Climate Change Beliefs Research Articles

Perspectives and awareness of endoscopy healthcare professionals on sustainable practices in gastrointestinal endoscopy: results of the LEAFGREEN survey.

Gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy is one of healthcare's main contributors to climate change. We aimed to assess healthcare professionals' attitudes and the perceived barriers to implementation of sustainable GI endoscopy. The LEAFGREEN web-based survey was a cross-sectional study conducted by the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Green Endoscopy Working Group. The questionnaire comprised 39 questions divided into five sections (respondent demographics; climate change and sustainability beliefs; waste and resource management; single-use endoscopes and accessories; education and research). The survey was available via email to all active members of the ESGE and the European Society of Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Nurses and Associates (ESGENA) in March 2023. 407 respondents participated in the survey (11% response rate). Most participants (86%) agreed climate change is real and anthropogenic, but one-third did not consider GI endoscopy to be a significant contributor to climate change. Improvement in the appropriateness of endoscopic procedures (41%) and reduction in single-use accessories (34%) were considered the most important strategies to reduce the environmental impact of GI endoscopy. Respondents deemed lack of institutional support and knowledge from staff to be the main barriers to sustainable endoscopy. Strategies to reduce unnecessary GI endoscopic procedures and comparative studies of single-use versus reusable accessories were identified as research priorities. In this survey, ESGE and ESGENA members acknowledge climate change as a major threat to humanity. Further improvement in sustainability beliefs and professional attitudes, reduction in inappropriate GI endoscopy, and rational use of single-use accessories and endoscopes are critically required.

Influence of climate change beliefs on adolescent food saving behavior: mechanisms mediating environmental concerns

Influence of climate change beliefs on adolescent food saving behavior: mechanisms mediating environmental concerns

Amish and Non-Amish Farmer Perspectives on Climate Change Causes, Effects, and Adaptation Strategies

Successful agricultural extension programs on climate change require a better understanding of the diverse and evolving farm population. Amish communities are an increasing constituency of rural populations. Ohio Amish and non-Amish farmers (n = 122) were surveyed on attitudes about weather events, climate change, potential adaptation, and policy strategies. Farmers’ belief in climate change and its associated effects were relatively low compared to other studies, with Amish farmers’ belief in climate change less than half that of their non-Amish counterparts. Farmers also tended to focus on isolated weather events over long-term trends. Respondents expressed more concern about government strategies to address climate change than the biophysical climate change effects, with a strong desire to adapt independently of government policy. These sentiments were more profound among the Amish. Both Amish and non-Amish farmers expressed views about God being in control of the weather and, thus, not a pressing source of concern for them. Results indicate the importance of Christian land stewardship principles and point to future research and outreach possibilities that could develop a better understanding of farmer motivations toward climate friendly practices through interviews and collaborative partnerships to promote conservation behaviors in culturally appropriate ways.

Success or Failure? News Framing of the COP26 Glasgow Summit and its Effects on Citizens’ Beliefs About Climate Change

The UN climate summits represent decisive moments for climate change policy. Under significant media coverage, world leaders gather for intense negotiations over policies to address global warming. Given the enormous political, economic, and environmental issues at stake, news media typically frame these summits in terms of success or failure. Still, we know surprisingly little about how these mediated mega events influence public perceptions both during and beyond the specific summit. Focusing on the 2021 Glasgow summit (COP26), this study combines a media content analysis and a two-wave panel survey with a rolling cross-section component, to determine how news framing influenced both summit-specific and more generic climate change beliefs among citizens in Sweden. Findings show (1) that beliefs about the success/failure of the summit took shape immediately following the summit, (2) that news framing effects were particularly pronounced when the final agreement was settled, and (3) that these instantaneous framing effects on summit-specific beliefs left small but lasting imprints on citizens’ generic climate change beliefs several weeks after the summit. These findings have implications for both climate opinion and theories of dynamic news framing effects.

