2016
DOI: 10.1007/s10584-016-1627-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Impacts of adaptation and responsibility framings on attitudes towards climate change mitigation

Abstract: It is likely that climate change communications and media coverage will increasingly stress the importance of adaptation, yet little is known about whether or how this may affect attitudes towards mitigation. Despite concerns that communicating adaptation could undermine public support for mitigation, previous research has found it can have the opposite effect by increasing risk salience. It is also unclear whether people respond differently to information about mitigation and adaptation depending on whether a… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
34
0
3

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 51 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
3
34
0
3
Order By: Relevance
“…It is the cultural cognition of risk theory that posits a collection of psychological mechanisms that dispose individuals to selectively agree with or disagree with evidence of risk in patterns that fit with the values that they hold (Douglas and Wildavsky 1982), thus forming perceptions of risk that reinforce their idealized "way of life" (Kahan et al 2011). In a recent study, Howell et al (2016) confirmed that pre-existing attitudes and beliefs towards climate change served as a filter through which study participants interpreted written climate change risk information. Other research has observed similar patterns (Repetto 2008, Hart andNisbet 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is the cultural cognition of risk theory that posits a collection of psychological mechanisms that dispose individuals to selectively agree with or disagree with evidence of risk in patterns that fit with the values that they hold (Douglas and Wildavsky 1982), thus forming perceptions of risk that reinforce their idealized "way of life" (Kahan et al 2011). In a recent study, Howell et al (2016) confirmed that pre-existing attitudes and beliefs towards climate change served as a filter through which study participants interpreted written climate change risk information. Other research has observed similar patterns (Repetto 2008, Hart andNisbet 2011).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recognizing these personally held feelings, as well as the underlying values, is critical for a reflexive reconsideration of expert boundary maintenance in the context of climate change (Beck & Mahony, ; O'Brien, ). As Lövbrand and Öberg (, p. 195) argue,
“it is necessary to instigate a reflexive and philosophically informed discussion about the situated and provisional nature of scientific advice in environmental policy‐making among scientists themselves and those making use of scientific results.”
In response, climate experts who accept the minimal impact of information transfer—coupled with its potential boomerang effects and the sophisticated ways that all individuals filter received information—require approaches that extend beyond publics already disposed to their messages (Howell et al, ) to include publics who, for any reason, may be resistant. Relationship building can undoubtedly contribute to deeper interactions with those already concerned with climate change, while avoiding the detrimental impacts of information transfer and, simultaneously, establishing the inter‐personal interactions that may allow for relationships to begin with those less concerned.…”
Section: Conclusion: the Expert's Dilemmamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Millard-Ball (2012) for example suggests that the possible side-effects of some geoengineering schemes could be negative enough so as to convince many countries to reduce their emissions, rather than suffer the consequences of unilateral actions by others (for a similar view, see the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity 2012: 13). Also, like geoengineering, climate change adaptation could be taken by the public as an easy response to climate change; yet studies suggest that an introduction to adaptation is just as likely to increase as to reduce people's support for mitigation (Carrico, Truelove, Vandenbergh, and Dana 2015;Howell, Capstick, and Whitmarsh 2016). That knowledge of adaptation can make people more concerned about the risks of climate change suggests that knowledge of geoengineering may do the same.…”
Section: Contextmentioning
confidence: 99%