Overcoming skepticism with education: interacting influences of worldview and climate change knowledge on perceived climate change risk among adolescents

Though many climate literacy efforts attempt to communicate climate change as a risk, these strategies may be ineffective because among adults, worldview rather than scientific understanding largely drives climate change risk perceptions. Further, increased science literacy may polarize worldview-driven perceptions, making some climate literacy efforts ineffective among skeptics. Because worldviews are still forming in the teenage years, adolescents may represent a more receptive audience. This study examined how worldview and climate change knowledge related to acceptance of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and in turn, climate change risk perception among middle school students in North Carolina, USA (n?=?387). We found respondents with individualistic worldviews were 16.1 percentage points less likely to accept AGW than communitarian respondents at median knowledge levels, mirroring findings in similar studies among adults. The interaction between knowledge and worldview, however, was opposite from previous studies among adults, because increased climate change knowledge was positively related to acceptance of AGW among both groups, and had a stronger positive relationship among individualists. Though individualists were 24.1 percentage points less likely to accept AGW than communitarians at low levels (bottom decile) of climate change knowledge, there was no statistical difference in acceptance levels between individualists and communitarians at high levels of knowledge (top decile). Non-White and females also demonstrated higher levels of AGW acceptance and climate change risk perception, respectively. Thus, education efforts specific to climate change may counteract divisions based on worldviews among adolescents.     

Climate change beliefs in an agricultural context: what is the role of values held by farming and non-farming groups?

Climate change in many agricultural contexts will increase tensions between farming and non-farming populations over adaptations in land use and water conservation strategies. How adequately these future tensions may be mitigated will be partially determined by each groups' beliefs about climate change. A voluminous literature shows that climate change beliefs are crucial for understanding engagement with climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies, and that values motivate climate change beliefs, but the role of values remains unclear, and comparisons of farming and non-farming populations are scant. We develop a model of climate change beliefs that integrates four main motivating factors - values, political ideology, knowledge, and worldview - and we explicitly compare members of farming and non-farming populations in an agricultural watershed in the Central Great Plains, USA. Our findings highlight the role of held values in motivating climate change beliefs and point to areas of potential consensus and tension within and among members of these two groups. The results provide an empirical basis for developing future climate change engagement strategies in contexts of growing divides and conflicts among farming and non-farming groups.     

Perceptions and responses to climate policy risks among California farmers

This paper considers how farmers perceive and respond to climate change policy risks, and suggests that understanding these risk responses is as important as understanding responses to biophysical climate change impacts. Based on a survey of 162 farmers in California, we test three hypotheses regarding climate policy risk: (1) that perceived climate change risks will have a direct impact on farmer's responses to climate policy risks, (2) that previous climate change experiences will influence farmer's climate change perceptions and climate policy risk responses, and (3) that past experiences with environmental policies will more strongly affect a farmer's climate change beliefs, risks, and climate policy risk responses. Using a structural equation model we find support for all three hypotheses and furthermore show that farmers’ negative past policy experiences do not make them less likely to respond to climate policy risks through participation in a government incentive program. We discuss how future research and climate policies can be structured to garner greater agricultural participation. This work highlights that understanding climate policy risk responses and other social, economic and policy perspectives is a vital component of understanding climate change beliefs, risks and behaviors and should be more thoroughly considered in future work.     

Climate change, powerlessness and the commons dilemma: Assessing New Zealanders’ preparedness to act

Mitigating climate change is recognized as an increasingly urgent task that requires understanding a range of different strategies, including voluntary behavior change. Among the psychological barriers to behavior change are perceptions of powerlessness and the commons dilemma. This paper examines the association between these factors in a sample of New Zealand citizens and clarifies their importance in relation to other barriers to action to mitigate climate change, including uncertainty and perceived risk. Stronger perceptions of powerlessness and the commons dilemma were related to lower levels of action to mitigate climate change and lesser importance being placed upon climate change as an influence on individual actions. The perceived risk of climate change and the perception that humans influence climate change were the strongest predictors of mitigation action.     

The “I” in climate: The role of individual responsibility in systematic processing of climate change information

Past research suggests that how we perceive risk can be related to how we attribute responsibility for risk-related issues, such as climate change; however, a gap in research lies in exploring possible connections between attribution of responsibility, risk perception, and information processing. Using the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model, this study fills this gap by examining how RISP-based variables are related to information processing and whether attribution of responsibility for mitigating climate change influences communication behaviors that are often predicted by elevated risk perceptions. Undergraduates at two large research universities (N = 572) were randomly assigned to read one of two newspaper articles that emphasized either individual responsibility (by highlighting personal actions) or societal responsibility (by highlighting government policy) for climate change mitigation. Results indicate that subjects in the individual responsibility condition were significantly more likely to process the message in a systematic manner; however, attribution of responsibility did not interact with risk perception to influence systematic processing. Moreover, attitudes toward climate change information and negative affect mediated the relationship between other key variables and systematic processing. These and other findings suggest that strategic communication about climate change may benefit from emphasizing individual responsibility to attract more attention from diverse audiences and to promote deeper thinking about the issue. Additional theoretical implications are presented.     

