Framing of Geoengineering Affects Support for Climate Change Mitigation

The growing recognition that climate change mitigation alone will be inadequate has led scientists and policymakers to discuss climate geoengineering. An experiment with a US sample found, contrary to previous research, that reading about geoengineering did not reduce conservatives’ skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Moreover, depending on how it is framed, geoengineering can reduce support for mitigation among both conservatives and non-conservatives. When geoengineering is framed as a major solution, people worry less about climate change, leading to reduced mitigation support. When framed as disastrous, people perceived geoengineering as riskier, also leading to a decrease in mitigation support. A more moderate framing of geoengineering as a partial solution is less susceptible to moral hazard effects. Overall, results suggest that geoengineering will not lessen political polarization over anthropogenic climate change, and could undercut support for mitigation efforts. Instead, framing geoengineering as a small piece to solving a big puzzle seems to be the best strategy to weaken this potential moral hazard.     

Psychological Reactance From Reading Basic Facts on Climate Change: The Role of Prior Views and Political Identification

Scholars continue to search for solutions to shift climate change skeptics’ views on climate science and policy. However, research has shown that certain audiences are resistant to change regarding environmental issues. To explore this issue further, we examine the presence of reactance among different audiences in response to simple, yet prominently used, climate change messages. Our results show that emphasizing the scientific consensus of climate change produces reactance, but only among people who question the existence of climate change. Moreover, adding political identification to the model as an additional moderating variable shows the increases in reactance occur among Republicans who question the existence of climate change. Finally, our results show that reactance to climate change messaging may lead to backfiring effects on important outcomes tied to climate change such as risk perceptions, climate change beliefs, and support for mitigation policies.     

Unintended Effects of Emphasizing the Role of Climate Change in Recent Natural Disasters

In 2017, the United States experienced a series of natural hazards (hurricanes, wildfires, and blizzards) that resulted in significant loss of life and property. Emphasizing the role of climate change in these events might offer an important tool for engagement, particularly with skeptical audiences. However, in a survey experiment (N?=?1504) involving three different natural hazards – hurricanes, wildfires, and blizzards – we find that emphasizing the role of climate change in these hazards produced unintended effects for climate change skeptics. In particular, skeptics experienced resistance to the news article, which associated with reduced perceived hazard severity. These backfiring effects likely serve as a defensive mechanism used by skeptics to maintain their prior views of climate change, illustrating the challenges faced in communicating climate change to skeptical audiences. These findings offer additional insight for those attempting to communicate climate-related risk information to skeptical audiences.     

Optimizing Messaging to Reduce Red Meat Consumption

Red meat production has a range of negative environmental impacts. We sought to characterize the motivations, environmental attitudes and demographics of red meat-eaters, and examine the effect of message framing in reducing future meat consumption. Canadian adult meat-eaters (593) completed a survey and were randomly assigned to one of six message treatments that presented information on the environmental impacts of meat production using frames representing social norms and/or place identity constructs. Taste and quality were the most important motivators for eating meat, while moral/ethical factors were the least. Forty-nine percent of respondents indicated they would reduce red meat intake after exposure to an information only message, while the social norms frame was more effective than others (χ2). Awareness of the environmental effects increased significantly after messaging for all 13 impacts. These findings should assist communicators with designing more effective messaging aimed at encouraging pro-environmental behaviours associated with meat consumption.     

Soil erosion vulnerability under scenarios of climate land-use changes after the development of a large reservoir in a semi-arid area

Climate and land-use/cover changes (LUCC) influence soil erosion vulnerability in the semi-arid region of Alqueva, threatening the reservoir storage capacity and sustainability of the landscape. Considering the effect of these changes in the future, the purpose of this study was to investigate soil erosion scenarios using the Revised Universal Soil Loss Equation (RUSLE) model. A multi-agent system combining Markov cellular automata with multi-criteria evaluation was used to investigate LUCC scenarios according to delineated regional strategies. Forecasting scenarios indicated that the intensive agricultural area as well as the sparse and xerophytic vegetation and rainfall-runoff erosivity would increase, consequently causing the soil erosion to rise from 1.78 Mg ha^?1 to 3.65 Mg ha^?1 by 2100. A backcasting scenario was investigated by considering the application of soil conservation practices that would decrease the soil erosion considerably to an average of 2.27 Mg ha^?1. A decision support system can assist stakeholders in defining restrictive practices and developing conservation plans, contributing to control the reservoir's siltation.     

