What is it that makes some people choose climate friendly lifestyles, while other continue to live unsustainably?
AACC_ClimatePsychology
Quick and easy interventions that inspire people to take direct climate
action are the holy grail. Behavioural scientists and policymakers are keen
to learn which small steps can make the biggest difference. One of the
largest experiments ever conducted in climate change psychology shows that
the same interventions have different outcomes depending on the specific
context, and crucially, the country in which change is being driven.
New research by an international team of more than 250 scientists studied
several environmental interventions and the way people responded to them in
63 countries.
In Austria, one of the best ways to increase effective pro-environmental
behaviour, such as time spent planting trees, is to present people with
information that shows climate change is already happening now, it is
negatively affecting Europe and it is harmful to people nearby. This is what
behavioural scientists call reducing psychological distance. This framing
makes the risks and dangers of climate change feel more immediate and
relatable, which encourages people to act against it.
But in Germany, a country that shares a similar language, culture and long
history with Austria, the same intervention had a very different outcome.
Participants tended to believe less in climate change, were less likely to
support climate change mitigation policies and were less likely to plant
trees.
The global outlook
Our team tested the effectiveness of 11 strategies designed to increase
climate change awareness and climate action around the globe.
More than 59,000 participants were shown one of 11 possible interventions
designed to influence their climate change beliefs, such as writing a letter
to one’s nephew or reading information about climate change as though its
effect were to occur very close to the reader. Then participants were
surveyed to assess their belief in climate change, support for mitigation
policies and involvement in different types of environmental action, such as
planting trees.
Overall, 86% of people surveyed believed that climate change is happening,
is a dangerous problem and is largely caused by humans. Support for
important climate mitigation policies was measured at an impressive 72%.
Another key measure was effortful behaviour: completing a tedious task, such
as identifying specific number combinations, in exchange for a donation to
plant a tree. More than half of the participants planted more than 300,000
trees, suggesting that most people do not question climate change, they
endorse policies meant to mitigate it and are willing to do whatever they
can to stop it.
Before conducting this experiment, we hoped to find out which interventions
would work in all contexts. Instead, we found some really interesting
results that have spurred even more scientific investigation in this domain.
When we put all the data together, we found that one intervention, like
reducing psychological distance, worked well in one context but then
backfired in another, as is the case in Austria and Germany. This is
probably due to the large amount of diversity in the data.
There could be further differences that our data has not accounted for.
Complicating things even more, interventions had different effects depending
on the variable we were targeting. If one intervention worked at increasing
belief in climate change, it tended to backfire on effortful behaviour.
No one solution will stimulate climate change mitigation internationally.
Both top-down regulations from policymakers and individual behaviour shifts
are necessary pieces of the puzzle and context is key.
A new app
We have used our findings to help design a new climate intervention app that
can empower people to make more environmentally conscious decisions at
governmental, community and household levels. Based on the vast pool of data
used in our research, anyone can explore how effective interventions have
been in specific countries, within certain age ranges or even according to
political identity, ideally by looking at samples with more than 30 people
for the best results.
This free and easy-to-use app could be particularly useful for policymakers
and climate change communicators. For example, if you want to know how to
best increase policy support in Europeans who are over 50 years old,
emphasising how those policies will affect future generations, especially
their own children and grandchildren, might be your best bet.
Voting for change
Whenever making personal choices related to climate change, such as opting
for a slow train or booking a quick flight, you can use these results to
help make your decision easier. Log into the app and see what works well for
people of a similar age to you living in the same country. You can then
consider the intervention before making your decision.
If reducing psychological distance is the best acting intervention, you can
remind yourself of all the ways that climate change is already affecting
people close to you. This will help you prioritise what is important to you
in the context of that decision and make the whole process simpler.
Voting is a choice that can have a huge effect on climate. Voting for
candidates and parties that prioritise climate change can help curb
greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly, one of the top predictors of whether a
climate policy will be adopted is public support.
Being vocal about climate policies that you support may help to spread
awareness and increase the likelihood that the policy is adopted. That might
involve writing letters to your local representatives, talking to friends
and family or posting on social media.
Our paper sheds new light on the effectiveness of various types of climate
messaging and the app offers practical ways to help facilitate climate
action. By streamlining the more targeted deployment of effective
interventions, less time and money will be wasted on interventions that
won’t feasibly work in that scenario. Coordinating efforts at all levels of
governance is necessary to effectively tackle the climate crisis because
time is of the essence.
Original source:
https://www.greenqueen.com