Climate change perceptions and their individual-level determinants: A cross-European analysis

There is now an extensive literature on the question of how individual-level factors affect climate change perceptions, showing that socio-political variables, notably values, worldviews and political orientation, are key factors alongside demographic variables. Yet little is known about cross-national differences in these effects, as most studies have been conducted in a single or small number of countries and cross-study comparisons are difficult due to different conceptualisations of key climate change dimensions. Using data from the European Social Survey Round 8 (n = 44,387), we examine how key socio-political and demographic factors are associated with climate change perception across 22 European countries and Israel. We show that human values and political orientation are important predictors of climate change beliefs and concern, as are the demographics of gender, age, and education. Certain associations with climate change perceptions, such as the ones for the self-transcendence versus self-enhancement value dimension, political orientation, and education, are more consistent across countries than for gender and age. However, even if the direction of the associations are to a large extent consistent, the sizes of the effects are not. We demonstrate that the sizes of the effects are generally smaller in Central and Eastern European countries, and that some demographic effects are larger in Northern European as compared to Western European countries. This suggests that findings from one country do not always generalize to other national contexts.     

Political ideology and climate change-mitigating behaviors: Insights from fixed world beliefs

Political conservatives are less likely to adopt climate change-mitigating behaviors, at least compared to their politically liberal counterparts. There thus have been extensive research explaining the so-called left–right divide. In the current research, we propose and test a novel explanation for this divide within the United States. Specifically, it is hypothesized that conservatives are more likely to see the world as fixed and unmalleable, in the sense that what they (as human beings) do to it will have little impact on diminishing the impacts of climate change. This perception and consequence of behavior should be independent of whether or not conservatives believe that global climate change is real and happening. In a study with 1,096 Americans, we find evidence for our hypotheses. Mediation analyses show that greater political conservatism predicts fewer climate change-mitigating behaviors due to greater fixed world beliefs and, consequently, lower perceptions of instrumentality of one’s actions to fight climate change, independent of climate change beliefs. Our work provides the first empirical evidence for a novel insight into why conservatives are less likely to act against climate change. Doing so, we also discuss the theoretical and practical contributions.     

Unstoppable climate change? The influence of fatalistic beliefs about climate change on behavioural change and willingness to pay cross-nationally

Although climate change is an urgent problem, behavioural and policy responses have not yet been sufficient to either reduce the volume of greenhouse gas emissions or adapt to a disrupted climate system. Significant efforts have been made to raise public awareness of the dangers posed by climate change. One reason why these efforts might not be sufficient is rooted in people’s need to feel efficacy to solve complex problems; the belief that climate change is unstoppable might thwart action even among the concerned. This paper tests for the effect of fatalistic beliefs on behavioural change and willingness to pay to address climate change using two cross-national surveys representing over 50,000 people in 48 nations.

Key policy insights

• The perception that climate change poses a risk or danger increases the likelihood of behavioural change and willingness to pay to address climate change.

• The belief that climate change is unstoppable reduces the behavioural and policy response to climate change and moderates risk perception.

• Communicators and policy leaders should carefully frame climate change as a difficult, yet solvable, problem to circumvent fatalistic beliefs.

     

Does socioeconomic status moderate the political divide on climate change? The roles of education,income, and individualism

Previous research documents that U.S. conservatives, and conservative white males in particular, tend to dismiss the threat of climate change more than others in the U.S. public. Other research indicates that higher education and income can each exacerbate the dismissive tendencies of the political Right. Bridging these lines of research, the present study examines the extent to which higher education and/or income moderate the ideological divide and the “conservative white male effect” on several climate change opinions, and whether these effects are mediated by an individualistic worldview (e.g., valuing individual liberty and limited government). Using nationally representative survey data of U.S. adults from 2008 to 2017 (N = 20,024), we find that across all beliefs, risk perceptions, and policy preferences examined, the ideological divide strengthens with both higher education and higher income. However, educational attainment plays a stronger role than income in polarizing the views of conservative white males. Further analyses support the hypothesis that differences in individualism partially explain the increased political polarization among more educated and higher-income adults, as well as greater dismissiveness among conservative white males relative to other demographic groups. These results highlight key moderators of opinion polarization, as well as ideological differences among conservatives, that are often overlooked in public discourse about climate change. Implications for climate change education and communication across demographic groups are considered.     

