scholarly journals Public Perceptions on the Procedural Values and Proposed Outcomes of the Finnish Climate Change Act Amendment

2022 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eerika Albrecht ◽  
Iikka Pietilä ◽  
Sanna-Riikka Saarela
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Sustainability Transition ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change ◽  
Procedural Values ◽  
Climate Neutrality

This article examines the public perceptions on the drafting process of Finnish Climate Act amendment, which is a legislation on the climate policy that aims to mitigate climate change and secure adaptive capacity. In this paper we present results of a thematic analysis, which reveals citizens' perceptions of the procedural values, with respect to transparency, participation, and acceptance, and the objectives of the amendment, such as the climate neutrality target for 2035. The research data consisted of 2,458 answers to a citizen survey on the Finnish Climate Change Act amendment. Our results reveal that the opinions of citizens ranged from highlighting the urgency of political action to climate denials, with varying perceptions on process and proposed outcomes. While over half of citizens felt positively about the 2035 climate neutrality target created in the Climate Change Amendment Act, only a third believed that there was appropriate opportunity for public participation in the amendment process. Based on these findings, we suggest that participatory and transparent processes in legislative drafting are prerequisites for the sustainability transition and the implementation of international climate mitigation targets.

Public perceptions of who counts as a scientist for controversial science

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (7) ◽  
pp. 797-811 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brianne Suldovsky ◽  
Asheley Landrum ◽  
Natalie Jomini Stroud
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
Genetically Modified Organisms ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Us ◽  
Science Media

In an era where expertise is increasingly critiqued, this study draws from the research on expertise and scientist stereotyping to explore who the public considers to be a scientist in the context of media coverage about climate change and genetically modified organisms. Using survey data from the United States, we find that political ideology and science knowledge affect who the US public believes is a scientist in these domains. Our results suggest important differences in the role of science media attention and science media selection in the publics “scientist” labeling. In addition, we replicate previous work and find that compared to other people who work in science, those with PhDs in Biology and Chemistry are most commonly seen as scientists.

scholarly journals Climate Change in Your Backyard: When Climate is Proximate, People Become Activists

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Sparks
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Political Action ◽  
Public Support ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
Survey Experiment ◽  
The World ◽  
Change Impact ◽  
Climate Disasters ◽  
Shed Light ◽  
Climate Mitigation Policies

Scientific warnings about climate change continue as climate disasters strike all around the world. There is increasing public support for climate mitigation policies, and major mass protests shed light on the issue. How does climate change impact increase climate activism? I build on a conventional understanding of activism by adding the insight of construal level theory. When climate change is experienced more directly, people are more likely to act because they care more and can link concern to specific actions. Among a sample of Californians (MTurk; n = 604) as climate was perceived as more proximate, respondents were more likely to take action. A survey-experiment conducted using a US sample (MTurk; n = 609) demonstrated that as issues become more psychologically proximate, respondents were more likely to take political action. These results suggest that organizers can activate proximity to mobilize supporters.

Improving Sustainability of the Environment in a Changing Climate

2016 ◽  
pp. 327-346
Author(s):  
Albert Arhin
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Sustainable Forest Management ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Benefit Sharing ◽  
Weak Institutions ◽  
Trade Offs ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Community

The mechanism of Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation plus conservation, sustainable forest management and enhancement of carbon stocks is emerging as one of the current efforts and actions being developed by the international climate change community to mitigate climate change. This chapter highlights the potentials as well as the challenges of this mechanism to reduce forest loss and improve the health and sustainability of the environment. Main potentials include its resolve to make trees worth more standing than cut, the transfer of funds to support conservation efforts and a focus on delivering social benefits. The main challenges include the less attention on unclear tenure and benefit-sharing framework; weak institutions and the complex historical, political and structural interests which have allowed powerful groups to expropriate the forest resources and trade-offs that may arise during implementation. It then outlines four broad areas where researchers can make contributions in national and local level policy-making and interventions related to REDD+.

scholarly journals The future of carbon dioxide removal must be transdisciplinary

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 20200038
Author(s):  
Tamara Jane Zelikova
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Carbon Dioxide ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Carbon Dioxide Removal ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
Emission Reductions ◽  
The Future ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Holistic Research

Carbon dioxide removal (CDR) represents a suite of pathways to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and mitigate climate change. The importance of CDR has expanded in recent years as emission reductions are not at pace to meet climate goals. This CDR-themed issue brings together diverse perspectives in order to identify opportunities to integrate across CDR disciplines, create a more holistic research agenda and inform how CDR is deployed. The individual papers within the issue discuss engineered and nature-based CDR approaches as well as the broader social and behavioural dimensions of CDR development and deployment. Here, I summarize the main take-aways from these individual papers and present a path for integrating key lessons across disciplines to ensure CDR is scaled equitably and sustainably to deliver on its climate mitigation promise.

scholarly journals Global klimapolitik: Fra Bali til Paris

Politik ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakob Skovgaard ◽  
Lau Blaxekjær
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Negotiations ◽  
The Road ◽  
Stated Goal ◽  
International Climate ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change ◽  
Global Agreement ◽  
Point Of Departure ◽  
International Climate Negotiations

This paper analyses the international climate negotiations from the so-called 2007 Bali Roadmap over the 2009 breakdown in negotiations at the UN climate summit COP15 to the following COP meetings with a focus on central issues and tendencies. e analysis is structured by applying the concepts of content and process as empirical and heuristic tools. is is used as the point of departure to analyse the road to Paris, where COP21 will be held in 2015 with the stated goal of reaching a global agreement corresponding to the previous goal of COP15, only now covering the period from 2020 onwards. e paper concludes that the recent COPs can be characterised by three overlapping discussions: How parties interpret and seek to imple- ment the principle of common but di erentiated responsibility, the principle of equity, as well as the question of real e ects of actions to mitigate climate change. 

scholarly journals Establishing a Governmental Duty of Care for Climate Change Mitigation: WillUrgendaTurn the Tide?

2015 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Josephine van Zeben
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
District Court ◽  
Duty Of Care ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
Ghg Reduction ◽  
International Climate ◽  
The Government ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change ◽  
Emission Of Greenhouse Gases

AbstractLiability for causing or failing to mitigate climate change has long been proposed as an alternative, or backstop, to lagging international cooperation. Thus far, there has been very limited success in holding governments or individuals responsible for the emission of greenhouse gases (GHGs) that are considered the primary cause of anthropogenic climate change. The recent landmark decision inUrgenda Foundationv.Government of the Netherlands (Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment)breaks with this tradition. In June 2015, the Dutch District Court (The Hague) held that the current climate policies of the government are not sufficiently ambitious for it to fulfil its duty of care towards Dutch society. The judgment, and the accompanying order for the government to adopt stricter GHG reduction policies, raises important questions about the future of climate change liability litigation, the separation of powers between the judiciary and the legislature, and the effect of litigation on international climate change negotiation and cooperation.

scholarly journals Geoengineering, climate change scepticism and the ‘moral hazard’ argument: an experimental study of UK public perceptions

2014 ◽  
Vol 372 (2031) ◽  
pp. 20140063 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam Corner ◽  
Nick Pidgeon
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Experimental Study ◽  
Moral Hazard ◽  
Systematic Investigation ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
The Public ◽  
Policy Debates ◽  
Climate Policies ◽  
It Impacts ◽  
The Uk

