Efficacy Trade-Offs in Individuals’ Support for Climate Change Policies

How can we reasonably justify a climate policy goal if we accept that only possible consequences from climate change are known? Precautionary principles seem to offer promising guidelines for reasoning in such epistemic situations. This chapter presents two versions of the precautionary principle (PP) and defends one of them as morally justifiable. However, it argues that current versions of the PP do not allow discrimination between relevant climate change policies. Therefore, the chapter develops a further version of the PP, the Controllability Precautionary Principle (CPP), and defends its moral plausibility. The CPP incorporates the following idea: in a situation when the possible outcomes of the available actions cannot be ranked with regard to their value, the choice between available options for action should rest on the comparison of how well decision makers can control the processes of the implementation of the available strategies.

Download Full-text

Comparing respondents who passed versus failed an Instructional Manipulation Check: A case study about support for climate change policies

International Journal of Market Research ◽

10.1177/14707853211023039 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 63 (4) ◽

pp. 408-415

Author(s):

Maria Rubio Juan ◽

Melanie Revilla

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

External Validity ◽

Structural Equation ◽

Online Survey ◽

Equation Modeling ◽

Manipulation Check ◽

Climate Change Policies ◽

Instructional Manipulation ◽

Using Data

The presence of satisficers among survey respondents threatens survey data quality. To identify such respondents, Oppenheimer et al. developed the Instructional Manipulation Check (IMC), which has been used as a tool to exclude observations from the analyses. However, this practice has raised concerns regarding its effects on the external validity and the substantive conclusions of studies excluding respondents who fail an IMC. Thus, more research on the differences between respondents who pass versus fail an IMC regarding sociodemographic and attitudinal variables is needed. This study compares respondents who passed versus failed an IMC both for descriptive and causal analyses based on structural equation modeling (SEM) using data from an online survey implemented in Spain in 2019. These data were analyzed by Rubio Juan and Revilla without taking into account the results of the IMC. We find that those who passed the IMC do differ significantly from those who failed for two sociodemographic and five attitudinal variables, out of 18 variables compared. Moreover, in terms of substantive conclusions, differences between those who passed and failed the IMC vary depending on the specific variables under study.

Download Full-text

Framing Messages on the Economic Impact of Climate Change Policies: Effects on Climate Believers and Climate Skeptics

Environmental Communication ◽

10.1080/17524032.2021.1890175 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-16

Author(s):

Mauro Bertolotti ◽

Patrizia Catellani ◽

Thomas Nelson

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Economic Impact ◽

Impact Of Climate Change ◽

Climate Change Policies

Download Full-text

Identifying integrated options for agricultural climate change mitigation

International Journal of Climate Change Strategies and Management ◽

10.1108/ijccsm-09-2012-0053 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 6 (2) ◽

pp. 192-211 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

John Tzilivakis ◽

Kathleen Lewis ◽

Andrew Green ◽

Douglas Warner

Keyword(s):

Climate Change ◽

Climate Change Mitigation ◽

Effective Means ◽

Integrated Approach ◽

Management Options ◽

Content Type ◽

Mitigation Options ◽

Trade Offs ◽

Environmental Objectives ◽

Change Mitigation

Purpose – In order to achieve reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, it is essential that all industry sectors have the appropriate knowledge and tools to contribute. This includes agriculture, which is considered to contribute about a third of emissions globally. This paper reports on one such tool: IMPACCT: Integrated Management oPtions for Agricultural Climate Change miTigation. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach – IMPACCT focuses on GHGs, carbon sequestration and associated mitigation options. However, it also attempts to include information on economic and other environmental impacts in order to provide a more holistic perspective. The model identifies mitigation options, likely economic impacts and any synergies and trade-offs with other environmental objectives. The model has been applied on 22 case study farms in seven Member States. Findings – The tool presents some useful concepts for developing carbon calculators in the future. It has highlighted that calculators need to evolve from simply calculating emissions to identifying cost-effective and integrated emissions reduction options. Practical implications – IMPACCT has potential to become an effective means of provided targeted guidance, as part of a broader knowledge transfer programme based on an integrated suite of guidance, tools and advice delivered via different media. Originality/value – IMPACCT is a new model that demonstrates how to take a more integrated approach to mitigating GHGs on farms across Europe. It is a holistic carbon calculator that presents mitigation options in the context other environmental and economic objectives in the search for more sustainable methods of food production.

Download Full-text