When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values,worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions

The IPCC's report on Global Warming of 1.5°C positioned climate change as one of the most worrying issues mankind has ever faced. Although many people worry about climate change, there is still much unknown about the origins and outcomes of worry about climate change; particularly, whether and how it can motivate specific and personal climate actions. The current paper investigates this critical relationship with data from the European Social Survey Round 8 (44,387 respondents from 23 countries). As expected, the more individuals worried about climate change, the more likely they were to take and support climate action. Yet, the process through which this association occurred differed between actions. Specifically, worry was both directly and indirectly, via feelings of personal responsibility to reduce climate change, associated with climate policy support; whereas worry was mostly indirectly associated with personal climate mitigation behaviours, via personal responsibility. In addition, worry about climate change appears partly rooted in biospheric values (i.e., caring about nature and the environment), and biospheric values were also clearly, directly and positively related to personal climate mitigation behaviours. The relationships were highly consistent across countries but varied somewhat in size. The results show how generic feelings about climate change can directly and indirectly affect both climate policy support and personal climate mitigation behaviours, thereby providing critical insights for science and policy making.     

Change and transition: the climate of Ukraine's agri-food sector

The agri-food sector has contributed significantly to climate change, but has an important role to play in climate change mitigation and adaptation. The agri-food sector has many potential win–win–win strategies that benefit mitigation and adaptation, and also deliver gains in rural income and land management. Post-Soviet transition economies provide a good model for understanding some of the barriers to adaptation and mitigation in the agri-food sector, due to their significant unmet agricultural potential combined with inefficient energy use. Ukraine is used as a case study to explore the barriers and bridges to addressing climate change in a post-Soviet state. A variety of stakeholders and farmers were interviewed about mitigation and adaptation and the current response capacity. Grounded theory analysis revealed themes that are perceived to function as barriers including: pandering, oligarchs and market interventions; corruption and transparency; and survival, freedom and law enforcement. Foreign involvement and investment emerged as a bridge to overcoming these barriers. The results indicate that significant progress in climate mitigation and adaptation in the agri-food sector in Ukraine will only be achieved if some of the wider political and social issues facing the country can be addressed.

Policy relevance

Ukraine has considerable potential for both agricultural production and climate change mitigation; however, this potential can only be met by identifying and addressing barriers currently impeding progress. This article found that barriers to effective climate change are perceived to stem from wider post-Soviet transition issues. These wider issues need to be addressed during the implementation of climate policy since they are viewed to be important by a wide variety of stakeholders. International negotiations have provided little incentive for Ukraine to achieve effective mitigation, and corrupt practices further impair mitigation projects. In addition, export quotas currently function as a maladaptive climate policy and reduce both farmers' capacity in Ukraine and international food security. Meanwhile, foreign involvement, not just financial investment, but also the investment of ideas can provide a bridge to effective climate policy. The international community needs to provide a legal framework and assist Ukraine in adopting transparent processes in order to successfully execute climate policy.     

Global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios through the lens of structural change

This paper analyses structural change in the economy as a key but largely unexplored aspect of global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios. Structural change can actually drive energy and land use as much as economic growth and influence mitigation opportunities and barriers. Conversely, stringent climate policy is bound to induce specific structural and socio-economic transformations that are still insufficiently understood. We introduce Multi-Sectoral macroeconomic Integrated Assessment Models as tools to capture the key drivers of structural change and we conduct a multi-model study to assess main structural effects – changes of the sectoral composition and intensity of trade of global and regional economies – in a baseline and 2°C policy scenario by 2050. First, the range of baseline projections across models, for which we identify the main drivers, illustrates the uncertainty on future economic pathways – in emerging economies especially – and inform on plausible alternative futures with implications for energy use and emissions. Second, in all models, climate policy in the 2°C scenario imposes only a second-order impact on the economic structure at the macro-sectoral level – agriculture, manufacturing and services - compared to changes modelled in the baseline. However, this hides more radical changes for individual industries – within the energy sector especially. The study, which adopts a top-down framing of global structural change, represents a starting point to kick-start a conversation and propose a new research agenda seeking to improve understanding of the structural change effects in socio-economic and mitigation scenarios, and better inform policy assessments.     

