Ezra M. Markowitz

Reassessing emotion in climate change communication

Debate over effective climate change communication must be grounded in rigorous affective science. Rather than treating emotions as simple levers to be pulled to promote desired outcomes, emotions should be viewed as one integral component of a cognitive feedback system guiding responses to challenging decision-making problems.

The moral complexity of climate change and the need for a multidisciplinary perspective on climate ethics

Al Gore, who was awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize jointly with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for their efforts to identify and combat climate change, claims that climate change “is not a political issue...[it] is a moral issue, one that affects the survival of human civilization” (Gore 2007). Similarly, James Hansen, who until recently was NASA’s leading climatologist, has argued that “the predominant moral issue of the 21st century, almost surely, will be climate change, comparable to Nazism faced by Churchill in the 20th century and slavery faced by Lincoln in the 19th century” (Hansen 2010). In recent years, these and dozens of other scientists, philosophers, politicians, religious and spiritual leaders, artists, businesspersons and others have spoken forcefully—and from a wide diversity of perspectives— about the ethical and moral dimensions of climate change. As Steve Gardiner (2004: 556), a leading scholar in the emerging multidisciplinary field of climate ethics, has put it, climate change is “fundamentally an ethical issue,” one that challenges our established morality and threatens our lives and our world (Gardiner 2004; Jamieson 2008). Motivated in part by the diverse and complex ethical considerations that have been raised by philosophical scholarship regarding climate change, scholars have begun to examine the “ethics of climate change” from a wide variety of disciplinary and multidisciplinary perspectives. In addition to moral and political philosophers, practical ethicists, and political theorists, a growing number of economists, political scientists, geographers, psychologists, legal scholars and others have shown a keen interest in examining and explicating the ethical dimensions of climate change from both normative and positive (descriptive) perspectives. Given the rapid growth of multidisciplinary scholarship on the ethical issues raised by global climate change, this Special Issue of Climatic Change aims at highlighting cutting-edge research that explores climate ethics from a wide variety of disciplinary and multidisciplinary perspectives, including work by philosophers, economists, political scientists, geographers, Climatic Change DOI 10.1007/s10584-014-1323-9

Climate ethics at a multidisciplinary crossroads: Four directions for future scholarship

In recent years, the field of climate ethics has grown into a truly multidisciplinary endeavor. Climate ethics scholars are pursuing both normative and positive questions about climate change using many different approaches drawn from a wide diversity of disciplinary and theoretical perspectives. Now, the field stands at a multidisciplinary crossroads, delineated in large part by two interrelated considerations: what are the key research questions most in need of multidisciplinary attention and what can be done to move the insights and implications of climate ethics scholarship into real-world climate decision-making. Here, we identify four directions for near-future climate ethics research that we believe are both in need of further examination and likely to be of interest to a diverse coalition of decision-makers working “on the ground”: geoengineering; scope of ethical consideration; responsibility of actors; and, hazards, vulnerabilities and impacts. Regardless of the specific questions they choose to pursue, multidisciplinary climate ethics researchers should strive to conduct accessible and actionable research that both answers the questions decision-makers are already asking as well as helps shape those questions to make decision-making processes more inclusive and ethically-grounded.

Peer pressure on the riverbank: Assessing catch-and-release anglers' willingness to sanction others' (bad) behavior

Given the well-documented impacts of angler behavior on the biological fitness of angled and released fish, optimizing the conservation value of catch-and-release angling hinges on the extent to which anglers are willing to adopt recommended best practices and refrain from harmful ones. One potentially powerful mechanism underlying adoption of best practices is the social pressure anglers can apply to one another to enforce community norms and values. Past work in other domains demonstrates that forms of interpersonal communication-including social sanctioning-can foster context-appropriate social norms and increase cooperative behavior; yet to date, little research has examined these dynamics in the context of species conservation. We conducted in-person and online surveys to explore the role of social sanctioning in the context of an internationally renowned wild steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) fishery in British Columbia, Canada. We investigated how diverse social-psychological and demographic factors influence anglers past and future sanctioning propensity. Results highlight that perceived capacity to influence the angling practices of others and professed concerns about ones own reputation were strongly predictive of both past and future sanctioning. Furthermore, while anglers reported relatively low-levels of past sanctioning behavior, most anglers simultaneously expressed a strong desire to sanction others in the future. Identifying ways to increase the social desirability and visibility of sanctioning actions could assist resource managers in promoting adoption and maintenance of best practices. More broadly, our findings underscore a significant yet underappreciated role for wildlife users and enthusiasts in cultivating a shared conservation ethic to help ensure biological conservation.

Climate change communication: Challenges, insights, and opportunities

Abstract The past decade has seen an explosion of both academic research and on-the-ground experimentation aimed at improving climate change communication (CCC) efforts. Much of this work has been conducted and/or supported by psychologists, communications scholars, political scientists, and others who have brought theories and methods from the social sciences to bear on the question of how to effectively communicate with diverse audiences about climate change. In this chapter, we begin by highlighting key challenges communicators face, including features of the problem itself, cultural and political conflict, and psychological barriers that shape how people engage with the issue. We then present seven insights gleaned from the existing evidence base that communicators can incorporate to improve outcomes, including the importance of knowing one’s audience, cultivating the right messengers, highlighting solutions, framing the issue carefully, and confronting false information in ways that unify diverse audiences rather than contribute to polarization. We conclude with recommendations for future directions in both research and practice.

Modeling intentions to sanction among anglers in a catch-and-release recreational fishery for golden dorado (Salminus brasiliensis) in Salta, Argentina

ABSTRACT Catch-and-release (C&R) angling is a powerful tool for reducing impacts on recreationally targeted fishes. Although C&R can be mandated in fisheries through regulation, voluntary adoption and informal management are often critical due to minimal enforcement opportunities. Anglers themselves may play a role in increasing C&R adoption through interpersonal sanctioning (i.e., self-policing). To date, little research has examined factors that predict the willingness of anglers to sanction others’ behavior. We present results from surveys (n = 49) with anglers in Argentina to explore their motivations to sanction other anglers within their stakeholder community. Anglers with the strongest intentions to sanction were younger and more open to adopting best practices, identified fishing as important to their lifestyle, and expressed high environmental concern relative to other anglers. Our findings highlight the role that recreational anglers can play in promoting best practices via interpersonal sanctioning and identify barriers that inhibit this type of action.

A Corporate Scandal that Hits Close to Home: Examining Owners’ Responses to the Volkswagen Diesel Emissions Scandal

ABSTRACT The 2015 Volkswagen Group (VW) diesel emissions scandal has affected no group of individuals more directly than owners of the affected vehicles. Yet to date no research has examined in depth how owners have responded to the scandal. This includes not only what owners have already done or plan to do with their vehicles (e.g. repair, participate in the buyback programme) but also their interpersonal communicative actions (e.g. talking with other owners) and attitudinal reactions (e.g. perceptions of the VW-EPA settlement). We conducted two surveys—one prior to and one after a settlement was reached between VW and US regulators—to examine owners’ behavioural and attitudinal responses. Here we present descriptive, topline results from these surveys, which reveal relatively strong but heterogeneous owner engagement with the scandal. Owners report significant ambivalence about their own and VW’s mitigative options moving forward. Given the role owners will play in mitigating the environmental and health impacts of the scandal, understanding their responses is of critical importance.