Moral Reasoning, Intuitions, and Perceptions of Climate Change

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ezra Markowitz
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Moral Reasoning ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Moral Issue ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
Technical Issue ◽  
Forthcoming Article ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Please check back later for the full article. Climate change is often perceived by individuals as a scientific, environmental, economic and/or technical issue. Until recently, the moral and ethical dimensions of the issue have appeared to resonate less strongly with many members of the public. Yet for over two decades, climate ethicists and others have argued strenuously that climate change is, perhaps at its core, a moral and ethical issue. What explains this apparent disconnect between normative and subjective perspectives on the moral core of climate change? Research has identified a set of key psychological and cultural mechanisms that influence and at times inhibit individual moral reasoning about climate change and, often, inhibit perceptions of climate change as a moral issue. Moral reasoning and intuitions about climate change in turn influence public engagement with and support for responses to the problem. The research to date suggests several new questions for scholars to examine further, and it offers implications for effective public communication and engagement.

Communication on Climate Change and Energy Alternatives in the United States

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby Bolsen ◽  
Matthew A. Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
News Coverage ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Political Information ◽  
Forthcoming Article ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
The U.S

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Please check back later for the full article. Most of what people think about politics comes from information acquired via exposure to mass media. Media thus serve a vital role in democracy as a fundamental conduit of political information. Scholars study the factors that drive news coverage about political issues, including the rise of discourse on climate change and shifts in media coverage over time. Climate change first received sustained attention in the U.S. press in the late 1980s and early 1990s. As scientific consensus emerged on the issue, interest groups and other actors emerged who accentuated the inherent uncertainty of climate science as a way to cast doubt on the existence of scientific consensus. The politicization of climate science has resulted in uncertainty among the public about its existence, anxiety about the effects of a fundamental transformation of U.S. energy systems, and support for the status quo in terms of the use of traditional energy sources. Media coverage often magnified the voices of contrarian scientists and skeptics because journalistic norms provided equal space to all sides, a semblance of false balance in news coverage that has persisted through the mid 2000s. By this time, the U.S. public had fractured along partisan lines due to rhetoric employed to generate support by elites. Media fragmentation and the rise of partisan news outlets further contributed to polarization, especially given the tendency of individuals to seek political information about climate change from trusted and credible sources. More recently, new media has come to play an increasingly significant role in communicating information on climate change to the public. Ultimately, there is a need for knowledge-based journalism in communicating climate change and energy alternatives to all segments of the U.S. public, but doing this effectively requires engagement with a broader audience in the debate over how best to address climate change. “Honest brokers” must be referenced in the media as they are best equipped to discuss the issue with citizens of different political identities and cultural worldviews. The success of collective efforts to mitigate and adapt to climate change requires not only scientific consensus but the ability to communicate the science in a way that generates greater consensus among the public.

scholarly journals Understanding the receivers and the reception of science's uncertain messages

2011 ◽  
Vol 369 (1956) ◽  
pp. 4891-4912 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Social Networks ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
Multiple Channels ◽  
Traditional Media ◽  
Public Authorities ◽  
Climate Change Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Need Support ◽  
Soufriere Hills

Although much work has been done by scientists in developing communications to non-scientist audiences, much less attention has been given by them to the ways in which those messages are interpreted. Here, I look at the published work that examines the issue. I focus on three contexts in particular: debates over the triple vaccine for measles, mumps and rubella, the impacts of the Soufrière Hills volcano on the inhabitants of the island of Montserrat and the public communication of the results of climate change research. Several common themes emerge. The most important conclusions are that scientists communicating with the public need to develop their methods deliberatively, involving their target audiences; and that they need to avoid undue dependence on traditional media and public authorities for such communication, and to develop multiple channels to those audiences, including Internet-based and more traditional social networks. Their approach to communicating uncertainty should depend on the context but, except in some extreme emergencies, transparency is generally a virtue. Above all, they need to persist in such public engagements even when the going is rough and extends over long periods. They need support in doing so.

scholarly journals Alan Betts: Green Energy Times, 2018

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Betts
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Energy Policy ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Green Energy ◽  
Collective Decision ◽  
The Public ◽  
Systems Perspective ◽  
Climate Change Denial ◽  
The Earth ◽  
The Future

This is a collection of my 2018 articles in the Green Energy Times (http://www.greenenergytimes.org/ ).This series started in 2016. Many of these articles have been edited or updated from articles I wrote forthe Rutland Herald, sometimes with different titles and pictures.They blend science and opinion with a systems perspective, and encourage the reader to explorealternative and hopeful paths for their families and society. They are written so that a scientist willperceive them as accurate (although simplified); while the public can relate their tangible experience ofweather and climate to the much less tangible issues of climate change, energy policy and strategies forliving sustainably with the earth system.The politically motivated attacks on climate science by the current president have sharpened my politicalcommentary this year; since climate change denial may bring immense suffering to our children and lifeon Earth.I believe that earth scientists have a responsibility to communicate clearly and directly to the public1 –aswe all share responsibility for the future of the Earth. We must deepen our collective understanding, sowe can make a collective decision to build a resilient future.

