IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i12p4861-d371533.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Communicating Climate Change Risk: A Content Analysis of IPCC’s Summary for Policymakers

Author

Listed:
  • P. Marijn Poortvliet

    (Strategic Communication Group, Wageningen University, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Meredith T. Niles

    (Department of Nutrition and Food Sciences & Food Systems Program, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA)

  • Jeroen A. Veraart

    (Wageningen Environmental Research, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Saskia E. Werners

    (Wageningen Environmental Research, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
    Water Systems and Global Change Group, Wageningen University, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Fiona C. Korporaal

    (Strategic Communication Group, Wageningen University, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands)

  • Bob C. Mulder

    (Strategic Communication Group, Wageningen University, 6700 EW Wageningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

This study investigated the effectiveness of climate change risk communication in terms of its theoretical potential to stimulate recipients’ awareness and behavioral change. We selected the summary for policy makers (SPM) of the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report in order to conduct a content analysis; the extended parallel process model and construal level theory served as conceptual lenses to perform the analysis. Specifically, we evaluated to what extent the SPM included informational elements of threat, efficacy and psychological distance related to climate change. The results showed that threat information was prominently present, but efficacy information was less frequently included, and when it was, more often in the latter parts of the SPM. With respect to construal level it was found that in the IPCC report concrete representations were used only sparingly. Theoretical relevance and implications for climate change risk communication with key audiences are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • P. Marijn Poortvliet & Meredith T. Niles & Jeroen A. Veraart & Saskia E. Werners & Fiona C. Korporaal & Bob C. Mulder, 2020. "Communicating Climate Change Risk: A Content Analysis of IPCC’s Summary for Policymakers," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-14, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:4861-:d:371533
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4861/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/12/4861/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Esther Turnhout & Bob Bloomfield & Mike Hulme & Johannes Vogel & Brian Wynne, 2012. "Listen to the voices of experience," Nature, Nature, vol. 488(7412), pages 454-455, August.
    2. Meredith Niles & Margaret Brown & Robyn Dynes, 2016. "Farmer’s intended and actual adoption of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 277-295, March.
    3. Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2005. "American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1433-1442, December.
    4. Unknown, 2014. "Media Coverage 2014," 2014: Ethics, Efficiency and Food Security: Feeding the 9 Billion, Well, 26-28 August 2014 225573, Crawford Fund.
    5. Paul Slovic, 1999. "Trust, Emotion, Sex, Politics, and Science: Surveying the Risk‐Assessment Battlefield," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(4), pages 689-701, August.
    6. Sander C. S. Clahsen & Irene van Kamp & Betty C. Hakkert & Theo G. Vermeire & Aldert H. Piersma & Erik Lebret, 2019. "Why Do Countries Regulate Environmental Health Risks Differently? A Theoretical Perspective," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 439-461, February.
    7. G. J. S. Hollin & W. Pearce, 2015. "Tension between scientific certainty and meaning complicates communication of IPCC reports," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 753-756, August.
    8. Tien Ming Lee & Ezra M. Markowitz & Peter D. Howe & Chia-Ying Ko & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2015. "Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(11), pages 1014-1020, November.
    9. Peter D. Howe & Matto Mildenberger & Jennifer R. Marlon & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2015. "Geographic variation in opinions on climate change at state and local scales in the USA," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(6), pages 596-603, June.
    10. Meredith T. Niles & Margaret Brown & Robyn Dynes, 2016. "Farmer’s intended and actual adoption of climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(2), pages 277-295, March.
    11. Arthur Petersen & Jason Blackstock & Neil Morisetti, 2015. "New leadership for a user-friendly IPCC," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(10), pages 909-911, October.
    12. Kurt Neuwirth & Sharon Dunwoody & Robert J. Griffin, 2000. "Protection Motivation and Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(5), pages 721-734, October.
    13. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    14. Richard Black, 2015. "No more summaries for wonks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(4), pages 282-284, April.
