climate crisis. Annual Review of Sociology, 46(1), 649–669. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054750
  Article
• Koehrsen, J., Dickel, S., Pfister, T., Rödder, S., Böschen, S., Wendt, B., Block, K., & Henkel, A. (2020). Climate change in sociology: Still silent or resonating?. Current Sociology, 68(6), 738–760. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392120902223
  Article
• Krueger, A. B., & Lindahl, M. (2001). Education for growth: Why and for whom?. Journal of Economic Literature, 39(4), 1101–1136.
  Article
• Latour, B. (2011). Waiting for Gaia: Composing the common world through art and politics [Lecture]. French Institute for the Launching of SPEAP. http://www.bruno-latour.fr/sites/default/files/124-GAIA-LONDON-SPEAP_0.pdf
• Lever-Tracy, C. (2008). Global warming and sociology. Current Sociology, 56(3), 445–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392107088238
  Article
• Liu, J. C.-E., & Szasz, A. (2019). Now is the time to add more sociology of climate change to our introduction to sociology courses. Teaching Sociology, 47(4), 273–283. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X19862012
  Article
• Lockie, S. (2013). Sociology and global environmental change. In UNESCO; International Social Science Council, World social science report 2013: Changing global environments (pp. 509–511). UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264203419-98-en
  Article
• Mascarenhas, M. (2009). Environmental inequality and environmental justice. Gould, K. A., & Lewis, T. L.Twenty lessons in environmental sociology. 127141). Oxford University Press.
• McKinnon, C. (2012). Climate change and future justice: Precaution, compensation, and triage. Routledge.
• Mills, C. W. (1959). The sociological imagination. Oxford University Press.
• Mooney, H. A., Duraiappah, A., & Larigauderie, A. (2013). Evolution of natural and social science interactions in global change research programs. Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences, 110(Suppl. 1), 3665–3672. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1107484110
  Article
• Nagel, J. (2015). Gender and climate change: Impacts, science, policy. Routledge.
• Nagel, J., Dietz, T., & Broadbent, J. (2010). Workshop on sociological perspectives on global climate change. National Science Foundation & American Sociological Association.
• Neverla, I., Luthje, C., & Mahmud, S. (2012). Challenges to climate change communication through mass media in Bangladesh: A developing country perspective. In P. Almlund P. H. Jespersen & S. Riis (Eds.), Rethinking climate change research: Clean technology, culture and communication (pp. 223–241). Ashgate Publishing.
• Norgaard, K. M. (2011). Living in denial: Climate change, emotions and everyday life. MIT Press.
• Norgaard, K. M. (2018). The sociological imagination in a time of change. Global and Planetary Change, 163, 171–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2017.09.018
  Article
• Obach, B. K. (2023). In defense of doom and gloom: Science, sensitivity, and mobilization in teaching about climate change. Teaching Sociology, 51(4), 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X231159094
  Article
• Pelling, M. (2011). Adaptation to climate change: From resilience to transformation. Routledge.
• Quijano, A. (2007). Coloniality and modernity/rationality. Cultural Studies, 21(2-3), 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380601164353
  Article
• Science and Security Board (2026, January 27). It is now 85 seconds to midnight: 2026 Doomsday Clock statement. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/2026-statement/
• Scoville, C., & McCumber, A. (2023). Climate silence in sociology? How elite American sociology, environmental sociology, and science and technology studies treat climate change. Sociological Perspectives, 66(5), 888–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/07311214231180554
  Article
• Ray, S. J., & Sibara, J (Eds.). (2017). Disability studies and the environmental humanities. Toward an eco-crip theory. University of Nebraska Press.
• Rincon, P. (2018, March 15). Stephen Hawking's warnings: What he predicted for the future. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-43408961
• Rohde, R. (2026, January 14). Global temperature report for 2025. Berkeley Earth. https://berkeleyearth.org/global-temperature-report-for-2025/
• Roy, S., Tandukar, S, & Bhattarai, U. (2022). Gender, climate change adaptation, and cultural sustainability: Insights from Bangladesh. Frontiers in Climate, 4, 841488. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.841488
  Article
• Ruddiman, W. F. (2003). The anthropogenic greenhouse era began thousands of years ago. Climatic Change, 61(3), 261–293. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:CLIM.0000004577.17928.fa
  Article
• UNESCO; International Social Science Council (2013). World social science report 2013: Changing global environments. UNESCO Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264203419-en
  Article
• United Nations Environment Programme (2010). Climate change [Factsheet]. https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/7933
• Van Praag, L., & Timmerman, C. (2019). Environmental migration and displacement: A new theoretical framework for the study of migration aspirations in response to environmental changes. Environmental Sociology, 5(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2019.1613030
  Article
• Wallerstein, I. (2011). The modern world-system I: Capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European world-economy in the sixteenth century. University of California Press.
• Williams, L., & Rota, A. (2011). Impact of climate change on fisheries and aquaculture in the developing world and opportunities for adaptation. Fisheries Thematic paper, 10(12), 314–332.
• Winders, B., & Ransom, E. (Eds.). (2019). Global meat: The social and environmental consequences of the expanding meat industry. MIT Press.
• World Bank (2013). Turn down the heat: Climate extremes, regional impacts, and the case for resilience. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/975911468163736818

Citations to this article as recorded by