Socioeconomic, psychological, and informational dynamics in shaping American public opinion perceptions on climate change

Climate change remains one of the most pressing challenges of the 21st century, invoking a wide spectrum of public opinions and attitudes. In the United States, sociopolitical, economic, and educational factors influence the public's perception of climate change and its science. This study examines the complexities of American public opinion on climate change by analyzing the relationship between various socio-demographic variables and three specific perceptions: belief in the occurrence of climate change, support for a carbon tax, and the convincingness of climate science. Utilizing logistic and linear regression models on survey data, this study identifies significant predictors for each climate change perception metric. The results indicate that political party affiliation, particularly Republican identification, is inversely related to the belief in climate change and the persuasiveness of climate science. Conversely, educational attainment correlates positively with both the belief in climate change and support for carbon taxation, suggesting that higher education levels foster greater acceptance and proactive attitudes towards climate policy. Gender analysis revealed that males are less inclined to find climate science convincing, highlighting the need for gender-sensitive communication strategies. Interestingly, regional factors showed negligible influence on climate change perceptions, challenging common assumptions about geographical determinants. This study contributes to the discourse on environmental policy and public engagement by delineating the demographic contours of climate change belief systems in the U.S., offering insights for targeted educational and communication strategies to bridge the ideological divide and enhance public consensus for climate action.

Persuading climate skeptics with facts: Effects of causal evidence vs. consensus messaging

Communicating the “97%’’ scientific consensus has been the centerpiece of the effort to persuade climate skeptics. Still, this strategy may not work well for those who mistrust climate scientists, to begin with. We examine how the American public—Republicans in particular—respond when provided with a relatively detailed causal explanation summarizing why scientists have concluded that human activities are responsible for climate change. Based on a preregistered survey experiment ( N = 3007), we assessed the effectiveness of detailed causal evidence versus traditional consensus messaging. We found that both treatments had noticeable effects on belief in human-caused climate change, with the causal evidence being slightly more effective, though we did not observe equivalent patterns for changes in attitudes toward climate policies. We conclude that conveying scientific information serves more as a remedy than a cure, reducing but not eliminating misperceptions about climate change and opposition to climate policies.

Exploring the relationships between worry about climate change, belief about personal responsibility, and mental wellbeing among adolescents and young adults

Today's adolescents and young adults experience high levels of media coverage, public opinion, and formal education about climate change. The young people of today are also projected to experience more climate change related extreme events than previous generations. Although adolescents and young adults may worry about the impacts of climate change and feel personal responsibility to reduce climate change, there is little known about how this relates to their mental wellbeing. This study used data from the 2016/17 European Social Survey Round 8 to examine relationships between climate change worry and beliefs about personal responsibility to reduce climate change with mental wellbeing (happiness and life satisfaction) among adolescents and young adults. Worry about climate change was negatively associated with both happiness and life satisfaction. Belief of a personal responsibility to reduce climate change was positively associated with both happiness and life satisfaction. Frequency of thoughts about climate change moderated the relationships between belief about personal responsibility and happiness. Belief in a personal responsibility to reduce climate change moderated the relationship between worry about climate change and both mental wellbeing outcomes. These findings suggest that young people who feel personally responsible for climate change reduction report on average better wellbeing, which means that holding such beliefs could be a promotive factor for positive mental health among adolescents and young adults.

Climate change worry in the times of the COVID-19 pandemic. Evidence from two large-scale European surveys

Climate change beliefs drive individual actions tackling climate change and influence the support of climate change policies. In the last two years, however, humanity has faced a parallel global crisis: the COVID-19 pandemic. The widely communicated finite pool of worry theory suggests that consideration of a crisis usually decreases when another crisis is emerging. Nevertheless, according to recent evidence, climate change concerns or awareness have increased during the pandemic. In this study, we aimed at describing recent changes in climate change concerns and examining the effect of COVID-fear on climate change worry in 28 European countries drawing on data from nationally representative surveys. We observed a strong increase in climate change concerns between 2016 and 2021, and a slight additional increase between during the pandemic (between 2020 and 2021) in the 28 countries examined, especially in those countries, where the level of concern was originally lower. The results of the multilevel models showed that COVID-19 fear reinforces climate change concerns which contradicts the finite pool of worry theory. These findings may come as good news given that increasing climate change concerns may raise individuals' support of climate policies, however, carefully designed awareness-raising campaigns are needed.

