A question of morals? The role of moral identity in support of the youth climate movement Fridays4Future

Misch, Antonia; Kristen, Susanne; Paulus, Markus

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0248353

Cited by 15 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 62 publications

(109 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the climate activists from "Fridays For Future" to "Extinction Rebellion" refer to the existential dimension, perceiving climate change as a threat to their future. The empirical research on this movement is still in its infancy (Fisher 2019;Knops 2021) but some survey-based studies suggest that participation of young people in climate strikes is related to risk perception (Brügger et al 2020;Misch et al 2021), in line with earlier studies (Wang et al 2018). The youth movement has identified climate change as the greatest existential threat to the Earth and to human beings, and they consider this threat as a moral element of their narrative (Han and Ahn 2020).…”

Section: Civil Society Climate Movementmentioning

confidence: 63%

The existential risk space of climate change

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Climate change is widely recognized as a major risk to societies and natural ecosystems but the high end of the risk, i.e., where risks become existential, is poorly framed, defined, and analyzed in the scientific literature. This gap is at odds with the fundamental relevance of existential risks for humanity, and it also limits the ability of scientific communities to engage with emerging debates and narratives about the existential dimension of climate change that have recently gained considerable traction. This paper intends to address this gap by scoping and defining existential risks related to climate change. We first review the context of existential risks and climate change, drawing on research in fields on global catastrophic risks, and on key risks and the so-called Reasons for Concern in the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. We also consider how existential risks are framed in the civil society climate movement as well as what can be learned in this respect from the COVID-19 crisis. To better frame existential risks in the context of climate change, we propose to define them as those risks that threaten the existence of a subject, where this subject can be an individual person, a community, or nation state or humanity. The threat to their existence is defined by two levels of severity: conditions that threaten (1) survival and (2) basic human needs. A third level, well-being, is commonly not part of the space of existential risks. Our definition covers a range of different scales, which leads us into further defining six analytical dimensions: physical and social processes involved, systems affected, magnitude, spatial scale, timing, and probability of occurrence. In conclusion, we suggest that a clearer and more precise definition and framing of existential risks of climate change such as we offer here facilitates scientific analysis as well societal and political discourse and action.

show abstract

Section: Civil Society Climate Movementmentioning

confidence: 63%

The existential risk space of climate change

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Namely, Winterich et al (2013) suggest that internalization motivates people to act accordingly primarily through their desire for self‐consistency, regardless of whether their actions are visible to others. In contrast, symbolization motivates people to verify their self through the reflected appraisal of others—when their actions are visible to others (Misch et al, 2021). In our study, perceived importance refers to the importance of reducing car use to save the environment, while the intention to reduce car use is a proxy of behavior.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From car use reduction to ride‐sharing: The relevance of moral and environmental identity

Culiberg

Cho

Koklič

et al. 2022

J of Consumer Behaviour

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Car use contributes significantly to environmental pollution, leading people to rethink their transport habits. Previous studies on car use reduction relied on established theories related to values and self-regulation to examine this decision. In this paper, we offer an alternative approach and examine the intention to reduce car use through the prism of identity theory, and propose environmental and moral identities, together with environmental concern, as the main antecedents to the importance of car use reduction and intention to reduce car use. Further, we consider ride-sharing intention as an outcome of the decision to reduce car use. The proposed conceptual model is tested on a sample of consumers from the United Kingdom using an online consumer panel. The results offer partial support for the influence of moral identity, environmental identity, and environmental concern on the importance to reduce car use and intention. The links among the importance of and intention to reduce car use, along with ride-sharing intentions, are supported. Finally, managerial implications are discussed, and future research directions are suggested.

show abstract

“…Likewise, seeing a scientific issue as moral is generally associated with a stronger willingness to act and more attention to information about the issue. Perceived moral obligation is associated with greater intentions to take action on climate change (Chen, 2020), and greater moral identity is associated with passive and active support for protests for climate policies (Misch et al, 2021). Likewise, participants reporting moral conviction about climate change were more persuaded by a text arguing that climate change was a serious problem and reported more negative emotions about it (Heddy et al, 2022).…”

Section: Lay Attitudes Toward Ge Foodmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mitigating consequence insensitivity for genetically engineered crops.

Inbar¹,

Waldhof²

2023

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many opponents of genetically engineered (GE) food say that it ought to be prohibited regardless of the risks and benefits (Scott et al., 2016). If many people are truly unwilling to consider risks and benefits in evaluating GE technology, this poses serious problems for scientists and policymakers. In a large demographically-representative German sample (N = 3,025), we investigate consequence-insensitive beliefs about GE crops among GE supporters and opponents, as well as whether these beliefs can be mitigated. We find that a large majority of opponents and a substantial minority of supporters are consequence-insensitive: They say that risks and benefits are irrelevant to their views. At the same time, the responses of consequence-insensitive participants to subsequent belief probes show substantial flexibility. Participants often gave responses inconsistent with the unconditional prohibition or permission of GE crops. These results suggest that professed consequence insensitivity should be taken as an expression of a strong moral belief rather than as literal endorsement of policy. Public Significance StatementThis study finds that many people in Germany say GMOs should be banned (or allowed) regardless of the risks or benefits of doing so. This is more common among people who are anti-GMO than those who are pro-GMO. However, even people who say that risks and benefits don't matter sometimes take them into account when they are asked to think harder about what might change their minds.

show abstract

A question of morals? The role of moral identity in support of the youth climate movement Fridays4Future

Cited by 15 publications

References 62 publications

The existential risk space of climate change

The existential risk space of climate change

From car use reduction to ride‐sharing: The relevance of moral and environmental identity

Mitigating consequence insensitivity for genetically engineered crops.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About