Acceptance Of Anthropogenic Climate Change Research Articles

Climate Crises, Ruined Islands, and British Metamodernism

ABSTRACT This article contends that popular acceptance of Anthropogenic climate change in early 2000s Britain coincided with cultural efforts to redefine the historical present via transhistorical phenomena through the concretization of deep time. This article therefore situates itself in the historical juncture between the IPCC’s first report (1990) and its fourth (2007) to argue that the climatological, financial and geopolitical crises that coalesced in the 1990s prompted a shift that changed the tenor of British climate fictions published in the 2000s. To address the supranational reach of the climate crisis, British authors used metamodernist means to map the historical ruination of remote islands onto speculative futures extrapolated from the climate reports of the IPCC – thereby conjuring the climatological transformation of Earth into an Earth-like planet and the propulsion of humans toward future obsolescence. Ultimately, this article attends to the ecocritical significance of Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas (2004), Self’s The Book of Dave (2006) and Winterson’s The Stone Gods (2007) to suggest that these metamodernist climate fictions transpose the failures of submerged pasts onto near-futures drawn from present precarity to undermine the present as unique, the future as determined and the past as inaccessible and of little use to the present or future.

In science we trust? Public trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections and accepting anthropogenic climate change.

One barrier to action on climate change is public trust in climate science, and projections made by climate scientists. However, climate science projections are rarely measured in public surveys. We designed survey questions based on two Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections regarding global warming and coral reef decline. We gauge Australians' trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, and explore how trust in climate science is associated with accepting anthropogenic climate change. A slim majority of Australian adults trust Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, with trust correlated positively with accepting anthropogenic climate change. While partisan divisions are extant in accepting anthropogenic climate change, partisan influences are attenuated substantially after controlling for trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, as trust in climate science mediates the influence of partisanship on the acceptance of anthropogenic climate change. A minority of those who accept anthropogenic climate change have low trust in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections, viewing scientists' computer models as unreliable, or believing climate scientists benefit from overstating the impact of climate change.

Increasing people's acceptance of anthropogenic climate change with scientific facts: Is mechanistic information more effective for environmentalists?

Knowledge-deficit models highlight that providing novel information increases knowledge and acceptance of empirical facts. Motivated cognition models, however, highlight that people often discount new attitude-conflicting facts. Thereby, according to motivated cognition models, people's levels of global warming knowledge and anthropogenic climate change acceptance markedly reflect their preexisting environmental attitude. In four studies (N = 845), we tested the efficacy of new information to foster knowledge and alter acceptance while simultaneously controlling for environmental attitude. Despite corroborating the association of knowledge and acceptance (Study 1), providing information about the physical-chemical mechanism behind global warming did not always promote the acceptance of anthropogenic climate change (Study 2 vs. Studies 3 and 4). Moreover, acceptance increases induced with mechanistic information did not exceed acceptance gains induced with information about global warming's consequences (Study 3). By contrast, our findings corroborate environmental attitude's relevance for two central remnants of learning: knowledge (Studies 1, 3, and 4) and behavior (e.g., information seeking: Study 4).

Does Public Knowledge of Climate Change Really Matter in Australia?

ABSTRACTReplicating questions on climate change and polar knowledge from the United States, this study examines the impact of climate related facts for predicting acceptance of anthropogenic climate change, and for predicting Green voting in Australia. Analysis of national survey data from the Australian Survey of Social Attitudes show that the likelihood of Green voting increases with climate knowledge. Climate-related knowledge is also positively associated with acceptance of anthropogenic climate change, but the effect of knowledge is moderated by party political identification. Greens, Labor Party identifiers and politically un-affiliated Australians align more closely with the scientific consensus on climate change as their climate knowledge increases. However, climate knowledge has no effect on the climate change attitudes of Liberal and National party identifiers. Climate knowledge also interacts with gender. Climate knowledge has a stronger association with anthropogenic climate change beliefs among women than it does among men. These findings suggest the information deficit model of science communication is likely to be efficacious among supporters of politically progressive parties in Australia, but less so among political conservatives.

A change in the wind? US public views on renewable energy and climate compared

BackgroundRenewable energy development is a necessary step toward climate change mitigation, so these topics have often been linked. In US public discourse, however, they have somewhat different profiles—climate change views are tied closely to partisan identity, whereas renewable energy exhibits more cross-cutting appeal, and sometimes more cross-cutting opposition as well. To what extent are such differences reflected in survey data tracking rates of change, respondent characteristics, and local or regional variations in public opinion on renewable energy and climate?MethodsWe explore similarities and differences in views of renewable energy and climate change using a unique collection of 18 US national or regional surveys totaling more than 14,000 interviews, conducted between 2011 and 2017. Individual surveys varied in context, content, and goals, but all asked two common energy and climate questions, which yield comparable and strikingly consistent results.ResultsPublic support for renewable energy appears broader than acceptance of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), especially in a more conservative region. Despite local controversies, support for renewable energy in recent years rose faster than ACC acceptance on two regional surveys. Political divisions remain wide on both topics, but wider regarding climate change—particularly among college-educated respondents. Renewable energy views in counties with proposed or operating wind farms are not systematically different from those in other counties.ConclusionsOverall, these results provide encouragement for promoting renewable energy in terms of its economic benefits, working around some of the political identity-based resistance to climate change mitigation. That approach could be most important in politically conservative regions where such resistance is strong.

