System Justification, the Denial of Global Warming, and the Possibility of “System-Sanctioned Change”

Abstract

Despite extensive evidence of climate change and environmental destruction, polls continue to reveal widespread denial and resistance to helping the environment. It is posited here that these responses are linked to the motivational tendency to defend and justify the societal status quo in the face of the threat posed by environmental problems. The present research finds that system justification tendencies are associated with greater denial of environmental realities and less commitment to pro-environmental action. Moreover, the effects of political conservatism, national identification, and gender on denial of environmental problems are explained by variability in system justification tendencies. However, this research finds that it is possible to eliminate the negative effect of system justification on environmentalism by encouraging people to regard pro-environmental change as patriotic and consistent with protecting the status quo (i.e., as a case of "system-sanctioned change"). Theoretical and practical implications of these findings are discussed.

Psychological responses to the proximity of climate change

“…Importantly, defensive reactions to climate change are not mere assumptions derived from related fields of research. There is empirical evidence suggesting that people use these strategies when they are confronted with threatening information about climate change 3,6,84,[86][87][88] . In other words, it is suggested here that the use of proximising as a strategy may exacerbate existing tendencies to use these defensive strategies among people who care about the things, people or places threatened by proximal climate change.…”

“…Many people exhibit a similar defensiveness and reluctance to change with regard to the place 93,94 , the social group 90 , and the society 95 they are part of. People are generally attached to the socioeconomic status quo and motivated to justify and maintain it, a tendency that becomes stronger when people are faced with a threat 88,95 . It is therefore likely that focusing on the negative consequences of proximal climate change, and one's own role in producing these 90 , will also bolster the tendency to adhere to the status quo and to reject appeals for change.…”

“…It is therefore likely that focusing on the negative consequences of proximal climate change, and one's own role in producing these 90 , will also bolster the tendency to adhere to the status quo and to reject appeals for change. This tendency might be further stimulated when one's socioeconomic system is being criticised for its role in causing climate change 88 , for assuming (co-) responsibility for the adverse effects of climate change would be difficult to reconcile with the view of one's system as just, fair, and beneficial 88 .…”

“…Thus, climate change can also pose a psychological threat 96 , for example in the form of guilt 80,91 , image threats to oneself 92 , to one's social group 90 , and to one's socioeconomic system 88,95 . Similar to physical threats from climate change, these psychological threats are likely to cause discomfort and to trigger coping strategies intended to reduce negative feelings 69,70 .…”

Political ideology affects energy-efficiency attitudes and choices

“…These different ideological positions are marked by diverging beliefs about the state of the world and the role of government in addressing societal issues. Compared with those on the political left, rightleaning individuals are more likely to dismiss concerns about climate change and to favor policies that protect free market opportunities for businesses by minimizing environmental regulation (16)(17)(18). Although protecting the environment is likely to be a priority for political liberals (a category that typically corresponds to the Democratic Party in the United States), political conservatives (a category that typically corresponds to the Republican Party in the United States) may find that this issue conflicts with the ideology to which they subscribe.…”