Do you believe in climate change? It may depend on your politics
A new study has found that one factor above all others is likely to influence a person鈥檚 belief 鈥� or disbelief 鈥� in climate change: political affiliation.
The research, published Monday in the journal , examined myriad studies and polls conducted across 56 countries, and challenged the popular notion that factors such as education, sex, and subjective knowledge are most likely to influence a person鈥檚 view on climate change.
The scientists also concluded that even ardent belief in climate change does not necessarily translate into a willingness to suffer personal sacrifice in an effort to address the situation.
鈥淎ge, sex and race aren't the issue: it's your , about big versus small government, about individualistic versus socialistic ways of responding to societal problems, about whether or not you have a moral suspicion of industry," said the study鈥檚 co-author Matthew Hornsey of the University of Queensland, Australia, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.
The study itself asserts that a 鈥渃ritical mass of people is skeptical that anthropogenic climate change is real, something that has long been identified as an obstacle to mitigation efforts.鈥�
The researchers involved in the study were hoping to shine a light on the reasons for widespread skepticism about climate change, so these factors can be targeted by a scientific community more and more convinced of the reality of climate change.
鈥淭he broader underlying issue is that the scientific world has been surprised at the failure of facts to change people鈥檚 beliefs,鈥� says Brendan Nyhan, a professor at Dartmouth College鈥檚 department of government, whose research focuses on political scandal and misperceptions about politics and health care, in a telephone interview with 海角大神.
鈥淲e can鈥檛 possibly read all the evidence, so we rely on trusted sources,鈥� continues Dr. Nyhan. 鈥淲hen those sources have differing points of view, we tend to believe those that share our ideology/political views.鈥�
In this latest study, it was found that political affiliation, 鈥渟pecific identification with political parties鈥� as opposed to 鈥渦nderlying political ideologies,鈥� was about twice as important as any other demographic variable in determining someone鈥檚 opinion on climate change.
Specifically, those inclined to vote for liberal political parties are more likely to believe in climate change than those who support more conservative ones.
In the United States, this translates into supporters of the Republican Party being more likely to disbelieve climate change, while Democratic Party voters are more likely to subscribe to climate change as a fact.
鈥淲e tend to see belief polarization over facts when political elites are divided and are delivering different cues. When elites are united, we don鈥檛 see the same polarization,鈥� Dr. Nyhan tells the Monitor.
鈥淚f you look at evidence over time, we see Republicans and Democrats pulling apart on the climate change issue; views didn鈥檛 used to be so polarized.鈥�
As Nyhan says, this political conflict among the elites tends to be reflected in the media, with reporters trying to represent both viewpoints, even if the facts begin to support one side of the debate more than the other. He adds, however, that this has started to change over the past few years, with some publications giving less of a voice to climate skeptics.
Another aspect of the research looked at how likely people were to modify their own lives as a result of their concerns over climate change, laying down the hypothesis that those believing in climate change would be more likely to engage in 鈥減ro-environmental behaviors.鈥�
But the data says otherwise: While people鈥檚 pro-environmental intentions are certainly impacted by their stance on climate change, their actual behavior shows less correlation.
鈥淭his is not surprising,鈥� reads the paper, 鈥済iven that constraints than are behaviors, so the relationship between beliefs and intentions is more 鈥榩ure.鈥欌��
The research also supports the assertion that, the more someone subscribes to the idea that scientists are trustworthy, and that there is scientific consensus around climate change, the more likely they themselves will believe in it.
鈥淭his shows the importance of driving home the large degree of scientific agreement over climate change to the public,鈥� says Riley Dunlap, one of the founders of environmental sociology and a professor of Oklahoma State University鈥檚 department of sociology, in an email interview with the Monitor.
鈥淵et, as the results indicate,鈥� continues Dr. Dunlap, 鈥渢he current level of partisan polarization over climate change tends to outweigh other factors, so it's clearly going to be difficult to convince some sectors of the public that it's a serious problem that needs to be dealt with.鈥�
The paper鈥檚 authors concur, pointing out that information regarding climate change is 鈥渟earched, remembered and assimilated鈥� in a way that supports a person鈥檚 worldview and political leanings.
An alternative strategy, therefore, is to repackage pro-environmental behaviors in ways that appeal to people鈥檚 ideologies rather than working against them, for example as a form of patriotism or "green" technology.
鈥淭he findings offer some hope,鈥� concludes the paper, 鈥渂ecause psychological factors are more susceptible to targeted interventions than are demographic constructs.鈥�
