In the United Kingdom, the Met Office issues regionally calibrated impact-based weather warnings. These aim to reduce harm to people and property. To decrease risk from severe weather, it is important to understand how members of the U.K. public interpret and act on these warnings. This paper addresses this through a postevent survey (n = 552) conducted following Storm Doris, a 2017 winter storm during which wind warnings were issued across much of the United Kingdom. Survey questions examined 1) understanding of impact-based wind warnings, 2) interpretation of local warning level, 3) predictors of perceived local risk (likelihood, impact severity, concern) implied by warnings, 4) predictors of trust in the forecast, and 5) predictors of recalled and anticipated action. Our findings indicate that U.K. residents generally understand that weather warnings are based on potential weather impacts, although many do not realize warnings are regionally calibrated. We also find that while local warning levels are rarely underestimated, they may sometimes be overestimated. Institutional trust in the Met Office and perceived vulnerability to weather predict both perceived risk and behavioral response, while warning “understandability” is linked to greater trust in the forecast. Strikingly, while differences in local warning levels influenced risk perception, they did not affect recalled or intended behavioral response. This study highlights the importance of institutional trust in the effective communication of severe weather warnings, and a need for education on impact-based weather warnings. Above all, it demonstrates the need for further exploration of the effect of weather warnings on protective behavior.

Carbon footprints-the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with consumer food choicessubstantially contribute to climate change. Life cycle analyses from climate and environmental sciences have identified effective rules for reducing these food-related GHG emissions, including eating seasonal produce and replacing dairy and red meat with plant-based products. In a national UK survey, we studied how many and which rules our participants generated for reducing GHG emissions of produce, dairy, and protein-rich products. We also asked participants to estimate GHG emission reductions associated with pre-selected rules, expressed in either grams or percentages. We found that participants generated few and relatively less effective rules, including ambiguous ones like 'Buy local'. Furthermore, participants' numerical estimates of pre-selected rules were less accurate when they assessed GHG emission reductions in grams rather than in percentages. Findings suggest a need for communicating fewer rules in percentages, for informing consumers about reducing food-related GHG emissions.

Decisions in the environmental and in particular the climate domain are burdened with uncertainty. Here, we focus on uncertainties faced by individuals when making decisions about environmental behavior, and we use the statistical sampling framework to develop a classification of different sources of uncertainty they encounter. We then map these sources to different public policy strategies aiming to help individuals cope with uncertainty when making environmental decisions.Keywords: Uncertainty; Risk; Sampling; Public policy; Environment; Climate change; Decision making Uncertainty in the environmental domainDecisions in the environmental domain are often burdened with uncertainty, at both the institutional and the individual level. Here, we focus on uncertainty faced by individuals when trying to decide about environmentally relevant behaviors. To prevent further climate change, should they be turning out lights, reducing car use, reducing air conditioning and heating, using energy-efficient appliances, buying green energy, or recycling? While all of these behaviors are helpful, their relative effectiveness depends on a number of known and unknown factors. Unlike in decisions under risk, where probabilities and values of outcomes of different actions are known and the best course of action can be calculated, in the presence of uncertainty probabilities, values, and even the full range of future outcomes are not known (Knight, 1921).Correspondence should be sent to Mirta Galesic,

With an increasing focus on the uptake of healthy and sustainable diets, a growing body of research has explored consumer perceptions and understanding of the environmental impacts and safety of foods. However, this body of research has used a wide range of methods to recruit participants, which can influence the results obtained. The current research explores the impact of different recruitment methods upon observed estimations of the carbon footprint (gCO2e), energy content (Kcal), food safety and animal using three different online recruitment platforms; Qualtrics (N = 397), Prolific (N = 407), Zooniverse (N~601, based on unique IP addresses). Qualtrics and Prolific participants rated the carbon footprint, energy content, food safety and animal welfare of all foods in the survey. Zooniverse citizens rated the carbon footprint or energy content then food safety or animal welfare of all foods in the survey. Kruskal-Wallis and Chi-square analyses compared the energy content and carbon footprint estimations with validated values, and differences in estimate accuracy and perceptions between recruitment methods. Participants were unable to accurately estimate the carbon footprint and energy content of foods. The carbon footprint of all foods were overestimated, with the exception of beef and lamb which was underestimated. The calorie content of fruits and vegetables are typically overestimated. Perceptions of animal welfare and food safety differed by recruitment method. Zooniverse citizens rated animal welfare standards to be lower for meat products and eggs, compared to Qualtrics and Prolific participants. Overall, Qualtrics participants typically held the highest food risk perceptions, however this varied by food type. The lack of knowledge about the carbon footprint and energy content of foods demonstrates the need for consumer education and communication to enable the move toward healthier and more sustainable diets. Perceptions of food safety and animal welfare demonstrate a baseline from which to develop consumer focused communications and governance. We have shown that different recruitment tools can result in differences in observed perceptions. This highlights the need to carefully consider the recruitment tool being used in research when assessing participant knowledge and perceptions.