Does it matter if people think climate change is human caused?

There is a growing consensus that climate is changing, but beliefs about the causal factors vary widely among the general public. Current research shows that such causal beliefs are strongly influenced by cultural, political, and identity-driven views. We examined the influence that local perceptions have on the acceptance of basic facts about climate change. We also examined the connection to wildfire by local people. Two recent telephone surveys found that 37% (in 2011) and 46% (in 2014) of eastern Oregon (USA) respondents accept the scientific consensus that human activities are now changing the climate. Although most do not agree with that consensus, large majorities (85–86%) do agree that climate is changing, whether by natural or human causes. Acceptance of anthropogenic climate change generally divides along political party lines, but acceptance of climate change more generally, and concerns about wildfire, transcend political divisions. Support for active forest management to reduce wildfire risks is strong in this region, and restoration treatments could be critical to the resilience of both communities and ecosystems. Although these immediate steps involve adaptations to a changing climate, they can be motivated without necessarily invoking human-caused climate change, a divisive concept among local landowners.

Tracking Public Beliefs About Anthropogenic Climate Change.

A simple question about climate change, with one choice designed to match consensus statements by scientists, was asked on 35 US nationwide, single-state or regional surveys from 2010 to 2015. Analysis of these data (over 28,000 interviews) yields robust and exceptionally well replicated findings on public beliefs about anthropogenic climate change, including regional variations, change over time, demographic bases, and the interacting effects of respondent education and political views. We find that more than half of the US public accepts the scientific consensus that climate change is happening now, caused mainly by human activities. A sizable, politically opposite minority (about 30 to 40%) concede the fact of climate change, but believe it has mainly natural causes. Few (about 10 to 15%) say they believe climate is not changing, or express no opinion. The overall proportions appear relatively stable nationwide, but exhibit place-to-place variations. Detailed analysis of 21 consecutive surveys within one fairly representative state (New Hampshire) finds a mild but statistically significant rise in agreement with the scientific consensus over 2010–2015. Effects from daily temperature are detectable but minor. Hurricane Sandy, which brushed New Hampshire but caused no disaster there, shows no lasting impact on that state’s time series—suggesting that non-immediate weather disasters have limited effects. In all datasets political orientation dominates among individual-level predictors of climate beliefs, moderating the otherwise positive effects from education. Acceptance of anthropogenic climate change rises with education among Democrats and Independents, but not so among Republicans. The continuing series of surveys provides a baseline for tracking how future scientific, political, socioeconomic or climate developments impact public acceptance of the scientific consensus.

Considering the Role of “Need for Cognition” in Students’ Acceptance of Climate Change & Evolution

Anthropogenic climate change (ACC) and evolution are examples of issues that are perceived differently by scientists and the general public. Within the scientific community, there are clear consensuses that human activities are increasing global temperatures (ACC) and that evolutionary mechanisms have led to the biodiversity of life on Earth (evolution). However, there is much debate in the public discourse about the scientific evidence supporting these topics. The purpose of our study was to explore the relationship between a student’s need for cognition (NFC) – preference to engage in and enjoy thinking – and the student’s acceptance of ACC and evolution. The results revealed that students with a higher NFC were more accepting of both ACC and evolution. Future investigations should include evaluating the efficacy of different instructional techniques on NFC and acceptance of polarizing topics such as evolution and ACC.

The Faithful Skeptics

Polling data has indicated that evangelical Christians tend toward skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Recognizing that evangelical Christians compose a politically influential population, we conducted interviews with pastors and lay members of churches in Dallas, Texas to assess the relationship between their religious beliefs and their views on climate change. In-depth interviews showed more complex relationships between religious and climate beliefs than has been documented by previous survey-based research. The interviews revealed a set of interrelated religious beliefs, namely in biblical inerrancy, God’s sovereignty, human sinfulness, eschatology, and evangelism, from which evangelicals draw to describe their perceptions of climate change. Our analysis shows how common belief interpretations contribute to skepticism of human-induced climate change for many interviewees. We also describe how alternative interpretations of these same beliefs promoted environmental concern and even acceptance of anthropogenic climate change among other interviewees. Results suggest the need to account for how faith shapes the complex and nuanced environmental beliefs that evangelicals hold.

What are the two biggest issues affecting your business?

Following the widespread acceptance of anthropogenic climate change in the early 1990s, much of the attention on climate change policy has been focused at the national and supranational scales of governance. The lack of attention to opportunities at substate scales of governance has resulted in missed opportunities for climate change mitigation and adaptation. In this chapter, we explore how dominant framings of scale have obscured and misconceived climate change action at the local and household. We then identify a range of simple evidence-based policy options for local government that demonstrate vast climate change mitigation potential. We show the major cumulative role that households have had in deploying solar PV energy across Australia.Finally, we note several examples that demonstrate the remarkable role that individuals can have in leveraging significant emissions reductions through advocacy and campaigning. It is evident that local government, households, and individuals are under-recognized, yet highly significant sites of climate change mitigation and adaptation.