Influencing climate change regulations: examining responses from large-scale firms

Recent climate change projections and a push towards a universal agreement on carbon emission reductions suggest that firms will need to respond to future regulatory changes. This paper employs an influencing strategies lens to examine how large-scale firms might respond to future climate change regulations. The study uses a structured qualitative methodology to explore and explicate the strategic responses from 21 international firms to the proposed emissions trading scheme outlined in Australia's Garnaut Climate Change Review. The results of the analysis show that firms can use pre-emptive influencing strategies in attempts to shape and mould regulatory design parameters, secure high levels of transitional economic support, and shift the balance of public policies and expenditure. Complementary defensive strategies may also target policy makers and regulators with some of the potential negative consequences of the new regulations.     

A conceptual approach to model sand–gravel extraction from rivers based on a game theory perspective

Sand–gravel mining is a significant parameter of economic development and social welfare function in modern societies. As demand for aggregate increases in construction industry, conflicts for the availability of the resource and environmental impacts become more intense. The present paper describes the contested status quo in riverbed sand–gravel mining activities with an example from Greece, as a case study. The scope is to propose a methodology about good governance of the mining sector that promotes a sustainable sharing of aggregate resource by securing environment and safekeeping revenues in the mining trade market.     

The News You Choose: news media preferences amplify views on climate change

How do choices among information sources reinforce political differences on topics such as climate change? Environmental sociologists have observed large-scale and long-term impacts from news media and think-tank reports, while experimental science-communication studies detect more immediate effects from variations in supplied information. Applying generalized structural equation modeling to recent survey data, previous work is extended to show that political ideology, education and their interaction predict news media information choices in much the same way they predict opinions about climate change itself. Consequently, media information sources serve as intervening variables that can reinforce and, through their own independent effects, amplify existing beliefs about climate change. Results provide empirical support for selective exposure and biased assimilation as mechanisms widening political divisions on climate change in the United States. The findings fit with the reinforcing spirals framework suggesting partisan media strengthens climate change beliefs which then influences subsequent use of media.     

Climate policy support under political consensus: exploring the varying effect of partisanship and party cues

By creating attitudinal rifts among partisan voters, political polarization is expected to negatively affect chances of effectively mitigating climate change. While such expectations generally have found support, less attention has been paid to the opposite claim that political consensus should eliminate the partisan dimension in climate change politics. This study tests this claim by studying how party identification, and party cues specifically, affects public policy attitudes in a context defined by political consensus. Using data from a large online access panel in Sweden, party identification and party cues are shown to matter for policy attitudes even in a consensus context. This effect is not limited to certain issues but is found across a wide range of policies, and the effect of party cues, for a given issue, varies across parties. The implications of this study and areas for future work are discussed.     

Depoliticizing adaptation: a critical analysis of EU climate adaptation policy

The ways in which climate adaptation is understood in the European Union is examined via three key policy documents: the Strategy on adaptation and the Green and White Papers that preceded it. Drawing on Poststructuralist Discourse Theory, light is shed on the implicit values and assumptions that underpin this recent policy initiative. The findings demonstrate a tension between the declared ambition to act on adaptation and implicit suggestions that nothing really has to change, and the challenge can be addressed by market and technological innovations, and by mainstreaming adaptation into existing sectoral policies. The policy discourse effectively serves to depoliticize choices societies make in response to climate change, presenting adaptation as a non-political issue. Insight into European adaptation discourse enables deeper understanding of recent policy developments and opens up possible entry points for critique.