Adaptive capacity and human cognition: The process of individual adaptation to climate change

Adaptation has emerged as an important area of research and assessment among climate change scientists. Most scholarly work has identified resource constraints as being the most significant determinants of adaptation. However, empirical research on adaptation has so far mostly not addressed the importance of measurable and alterable psychological factors in determining adaptation. Drawing from the literature in psychology and behavioural economics, we develop a socio-cognitive Model of Private Proactive Adaptation to Climate Change (MPPACC). MPPACC separates out the psychological steps to taking action in response to perception, and allows one to see where the most important bottlenecks occur—including risk perception and perceived adaptive capacity, a factor largely neglected in previous climate change research. We then examine two case studies—one from urban Germany and one from rural Zimbabwe—to explore the validity of MPPACC to explaining adaptation. In the German study, we find that MPPACC provides better statistical power than traditional socio-economic models. In the Zimbabwean case study, we find a qualitative match between MPPACC and adaptive behaviour. Finally, we discuss the important implications of our findings both on vulnerability and adaptation assessments, and on efforts to promote adaptation through outside intervention.     

The genesis of climate change activism: from key beliefs to political action

Climate change activism has been uncommon in the U.S., but a growing national movement is pressing for a political response. To assess the cognitive and affective precursors of climate activism, we hypothesize and test a two-stage information-processing model based on social cognitive theory. In stage 1, expectations about climate change outcomes and perceived collective efficacy to mitigate the threat are hypothesized to influence affective issue involvement and support for societal mitigation action. In stage 2, beliefs about the effectiveness of political activism, perceived barriers to activist behaviors and opinion leadership are hypothesized to influence intended and actual activism. To test these hypotheses, we fit a structural equation model using nationally representative data. The model explains 52 percent of the variance in a latent variable representing three forms of climate change activism: contacting elected representatives; supporting organizations working on the issue; and attending climate change rallies or meetings. The results suggest that efforts to increase citizen activism should promote specific beliefs about climate change, build perceptions that political activism can be effective, and encourage interpersonal communication on the issue.     

Climate Change and Floodplain Management in the United States

Federal agencies use flood frequency estimates to delineate flood risk, manage the National Flood Insurance Program, and ensure that Federal programs are economically efficient. The assumption behind traditional flood risk analysis is that climate is stationary, but anthropogenic climate change and better knowledge of interdecadal climate variability challenge the validity of the assumption. This paper reviews several alternative statistical models for flood risk estimation that do not assume climate stationarity. Some models require subjective judgement or presuppose an understanding of the causes of the underlying non-stationarity, which is problematic given our current knowledge of the interaction of climate and floods. Although currently out of favor, hydrometeorological models have been used for engineering design as alternatives to statistical models and could be adapted to different climate conditions. Floodplain managers should recognize the potentially greater uncertainty in flood risk estimation due to climate change and variability and try to incorporate the uncertainties into floodplain management decision-making and regulation.     

Who remembers a hot summer or a cold winter? The asymmetric effect of beliefs about global warming on perceptions of local climate conditions in the U.S.

This paper explores the phenomenon of local climate perception and the extent to which public perceptions match climate conditions as recorded in instrumental climate data. We further examine whether perceptions of changes in local climates are influenced by prior beliefs about global warming, through the process of motivated reasoning. Using national survey data collected in the United States in 2011, we find that subjective experiences of seasonal average temperature and precipitation during the previous winter and summer were related to recorded conditions during each season. Beliefs about global warming also had significant effects on subjective experiences with above-normal temperatures, particularly among those who believed that global warming is not happening. When asked about the summer of 2010, those who believed that global warming is not happening were significantly less likely to report that they had experienced a warmer-than-normal summer, even when controlling for demographics and local climate conditions. These results suggest that the subjective experience of local climate change is dependent not only on external climate conditions, but also on individual beliefs, with perceptions apparently biased by prior beliefs about global warming.     

Perceptions of climate and climate change by Amazonian communities

The Amazon region has been undergoing profound transformations since the late ‘70s through forest degradation, land use changes and effects of global climate change. The perception of such changes by local communities is important for risk analysis and for subsequent societal decision making. In this study, we compare and contrast observations and perceptions of climate change by selected Amazonian communities particularly vulnerable to alterations in precipitation regimes. Two main points were analysed: (i) the notion of changes in the annual climate cycle and (ii) the notion of changes in rainfall patterns. About 72% of the sampled population reports perceptions of climate changes, and there is a robust signal of increased perception with age. Other possible predictive parameters such as gender, fishing frequency and changes in/planning of economic activities do not appear overall as contributing to perceptions. The communities’ perceptions of the changes in 2013–2014 were then compared to earlier results (2007–2008), providing an unprecedented cohort study of the same sites. Results show that climate change perceptions and measured rainfall variations differ across the basin. It was only in the southern part of the Amazon that both measured and perceived changes in rainfall patterns were consistent with decreased precipitation. However, the perception of a changing climate became more widespread and frequently mentioned, signalling an increase in awareness of climate risk.     

