Dr Lorraine Whitmarsh came to Manchester and gave a very compelling seminar about the causes and consequences of climate scepticism. MCFly co-editor Marc Hudson wonders, though, if the reasons for the laughable state of the “climate movement” – a topic that Dr Whitmarsh was not, to be fair, setting out to tackle – lie elsewhere…

She spoke to about 45 people at the latest in the Centre for Census and Survey Research, Institute for Social Change and Social Statistics Seminar Series. She opened with an overview of the consensus around climate change (IPPC 4AR and beyond) and the ways the public are involved (a. energy use – domestic, transport and also “embedded emissions”, b. on the receiving end of climate risks and c. supportive (or opposed) to specific policies),

Apparently awareness of the issue is virtually universal, but many/most see it as a distant/low priority. This is partly down to optimism bias (folks thinking they’ll be okay) and temporal discounting (“why worry, it’s the future?”) and psychological distancing (“far of people of whom we know little”).

Concern about climate change is volatile, partly due to the “finite pool of worry” and partly because of the “availability heuristic” (people can more easily imagine other problems).

In a pope-still-catholic moment, it turns out that (rich) old white men are over-represented in denialist circles.

On the question as to why some people are sceptical, Dr Whitmarsh said that there were two popular explanations

1. it’s down to ignorance/misunderstanding (and the solution is… more information!)
2. it’s due to different (and threatened) worldviews (as argued in Mike Hulme’s “Why we disagree about climate change”)

She said there’s empirical support for this, and described a survey she did in 2008 or so, a postal survey of two regions of the UK. It turns out, as per before, that old men, especially those with an income in excess of £75,000 are the most sceptical (see Terror Management Theory below)

So, lots of conservative voters “sceptical” and UKIP voters “off the scale.”

 Is scepticism rising?

Well, the Daily Mail would like to crow about that, and if it has indeed “doubled” its from a relatively low baseline.  In general, the answer is depends where you measure from, and concern/”belief” seems to be bouncing back up a bit…

At this point Dr Whitmarsh asked the audience what they thought might explain a dip in concern/rise in scepticism

• individuals losing stomach for belief once it will cost them money
• politicians not doing anything
• no personal experience
• the weather
• recession
• denialists being good at what they do
• media milking controversy
• boredom with the issue
• people generally more sceptical about everything

Dr Whitmarsh mentioned the hacked emails “Climategate” in 2009, but it turns out those sorts of single events haven’t been that important – they’ve merely re-inforced specific views, and many people haven’t heard of it.

She pointed out that both the sceptical and concerned ways of thinking and justifications for inaction/action have been around for a generation (or more) and that the recent drop in concern is perhaps related to the reduced media coverage.

She closed with the “what is to be done” question. I’ll try to get hold of the slides for this.

Source – trusted, attractive, independent
Message – context, format, tone, language, balance, image. Fear should be used with caution, since it can lead to apathy, denial
Audience – those that are motivated to think
Context – timing, consistency,/congruence with other messages.
Target concerns and values of your audience-proposals

What could have been mentioned (though to be fair, an hour is not a very long time at all!)
the Issue Attention Cycle (Anthony Downs)
Terror Management Theory

Things to look up
Finite Pool of Worry

MCFly sez: We have some laws and “action” “plans”, but they’re not worth the paper they are written on. Our bureaucrats and “policy”- “makers” are in an circle je… echo chamber (this is a family publication, after all.) Meanwhile, the climate movement failed to find ways to communicate the urgency, to get beyond scare tactics. The climate movement failed to understand that it would be a marathon, not a sprint, and that sitting in a field surrounded by cops wasn’t going to put pressure on local politicians and local bureaucrats. We have met the enemy, y’see, and he is us.

Also, if we need more participatory forms of decision-making, then we also need more participative forms of academic ritual. Just sayin’.