Related Papers
Voices of Mexico
Narrative, Rhetoric, and Reality of Climate Change Do We Need More?
2013 •
SIMONE LUCATELLO
Promoting pro-environmental action in climate change deniers
2012 •
Renata Bongiorno, Matthew Hornsey
Defining Problems and Solutions : How do knowledge and beliefs about climate change influence support for climate policies ?
2015 •
Alexandra Bass
climate change influence support for climate policies? Alexandra Bass November 16, 2015 Rough draft: Please do not circulate outside the workshop This analysis provides an empirical test for an idea underlying many real-world environmental advocacy campaigns: that people who believe climate change exists are more likely to be concerned about its consequences, and in turn more likely to support climate mitigation policies. The analysis also seeks to disentangle the relative influences of factual knowledge and political predispositions on Americans’ beliefs and opinions about climate change.
Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews
Why We Disagree About Climate Change: Understanding Controversy, Inaction, and Opportunity
2010 •
Michael Svoboda
European Journal of Communication
Up with ecology, down with economy? The consolidation of the idea of climate change mitigation in the global public sphere
Eeva Luhtakallio
Promoting Climate Actions: A Cognitive-Constraints Approach
Patricia Cheng
Many Americans do not view climate change as a threat requiring urgent action. Moreover, among U.S. conservatives, higher science literacy is paradoxically associated with higher anthropogenic climate-change skepticism. The present study harnessed the power of two cognitive constraints essential to belief formation and revision to design educational materials that can mitigate these problems. The key role of the coherence and causal-invariance constraints, which map onto two narrative proclivities that anthropologists have identified as universal, predicts that climate-change information embedded in scientific explanations of (indisputable) everyday observations within a coherent personal moral narrative, juxtaposed with reasoners’ typically less coherent explanations, will be more persuasive than climate-change information by itself. An experiment conducted in U.S. states with the highest level of climate skepticism demonstrates that across the political spectrum, conveying science...
International Journal of Environment and Climate Change
How Political Events Can Motivate Some Risk Mitigation Activities for Climate Change
2019 •
Maliha Farrooz
Aim: To stem the risks of future climate change, more people need to be motivated to take actions that will mitigate the release of greenhouse gases into the environment. Important to this discussion was that these actions include both public and private sphere behaviors. Duration of Study: April 2016 to March 2017. Methodology: We surveyed individual’s beliefs about climate change and their stated willingness to take different actions to mitigate the risks of climate change. Results: Public sphere behaviors affect the environment only indirectly by influencing either public policies or other private sphere behaviors. Private sphere behaviors have direct environmental consequences but the consequences are small. Individual private sphere behaviors have environmentally significant impacts only in the aggregate when many people independently do similar things. Conclusion: Our study replicated many of the results from the literature, in particular, that individuals are most willing to ...
CLIMATE CHANGE AWARENESS the ability to factor climate change into decision making
Beverlyn Abad
Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science
(Still) Disagreeing About Climate Change: What Way Forward?
2015 •
Mike Hulme
Why does climate change continue to be a forceful idea which divides people? What does this tell us about science, about culture and about the future? Despite disagreement, how might the idea of climate change nevertheless be used creatively? In this essay I develop my investigation of these questions using four lines of argument. First, the future risks associated with human-caused climate change are severely underdetermined by science. Scientific predictions of future climates are poorly constrained; even more so the consequences of such climates for evolving human socio-technological and natural ecosystems. Second, I argue that to act politically in the world people have to pass judgements on the facts of science; facts do not speak for themselves. Third, because these judgements are different, the strategic goals of policy interventions developed in response to risks associated with future climate change are inevitably multiple and conflicting. Finally, reconciling and achieving diverse goals requires political contestation. ‘Moving forward’ on climate change then becomes a task of investing in the discursive and procedural pre-conditions for an agonistic politics to work constructively, to enable ways of implementing policies when people disagree.
Michigan Journal of Sustainability
Responding to Climate Change Skepticism and the Ideological Divide
Irina Feygina