Strategic Framing and Persuasive Messaging to Influence Climate Change Perceptions and Decisions

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toby Bolsen ◽  
Matthew A. Shapiro
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Diverse Range ◽  
The Public ◽  
Scientific Consensus ◽  
Partisan Polarization ◽  
Change Perceptions ◽  
Strategic Framing ◽  
Range Of Values

The importance of framing as a concept is reflected by the massive amount of attention it has received from scholars across disciplines. As a communicative process, framing involves making certain considerations salient as a way to simplify or shape the way in which an audience understands a particular problem and its potential solutions. As recently as the early 2000s, social scientists began to examine how strategic frames in a communication affect both individuals’ beliefs about climate change and the actions they are willing to support to mitigate the likely effects. Research on the effects of how strategic frames influence the attitudes, beliefs, and preferences of individuals in this domain primarily builds on insights from framing theory, which explains that an individual’s attitude or preference in any given context depends on the available, accessible, and most applicable (i.e., perceived strongest) considerations. But it is much more than theory: frames related to the effects and potential solutions for climate change have been employed strategically by various actors in an effort to shape public opinion and public policy. Perceptions of scientific consensus on climate change are thought to play an important role in determining support for policy actions. Consequently, strategic actors promote a particular agenda by accentuating the inherent uncertainty of climate science, thus casting doubt on the scientific consensus. This has contributed to partisan polarization on climate change and the rise of protective forms of information processing and reasoning in this domain. Strategic messages and frames that resonate with particular subgroups have no effect, or may even backfire, on other segments of the population. Additionally, as individuals who possess different partisan identities become more knowledgeable and numerate, they become increasingly likely to accept information and messages that bolster their existing group loyalties and to reject communications that challenge those identities. Science communicators are thus presented with a considerable barrier to building consensus among the public for action on climate change. In response, scholars have begun to identify strategies and approaches for addressing audiences with the kinds of messages that are most likely to resonate with individuals possessing a diverse range of values and political identities. Further research must identify ways to overcome partisan motivated reasoning on climate change and the persistent and deleterious effects that have resulted from the politicization of climate science.

Mass Media and the Social Amplification of Climate Change Risks

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Allan Mazur
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
New York ◽  
Global Warming ◽  
News Media ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
New York Times ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Public Concern ◽  
Forthcoming Article ◽  
Public Concerns

This is an advance summary of a forthcoming article in the Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Please check back later for the full article. Global warming was not on public or media agendas prior to 1998. In summer of that year, during an unusual heat wave, The New York Times and other major U.S. news organizations saliently reported warnings by NASA scientist James Hansen that the earth is warming. This alarm quickly spread to secondary media and to the news media of other nations. According to the “Quantity of Coverage Theory,” public concerns and governmental actions about a problem rise and fall with the extent of media coverage of that problem, a generalization that is applicable here. Over the next few years, global warming became part of a suite of worldwide issues (particularly the ozone hole, biodiversity, and destruction of rain forests) conceptualized as the “endangered earth,” more or less climaxing on Earth Day 1990. Media coverage and public concerns waned after 1990, thereafter following an erratic course until 2006, when they reached unprecedented heights internationally, largely but not entirely associated with former Vice President Al Gore’s promotion of human-caused climate change as “an inconvenient truth.” By this time, the issue had become highly polarized, with denial or discounting of the risk a hallmark of the political right, especially among American Republicans. International media coverage and public concern fell after 2010, but at this writing in 2015, these are again on the rise. The ups and downs of media attention and public concern are unrelated to real changes in the temperature of the atmosphere.

scholarly journals Expert communication on Twitter: Comparing economists and scientists’ social networks, topics and communicative styles

2020 ◽  
pp. 096366252095725
Author(s):  
Marina Della Guista ◽  
Sylvia Jaworska ◽  
Danica Vukadinović Greetham
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Public Engagement ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Semantic Network ◽  
Public Communication ◽  
Communicative Practices ◽  
The Public ◽  
Multimedia Contents ◽  
Language Analysis ◽  
Use Of Social Media

Experts increasingly use social media to communicate with the wider public, prompted by the need to demonstrate impact and public engagement. While previous research on the use of social media by experts focused on single topics and performed sentiment analysis, we propose to extend the scope by investigating experts’ networks, topics and communicative styles. We perform social and semantic network as well language analysis of top tweeting scientists and economists. We find that economists tweet less, mention fewer people and have fewer Twitter conversations with members of the public than scientists. Scientists use a more informal and involved style and engage wider audiences through multimedia contents, while economists use more jargon, and tend to favour traditional written media. The results point to differences in experts’ communicative practices online, and we propose that disciplinary ways of ‘talking’ may pose obstacles to an effective public communication of expert knowledge.