Attribution matters: Revisiting the link between extreme weather experience and climate change mitigation responses

The literature suggests that extreme weather experiences have potential to increase climate change engagement by influencing the way people perceive the proximity and implications of climate change. Yet, limited attention has been directed at investigating how individual differences in the subjective interpretation of extreme weather events as indications of climate change moderate the link between extreme weather experiences and climate change attitudes. This article contends that subjective attribution of extreme weather events to climate change is a necessary condition for extreme weather experiences to be translated into climate change mitigation responses, and that subjective attribution of extreme weather to climate change is influenced by the psychological and social contexts in which individuals appraise their experiences with extreme weather. Using survey data gathered in the aftermath of severe flooding across the UK in winter 2013/2014, personal experience of this flooding event is shown to only directly predict perceived threat from climate change, and indirectly predict climate change mitigation responses, among individuals who subjectively attributed the floods to climate change. Additionally, subjective attribution of the floods to climate change is significantly predicted by pre-existing climate change belief, political affiliation and perceived normative cues. Attempts to harness extreme weather experiences as a route to engaging the public must be attentive to the heterogeneity of opinion on the attributability of extreme weather events to climate change.     

A new scenario framework for climate change research: the concept of shared climate policy assumptions

The new scenario framework facilitates the coupling of multiple socioeconomic reference pathways with climate model products using the representative concentration pathways. This will allow for improved assessment of climate impacts, adaptation and mitigation. Assumptions about climate policy play a major role in linking socioeconomic futures with forcing and climate outcomes. The paper presents the concept of shared climate policy assumptions as an important element of the new scenario framework. Shared climate policy assumptions capture key policy attributes such as the goals, instruments and obstacles of mitigation and adaptation measures, and introduce an important additional dimension to the scenario matrix architecture. They can be used to improve the comparability of scenarios in the scenario matrix. Shared climate policy assumptions should be designed to be policy relevant, and as a set to be broad enough to allow a comprehensive exploration of the climate change scenario space.     

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.     

An iconic approach for representing climate change

International and national greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals implicitly rely in part on individuals undertaking voluntary emissions reductions through lifestyle decisions. Whilst there is widespread public recognition of climate change as an issue, there are many barriers – cognitive, psychological and social – preventing individuals from enacting lifestyle decarbonisation. More effective climate change communication approaches are needed which allow individuals to engage meaningfully with climate change, thus opening new prospects for lifestyle decarbonisation. This study presents an iconic approach to engagement, tested in the UK context, which allows individuals to approach climate change through their own personal values and experiences. The iconic approach harnesses the emotive and visual power of climate icons with a rigorous scientific analysis of climate impacts under a different climate future. Although some climate icons already exist – for example the Thermohaline Circulation shutdown – these ‘expert-led’ icons fail to effectively engage ‘non-experts’. We demonstrate that the non-expert-led iconic approach helps overcome some of the cognitive and affective barriers that impede action towards lifestyle decarbonisation.     

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.     

A shale gas revolution for China?

The question of whether China is on the verge of a ‘shale gas revolution’ is examined. This has potentially significant consequences for energy policy and climate change mitigation. Contrary to the optimistic reading of some commentators, it argues that various technological, environmental, political, regulatory and institutional factors will constrain the growth of China's shale gas market and that such a revolution might in any event have consequences that are at best mixed, at worst antithetical to climate change mitigation.Policy relevanceChina's reserves of unconventional gas have the potential to transform energy policy, as has occurred in the US, resulting in the substitution of shale gas for coal in the energy mix. Because gas emits only approximately half the GHG per unit as coal, such a move would have important implications for climate policy. However, substantial obstacles stand in the way of the ‘energy revolution’ that some policy analysts see China as embarking upon. The need to acknowledge these obstacles, particularly those relating to regulation and governance (and whether or to what extent they can be overcome), is an issue of profound importance to the future of climate and energy policy.     

The need for and use of socio-economic scenarios for climate change analysis: A new approach based on shared socio-economic pathways

Socio-economic scenarios constitute an important tool for exploring the long-term consequences of anthropogenic climate change and available response options. A more consistent use of socio-economic scenarios that would allow an integrated perspective on mitigation, adaptation and residual climate impacts remains a major challenge. We assert that the identification of a set of global narratives and socio-economic pathways offering scalability to different regional contexts, a reasonable coverage of key socio-economic dimensions and relevant futures, and a sophisticated approach to separating climate policy from counter-factual “no policy” scenarios would be an important step toward meeting this challenge. To this end, we introduce the concept of “shared socio-economic (reference) pathways”. Sufficient coverage of the relevant socio-economic dimensions may be achieved by locating the pathways along the dimensions of challenges to mitigation and to adaptation. The pathways should be specified in an iterative manner and with close collaboration between integrated assessment modelers and impact, adaptation and vulnerability researchers to assure coverage of key dimensions, sufficient scalability and widespread adoption. They can be used not only as inputs to analyses, but also to collect the results of different climate change analyses in a matrix defined by two dimensions: climate exposure as characterized by a radiative forcing or temperature level and socio-economic development as classified by the pathways. For some applications, socio-economic pathways may have to be augmented by “shared climate policy assumptions” capturing global components of climate policies that some studies may require as inputs. We conclude that the development of shared socio-economic (reference) pathways, and integrated socio-economic scenarios more broadly, is a useful focal point for collaborative efforts between integrated assessment and impact, adaptation and vulnerability researchers.     