Using Data Science to Assess the Impact of Disaster Event on Climate Change Belief: Case of Australian Bushfire Catastrophe

Australia, vulnerable to bushfire incidents due to its unique climatic conditions, witnessed a transformative event in the 2019-2020 bushfire season. This research examines the impact of these bushfires on public perception of climate change. Leveraging robust statistical techniques, including McNemar's hypothesis testing and logistic regression, the study deciphers survey data collated pre and post these fires. The study's hypothesis that post-fire respondents are more likely to acknowledge climate change's role is confirmed. Factors such as education, political affiliation, and support for fossil fuel reduction are identified as influential predictors of climate change belief. The analysis also highlights the complex interplay of demographic characteristics and media exposure in shaping attitudes. Notably, direct firebush exposure showed a nuanced relationship with belief. The research underscores a significant shift in Australian attitudes toward climate change following the bushfires. These findings contribute to our understanding of public opinion dynamics and the role of experiential factors in climate change belief.

Can knowledge transfer speed up climate change mitigation in agriculture? A randomized experimental evaluation of participatory workshops

Livestock management is recognized as the largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) and ammonia emissions in agriculture. Despite the many available mitigation options, they are often not taken up by farmers even when they are economically beneficial for farms. Effective knowledge transfer is among the critical policy instruments to increase the adoption of new mitigating measures. Recently, there has been a shift in agricultural knowledge transfer from a linear, top-down learning model towards more participatory approaches that emphasise peer-to-peer learning. However, effectiveness of the new model has rarely been evaluated. Our study assessed the impact of participatory workshops on farmers’ uptake of climate-friendly soil and manure management practices that can help reduce GHG and ammonia emissions. A group of 438 cattle-rearing farmers from two Slovenian regions participated in a randomised experimental evaluation, of which 225 received training and 213 participated in a control group. After attending the participatory workshops, farmers had statistically significant and on average 25% higher knowledge levels of climate change and mitigation measures. Furthermore, the intention to perform mitigation measures was significantly higher, on average by 19%, compared to the control group. The workshops also had a significant positive effect on attitudes towards mitigation measures, climate change beliefs, social norms, psychological distance and perceived behavioural control. However, previous personal experience (habits) had a stronger effect on intentions than participation in workshops. Based on the results we provide recommendations on how to best use various policy tools to increase the adoption of mitigation measures.

Consumer attitudes towards hydroponic cultivation of vegetables – Specifically exploring the impact of the fertilisation strategy (using mineral origin or food waste as fertilisers)

This study explores consumer attitudes and beliefs towards hydroponics (growing without soil), as well as the willingness to eat vegetables grown using two different fertilisation strategies (mineral and food waste). The impact of food neophobia, connectedness to nature and awareness of ongoing climate change is also explored. Data were collected through a survey (October 2021) with 1,000 Swedish respondents. Less than half of the respondents were aware of hydroponics, with no differences due to gender or age. Nonetheless, education turned out to be a predictor. No differences were seen in attitude due to gender or level of education, yet a slightly more positive attitude was found among older respondents and a more positive attitude among those who had not heard about hydroponic systems before. Food neophobia and higher age only (negatively) predicted the willingness to eat food with input from food waste, whereas connectedness to nature did not predict willingness to eat vegetables from any of the two fertilising systems. A belief in climate change had a positive impact on the willingness to eat vegetables from both systems. The results revealed significant differences between the two systems, with the circular perceived as significantly more natural, environmentally friendly, more exciting, representing the future, more energy efficient, more innovative as well as more positive overall, compared to the mineral. These qualities could be used by stakeholders when communicating these new systems. The results support the understanding that hydroponics is a food technology to which consumers express positive attitudes and beliefs.

Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries.

Decades after the scientific debate about the anthropogenic causes of climate change was settled, climate disinformation still challenges the scientific evidence in public discourse. Here we present a comprehensive theoretical framework of (anti)science belief formation and updating to account for the psychological factors that influence the acceptance or rejection of scientific messages. We experimentally investigated, across 12 countries (N = 6,816), the effectiveness of six inoculation strategies targeting these factors-scientific consensus, trust in scientists, transparent communication, moralization of climate action, accuracy and positive emotions-to fight real-world disinformation about climate science and mitigation actions. While exposure to disinformation had strong detrimental effects on participants' climate change beliefs (δ = -0.16), affect towards climate mitigation action (δ = -0.33), ability to detect disinformation (δ = -0.14) and pro-environmental behaviour (δ = -0.24), we found almost no evidence for protective effects of the inoculations (all δ < 0.20). We discuss the implications of these findings and propose ways forward to fight climate disinformation.

