Efficacy of interventions to improve public support for evidence based public health and climate change policy measures: a systematic review.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel Coleman ◽  
Rebecca Clifford ◽  
Catherine Hewitt ◽  
Jim McCambridge
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Message Framing ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Alcohol Policy ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Policy Measures

Abstract Background Policies which reduce affordability and availability of alcohol are known to be effective in reducing alcohol harms. Public support is important in policy decision making and implementation, and it may be possible to intervene to improve public support for alcohol policy measures. This systematic review aims to explore the effects of interventions to increase public support for evidence based policy measures in relation to either public health or climate change, and to examine underpinning theory and content of effective interventions.Methods The electronic search strategy was built around the constructs "public support or opinion", "health or climate change policies" and "interventions". Backward and forward searching was conducted, and authors of included papers contacted. Studies were included if they aimed to intervene to improve public support for public health or climate change policy measures, were controlled trials, and targeted the general public.Results Sixteen studies were included in this review, of which 13 had sufficient data for inclusion in meta analyses. The pooled effect estimates for continuous and binary data both show improvements in public support for policy measures as a result of evaluated interventions. The pooled standardised mean difference (n=8 studies) is 0.13 (95% C.I. 0.08-0.17), and the pooled odds ratio (n=5 studies) is 1.72 (95% C.I. 1.33-2.21). Careful attention to message framing, with or without narrative persuasion, appears particularly important content for efficacious interventions.Conclusion This systematic review demonstrates the efficacy of interventions to improve public support for public health policies.

scholarly journals Towards an understanding of when non-climate frames can generate public support for climate change policy

2017 ◽  
Vol 50 (7) ◽  
pp. 781-806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J.A. Walker ◽  
Tim Kurz ◽  
Duncan Russel
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Policy Study ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Car Use ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Car Use Reduction

There is a growing tendency for policy makers to frame climate change action in terms of non-climate benefits, raising important empirical questions regarding the utility of such approaches. Across three studies we explore whether (and when) non-climate frames can lead to greater support for climate policy relative to climate frames. In Study 1 we framed a car-use reduction policy in relation to climate change or public health and showed that non-climate frames can stimulate greater support for climate policy. Study 2 explored frame relevance as a potential boundary condition to the efficacy of non-climate frames. Study 3 found that attempts to frame climate policy in relation to non-climate issues that affect participants personally can fail if that issue is not seen as being sufficiently relevant. We suggest that non-climate frames can be an effective tool in stimulating support for climate policy, however greater consideration of the key mechanisms is required.

Supporting Evidence-Based Water and Climate Change Policy in Scotland Through Innovation and Expert Knowledge: The Centre of Expertise for Waters (CREW)

2021 ◽  
pp. 165-186
Author(s):  
Robert C. Ferrier ◽  
Rachel C. Helliwell ◽  
Helen M. Jones ◽  
Nikki H. Dodd ◽  
M. Sophie Beier ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Supporting Evidence ◽  
Change Policy

scholarly journals Depoliticizing And Humanizing Climate Change Through A Public Health Frame: A Case Study Of Ontario’s Climate Change Policy Discourse

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luckrezia Awuor
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Policy Discourse ◽  
Public Health Perspective ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
The Public ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Primary Focus

The relevance of a public health frame in supporting the climate change impact awareness and consensus on actions is well recognized but largely underutilized. Overall, supporting public health’s capacity in climate change has focused on projecting and highlighting public health impacts due to climate change, identifying public health policy responses, and emphasizing public health role. The integration of the public health perspective in the discussion and communication of climate change ideas has remained elusive.<div>Climate change is also a complex social problem whose construction of meaning and actions is rooted in institutionalized language, discourse, and human interactions. Thus, understanding of the construction of the relevance of public health in climate change discourse is central to understanding the impediments of the public health frame application. Unfortunately, this has been a neglected area of research, and the dissertation responded to that gap. </div><div>To delineate the impediments of the public health frame, the study used the case study of the context of climate change policy discourse in the Province of Ontario (Canada) to examine the construction of public health relevance, the extent of public health frame application, and the systematic influences in the discourse.</div><div>The analysis of policy documents and key informant interviews revealed that the public health frame remained isolated from the primary focus of Ontario’s climate change policy discourse. Instead, Ontario’s historically and socially constructed climate change as an economic and political issue solved through market strategies and technological innovations forwarded by political, bureaucratic, and technological elites. The focus substantiated the types of structures and processes of policies and decisions, the relevant actors and knowledge, and the values supporting the discursive, normative, and strategic practices. Ontario’s focus also limited the utilization of the public health frame and the supporting capacities through the misalignment between public health and the provincial strategic actions, the lack of recognition and integration of public health roles, mandate and structures, and limited public health capacity building initiatives.</div><div>Therefore, public health framing as an endpoint of climate change discourse requires legitimation of public health in the underlying institutional structures for, and governance of, climate change. </div>

scholarly journals Depoliticizing And Humanizing Climate Change Through A Public Health Frame: A Case Study Of Ontario’s Climate Change Policy Discourse

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luckrezia Awuor
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Policy Discourse ◽  
Public Health Perspective ◽  
Political Issue ◽  
The Public ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Primary Focus