The economics of leadership in climate change mitigation

Which kind of reaction can a nation or group of nations expect when leading by example in climate policy? This synthesis article describes possible positive reaction mechanisms from different fields of economics, some of which have scarcely been linked to climate economics previously. One effect may be behavioural, a reaction motivated by fairness, reciprocity, or norms. Second, other nations may interpret the leader's action as a signal on his preference or the value of the objective and adjust their own policy based on the new information. Third, the leader may provide a service to other nations, which decreases their costs and risks. The followers could benefit by learning successful policies, adopting technologies, and obtaining information on the cost of environmental policy. All of these mechanisms have in common that the leader sets an example with the intention of motivating others to contribute to the public good.

Policy relevance

A large body of both theoretical and empirical evidence shows that leading by example in climate change mitigation by a small group of nations has important potential for motivating other nations to follow. Modern economics has identified a range of mechanisms to explain why simple free-riding is unlikely to dominate the reaction to leadership. One such mechanism is described by behavioural economics. Humans often behave as conditional cooperators, meaning that they are willing to do their bit once a leader has done his. A second mechanism is the transmission of a credible signal that the leader considers climate change mitigation to be important. Finally, the leader gains knowledge, which spills over to other countries and thus moves their cost–benefit ratio in favour of mitigation. This evidence implies that leadership provides a promising alternative to stimulate the global cooperation that will eventually be needed to stabilize the climate.     

Applying personal carbon trading: a proposed ‘Carbon,Health and Savings System’ for British Columbia,Canada

Addressing climate change requires the synergy of technological, behavioural and market mechanisms. This article proposes a policy framework that integrates the three, deploying personal carbon trading as a key element within a policy portfolio to reduce personal carbon footprints. It draws on policy and human motivation literatures that address the behavioural changes that may be needed in the context of a long-term threat such as climate change. This proposal builds on an analysis of the British Columbia carbon tax, international examples of carbon pricing instruments and strategies for behavioural change such as social networks, loyalty management, mobile apps and gamification. Interviews were conducted with experts in financial services, energy conservation and clean technology, as well as with specialists in climate, health and taxation policy. Their input, together with a review of the theoretical literature and practical case studies, informed the proposed design of a Carbon, Health and Saving System for promoting individual engagement and collective action by linking long-term climate mitigation measures with short-term personal and social goals, including health, recreation and social reinforcement.

Policy Relevance

This article identifies areas for climate policy innovation and recommends policies that can support, promote and enable personal carbon budgeting and collective action. Although this study is focused on British Columbia, both the input provided by key opinion leaders and the proposed framework are applicable to other jurisdictions.

This policy proposal shows how personal carbon trading could work in the context of a Canadian province with an existing climate mitigation policy. It also specifies a minimum viable product approach to establishing the economic, social and technological foundations for personal carbon trading.

The Carbon, Health and Saving System identifies the technologies and stakeholders needed to implement personal carbon trading, and offers the possibility of motivating a widespread conscious human response in the event that carbon taxation proves insufficient to generate economic adaptation in a changing climate.     

Climate change or nuclear power—No thanks! A quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain

The UK is witnessing a new line in political debate around new nuclear energy generation as one potential feature of future energy policy, specifically for contributing to climate change mitigation alongside energy security. Little is known about how ordinary citizens might be responding to this reframing. This paper reports the results from a major British survey (n=1491) undertaken in the autumn of 2005. The consistent message is that while higher proportions of the British public are prepared to accept nuclear power if they believe it contributes to climate change mitigation, this is a highly conditional view, with very few actively preferring this over renewable sources given the choice. People see both climate change and nuclear power as problematic in terms of risks and express only a ‘reluctant acceptance’ of nuclear power as a ‘solution’ to climate change. The combined data from this survey can also be interpreted as an indication of the complexity surrounding beliefs about energy futures and the difficulty of undertaking simplistic risk–risk tradeoffs within any single framing of the issues; such as nuclear energy versus climate change. The results also indicate that it would be unwise, in the UK as elsewhere, to simplistically assume that there exists any single or stable public ‘opinion’ on such complex matters. We conclude with a discussion of the role and implications of the survey evidence for the policy process.     

Health co-benefits and the development of climate change mitigation policies in the European Union

The 2015 Paris Agreement requires increasingly ambitious emissions reduction efforts from its member countries. Accounting for ancillary positive health outcomes (health co-benefits) that result from implementing climate change mitigation policies can provide Parties to the Paris Agreement with a sound rationale for introducing stronger mitigation strategies. Despite this recognition, a knowledge gap exists on the role of health co-benefits in the development of climate change mitigation policies. To address this gap, the case study presented here investigates the role of health co-benefits in the development of European Union (EU) climate change mitigation policies through analysis and consideration of semi-structured interview data, government documents, journal articles and media releases. We find that while health co-benefits are an explicit consideration in the development of EU climate change mitigation policies, their influence on final policy outcomes has been limited. Our analysis suggests that whilst health co-benefits are a key driver of air pollution mitigation policies, climate mitigation policies are primarily driven by other factors, including economic costs and energy implications.

