Mobilising climate action
Psychological research can help to change beliefs and motivate climate action
Image: thefishsite.com
In 1854 Dr John Snow demonstrated that a communal pump on Broad Street in Soho was a source of the cholera epidemic in London. The pump handle was removed and the disease stopped. Dr Snow is now seen as the model of how science can guide enlightened public health; research the root cause of the problem, then make the necessary changes.
But the gap between knowledge and action is not that simple. We know that too much carbon (and some other chemicals) results in global warming, sea-level rise, extreme weather, fires and catastrophic impacts on ecosystems. But carbon use is on the rise.
Dr Snow did not convince everyone. His idea that cholera was the result of faecal contamination of water was too distasteful for many to consider. The pump handle was re-installed, without dealing with the cesspit close to the pump’s water supply.
Drinking clean, uncontaminated water is a great idea. But making things happen usually means disruption to existing ways of doing things. Regulations, inspections, sanctions – all a pain for those who have to comply. Reducing carbon production means a wrenching change to existing patterns of behaviour and significant costs to those with serious investments in the present way of living or running a business.
When did you see compelling evidence of the climate emergency? Was it Al Gore’s Inconvenient Truth lecture? The freeze-frame photography of glacier retreat? Coverage of fires, floods or climate-induced famine? Has there been a lag between your prioritising climate change as an issue and your political and personal action?
The UN's panel on climate change has told us (again) that we are ‘perilously close’ to irreversible climate change.
The remedy is a mix of individual action (for example, less flying, more plant-based meals), community-based action (tree planting anyone?) and country-level, ideally collaborative international country action (including transitioning away from coal-fired energy).
Mobilisation is happening at all of these levels. Approaches will vary – from persuading more people that cycling is exhilarating, to electing representatives who will give the climate issue a serious push.
It’s a long way from Dr John Snow persuading the local officials to turn off the tap. Luckily we have learned how to communicate persuasively and mobilise political issues.
Getting political
Politics is being shaken up. Trump the apparent outsider to the political mainstream, energised the angry victims of neoliberal capitalism to move away from the Democratic Party. In Australia, professional women, without a political backstory, and presumably the more credible for that, emphasised a climate agenda as well as integrity and won against male Liberal incumbents. It helped that renewable energy investor Simon Holmes a Court set up Climate 200 to fund 22 ‘teal’ candidates with over $12 million. Presumably, he sees the potential for a return on his investment in terms of the growth of the renewables industry.
The new electoral split is between conservative politicians backed by industries that take a toll on climate and liberals (with a small ‘l’) backed by those investing in more climate-friendly industries. The conservatives are supported by, to be simplistic, those with miserable experiences of the existing socioeconomic settings and/or who are more threatened by impending change. And those with transferable skills who can see the opportunities in the growing green future lean to liberal.
Up-and-coming elites need to see that the smart money is going into the green economy and that it is in their interest to support the decision-makers who will accelerate that. This should create a virtuous circle – from the climate activist point of view – where the teal politicians help shape a greener economy, providing a better investment environment for green entrepreneurs. This is an opportunity for green voices – to get amongst it in economic forums and spell out the rich returns that are available.
There are clues about how to develop the communication skills to get cut through in these forums. Ethan Burch and colleagues have developed an online game (The Echo Chamber) which teaches rhetorical skills to would-be communicators.
Reaction
Some people are more resistant to change. In the US, conservative people are more likely to be dubious about the reality of climate change. You possibly remember the positive response Donald Trump got at rallies when he labelled climate change “a hoax” – he knew that line would get a good reaction from his change-averse audience.
‘Science-plaining’ to such people – telling them of the scientific consensus behind the need for urgent action – embeds them more deeply in their view that it is all a conspiracy.
These sceptics have doubts about the scientists as well as the science. Social psychologists have found that the ‘conservative package’ of beliefs has a consistent theme of believing in conspiratorial forces which aim to destroy the existing social order (from challenging gender roles to threatening the ability to put meat on the grill).
Then there are vested interests. New Zealand doesn’t have many coal miners but we do have farmers who have serious money invested in a business model which requires lots of methane-burping and farting animals.
These people are fighting change. That happens on two fronts. First is denial – the “hoax” pushed by Trump. Then the argument that change is economically ruinous, or not that urgent.
Three suggestions to motivate and mobilise action
1. Emphasise the positive
What helps the green message land successfully? Assuming that if only people knew enough facts (for example ‘science-plaining’) doesn’t cut it. Themes of fear and threat (we’re going to be toast!) also don’t seem to have cut-through.