Many commentators have expressed concerns that researching and/or developing geoengineering technologies may undermine support for existing climate policies—the so-called moral hazard argument. This argument plays a central role in policy debates about geoengineering. However, there has not yet been a systematic investigation of how members of the public view the moral hazard argument, or whether it impacts on people's beliefs about geoengineering and climate change. In this paper, we describe an online experiment with a representative sample of the UK public, in which participants read one of two arguments (either endorsing or rejecting the idea that geoengineering poses a moral hazard). The argument endorsing the idea of geoengineering as a moral hazard was perceived as more convincing overall. However, people with more sceptical views and those who endorsed ‘self-enhancing’ values were more likely to agree that the prospect of geoengineering would reduce their motivation to make changes in their own behaviour in response to climate change. The findings suggest that geoengineering is likely to pose a moral hazard for some people more than others, and the implications for engaging the public are discussed.

scholarly journals An Assessment of Public Perceptions of Climate Change Risk in Three Western U.S. Cities

2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 449-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abigail Sullivan ◽  
Dave D. White
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Risk Perceptions ◽  
Metropolitan Areas ◽  
Personal Responsibility ◽  
Mail Survey ◽  
The United States ◽  
Public Perceptions ◽  
Climate Change Risk ◽  
The Public

Abstract Risk perceptions influence individual and collective action related to climate change, and there is an important gap between public and expert perceptions of climate change risk, especially in the United States. Past studies have found that on average 40% of the American public believe climate change will affect them personally. We contribute a study of climate change risk perceptions in the metropolitan areas of three western U.S. cities (Denver, Colorado; Las Vegas, Nevada; Phoenix, Arizona), assessing overall patterns and drivers. A representative mail survey (N = 786) of the general public in these cities revealed that 60% of respondents identified climate change as personally risky, with the perception that it will impact either their family or their city in the next 30 years. Our results indicate that the gap in risk perceptions between the public and experts may be decreasing, although we discuss several limitations and reasons why this result requires further investigation. Using regression models, we analyze factors that are hypothesized to drive risk perceptions and discover that pro-environmental worldview and perceived personal responsibility are the most influential predictors. We discuss the implications of our results for fostering collective action to address climate change in dry, western U.S. metropolitan areas.

scholarly journals Climate Adaptation and Climate Mitigation Do Not Undermine Each Other: A Cross‐Cultural Test in Four Countries

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Urban ◽  
Davina Vačkářová ◽  
Tomas Badura
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Adaptation ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Climate Mitigation ◽  
Adaptation Measures ◽  
Total N ◽  
Mitigation And Adaptation ◽  
Essential Components ◽  
Mitigate Climate Change

Adaptation and mitigation are both essential components of strategies that aim to decrease risks associated with climate change. A number of existing studies, however, suggest that the two might be negatively affecting each other – climate adaptation might decrease mitigation efforts and vice versa. We have examined these effects in five experimental studies carried out in four countries (total N = 4,800) and have used Bayesian analysis to evaluate the strength of empirical support for such effects. We did not find any evidence that compensation between climate mitigation and adaptation takes place. On the contrary, we found some evidence, albeit rather weak, that prior focus on adaptation measures increases the subsequent tendency to engage in mitigation behavior; this effect is likely to be driven by an increase in worry about the impacts of climate change that results from a prior focus on climate adaptation. If anything, offering adaptation options may increase the tendency to mitigate climate change.

The Role of Science in Climate Change Lawmaking

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy Meyer
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Scientific Organization ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Scientific Uncertainty ◽  
Intergovernmental Panel ◽  
Climate Change Negotiations ◽  
The Public ◽  
International Climate ◽  
International Climate Change

This chapter examines how international legal institutions foster cooperation in the presence of scientific uncertainty, especially in the area of international climate change law. It analyses the theory of epistemic institutions and applies it to the primary international scientific organization working on climate change issues, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The IPCC’s assessment reports play a major role in setting the terms of the public debate about climate change negotiations that takes place within the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Although independent of the UNFCCC, the IPCC’s work product is thus a key input into the UNFCCC’s efforts to negotiate international climate change rules. However, the IPCC’s credibility has been called into question due to a relative lack of participation by scientists from developing countries in the assessment process.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document