Global warming vs. climate change frames: revisiting framing effects based on new experimental evidence collected in 30 European countries

Existing evidence suggests that climate change beliefs can be subject to how the issue is framed. Particularly, the choice between a “global warming” versus a “climate change” framing influenced survey responses in some previous experiments. Furthermore, since the issue of climate change has become strongly polarized politically, framing effects were found to be moderated by political identification. Nevertheless, most of these framing effects were observed in the USA and may not be generalized in other cultures. To contribute to this area of research, we embedded an experiment in nationally representative telephone surveys conducted in 30 European countries in August–September 2021. We manipulated the wording of four climate change-related questions (“global warming” vs. “climate change”) and assessed treatment effects both in the full sample and separately among leftist, rightist, green, and right-wing party voters. Our results regarding climate change existence belief replicated earlier findings since existence belief was significantly higher in the climate change group. We also found that the perceived negative impact was slightly lower when the issue was framed as “climate change.” In contrast, little evidence was found of people being more skeptical or less worried when asked about “global warming” compared to “climate change.” In general, skepticism was higher on the political right; however, leftists, rightists, green, and right-wing voters reacted similarly to the two frames in our European sample. We consider possible explanations for the null findings and argue that the use of “climate change” framing in communication strategies promoting climate action itself will do little to lower skepticism in Europe.

Climate change concerns and mortgage lending

We examine whether beliefs about climate change affect loan officers’ mortgage lending decisions. We show that abnormally high local temperature leads to elevated attention to and belief in climate change in a region. Loan officers approve fewer mortgage applications and originate lower amounts of loans in abnormally warm weather. This effect is stronger among counties heavily exposed to the risk of sea-level rise, during periods of heightened public attention to climate change, and for loans originated by small lenders. Additional tests suggest that the negative relation between temperature and approval rate is not fully explained by changes in local economic conditions and demand for mortgage credit, or deteriorating quality of loan applicants. By contrast, Fintech lenders partially fill the gap in demand left by traditional lenders when local temperature is abnormally high.

Climate change profiles of New Zealanders over time: a one-year latent transition analysis of climate change beliefs and concern

ABSTRACT Scientific evidence unequivocally shows that human activities cause climate change, but some people still deny it. Using New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study data from 2018 and 2019 (N = 34,733), we examined segmentation profiles regarding beliefs and concern about climate change (‘Climate change is real’, ‘Climate change is caused by humans’, ‘I am deeply concerned about climate change’), the probabilities of transitioning to and from profiles over time, and the characteristics of individuals in each profile. Five profiles were identified with varying levels of climate change beliefs and concern. The largest profile (60.4% of respondents) had the highest levels of climate change beliefs and concern, while the smallest profile (3.7% of respondents) had the lowest. Over time, more people moved from profiles of lower into profiles of higher levels of climate change beliefs and concern. The profile with the highest levels was the most stable, with members having an 82.7% chance of staying in this profile over time. Compared to this group, members of the profile with the lowest levels of climate change beliefs and concern were more likely to be male, New Zealand European, parents, religious, and to endorse conservative and system-justifying ideologies. We discuss the implications of the findings.

Climate change beliefs and their correlates in Latin America

The ability of climate skeptics to block climate action depends on prevailing beliefs among the public. Research in advanced democracies has shown skepticism about the existence, the causes, and the consequences of climate change to be associated with socio-demographic features and political ideology. Yet, little is known about climate-related beliefs elsewhere. We address this gap by mapping beliefs in climate change and their correlates in Latin America. We show skepticism over the existence and anthropogenic origins of climate change to be limited, but identify a high number of skeptics around the severity of its consequences. Furthermore, we show skepticism to be correlated with psychological rather than socio-political factors: individualistic worldviews in particular drive disbelief in the severe consequences of climate change, a worrying finding in contexts where social trust is low. These findings offer a starting point for better addressing the constraining effects of climate skepticism in the Global South.

