All eyes on Paris?

Following a study conducted by Cardiff University and the National Institute of Environmental Studies in Japan (2013), the British headlines were dominated by the results of the study which showed that the number of climate sceptics in Britain had risen from 15% to 19%. Why is it that the issue of climate change has become an unexpectedly controversial topic and plain science being questioned by the public? Ahead of the urgently important United Nations Climate Change Conference (aka COP21) in Paris in a fortnight, we must question why is it that a significant proportion of the public continues to question and deny that the climate is changing? This blog will explore how present day society perceives the topic of climate change, referring specially to the public opinion on the upcoming UN climate conference in Paris.

 

 

According to a study published by Yale University (2009), we can categorise people’s perceptions, attitudes, values and motives towards climate change into six distinct groups. A summary of the study is explained in the video above. People who were making substantial changes to their lives and hungry to understand more about the issue can be labelled as being ‘Alarmed’ by climate change and 18% of the public were identified in the study. The largest proportion of the population (33%) were labelled as 'Concerned' with those people being convinced that global warming is happening but yet to make any personal engagement with the issue. The 'Cautions' (19%), 'Disengaged' (12%) and 'Doubtful' (11%) represent different levels of understanding and acceptance. The final category represented 7% of the public which were labelled as being ‘Dismissive’ about climate change, people who were actively involved in opposing any efforts at tackling the issue of climate change. In order to communicate effectively with the audience, the study highlights how crucial it is to understand who the audience is, the level of understanding the audience previously has on the issue, and the psychological, cultural, and political reasons the audience have for acting. Then, and only then, can we being to effectively communicate the science on climate change to the public by tailoring each message to the target audience.

 

With article appearing in the media over recent weeks with headline including “All eye will be on Paris this December” and "Paris climate summit: The world is ready for change", the British public cannot shy away from the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference (aka COP21) in Paris. The talks at the end of this month will be a historical event when countries will come together in an urgent response to the changing climate to negotiate and form a long-term, legally binding and universal agreement on climate. For those labelled as ‘Alarmed’, and also possibly the 'Concerned' audience, these will be gripping stuff. But to everyone else, I question how important Paris itself is? I recently attended a talk by the charity Climate Outreach titled ‘Are we engaged: UN Climate Talks and the UK public’ which tackled the question – what does the UK public think about the UN climate negotiations? A certainly lively talk based upon the results of a recently published report by Climate Outreach (2015). The report highlighted: 1) a lack of public understanding and engagement with the upcoming talk, 2) a sense of fear, concern and powerlessness when people hear the words ‘climate change’, 3) the feeling that the government were keeping people in the dark and implementing an attitude of ‘not in front of the children’, and 4) questioning the technical feasibility of the policies, how to measure, monitor and police the negotiations in Paris and the progress after Paris. The study highlights the failures of the scientific community, the government and the media in communicating with the public. 

Clearly, there is a need to revaluate the way that we communicate science and tactics of tackling the issue of climate change with the public. Catastrophic stories about collapsing ice sheets and drowning polar bears play on the public's emotions and create a sense of fear and panic; a key finding from the Climate Outreach study. Capstick and Pidgeon (2014) found that climate scientism was more strongly associated with a lack of concern about climate change, leading the authors to suggests that we should tackle the issue by make climate change relevant to people’s personal lives. This shows that people will being listening as soon as they personally experience the effects of climate change – a reactive attitude not a proactive attitude. Therefore, the argument that we need to use to tackle climate change is one that concerns people’s lifestyle; ears will start listening to climate scientists as soon as energy bills and food prices increase. Lets change people's attitude by encouraging a healthier, Scandinavian-like lifestyle; pollution-free cities and promoting organic gardening and communal activities; tackling climate change at the same in a subtler way. In a study by Lorenzoni and Pidgeon (2006) into European public views on climate change, they conclude that if people grasp personal benefits, they are more likely to listen, act and take interested.

We need to bring the biggest challenge facing the human race to life and make it relevant to people's lives. After the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Paris, a positive and encouraging attitude will be vital to  drive the momentum around the public attitude towards climate change. As found in the study by Climate Outreach, a huge hype leading up to the negotiations in Paris followed by a crashing deflation of public support must be avoided.