1 / 33

Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation:

Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation: The public, politics and forcing people to be green Dr David Ockwell February 2008 d.g.ockwell@sussex.ac.uk. Overview. The problem: Climate change – what are we trying to achieve? The public: Public behaviour change

gerald
Download Presentation

Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation:

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation: • The public, politics and forcing people to be green • Dr David Ockwell • February 2008 • d.g.ockwell@sussex.ac.uk

  2. Overview • The problem: • Climate change – what are we trying to achieve? • The public: • Public behaviour change • Forcing people to be green: • Regulation and behaviour change • The politics: • Why aren’t politicians regulating behaviour? • Implications: • A new role for public communication • Reorienting the research agenda

  3. The problem

  4. Climate change • EU 2oC target to avoid dangerous climate change • Stern Review • Stabilisation at 500–550ppm CO2e • UK Climate Change Bill 60% reduction by 2050 - based on RCEP (2000) 550ppm CO2 target • cited Met Office data suggesting 550ppm CO2 = 2.3oC by 2100 • IPCC 2007?

  5. Global mean surface temperature increase above pre-industrial levelsIPCC WG1 (2007) p 66.

  6. The public

  7. 2005UK carbon emissions by end userDefra / AEA 2006

  8. 2005UK carbon emissions by end userBased on Defra / AEA 2006

  9. Agency vs. structure • Infrastructure • e.g. existing housing stock, planning • Elasticity of demand and availability of substitutes • e.g. public transport • Institutions • e.g. quarterly electricity bills, social norms (cars as status symbols) • Socio-technical lock-in

  10. Emissions savings from behaviour change • Walking, cycling, using public transport, car sharing • Turning off the lights • Energy saving light bulbs • Not leaving things on standby • Turning the heating down and wearing a jumper • Recycling / composting • Flying less

  11. Encouraging behaviour change • ‘Are you doing your bit?’ campaign • Defra, Carbon Trust, BERR, DfT, Energy Savings Trust, Environment Agency, UK Climate Impacts Programme: UK Climate Change Communications Working Group Developing “a communication strategy to change attitudes towards climate change in the UK”

  12. Problems with achieving behaviour change • ‘Attitude-behaviour’ gap • Collective action problem / prisoner’s dilemma / free-rider effect • Intractable opinions e.g. Michael Thompson's Cultural Theory - individualists, egalitarians, fatalists and hierarchists

  13. Forcing people to be green

  14. Forced behaviour change • Overcomes attitude-behaviour gap • Overcomes collective action problem • Individualists and fatalists have to suck it up • Responds to the urgency of the problem

  15. Regulated behaviour and encouraging innovation • Social innovation e.g. car clubs, walking buses, community heat and power generation, social energy cost reducing schemes, transition towns • Technical innovation in low carbon direction is in anticipation of future regulation of carbon emissions e.g. hybrid vehicle technologies

  16. Risks & Opportunities of Carbon ConstraintsSource: WRI 2001 Additional cost per vehicle DECREASING RISK FROM CARBON CONSTRAINTS

  17. Regulated behaviour and encouraging innovation • Regulations, or the anticipation thereof, encourage low carbon innovation

  18. The politics

  19. The government gets the science Peter Madden (Previously Head of Policy at the Environment Agency; Ministerial Adviser at DETR and DEFRA): ‘I don't think that Government inaction on climate change has anything to do with the science’. John Lawton (Chair, Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution): ‘David Miliband has unquestionably grasped the science….Miliband knows urgent action is needed’ ‘It is not just the politicians, the senior [DEFRA] civil servants get the science too’.

  20. The environment as bad politics • Electoral cycles vs. climate change

  21. The environment as bad politics • Political capital – a precious resource • Fuel protests 2000 ‘… it put the fear of God into them and it is used rather too frequently now as a justification for not doing much with transport.’ Sara Eppel, Director of Policy, Sustainable Development Commission • Road pricing petition – almost 2 million signatures • Press coverage of Climate Change Bill • VAT on domestic energy

  22. The environment as bad politics • Mid-termism • 2005 election: environment = most important issue for only 2% of voters (Whiteley et al 2005: 154)

  23. Environmental Protection in Party Manifestos 1959-2005Sources: Budge et al (2001) and Klingemann (2006)

  24. Implications

  25. Reorienting climate change communication for effective mitigation A new role for climate change communication: Changing people’s perceptions of the need to accept regulation

  26. Learning from past precedents • Smoking ban • Banning plastic bags in Modbury, Devon • Seat belts, drink driving • London congestion charge • 1970s oil crisis (stickers in Austrian cars) • Slavery

  27. Forced behaviour change:Questions • What can you force people to do? • Turn off the lights/fill the kettle less/turn heating down? • Domestic energy consumption largely infrastructural issue (agency / structure) • Personal carbon trading, rubbish charging, plastic bag tax, differentiated parking charges (Richmond), VED, road pricing, speed cameras/limits – any others?

  28. Reorienting the research agenda • Universities most trusted sources of information (Lorenzoni et al. 2007) • Research already under way: • UEA, Surrey, Oxford, Sussex etc • Not arguing that existing research effort on behaviour change should be forgotten – high degree of synergy

  29. Reorienting the research agenda • Recognition at a more strategic level “Changing behaviours and lifestyles” = first of five key themes identified by Research Councils’ Energy Programme • ‘map’ people’s current energy perceptions • develop and test innovative methods of public engagement • understand role of media and mass communications in forming lifestyle aspirations & influencing energy consumption

  30. Reorienting the research agenda • Communicatively smart communication • Politically smart communication

  31. Communicatively smart communication • Insights from advertising e.g. diffuse issue, diverse social groups – synergy with discrete areas where regulation possible • Make it local • A role for the arts? e.g. Nicholson-Cole 2005 • Understanding framing effects e.g. Whitmarsh (forthcoming) • Engaging with children?

  32. Politically smart communication • Directed communications aimed at providing rapid feedback to politicians of a change in the public mood • What informs politicians’ perceptions of public opinion? • Focus groups? • Target constituencies? • Direct action? • When does something become an electoral issue? • When does something become party political e.g. the Cameron effect • Ethical issues – researcher vs. activist

  33. Conclusion • Regulating people’s behaviour is an important, effective option in the context of the urgency of climate change (remain aware of agency/structure issue) • Reorient communication efforts towards influencing perceptions of the need for regulation, rather than influencing perceptions in an attempt to change behaviour • Environment as good politics, not bad politics

More Related