More talk, no action? The link between exposure to extreme weather events, climate change belief and pro-environmental behaviour

ABSTRACT Previous research has shown a link between extreme weather events and people’s beliefs about climate change and their pro-environmental behaviour. This indicates that people may become more environmentally friendly amid increasing extreme weather events. Still, the influence of experiencing extreme weather events on actual behaviour has rarely been tested with large-scale individual-level data and longitudinal methods. This study links panel data from 35,678 individuals to floods across England and heatwaves across the UK and applies within-person estimators to account for pre-existing differences between affected and unaffected individuals. Results reveal that individuals are more likely to believe in climate change after being affected by a geographically proximate flood or a temporally proximate heatwave. This association is stronger among initially right-leaning partisans and those initially more sceptic about the existence of climate change, thereby indicating attitudinal updating due to experiential learning. However, those exposed to extreme weather events do not change their environmental behaviour such as energy saving, sustainable shopping or mode of transportation. Even among those who are more likely to believe in climate change, people’s behaviour does not react to extreme weather events.

Perceptions of the Benefits and Barriers to Vegetarian Diets and the Environmental Impact of Meat-Eating

This pre-registered study investigated beliefs about climate change, the impact of meat consumption on the environment, and willingness to reduce meat intake in a large community sample of Australian social media users (N = 740). It also conceptually replicates Lea and Worsley’s (2003) study on Australians’ perceptions of the benefits and barriers to a vegetarian diet. Although most participants indicated a belief in climate change, only half agreed that agriculture and animal husbandry are a leading cause of climate change. Participants believed reducing and eliminating meat intake to be some of the least effective actions against climate change, contributing to a low willingness to change meat intake. Compared with Leah and Worsley, a significantly greater proportion of participants agreed with most of the benefits (11 of 15) and barriers (12 of 14) to vegetarianism. Both perceived benefits and barriers to vegetarianism significantly predicted participant meat consumption (red meat, poultry, and seafood). Overall, results indicate an increase in the number of people who are aware that meat-eating has environmental impacts, although they believe its impact to be significantly less than other pro-environmental behaviours (e.g., using public transport, recycling things more, and using more energy from renewable sources).

The causal impact of local weather anomalies on beliefs about the occurrence of climate change

Research has demonstrated that members of the public recognize anomalous weather patterns, and that subjective perceptions of the weather are related to beliefs about the occurrence of climate change. Yet despite two decades of scholarship and dozens of studies, inconsistent and insufficient data have made it difficult to credibly identify the causal impact of objective experiences on perceptions, and the impact of perceptions on beliefs regarding climate change occurrence. Here, we overcome these limitations by collecting and analyzing data from a 5-y panel survey of 2,500 individuals in Oklahoma, a US state that is highly divided on questions about climate change. Our findings indicate that the relationship between local weather anomalies and climate change beliefs is heavily dependent on baseline beliefs about whether climate change was occurring. For people who did not believe in climate change in the initial survey in our series, perceptions of anomalously hot and dry seasons shifted their beliefs towards the occurrence of anthropogenic climate change, whereas their perceptions of anomalously cool and wet seasons shifted their beliefs away from anthropogenic climate change. This relationship was not present among people who believed that climate change was occurring at the beginning of the study; their perceptions of seasonal temperature and precipitation anomalies had no effect on their beliefs about climate change. These patterns have substantial implications for the evolution of public beliefs about climate change.

Does Wildfire Exposure Influence Corporate Disaster Preparedness? A Study of Natural Resources Extraction Firms in Canada

Managers must make critical disaster preparation decisions to protect firm assets from the threat of wildfire activity. Prior literature stresses the importance of past disaster experience as a key driver of disaster preparation. The article finds that, while experience with disasters is a critical condition, it is insufficient to explain disaster preparation activities by firms. Managerial perceptions including belief in anthropogenic climate change and the perception of increasing wildfires can substitute for direct negative wildfire experience. The article builds configural theory to explain how the psychological “closeness” of wildfire hazards can influence managerial decisions to prepare for disasters in the presence of key organizational characteristics. This study adopts a qualitative comparative analytical approach, drawing on manager surveys and biophysical wildfire data from 20 Canadian mining and resource extraction sites. The article also contrasts manager perceptions of wildfire risk with those of experts and captures a gap in risk perception.