The relevance of a public health frame in supporting the climate change impact awareness and consensus on actions is well recognized but largely underutilized. Overall, supporting public health’s capacity in climate change has focused on projecting and highlighting public health impacts due to climate change, identifying public health policy responses, and emphasizing public health role. The integration of the public health perspective in the discussion and communication of climate change ideas has remained elusive.<div>Climate change is also a complex social problem whose construction of meaning and actions is rooted in institutionalized language, discourse, and human interactions. Thus, understanding of the construction of the relevance of public health in climate change discourse is central to understanding the impediments of the public health frame application. Unfortunately, this has been a neglected area of research, and the dissertation responded to that gap. </div><div>To delineate the impediments of the public health frame, the study used the case study of the context of climate change policy discourse in the Province of Ontario (Canada) to examine the construction of public health relevance, the extent of public health frame application, and the systematic influences in the discourse.</div><div>The analysis of policy documents and key informant interviews revealed that the public health frame remained isolated from the primary focus of Ontario’s climate change policy discourse. Instead, Ontario’s historically and socially constructed climate change as an economic and political issue solved through market strategies and technological innovations forwarded by political, bureaucratic, and technological elites. The focus substantiated the types of structures and processes of policies and decisions, the relevant actors and knowledge, and the values supporting the discursive, normative, and strategic practices. Ontario’s focus also limited the utilization of the public health frame and the supporting capacities through the misalignment between public health and the provincial strategic actions, the lack of recognition and integration of public health roles, mandate and structures, and limited public health capacity building initiatives.</div><div>Therefore, public health framing as an endpoint of climate change discourse requires legitimation of public health in the underlying institutional structures for, and governance of, climate change. </div>

scholarly journals How Do Different Frames Affect Public Support for Climate Change Policy: Evidence from a Multi-Country Conjoint Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niheer Dasandi ◽  
Hilary Graham ◽  
David Hudson ◽  
Slava Jankin Mikhaylov ◽  
Jennifer vanHeerde-Hudson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Mitigation Policy ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
The Usa ◽  
And Migration ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Mitigation Policies

This study tests the effects of different framings of climate change messages on public support for mitigation policy using conjoint survey experiments conducted in five countries: China, Germany, India, the UK, and the USA. We consider four different types of climate change frames: valence (positive vs. negative), theme (economic, environmental, health, and migration), scale (individual, community, country, and global), and timeframe (2050, 2030, now). The analysis also tests the effects of these different frames on individuals who are not concerned by the effects of climate change. Our results show a positive framing, in terms of the opportunities they provide, increases support for mitigation policies. We also find that an environmental and health framing of climate change increases public support for mitigation, while a migration framing reduces public support, and an economic framing has no effect. The results also show that framing climate change at a global level elicit greater public support for mitigation than at an individual level, and discussing the current impacts of climate change leads to greater support than future impacts. Our analysis also finds that a positive framing and a health framing of climate change also increase support for mitigation policies among those not concerned by the effects of climate change.

scholarly journals Climate Change Policy Evaluation and Its Impact on Island Nations: Case Of Singapore And Sri Lanka

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 23-37
Author(s):  
Osada Vishvajith Peiris
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Sri Lanka ◽  
Policy Evaluation ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Negative Influence ◽  
Economic Sectors ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Policy Measures

Climate Change (CC) is universally recognized as a major global threat due to its nature of impacts. Island nations are known to be the most vulnerable to CC impacts where many countries have initiated mitigation and adaptation actions through sector-based policy measures. Singapore and Sri Lanka are two Asian island nations with CC induced threats. Two countries are different in terms of economic development, but similar developing countries in the CC agenda. In this context, both the countries have initiated mitigation and adaptation actions through policy measures. This study compares the key climate driven performance indicators with historical data to evaluate the performance of climate change policy of each country. Generally, policy evaluation has been conducted by adopting scientific and non-scientific tools, but it is seldom see that the relation of climate driven indicators along with CC policy. Also the policy research was mostly based on European case studies and Asian island nations were not easy to find in this context. The comparison of two countries in terms of CC policy is to determine the key vulnerable sectors where intervention is necessary for island nations. Mitigation policies are evaluated in Singapore and Sri Lanka using GHG emission pathways under twelve (12) indicators and adaptation policies are measured under the national expenditure of key sectors of the economy under seven (07) indicators. The analysis further elaborated by comparing both countries with key economic sectors that has positive and negative influence on CC impacts. Finally, the analysis outcome is used for lessons to learn from each other in improving the CC policy of Singapore and Sri Lanka. As every country has a unique set of strategies to minimize contributions to CC impacts, unique features that are common to both countries are chosen as variables for the comparison. Policy recommendations are provided to implement solid action plan for post 2020. The study expects to assist island countries to strengthen the CC policy as a national priority to manage unforeseen impacts posed by CC phenomena

A Climate Backlash: Comparing Populist Parties’ Climate Policies in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden

2021 ◽  
pp. 107049652110277
Author(s):  
Antto Vihma ◽  
Gunilla Reischl ◽  
Astrid Nonbo Andersen
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Policy ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The United States ◽  
Party Competition ◽  
Empirical Science ◽  
Ideal Types ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Change Policy

The rise of authoritarian populism has disrupted the patterns of party competition in many Western societies. Related to this development, the current debates in the United States and European Union illustrate how empirical science on climate change may become intensely politicized, and all ambitious climate policies challenged in the contemporary political landscape. We set out an analytical framework with three ideal types of political strategies for opposing climate policies: climate science denialism, climate policy nationalism, and climate policy conservativism. Empirically, the article investigates populist resistance to ambitious climate change policy in the Nordic context, where countries have sought to assume global leadership in climate politics and have considerable public support for climate action. In an analysis of the evolving positions of populist parties in Denmark, Finland, and Sweden in recent elections, the article sheds light on the interconnection between populism and climate change policy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document