Making the Climate a Part of the Human World

2011 ◽  
Vol 92 (10) ◽  
pp. 1297-1302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon D. Donner
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Cultural Beliefs ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Anthropogenic Climate Change ◽  
Outreach Programs ◽  
The Public ◽  
Weather And Climate ◽  
Human World ◽  
City States

Doubts about the scientific evidence for anthropogenic climate change persist among the general public, particularly in North America, despite overwhelming consensus in the scientific community about the human influence on the climate system. The public uncertainty may be rooted in the belief, held by many cultures across the planet, that the climate is not directly influenced by people. The belief in divine control of weather and climate can, in some cases, be traced back to the development of agriculture and the early city-states. Drawing upon evidence from anthropology, theology, and communication studies, this article suggests that in many regions this deeply ingrained belief may limit public acceptance of the evidence for anthropogenic climate change. Successful climate change education and outreach programs should be designed to help overcome perceived conflict between climate science and long-held cultural beliefs, drawing upon lessons from communication and education regarding other potentially divisive subjects, such as evolution.

scholarly journals Australia’s 2020 summer shows our changed climate future - a public health preparedness challenge

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
L Hanna
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Fossil Fuels ◽  
Planetary Systems ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Public Health Preparedness ◽  
The Public ◽  
Environmental Determinants Of Health ◽  
National Capital ◽  
Public Health Challenge

Abstract Background Humans have wandered this planet for hundreds of thousands of years, yet in the last 160 years we have dramatically disrupted planetary systems upon which we depend. Humanity has polluted the oceans, rivers, air and soils. Our persistent burning of fossil fuels to power opulent lifestyles is now perilously close to permanently disrupting global climatic systems. Problem It is clear. The problem is us. Australia's summer of horrors provides a terrifying glimpse into our collective future. This rich and exquisitely advantaged nation has voted for governments that have ignored fragile ecosystems, dismantled environmental protection laws, ignored climate science and expanded its fossil fuel exploration, extraction, consumption and exportation. It has systematically silenced science, ignored its duty of care to protect its present and future citizenry. Evidence The 2019-2020 summer brought unprecedented disasters to a country familiar with disasters. After the hottest and driest year on record came the world's largest bushfire, which started in winter, and burned uncontainable for 7 months across 5 states. Billions of animals perished, thousands of homes & businesses destroyed, 33 people burned alive. Continental-wide temperatures of 42oC. Smoke levels exceeded hazardous levels by a factor of 25, lingered 6weeks in the national capital, circumnavigated the southern hemisphere. 80% of Australians were affected by the fires in some way, and the nation fell into a deep grief. The public health challenge As the world faces new climate regimes, the associated health challenges are elevating to unheralded and unforeseen levels. Public health preparedness for past situations will inevitably fail. Events are no longer singular, short lived or readily managed. Today's events are multifaceted, expansive and protracted. Their sheer magnitude and scale prevent response activities, interrupt transport and supply chains and shut down power and communications. Key messages Unfettered human development has degraded planetary systems upon which humanity depends for survival and flourishing. Climate change is disrupting all our key environmental determinants of health. Environmental degradation and climate change now present a rapidly intensifying health emergency. Australia’s summer of disasters demonstrates we need an explosion of public health preparedness.

scholarly journals Decision-making through the grapevine: Winegrowers' perceptions on climate change and the barriers to adaptation planning in New Zealand

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Alyssa Ryan
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Wine Industry ◽  
Adaptation Planning ◽  
Climate Projections ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Wine Production ◽  
Climate Change Research

<p>New Zealand wine is cultivated in cool climates that produce distinctive flavours and wine-styles, which are representative of the terroir of the region. The effects of climate change can impact the quality and quantity of winegrapes, and the production of premium wine. The aim of this research was to investigate adaptation planning in the New Zealand wine industry by evaluating winegrowers’ decision-making and perceptions of climate change. Research was conducted using primary survey data from New Zealand winegrowers and semi-structured interviews with winegrowers from three case study regions of Marlborough, Central Otago, and Hawke’s Bay. The study was designed to assess how climate change is understood throughout the industry, whether adaptation plans are being developed or employed and the barriers hindering winegrowers’ implementation of adaptation strategies. The results show that winegrowers are somewhat informed about climate change with some adaptation planning occurring. However, the majority of winegrowers have no plans to adapt to climate change. The uncertainty in the climate science and the availability of information were indicated as a barrier to adaptation planning. Winegrowers convey the need for regional information with a focus on reliable forecasting and climate projections for the next few years. The New Zealand wine industry is in a positive position to undertake adaptation with the opportunity to exploit the benefits of climate change for wine production.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document