Transcript Confused and Scared and Deeply in Denial

Confused and Scared and
Deeply in Denial
Improving climate change communication
and facilitating social change
Susanne C. Moser, Ph.D. & Lisa Dilling, Ph.D.
ESIG Coffee Talk, February 24, 2004
The Not-so-lucky Clover Leaf of
Communicating Urgency, Need for Change
Complexity
& time lag
in climate
system
Societal
structures
and values
resistant to
change
What
now?
People
perceive no
urgency
Climate change
no longer just
a science
problem
The Difficult Character of Climate
Change
 Global
 Complex system (with lags and thresholds)
 Defined and perceived as slow/gradual or as






occurring in the far future
Difficult to detect
Causes pervasive >> solutions challenging
(we have found the scapegoat and it is us)
Impacts dispersed; not all bad; many
“creeping” phenomena
Cumulative, synergistic
Uncertainty pervasive
Politically very controversial
Public Perceptions of Climate Change
 ~90% of American public aware of “global warming”
 For ~30% it is personally serious, urgent, worth





worrying about
Still confusion about causes of global warming
Global warming is inevitable and unfixable
Related to irreversible deterioration of moral values
Few know about solutions; most are (believed to be)
ineffective or irrelevant
Few if any studies have looked at adaptation; climate
variability
“The typical global warming news story overwhelms
and immobilizes people.”
(Frameworks Institute 2003)
Societal Resistance to Change
Some examples…
 A power plant has a design life of 30+ years
 A dam is built to last for decades to 100 years
 Dominant economic paradigm and supporting
social structures last decades to centuries
 Values change at generational timescales
“The conditions that brought us climate change, as well as the
conditions surrounding future options for dealing with it, are
embedded in socioeconomic structures and value systems,
embracing material advancement and fossil fuels – structures
and values that are highly resistant to change.”
Trumbo and Shanahan, 2000
Confused and Scared
and Deeply in Denial
OUTLINE
1. The communication – social change
interface
2. Communication needs
3. Social change at all levels
4. A bottom-up framework for
communication and social change
5. Challenges and outcomes of
initial project
Why the Communication – Social
Change Interface?
 What is not seen does not exist
Detection and naming of problem
 Public agenda setting
 What is not understood is dismissed, denied, or polemically
discussed
 Facilitation of informed public discourse about issue and
solutions
 How something is framed determines response
 Influence on “issue culture”
 What is not talked about exerts no political pressure
 Link between public discourse and political stage
 Without accessible solutions we will do nothing
 Critical R&D, promotion
>> Critical role for science/scientists
(educator, supporter, ally/adversary, engineer)

Climate Change Action & Communication
Needs
PREVENTION, MITIGATION
ADAPTATION
(ADAPTATION)
(MITIGATION)
 Anticipatory, planned, strategic
action
 Autonomous, reactive,
instantaneous action
 Actions taken by governments,
 Actions taken by individuals,
public decision-makers, and
business leaders
private decision-makers,
agencies
 Legislation, regulation,
incentives
 Convincing causality, need for
action recognized, need for
probablistic climate information,
for advance planning
 Behavioral changes,
administrative actions
 Need for present-time weather
or near-term climate information
for response to extreme events,
variability
The Need for Tailored and Effective
Communication
COMMUNICATING…
 What?
 How much?
 In what format?
 When?
 How often?
 To what end?
And most of all…
 To whom?
Social Change: Where to begin?
 Individuals? – all, specific ones
 Businesses?
 NGOs?
 Government?
 International
 National
 State
 Local
Theories of Social Change:
structure vs. agency – still…
Individuals
Small
Informal
Collectives
Private
Not-for-Profits
Private
Businesses
Public
Institutions
•Belief model
•Policy windows
•Organizational change theories
•Deficit model
model
(e.g., stage theory)
•Theory of reasoned action
•Regulatory
•Stages of change model
approach
•Consumer information
•Advocacy
processing
coalition approach
•Deliberative, inclusionary
processes & procedures
•Rational actor paradigm
(e.g., social marketing)
•Qualitative choice theory
•Social learning theory
•Altruism, empathy, pro-social •Diffusion of innovation theory
behavior models
•Community organization theories
(e.g., social network theory)
> > > > > Society at large < < < < <
•Theories of social (counter)movements (mobilization, opportunities, resources)
•Diffusion of innovation theory
A Bottom-Up Framework: CommunicationBehavior Change Continuum
Unwieldy
problem
Audience
Choice
Behavior
Change
Sought
Communication
Mental
Models
Message
Framing
Identification
of
Barriers
Messenger
Choice
Program
Design &
Planning
Communication
Channel
Choice
Behavior
Change
Tools
Message
Reception
Maintenance
Behavior Change
Termination
Challenges for Project/Workshop
 Walking Our Talk
 Communicating across disciplinary boundaries
 Communicating across professional boundaries
 Raising awareness of climate impact and keeping it to a
minimum
 Theoretical Integration/Complementarity
 Different disciplines
 Levels of social change
 Maintaining credibility for academics and relevance
for practitioners

Balance of research and action agendas
Expected Outcomes of MacArthur
Project
1. Edited volume and synthesis paper
2. Research agenda


What aspects are we currently neglecting?
Which do we overstate?
3. Action agenda


What kinds of practical expertise
would be most useful to draw on?
How do we hold the line between
research and advocacy?
4. Proposal to NSF (HSD or Biocomplexity)

Explore communication/social change
further in regional context (Northeast)
And useful lessons for NCAR…
“What is done with information
is as important
as the information itself.”
H. Jesse Smith (2004)
Workshop website: http://www.esig.ucar.edu/changeworkshop/index.html