Actual carbon emissions are the ‘bottom line’ of what needs to happen to tackle climate change, and a lagging indicator of these efforts. It’s encouraging that, for the first time, emissions appear to have stopped growing on a year-by-year basis, according to data from the IEA. Let’s hope they actually start dropping soon!
Our fifth Environmental Choices report, 2013 edition, is now available.
There are three interlinked themes to this report.
The first theme is to explore the values that people have and how they relate to their attitudes towards climate change. One hypothesis we wanted to test was whether people concerned about climate change were less materialistic than other people. Another hypothesis was to test the idea (from the quote shown in the ‘Preface to 2013 edition of Environmental Choices’ of this report) that “eco-warriors generally have no money”. Findings from this research show the benefits of using such an evidence-based approach to understanding society, and the dangers of being misled by cultural stereotypes.
The second theme is to explore how peoples personal passions are associated with their concern about climate change. Using a Predictive Analytics approach, the analysis shows how it is possible to predict the probability of someone being concerned about climate change by knowing their age, gender, nationality and their passions.
The final theme is about incentives. The analysis considers how people’s vested interests might impact their attitudes towards climate change – specifically in terms of their employment. Do people working in fossil fuel industries tend to reject the threat of climate change?
This is one of 14 reports from the Environmental Choices study conducted in Canada, England and the US. The original research was conducted in late 2008, and the reports have had a major upgrade for the ‘2013 edition’ – complete with new analyses, easier navigation, better distribution through books and via iPAD, and new pricing.
With Environmental Choices, our general goal has been about understanding how much ‘concern about climate change’ makes a difference to people in the choices they make and the policies they would support.
Alan Rusbridger today explains “Climate Change: why the Guardian is putting threat to Earth front and centre”.
In a previous post I was critical of how a Pew poll about climate change has been interpreted:
As a voter, the key reason that I personally would choose between political candidates would be according to how well, in my opinion, they would tackle climate change. For me, this is a stronger reason to vote for someone than any party political allegiance I might have. How many other people are like this? That is the kind of analysis I would like to make from the Pew poll. It is why I think that Whit Ayer’s analysis of the Pew poll is flawed.
A New York Times article published today addresses this exact issue very well.
Prior to COP 19 in Paris, each country has been asked to share their climate change plans. The UN has set-up a site to receive these plans, where it will also be possible to view these plans.