Improving Public Engagement With Climate Change

Despite being one of the most important societal challenges of the 21st century, public engagement with climate change currently remains low in the United States. Mounting evidence from across the behavioral sciences has found that most people regard climate change as a nonurgent and psychologically distant risk—spatially, temporally, and socially—which has led to deferred public decision making about mitigation and adaptation responses. In this article, we advance five simple but important “best practice” insights from psychological science that can help governments improve public policymaking about climate change. Particularly, instead of a future, distant, global, nonpersonal, and analytical risk that is often framed as an overt loss for society, we argue that policymakers should (a) emphasize climate change as a present, local, and personal risk; (b) facilitate more affective and experiential engagement; (c) leverage relevant social group norms; (d) frame policy solutions in terms of what can be gained from immediate action; and (e) appeal to intrinsically valued long-term environmental goals and outcomes. With practical examples we illustrate how these key psychological principles can be applied to support societal engagement and climate change policymaking.

[1]  M. Deutsch,et al.  A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgement. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[2]  Jennifer Phillips,et al.  Communication and Mental Processes: Experimental and Analytic Processing of Uncertain Climate Information , 2007 .

[3]  Mark J. Hurlstone,et al.  The Effect of Framing and Normative Messages in Building Support for Climate Policies , 2014, PloS one.

[4]  Jonathan Evans.  Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. , 2008, Annual review of psychology.

[5]  S. Sloman.  The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. , 1996 .

[6]  Noah J. Goldstein,et al.  The Constructive, Destructive, and Reconstructive Power of Social Norms , 2007, Psychological science.

[7]  S. Linden.  The social-psychological determinants of climate change risk perceptions: Towards a comprehensive model , 2015 .

[8]  N. Kerr,et al.  “. . and besides, I probably couldn't have made a difference anyway”: Justification of Social Dilemma Defection via Perceived Self-Inefficacy , 1997 .

[9]  R. Gifford,et al.  Psychology and Global Climate Change: Addressing a Multi-faceted Phenomenon and Set of Challenges A Report by the American Psychological Association's Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change Members , 2009 .

[10]  A. Tversky,et al.  The Disjunction Effect in Choice under Uncertainty , 1992 .

[11]  A. Leiserowitz,et al.  The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change as a Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence , 2015, PloS one.

[12]  Dale T. Miller,et al.  The norm of self-interest. , 1999, The American psychologist.

[13]  E. Shafir.  The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy , 2013 .

[14]  Y. Trope,et al.  Construal-level theory of psychological distance. , 2010, Psychological review.

[15]  S. Linden.  Intrinsic motivation and pro-environmental behaviour , 2015 .

[16]  E. Weber,et al.  Public Understanding of Climate Change in the United States Scientific Understanding of Climate Change These Assess- Ments Support the following Conclusions with High Or , 2011 .

[17]  Anthony Leiserowitz,et al.  The genesis of climate change activism: from key beliefs to political action , 2014, Climatic Change.

[18]  A. Leiserowitz.  Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect, Imagery, and Values , 2006 .

[19]  Ortwin Renn,et al.  The social amplification/attenuation of risk framework: application to climate change , 2011 .

[20]  P. Slovic,et al.  Risk Perception and Affect , 2006 .

[21]  Teresa A. Myers,et al.  The relationship between personal experience and belief in the reality of global warming , 2012, Nature Climate Change.

[22]  Anthony Leiserowitz,et al.  Global perceptions of local temperature change , 2013 .

[23]  Sander van der Linden,et al.  On the relationship between personal experience, affect and risk perception: The case of climate change , 2014, European journal of social psychology.

[24]  N. McGlynn.  Thinking fast and slow. , 2014, Australian veterinary journal.

[25]  Vladas Griskevicius,et al.  Naturally Green: Harnessing Stone Age Psychological Biases to Foster Environmental Behavior , 2014 .

[26]  Anthony A Leiserowitz,et al.  American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? , 2005, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[27]  R. Gifford.  The dragons of inaction: psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. , 2011, The American psychologist.

[28]  N. Weinstein.  Unrealistic optimism about future life events , 1980 .

[29]  E. Deci,et al.  A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. , 1999, Psychological bulletin.

[30]  Vladas Griskevicius,et al.  SOCIAL NORMS: AN UNDERESTIMATED AND UNDEREMPLOYED LEVER FOR MANAGING CLIMATE CHANGE , 2008 .

[31]  Carl A. Kallgren,et al.  A Focus Theory of Normative Conduct: A Theoretical Refinement and Reevaluation of the Role of Norms in Human Behavior , 1991 .

[32]  Christopher K. Hsee,et al.  Risk as Feelings , 2001, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  L. Festinger.  A Theory of Social Comparison Processes , 1954 .

[34]  A. Spence,et al.  The Psychological Distance of Climate Change , 2012, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[35]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk — Source link , 2007 .

[36]  Joseph E LeDoux.  Cognitive-Emotional Interactions in the Brain , 1989 .

[37]  Florian G. Kaiser,et al.  Temporal pessimism and spatial optimism in environmental assessments: An 18-nation study , 2009 .

[38]  L. Steg,et al.  Comparing the effectiveness of monetary versus moral motives in environmental campaigning , 2013 .

[39]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  Framing and Communicating Climate Change: The Effects of Distance and Outcome Frame Manipulations , 2010 .

[40]  S. Chaiken,et al.  Dual-process theories in social psychology , 1999 .

[41]  A. Tversky,et al.  Prospect theory: analysis of decision under risk , 1979 .

[42]  G. Berns,et al.  Intertemporal choice – toward an integrative framework , 2007, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[43]  E. Weber.  Experience-Based and Description-Based Perceptions of Long-Term Risk: Why Global Warming does not Scare us (Yet) , 2006 .

[44]  Gilles E. Gignac,et al.  The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science , 2013 .

[45]  Nicholas Frank Pidgeon,et al.  Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience , 2011 .

[46]  T. Tyler,et al.  The mass media and judgments of risk: Distinguishing impact on personal and societal level judgments. , 1984 .

[47]  Laurie A. Rudman,et al.  When Truth Is Personally Inconvenient, Attitudes Change , 2013, Psychological science.

[48]  Robert B. Cialdini,et al.  A focus theory of normative conduct , 1990 .

[49]  Noah J. Goldstein,et al.  Normative Social Influence is Underdetected , 2008, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[50]  Troy D. Abel,et al.  A Value-Belief-Norm Theory of Support for Social Movements: The Case of Environmentalism , 1999 .

[51]  Dennis Fitzgerald,et al.  Do people “personally experience” global warming, and if so how, and does it matter? , 2013 .