Schlagwort: public awareness

Austin, Maura M.K.; Converse, Benjamin A. (2021): In search of weakened resolve: Does climate-engineering awareness decrease individuals’ commitment to mitigation?

Austin, Maura M.K.; Converse, Benjamin A. (2021): In search of weakened resolve: Does climate-engineering awareness decrease individuals’ commitment to mitigation? In Journal of Environmental Psychology 356 (6335), p. 101690. DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101690.

„As climate predictions become more dire, it is increasingly clear that society cannot rely on mitigation alone. In response, climatologists and engineers have been developing climate-engineering technology to directly intervene on the climate through strategies such as solar radiation management and carbon dioxide removal. While these technologies have some encouraging features, they also involve risk on many dimensions. One behavioral risk that concerns many observers is the possibility that the prominence of climate-engineering scenarios could decrease the public’s commitment to mitigation, a concern variously described as moral hazard or weakened resolve. Across 8 experiments (N = 2514) we tested whether exposure to naturalistic information about climate-engineering technology decreases individuals‘ commitment to mitigation efforts.“

LINK

Raimi, Kaitlin T. (2021): Public Perceptions of Geoengineering

Raimi, Kaitlin T. (2021): Public Perceptions of Geoengineering. In Current Opinion in Psychology. DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.03.012.

„In the face of unrelenting climate change and insufficient mitigation, experts are increasingly considering using geoengineering—carbon dioxide removal (CDR) and solar radiation management (SRM)—to manipulate the Earth’s climate. So far, most laypeople are unaware of geoengineering and many are resistant to these technologies when told about them. A growing literature finds that these initial reactions are tied to psychological traits, beliefs, and identities including trust in the actors involved, political and social identities, beliefs about tampering with the natural world, and perceived tradeoffs between geoengineering and alternative approaches. Finally, given the lack of existing knowledge of geoengineering, public acceptance is highly susceptible to how these technologies are framed, offering both risks and opportunities for climate communication.“

LINK

Howarth, Candice; et al. 2020: “Effectively Communicating Climate Science beyond Academia: Harnessing the Heterogeneity of Climate Knowledge.”

Howarth, Candice, Laurie Parsons, and Harriet Thew. 2020: “Effectively Communicating Climate Science beyond Academia: Harnessing the Heterogeneity of Climate Knowledge.”[nbsp]One Earth[nbsp]2 (4): 320–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.04.001.

‌“This Primer discusses the heterogeneous manner in which climate change messaging is received by different audiences, how social scientific approaches could help to better tailor climate change messaging to this varied landscape, and how attempts to close this gap must consider the emotional and affective dimensions of climate messaging. We explore how the use of narratives can enhance effective climate science communication and emphasize the importance of evidence-based advocacy in the current era of global challenges, uncertainty, and post-truth.“

LINK

C2G2: Preliminary public opinion on outdoor experiments

„As a student at Harvard College studying Environmental Science and Public Policy, I wrote my senior thesis about public opinion on SCoPEx. With funding from Harvard’s Weatherhead Center for International Affairs,[2] I conducted deliberative workshops with Boston and Cambridge residents to explore public perception of SCoPEx and solar geoengineering more broadly. It is worth noting that the sample size for my study was quite small: the initial focus group involved four participants, and the subsequent deliberative workshops had five participants each for a total of twenty people. This was due to temporal and monetary constraints; participants were compensated at $15 per hour. Thus, the findings included here are tentative and meant to serve more as guidance for future research than definitive answers about public opinion on SCoPEx.“

LINK