Physical and economic bias in climate change research: a scientometric study of IPCC Third Assessment Report

This study demonstrates that IPCC Third Assessment Report is strongly dominated by Natural sciences, especially the Earth sciences. The Social sciences are dominated by Economics. The IPCC assessment also results in the separation of the Earth, Biological and Social sciences. The integration that occurs is mainly between closely related scientific fields. The research community consequently imposes a physical and economic bias and a separation of scientific fields that the IPCC reproduces in the policy sphere. It is argued that this physical and economic bias distorts a comprehensive understanding of climate change and that the weak integration of scientific fields hinders climate change from being fully addressed as an integral environmental and social problem. If climate change is to be understood, evaluated and responded to in its fullness, the IPCC must broaden its knowledge base and challenge the anthropocentric worldview that places humans outside of nature.     

Understanding the psychological distance of climate change: The limitations of construal level theory and suggestions for alternative theoretical perspectives

Many perceive climate change to be more relevant to distant places, future times, and other people than to the here and now and oneself. This perception has sparked interest in construal level theory (CLT) as a framework to understand how the public sees climate change, and how the subjective psychological distance at which people mentally represent objects affects their decisions and actions. Although at first CLT may appear to be the ideal lens through which to investigate psychological distance, I argue that applications of the theory in explaining and predicting climate change (in)action are limited. Researchers have sometimes used CLT in ways inconsistent with its original articulation; namely, (1) when claiming that psychological distant events are less personally relevant than close events; (2) when treating psychological distance as a stable individual belief; and (3) when speculating about what happens when such beliefs change. This article identifies places where research diverges from the scope of CLT, and suggests alternative perspectives that are theoretically better suited to investigating some important and common questions. As a constructive plea for theoretically rigorous research projects and practical work, this article outlines directions for future research that should help advance the field's understanding of psychological distance in the context of climate change and make interventions more effective.     

How does framing affect policy support for emissions mitigation? Testing the effects of ocean acidification and other carbon emissions frames

Public support for carbon emissions mitigation is crucial to motivate action to address global issues like climate change and ocean acidification (OA). Yet in the public sphere, carbon emissions mitigation policies are typically discussed in the context of climate change and rarely in the context of OA or other global change outcomes. In this paper, we advance research on OA and climate change perceptions and communication, by (i) examining causal beliefs about ocean acidification, and (ii) measuring support for mitigation policies from individuals presented with one of five different policy frames (climate change, global warming, carbon pollution, air pollution, and ocean acidification). Knowledge about OA causes and consequences is more widespread than we anticipated, though still generally low. Somewhat surprisingly, an “air pollution” mitigation frame elicits the highest degree of policy support overall, while “carbon pollution” performs no better than “climate change” or “global warming.” Framing effects are in part contingent on prior knowledge and attitudes, and mediated by concern. Perhaps due to a lack of OA awareness, the OA frame generates the least support overall, although it seems to close the gap in support associated with political orientation: the OA frame increases support among those (few) conservatives who report having heard of OA before the survey. These findings complement previous work on climate change communication and suggest the need for further research into OA as an effective way to engage conservatives in carbon emissions mitigation policy. Potentially even more promising is the air pollution framing.     

Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA

Given the well-documented campaign in the USA to deny the reality and seriousness of anthropogenic climate change (a major goal of which is to “manufacture uncertainty” in the minds of policy-makers and the general public), we examine the influence that perception of the scientific agreement on global warming has on the public’s beliefs about global warming and support for government action to reduce emissions. A recent study by Ding et al. (Nat Clim Chang 1:462–466, 2011) using nationally representative survey data from 2010 finds that misperception of scientific agreement among climate scientists is associated with lower levels of support for climate policy and beliefs that action should be taken to deal with global warming. Our study replicates and extends Ding et al. (Nat Clim Chang 1:462–466, 2011) using nationally representative survey data from March 2012. We generally confirm their findings, suggesting that the crucial role of perceived scientific agreement on views of global warming and support for climate policy is robust. Further, we show that political orientation has a significant influence on perceived scientific agreement, global warming beliefs, and support for government action to reduce emissions. Our results suggest the importance of improving public perception of the scientific agreement on global warming, but in ways that do not trigger or aggravate ideological or partisan divisions.