Transcript Document

Understanding Environmental Attitudes:
The Case of Climate Change
Nick Pidgeon
School of Psychology, Cardiff University
ESRC Professorial Climate Change Fellow
Institute of Biology Meeting
Valuing our Life Support Systems
London, April 2009
Saturday 19
February 2005
‘Dangerous’ Climate Change
• Introduced in UNFCCC 1992 – objective of policy is to avoid
dangerous anthropogenic interference
• Danger involves risk and uncertainty as measured by
science
• But also societal values
– e.g. about severity of consequences
– about acceptability of options (risks, benefits, costs) for
addressing risk
– hence perceptions matter
Projected Impacts of Climate Change (source Stern 2006)
0°C
Food
Water
Global temperature change (relative to pre-industrial)
1°C
2°C
3°C
4°C
5°C
Falling crop yields in many areas, particularly
developing regions
Falling yields in many
Possible rising yields in
developed regions
some high latitude regions
Small mountain glaciers
disappear – water
supplies threatened in
several areas
Significant decreases in water
availability in many areas, including
Mediterranean and Southern Africa
Sea level rise
threatens major cities
Ecosystems
Extensive Damage
to Coral Reefs
Rising number of species face extinction
Extreme
Rising intensity of storms, forest fires, droughts, flooding and heat waves
Weather
Events
Risk of Abrupt and
Increasing risk of dangerous feedbacks and
Major Irreversible
abrupt, large-scale shifts in the climate system
Changes
4
Changing attitudes towards the
environment
(see Ipsos-Mori, Turning Point or Tipping Point, 2007)
Mental Models
• Early work (1990s) on mental models of ‘global
warming’ found:
– People understand some of the impacts (melting glaciers,
hotter summers)
– Confused ‘climate change’ with ‘variation in weather’
– And had an imperfect grasp of the causes, and what could
be done (e.g. thought the hole in the ozone layer, or nuclear
power were causes), think recycling is an appropriate
response
– Might lead to inappropriate behaviors (stop using spray
deodorants, oppose nuclear power, consider recycling as a
response is sufficient)
– See Kempton (1991; Bostrom et al 1994)
Attitude and Perception Studies
People in Europe and North America
• Do see it as ‘risky’ – but not as pressing as other social or
environmental issues
• Some still think the science is uncertain
• A distant problem affecting other people and times
• Cross-national variation (e.g. Southern vs Northern Europe).
• Attitudes can be based upon wider political beliefs (e.g. USA)
• Think others are responsible for taking action
• NO SINGLE PUBLIC!
see Lorenzoni and Pidgeon (2006) Climatic Change, 77, 73-95.
How important are these issues to you?
(Base GB, 1547, 2002) Scale: 1= Not at all important, 5 = Very important
Health (P)
4.84
Partner and family (P)
4.79
Law and order (S)
4.71
Personal safety (P)
4.70
Education (S)
4.66
Being independent (P)
4.62
Privacy (P)
4.58
Having a comfortable life (P)
4.50
Personal finance (P)
4.46
Social relations/Friends (P)
4.44
Environmental protection (S)
4.43
Terrorism (S)
4.41
RADIOACTIVE WASTE
4.22
The economy (S)
4.21
Animal welfare (S)
4.15
Excitement/Fun (P)
4.11
World poverty (S)
4.06
Tackling human rights (S)
4.03
Work (P)
3.99
CLIMATE CHANGE
3.84
Population growth (S)
3.71
GENETIC TESTING
3.62
RADIATION FROM MOBILE PHONES
3.39
GM FOOD
3.29
Religion (P)
3.07
Do you think the world’s climate is changing, or not? (2005, n=1491)
91% Yes
4% No
5% Don’t know
What do you think is causing the world’s climate to change? (%)
Air pollution
39
Cars / planes / transport
31
Burning fossil fuels, such as coal and oil, from power stations
29
Industry / factories / emissions from factories
19
Loss of ozone layer
19
Global warming (unspecified)
17
Deforestation / logging / clearing of rainforests
15
Carbon dioxide
15
Man – made (unspecified)
13
Burning trees / forest fires
10
Natural causes (unspecified)
9
Oil / gas / coal emissions
9
Nuclear power
5
Other
21
‘Which one, if any, of these do you think should be mainly
responsible for taking action against climate change?’
National
Governments
(39%)
The
international
community
(32%)
Don’t know
(2%)
Local
authorities
Industry/
(2%)
Companies
(10%)
Environmental
Individuals and
groups
their families
(4%)
(8%)
(n=1491, 2005, Source Poortinga, Pidgeon and Lorenzoni, 2006)
People see others as responsible. Also sets a dilemma as
people also tend not to trust these institutional actors.
Climate Risk Governance ‘Trap’.
