Reframing climate change as a public health issue: an exploratory study of public reactions

Abstract

BackgroundClimate change is taking a toll on human health, and some leaders in the public health community have urged their colleagues to give voice to its health implications. Previous research has shown that Americans are only dimly aware of the health implications of climate change, yet the literature on issue framing suggests that providing a novel frame - such as human health - may be potentially useful in enhancing public engagement. We conducted an exploratory study in the United States of people's reactions to a public health-framed short essay on climate change.MethodsU.S. adult respondents (n = 70), stratified by six previously identified audience segments, read the essay and were asked to highlight in green or pink any portions of the essay they found "especially clear and helpful" or alternatively "especially confusing or unhelpful." Two dependent measures were created: a composite sentence-specific score based on reactions to all 18 sentences in the essay; and respondents' general reactions to the essay that were coded for valence (positive, neutral, or negative). We tested the hypothesis that five of the six audience segments would respond positively to the essay on both dependent measures.ResultsThere was clear evidence that two of the five segments responded positively to the public health essay, and mixed evidence that two other responded positively. There was limited evidence that the fifth segment responded positively. Post-hoc analysis showed that five of the six segments responded more positively to information about the health benefits associated with mitigation-related policy actions than to information about the health risks of climate change.ConclusionsPresentations about climate change that encourage people to consider its human health relevance appear likely to provide many Americans with a useful and engaging new frame of reference. Information about the potential health benefits of specific mitigation-related policy actions appears to be particularly compelling. We believe that the public health community has an important perspective to share about climate change, a perspective that makes the problem more personally relevant, significant, and understandable to members of the public.

A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change

“…Our results are also consistent with past research that has found that a diversity of audience segments respond positively to an emphasis on the public health consequences of climate change and the health benefits of action (Maibach et al 2010). Furthermore, although emphasizing the national security implications of climate change has been assumed to be an effective strategy for engaging conservatives and other groups (Boykoff 2011), our findings show that in this instance (for reasons we speculate below) the national security frame actually generated substantial anger among the Doubtful and Dismissive segments of the public, both of whom lean conservative in their political outlook.…”

“…More recently, it is increasingly being framed as a political problem. Social scientists, however, have suggested a variety of potential alternative frames, each of which can validly and accurately emphasize other relevant dimensions of the issue-such as public health, national security, extreme weather events, and/or the economy (Nisbet 2009;Nisbet and Scheufele 2009;Maibach et al 2010). Such alternative frames may be more effective at engaging audiences than the environmental or political frames that currently dominate public discourse.…”

“…Such alternative frames may be more effective at engaging audiences than the environmental or political frames that currently dominate public discourse. Research on a public health frame, for example, suggests that when climate change is introduced as a human health issue, a broad cross-section of audiences-even segments otherwise skeptical of climate science-find the information to be compelling and useful (Maibach et al 2010). Framing research can identify not only which frames are likely to be effective, and with whom, but also which are likely to "boomerang."…”

“…Recent analyses of the U.S. public have mapped how climate change-related predispositions and perceptions vary across six distinct 'interpretive communities' of individuals called "Global Warming's Six Americas" (Maibach et al 2010). These audience segments range along a continuum of knowledge, attitudes, and behavior, from the Alarmed (who accept climate change as a problem, are concerned, and who are looking for opportunities to take personal and political action) to the Dismissive (who reject the reality of climate change and strongly oppose action).…”

The Lancet Countdown: tracking progress on health and climate change

“…As insuffi cient understanding of climate change is one of the largest perceived barriers to individual engagement, it is an important fi nding that the framing of climate change as a public health issue enhances engagement. [82][83][84] The Lancet Countdown will bring together evidence on changes in public understanding relating to health and climate change-more specifi cally, in terms of the perceived threats and opportunities of the responses. One possible long-term but resource-intensive approach would be to use phone-based and online public opinion polling techniques across a range of countries and settings.…”