1 / 69

From Climate Change Denial to Pro-Environmental Action: A Story of Human Needs

From Climate Change Denial to Pro-Environmental Action: A Story of Human Needs. Irina Feygina Environmental Activism in the Digital Age: Saving the World in Bits and Bytes NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering April 2 nd , 2014. My Research Partners. Erin Hennes

kennan
Télécharger la présentation

From Climate Change Denial to Pro-Environmental Action: A Story of Human Needs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. From Climate Change Denial to Pro-Environmental Action:A Story of Human Needs Irina Feygina Environmental Activism in the Digital Age: Saving the World in Bits and Bytes NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering April 2nd, 2014

  2. My Research Partners Erin Hennes New York University John T. Jost New York University Rachel Goldsmith Turow Mt. Sinai Su Anne Huang FlexEnergy

  3. Environment: Damage and Pollution • Environmental Problems • Depletion of resources • Non-biodegradable waste and toxic pollutants • Ecosystem collapse • Climate Change • Loss of low-lying habitats • Increases in the number and severity of tropical hurricanes and cyclones • Oceanic acidification • Floods and droughts; Forest fires • Severe threat to agriculture, industry, and human health Hansen, 2004; IPCC AR4, 2007; Oreskes, 2004; Scheffer, Carpenter, Foley, Fokes, & Walker, 2001; Weart, 2004; Webster, Holland, Curry, & Chang, 2005

  4. Climate Change: Evidence • UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Forth Assessment Report concluded that: • The IPCC report: • Prepared by thousands of scientists • Integrated over dozens of thousand of peer reviewed publications • Reviewed by over a hundred governments prior to publication • “Warming of the climate system is unequivocal" • “Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely (over 90% likelihood) due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.“ IPCC AR4 WGI, 2007

  5. Climate Change: Evidence • Evidence: • Eleven of the past twelve years warmest in history • Warming over past 100 years far exceeds prior hundred years • Widespread melting of snow and ice, declining mountain glaciers and snow cover • Rise in sea level across the globe due to thermal expansion, melting glaciers, ice caps, and polar sheets • Emission of greenhouse gases has grown by about 80% since the 1970s • Primary cause: human use of fossil fuels IPCC AR4 WGI, 2007; IPCC AR4 WGII, 2007

  6. Climate Change: Mitigation • Mitigation measures enacted in the next two decades will have a profound impact on whether it will be possible to stabilize the content of atmospheric greenhouse gases at a relatively low level and limit the impacts of climate change. • Continued reliance on high-emission technologies and industry practices significantly increases the risk of severe climate change, the cost and time necessary to achieve stabilization, and the scope of its long-term impacts • Greenhouse gas concentrations need to be limited to 445-650 parts per million to avoid most dangerous levels of CC • Possible at a reasonable cost of less than 3% of the global GDP, and a decrease in GDP growth of about 0.1% IPCC AR4 WGIII, 2007

  7. Climate Change: Mitigation • Energy efficiency, alternative/renewable sources of energy • Vehicle efficiency, alternative fuel vehicles, public transport • Building efficiency - insulation, energy sourcing, appliance and lighting updating, and passive and active solar design • Efficiency in industry, including heat and power recovery and material recycling, among many others • Agricultural efficiency – energy, land management, restoration, fertilizer management, and energy crops • Improved forestry management, including reforestation, wood harvesting, and production of bio-energy; • Improved waste management through recycling, composting, improved water treatment, and recovery of greenhouse gases from landfills and incineration

  8. Responses of the Political Elite

  9. Responses of the Political Elite • Some of the scientists, I believe, haven’t they been changing their opinion a little bit on global warming? There’s a lot of differing opinions and before we react I think it’s best to have the full accounting, full understanding of what’s taking place. - George W. Bush, presidential debate

  10. Responses of the Political Elite • With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? It sure sounds like it. - James Inhofe, U.S. Senator, OK

  11. Responses of the Political Elite • I can tell you, our grandchildren will laugh at those who predicted global warming. We’ll be in global cooling by then, if the Lord hasn’t returned. I don't believe a moment of it. The whole thing is created to destroy America's free enterprise system and our economic stability. - Reverend Jerry Falwell

  12. Responses of the Political Elite • If President Obama has his way, the Copenhagen conference will produce mandatory emissions limits that would destroy millions of American jobs and damage our economic competitiveness for decades to come. - Marsha Blackburn, U.S. Representative, TN