– People are concerned about climate change, but see
politicians and policy makers as primarily responsible
hence are not impelled to act. In addition trust in these
institutional actors is low
– In turn politicians want people to act, while at the same
time see the electoral cycle as a reason to not impose what
they see as unpopular environmental measures
– Resolving the perceptions on both side of this argument,
and in a way that does not erode confidence and trust
further, will be critical
US Beliefs on Media Reporting by
Political Party (Gallup Polls)
Source: Dunlap & McCright, 2008, Environment.
Understand Barriers to Engaging
With Climate Change
Lorenzoni, Whitmarsh and Nicholson-Cole, Global Env Change, 2007
• Lack of knowledge
• Uncertainty and Scepticism
• Distrust in Information
Sources
• Externalising Responsibility
• Distant Threat
• A Marginal Threat
•
•
•
•
•
Fatalism and Helplessness
Lack of Political Action
Lack of Business Action
Worry about Free-riders
Social Expectations (to
consume)
• Lack of Enabling Initiatives
• (+ ‘Rebound Effects’)
2007 Summer Floods
•
Floods across large parts of Southern and
Northern England in summer (June, July,
August) of 2007
•
“In terms of scale, complexity and duration,
this is simply the largest peacetime emergency
we’ve seen.”
•
55,000 properties flooded. Around 7,000
people were rescued from the flood waters by
the emergency services and 13 people
•
Largest loss of essential services since World
War II, with almost half a million people
without mains water or electricity.
•
Insurance industry pay out over £3 billion
(Pitt Report, 2007)
Behaviour Change - Approaches
• Understand and Target Barriers to Change
• Recognise different ‘publics’
• Target Behaviours which BOTH Make a Difference
(e.g. improve energy efficiency) and are Low Cost for
Individuals
• Downstream and Upstream Interventions
Acknowledgements
Website www.understanding-risk.org
[email protected]
Most Effective Actions
(Gardner & Stern, 2008)
References – I
(Key readings indicated by *)
Evidence for Climate Change
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fourth Assessment Report (2007). Climate
Change 2007: Synthesis Report. Cambridge: CUP. (available on Web)
Stern, N (2006) The Economics of Climate Change. Cambridge: CUP. (available on Web)
Plus – a very concise readable little book:
Emanuel, K. (2007) What We Know about Climate Change. Cambridge Mass: MIT Press.
Mental Models and Images of Global Warming
*Bostrom, A., Morgan, M.G., Fischhoff, B. and Read, D.: 1994, ‘What do people know about
global climate change? 1. Mental models’, Risk Analysis, 14(6), 959-970.
Stern, P. C. (1992). Psychological dimensions of global environmental change. Annual Review of
Psychology, 43, 269-302.
Kempton, W. (1991). Lay perspectives on global climate change. Global Environmental Change:
Human and Policy Dimensions, 1, 183-208.
*Lorenzoni, I., Doria, M.F. et al (2006) Cross-national comparisons of image associations with
'global warming' and 'climate change' among laypeople in the United States of America and
Great Britain. Journal of Risk Research, 9(3), 265-281.
References – II (Key readings - *)
Attitude Studies and Surveys
*Lorenzoni, I. and Pidgeon, N.F (2006) Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives.
Climatic Change, 77, 73-95.
Poortinga W., Pidgeon, N.F. and Lorenzoni, I. (2006) Public Perceptions of Nuclear Power, Climate Change
and Energy Options in Britain: Summary Findings of a Survey Conducted during October and
November 2005. Technical Report (Understanding Risk Working Paper 06-02). Norwich: Centre for
Environmental Risk. (this report is available from NP or WP)
Dunlap, R.E. & McCright, A.M. (2008) Environment, V50(5), 26-35.
Pidgeon, N.F., Lorenzoni, I. and Poortinga, W. (2008) Climate change or nuclear power - no thanks! A
quantitative study of public perceptions and risk framing in Britain. Global Environmental Change, 18, 6985.
* Downing, P. and Ballantyne, J. (2007) Tipping Point or Turning Point? Ipsos-Mori Social Research Institute.
(Available on Web)
Media Reporting
Carvalho, A and Burgess, J. (2005) Cultural circuits of climate change in the UK broadsheet newspapers 19852003. Risk Analysis, 25(6), 1457-1469.
Boykoff, M. (2007) Flogging a dead norm? Newspaper coverage of anthropogenic climate change in the United
States and United KIngdon for 2003-2006. Area, 93(4), 470-481.
Behaviour Change
*Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S. and Whitmarsh, L. (2007) Barriers perceived to engaging with climate
change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17, pp. 445459.
Gardner, G.T. and Stern, P.C. (2008) The most effective actions US households can take to curb climate change.
Environment, V50(5), 12-24.
*Spence, A., Pidgeon, N.F. and Uzzell, D. (2009) Climate change – psychology’s contribution.
The Psychologist, 22(2), 108-111.
Interventions Upstream and
Downstream
(see Spence, Pidgeon, Uzzell, 2009)
Health Psychology makes a distinction between:
• Downstream intervention (change attitudes)
• Upstream intervention (structural or enabling
changes which remove barriers to desired
behaviour)