Research by Chinh Cong Ngo and colleagues published last year compared different approaches to mobilise Vietnamese farmers to climate action. These farmers are on the south-central coast and are vulnerable to sea-level rise. The outcome measured was ‘behavioural intentions’ – not as compelling a result as actually doing something – but intentions are a real guide to action. More positive intentions (and self-belief in capability) resulted from messages emphasising specific action that would result in positive gains over messages with abstract suggestions to reduce threats of loss. A sample ‘positive’ and ‘concrete’ message:
“By following the local weather forecast for Quy Nhon, you can better plan your activities, for example, your crop farming, aquaculture, going to the sea for fishing or travelling. This allows you to increase and protect your harvest or catch, and to protect your health and safety by avoiding bad weather or preparing for it.”
Some positives in a more green future:
· Green jobs – more of them, and potential to transition into them There is evidence of transferability of skills from operating a fossil-fueled energy plant to installing solar panels
· Less pollution – is not only good for our health but also for plant and animal health. Crop growth improves with reductions in air pollution
· Healthy lifestyles – this is a powerful message for those considering changing their diet – reduced risk of heart disease and cancer
· Less risk of global conflict – it's oil revenue that keeps Putin’s war machine going right?
Intriguingly, for such a scary topic – young adults (18-21) respond well to humour. A sample placard: ‘This earth is getting hotter than my imaginary boyfriend’.
On ABCs “Jimmy Kimmel Live,” Kimmel hyped a going-out-of-business advertisement for Planet Earth:
“Everything must go! 50% of all nocturnal animals, insects, reptiles and amphibians … priced to sell before we live in hell. But you must act fast because planet Earth is over soon. And when it’s gone, it’s gone.”
2. Amplify the message
Of course, communications technology can significantly reinforce messaging. Many people now use wearables to monitor, and potentially motivate their activity. A 2020 meta-analysis of 12 studies which included 1,693 healthy adults indicated that wearable trackers result in modest short-term increases in physical activity. Add in social media and there is potential to track and modify an individual’s carbon footprint and green behaviours.
Reporting on daily steps can be re-purposed to reporting on car trips avoided. Pictures of scrumptious meals can include carbon count instead of calories.
3. Connect beliefs and actions into a positive theme
While individual and community action (turning off the lights and planting trees) will not do enough, getting people to act in a way they see as climate-friendly can prompt them to continue to act in a ‘green’ way. Potentially making other green choices – such as voting.
Re-framing this bundle of beliefs and actions, for example, as taking on kaitiakitanga for a part of the world, can motivate more concerted action at the community and societal level.
Helping people to see themselves living a coherent and consistent life results in them experiencing greater authenticity and enhances their wellbeing – they feel happier.
At the personal level – lining your action up with your values will help build your sense of living a life of meaning, and motivate your climate action – whether that’s voting for green candidates or planting a tree, or the whole bundle.
Stewart Forsyth is an organisational psychologist and executive coach and also the author of 21 Remarkable People – available from Amazon or Apple or other eBook sources.
References:
Ethan Burch – Burch, E., Fernsler, J., Brulle, R., & Zhu, J. (2016, October). Echo Chamber: A persuasive game on climate change rhetoric. In Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play Companion Extended Abstracts (pp. 101-107).
‘Science-plaining’ - Ma, Y., Dixon, G., & Hmielowski, J. D. (2019). Psychological reactance from reading basic facts on climate change: The role of prior views and political identification. Environmental Communication, 13(1), 71-86.
Social psychologists – Kerr, J.R & WilsonsM.S. (2021). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation predict rejection of science and scientists. Group processes and intergroup relations, 24, 550-567
Chinh Cong Ngo - Ngo, C. C., Poortvliet, P. M., & Klerkx, L. (2022). The persuasiveness of gain vs. loss framed messages on farmers’ perceptions and decisions to climate change: A case study in coastal communities of Vietnam. Climate Risk Management, 35, 100409.
Green jobs – Forsyth, S. (2020). From old to new energy: how easily will workers move to new jobs? Management Magazine
Less pollution – Noeline Selin (2021). Ask MIT Climate; Zongbo Shi (2014). World Economic Forum.
Healthy lifestyles - Medawar, E., Huhn, S., Villringer, A. et al. The effects of plant-based diets on the body and the brain: a systematic review. Transl Psychiatry 9, 226 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-019-0552-0
Humour - Skurka, C., Romero-Canyas, R., Joo, H. H., Acup, D., & Niederdeppe, J. (2022). Emotional Appeals, Climate Change, and Young Adults: A Direct Replication of. Human Communication Research, 48(1), 147-156.
Jimmy Kimmel – Boykoff, M. (2019) Leave ‘em laughing instead of crying. The Conversation.
Wearable activity monitors – Sun Tang (2020). Effectiveness of Wearable Trackers on Physical Activity in Healthy Adults: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. JMIR Uhealth 8 (7) e15576
Acting in a green way - Schwartz, D., Loewenstein, G. & Agüero-Gaete, L. Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour through green identity labelling. Nat Sustain 3, 746–752 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-020-0543-4
Authenticity - Sutton, A. (2020). Living the good life: A meta-analysis of authenticity, well-being and engagement. Personality and Individual Differences, 153(2020), 109645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109645