Key policy insights

• Health co-benefits are quantified and monetized as part of the development of EU climate change mitigation policies but their influence on the final policies agreed upon is limited.

• Barriers, such as the immediate economic costs associated with climate action, inhibit the influence of health co-benefits on the development of mitigation policies.

• Health co-benefits primarily drive the development of EU air pollution mitigation policies.

• The separation of responsibility for GHG and non-GHG emissions across Directorate Generals has decoupled climate change and air pollution mitigation policies, with consequences for the integration of health co-benefits in climate policy.

     

Transforming barriers into enablers of action on climate change: Insights from three municipal case studies in British Columbia,Canada

Despite a wealth of financial, technical, and human capacity in Canadian cities, it remains a challenging task to transform this capacity into effective climate change adaptation and mitigation. Indeed, mitigative and adaptive capacities only represent the potential to achieve the ultimate goals of greenhouse gas and vulnerability reduction. This paper builds on previous explorations of barriers to identify powerful levers by which action can be triggered and sustained at the local level through the study of three municipalities in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia, Canada. The necessity of an explicitly articulated high-level directive, leadership that stimulates an organizational culture of innovation and collaboration, and the ‘institutionalization’ of climate change response measures within standard operating procedures emerged as crucial enablers of action. Addressing a lack of technical, financial, or human resources is less a matter of creating more capacity than of facilitating the effective use of existing resources. This facilitation depends most fundamentally on re-working the path dependent institutional structures, organizational culture and policy-making procedures that have characterized the unsuccessful patterns of climate change policy development in the past. The ultimate goal is to contribute to the ongoing efforts to adapt institutions to the complex and uncertain futures associated with a changing climate, while simultaneously embedding broader sustainability goals in long-range strategic planning.     

Climate policy meets national development contexts: Insights from Kenya and Mozambique

Despite the growth in work linking climate change and national level development agendas, there has been limited attention to their political economy. These processes mediate the winners, losers and potential trade-offs between different goals, and the political and institutional factors which enable or inhibit integration across different policy areas. This paper applies a political economy analysis to case studies on low carbon energy in Kenya and carbon forestry in Mozambique. In examining the intersection of climate and development policy, we demonstrate the critical importance of politics, power and interests when climate-motivated initiatives encounter wider and more complex national policy contexts, which strongly influence the prospects of achieving integrated climate policy and development goals in practice. We advance the following arguments: First, understanding both the informal nature and historical embeddedness of decision making around key issue areas and resource sectors of relevance to climate change policy is vital to engaging actually existing politics; why actors hold the positions they do and how they make decisions in practice. Second, we need to understand and engage with the interests, power relations and policy networks that will shape the prospects of realising climate policy goals; acting as barriers in some cases and as vehicles for change in others. Third, by looking at the ways in which common global drivers have very different impacts upon climate change policy once refracted through national levels institutions and policy processes, it is easier to understand the potential and limits of translating global policy into local practice. And fourth, climate change and development outcomes, and the associated trade-offs, look very different depending on how they are framed, who frames them and in which actor coalitions. Understanding these can inform the levers of change and power to be navigated, and with whom to engage in order to address climate change and development goals.     

Public engagement with carbon and climate change: To what extent is the public ‘carbon capable’?

The relevance of climate change for society seems indisputable: scientific evidence points to a significant human contribution in causing climate change, and impacts which will increasingly affect human welfare. In order to meet national and international greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction targets, there is an urgent need to understand and enable societal engagement in mitigation. Yet recent research indicates that this involvement is currently limited: although awareness of climate change is widespread, understanding and behavioral engagement are far lower. Proposals for mitigative ‘personal carbon budgets’ imply a need for public understanding of the causes and consequences of carbon emissions, as well as the ability to reduce emissions. However, little has been done to consider the situated meanings of carbon and energy in everyday life and decisions. This paper builds on the concept of ‘carbon capability’, a term which captures the contextual meanings associated with carbon and individuals’ abilities and motivations to reduce emissions. We present empirical findings from a UK survey of public engagement with climate change and carbon capability, focusing on both individual and institutional dimensions. These findings highlight the diverse public understandings about ‘carbon’, encompassing technical, social, and moral discourses; and provide further evidence for the environmental value-action gap in relation to adoption of low-carbon lifestyles. Implications of these findings for promoting public engagement with climate change and carbon capability are discussed.