  13. Responses of the Public Carroll, 2007; Dunlap, 2008; Gallup Poll, 2009; Stoll-Kleeman, O’Riordan, & Jaeger, 2001; Takacs-Santa, 2007

  14. Responses of the Public • 36% worry a great deal about global warming • 58% believe that global warming is the result of human activity • 6% consider environment a priority in policy Carroll, 2007; Dunlap, 2008; Gallup Poll, 2009; Stoll-Kleeman, O’Riordan, & Jaeger, 2001; Takacs-Santa, 2007

  15. http://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspxhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspx

  16. http://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspxhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspx

  17. http://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspxhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspx

  18. http://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspxhttp://www.gallup.com/poll/153608/Global-Warming-Views-Steady-Despite-Warm-Winter.aspx

  19. Responses of the Public • Despite threat of a changing climateand evidence of human contribution to the problem society and individuals are failing to acknowledge or take responsibility for ecological problems • How can we account for this psychological inconsistency?

  20. Barriers to Action • Challenges in procuring information • Assessing the likelihood, severity, and causes • Discomfort with uncertainty • Perceptions of climate change effects as distant • Separation or alienation from natural ecosystems • Lack of personal and collective efficacy • Choosing individual gain over collective well-being • Attachment to habits

  21. System Justification Theory • Motivation to defend and bolster the social, political, and economic status quo • Fulfills three key psychological needs: • Epistemic: Certainty, stability, control • Existential: Safety and reassurance • Relational: Affiliate with other members of system • Reduce dissonance, anxiety, uncertainty • Manage threat to status quo and system Jost & Hunyady, 2005; Jost, Ledgerwood, & Hardin, 2008; Jost, Liviatan, et al., 2009; Jost, Wakslak, & Tyler, 2008

  22. System Justification Theory • Motivation to defend and bolster the social, political, and economic status quo • Legitimize hierarchy → Opposition to equality • Uphold the status quo → Resistance to change • Interferes with: • Acknowledging shortcomings in the status quo • Forming intentions to correct problems • Taking action to improve status quo and the system Jost & Thompson, 2000; O’Brien & Major, 2005; Rankin, Jost, & Wakslak, 2009; Wakslak, Jost, Tyler, & Chen, 2007

  23. System Justification Theory • Stereotyping • Rationalization of economic inequality • American Dream; Meritocracy • Protestant Work Ethic • Racial hierarchy • Depressed entitlement • Traditional gender roles and relations • Homophobia • Value of oneself and one’s group

  24. Current system harmful to environment • Economy: • Destructive industrial practices – depleting of resources; production, transportation, disposal – pollution • Market ideology of progress, development, consumption • Social: • Domination by humans of the natural world • Technology and human ingenuity prevails • Governmental and institutional: • Environmental issues peripheral and inconsequential • Indifference and inaction

  25. Environment: Threat to the System • Environmental problems threaten the economic, social, and political aspects of the current system • Helping the environment entails: • Admitting that the current system may NOT be legitimate, beneficial, or stable • Extensively changing the system Feygina, Goldsmith, & Jost, 2010; Jost, Blount, Pfeffer, and Hunyady, 2003; Wakslak, Jost, Tyler, & Chen, 2007

  26. Environment: Threat to the System • External threat to system • Protect from the threatening other • Internal threat to the system = the threat IS the system • Denial and resistance Feygina, Jost, & Goldsmith, 2010

  27. Environment: Threat to the System • Motivation to justify the system may interfere with acknowledging problem: • Cope with threat by denying or minimizing environmental problems • Maintain a positive view of the system • Resist change in system, fail to alter environmentally harmful behaviors • Maintain the status quo Feygina, Jost, & Goldsmith, 2010; Jost, Blount, Pfeffer, and Hunyady, 2003; Wakslak, Jost, Tyler, & Chen, 2007

  28. Research Evidence • Correlational studies • Questionnaire surveys • Experimental studies • Self-report and behavioral measures • University students • The general population • International samples

  29. System Justification & Denial System Justification • General system justification • “Most policies serve the greater good” • “Everyone has a fair shot at wealth and happiness” • “In general, you find society to be fair” • “Society is set up so that people usually get what they deserve”

  30. System Justification & Denial System Justification • General system justification • Economic system justification • “If people work hard, they almost always get what they want” • “Laws of nature are responsible for differences in wealth in society” • “Most people who don’t get ahead in our society should not blame the system; they have only themselves to blame”

  31. System Justification & Denial System Justification • General system justification • Economic system justification • System justifying ideologies • Opposition to equality • Protestant work ethic

  32. System Justification & Denial System Justification Denial of environmental realities • Denial of possibility of an ecological crisis • Refusal to abide by the constraints of nature • Denial that balance in nature is tenuous • Denial of limits to growth

  33. System Justification & Denial System Justification Denial of environmental realities Denial that climate change is occurring Willingness to harm the environment Less intentions to help the environment Less priority of environment in policy Decreased action to address climate change

  34. Group Differences in Environmentalism System justification explains widespread group differences in environmental attitudes: • Political Orientation Jost, Nosek, & Gosling, 2008; Jost & Hunyady, 2002. Begley, 2007; Carroll, 2006; Gallup, 2006; Pew Research Center, 2006; Saad, 2007

  35. Group Differences in Environmentalism Rep Dem • Environmental destruction: - serious problem 24% 54% - important problem 23% 56% - caused by human activity 24% 54% • Evidence of global warming 58% 81% • Global warming risks: 34% 75% • increases in hurricanes • extinction of animal species • increase in disease Begley, 2007; Carroll, 2006; Gallup, 2006; Pew Research Center, 2006; Saad, 2007

  36. Political Orientation

  37. Political Orientation

  38. Group Differences in Environmentalism System justification explains widespread group differences in environmental attitudes: • Political Orientation • Environmental attitude differences across ideological spectrum • More system justification reported by conservatives Jost, Nosek, & Gosling, 2008; Jost & Hunyady, 2002. Begley, 2007; Carroll, 2006; Gallup, 2006; Pew Research Center, 2006; Saad, 2007

  39. Group Differences in Environmentalism System justification explains widespread group differences in environmental attitudes: • Political Orientation • National Identification • Greater system justification • More denial of environmental problems, less action Jost, Nosek, & Gosling, 2008; Jost & Hunyady, 2002

  40. Group Differences in Environmentalism System justification explains widespread group differences in environmental attitudes: • Political Orientation • National Identification • Gender • Women, compared to men: • More aware of environmental problems • More concerned about consequences of environmental problems • Engage in more action to respond to climate change • Greater system justification among men Jost, Nosek, & Gosling, 2008; Jost & Hunyady, 2002

  41. Group Differences in Environmentalism System justification explains widespread group differences in environmental attitudes: • Political Orientation • National Identification • Gender • Education • Positively related to pro-environmentalism • Negatively related to engagement in system justification Jost, Nosek, & Gosling, 2008; Jost & Hunyady, 2002

  42. Motivated Cognition • Ignorance in the face of environmental realities is a means to satisfy system justification needs • Denial of climate change is facilitated by information processing distortions: • Evaluation • Recall • Tactile perception Hennes, Feygina, and Jost (2011)

  43. Motivated Cognition • People motivated to justify the system: • Found messages disparaging the case for climate change to be more persuasive • Evaluated the evidence for climate change to be weaker • Perceived Americans as having less control over global climate change Hennes, Feygina, and Jost (2011)

  44. Motivated Cognition • Experimentally increasing the motivation to justify the system • Political system exerts a strong (vs. weak) impact on your life circumstances • Exacerbated skepticism about climate change • Misremember details from article just read: • Recalled less proportion of man-made carbon emissions • Scientists who reported errors in the 2007 IPCC report were misidentified as skeptics Hennes, Feygina, and Jost (2011)

  45. Motivated Cognition • Providing an opportunity to deny climate change • Positive illusions about state of the environment • Increased perceptions of the social system as: • Fair • Legitimate • Successful • Beneficial Feygina, Goldsmith, and Jost (2011)

  46. Motivated Cognition • System justification • Chronic • Experimentally increased • Perceived ambient temperature as lower • In the park during the summer months • A difference of 7 degrees! • Mediated relationship between system justification and skepticism about climate change Hennes, Feygina, and Jost (2011)

  47. System Justification and Denial • System justification results in: 1. Increased denial of environmental realities • Motivated cognition and perception 2. Willingness to harm the environment 3. Decreased action to address environmental challenges 4. Helps explain differences in environmental outcomes • Political orientation • National identification • Gender • Education Feygina, 2012; Feygina, Jost, & Goldsmith, 2010

  48. System Justification and Denial • What Can Be Done?

More Related