    15. Charlotte Jones & Donald W. Hine & Anthony D. G. Marks, 2017. "The Future is Now: Reducing Psychological Distance to Increase Public Engagement with Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(2), pages 331-341, February.
    16. John Sterman, 2011. "Communicating climate change risks in a skeptical world," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 811-826, October.
    17. Brenda Ekwurzel & Peter Frumhoff & James McCarthy, 2011. "Climate uncertainties and their discontents: increasing the impact of assessments on public understanding of climate risks and choices," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 791-802, October.
    18. Ralf Barkemeyer & Suraje Dessai & Beatriz Monge-Sanz & Barbara Gabriella Renzi & Giulio Napolitano, 2016. "Linguistic analysis of IPCC summaries for policymakers and associated coverage," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(3), pages 311-316, March.
    19. P. Bubeck & W. J. W. Botzen & J. C. J. H. Aerts, 2012. "A Review of Risk Perceptions and Other Factors that Influence Flood Mitigation Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1481-1495, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Emma Frances Bloomfield & Chris Manktelow, 2021. "Climate communication and storytelling," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-7, August.
    2. Hea Young Lim & Ki Han Kwon, 2023. "Sustainable Assessment of the Environmental Activities of Major Cosmetics and Personal Care Companies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-20, September.
    3. Christina Marie Mitcheltree, 2023. "Towards a sense of urgency for innovation realization: a case study on complacency asymmetries in interorganizational relations," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-37, December.
    4. Andreea Hancu-Budui & Ana Zorio-Grima & Jose Blanco-Vega, 2020. "Audit Institutions in the European Union: Public Service Promotion, Environmental Engagement and COVID Crisis Communication through Social Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(23), pages 1-32, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.
    2. Loredana Antronico & Roberto Coscarelli & Francesco De Pascale & Dante Di Matteo, 2020. "Climate Change and Social Perception: A Case Study in Southern Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-24, August.
    3. Olugbemi Mosunmola Aroke & Behzad Esmaeili & Sojung Claire Kim, 2021. "Impact of Climate Change on Transportation Infrastructure: Comparing Perception Differences between the US Public and the Department of Transportation (DOT) Professionals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-19, October.
    4. Alexa Tanner & Joseph Árvai, 2018. "Perceptions of Risk and Vulnerability Following Exposure to a Major Natural Disaster: The Calgary Flood of 2013," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(3), pages 548-561, March.
    5. Ajay S. Singh & Francis Eanes & Linda S. Prokopy, 2020. "Climate change uncertainty among American farmers: an examination of multi-dimensional uncertainty and attitudes towards agricultural adaptation to climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1047-1064, October.
    6. James R. Meldrum & Patricia A. Champ & Hannah Brenkert‐Smith & Travis Warziniack & Christopher M. Barth & Lilia C. Falk, 2015. "Understanding Gaps Between the Risk Perceptions of Wildland–Urban Interface (WUI) Residents and Wildfire Professionals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(9), pages 1746-1761, September.
    7. Lisette Beek & Manjana Milkoreit & Linda Prokopy & Jason B. Reed & Joost Vervoort & Arjan Wardekker & Roberta Weiner, 2022. "The effects of serious gaming on risk perceptions of climate tipping points," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 170(3), pages 1-23, February.
    8. Liang-Chu Ho & Yu-Hsien Sung & Chia-Chun Wu & Pei-Shan Lee & Wen-Bin Chiou, 2020. "Envisaging Mitigation Action Can Induce Lower Discounting toward Future Environmental Gains and Promote Pro-Environmental Behavior," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-12, November.
    9. Michal Titko & Jozef Ristvej & Zenon Zamiar, 2021. "Population Preparedness for Disasters and Extreme Weather Events as a Predictor of Building a Resilient Society: The Slovak Republic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-24, February.
    10. R. S. Clements & S. K. Birthisel & A. Daigneault & E. Gallandt & D. Johnson & T. Wentworth & M. T. Niles, 2021. "Climate change in the context of whole-farming systems: opportunities for improved outreach," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    11. Caroline Brock & Van R. Haden, 2024. "Amish and Non-Amish Farmer Perspectives on Climate Change Causes, Effects, and Adaptation Strategies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-14, January.
    12. Sandra Ricart & Jorge Olcina & Antonio M. Rico, 2018. "Evaluating Public Attitudes and Farmers’ Beliefs towards Climate Change Adaptation: Awareness, Perception, and Populism at European Level," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-24, December.
    13. Stefan Linde, 2020. "The Politicization of Risk: Party Cues, Polarization, and Public Perceptions of Climate Change Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2002-2018, October.
    14. Abinash Bhattachan & Matthew D. Jurjonas & Priscilla R. Morris & Paul J. Taillie & Lindsey S. Smart & Ryan E. Emanuel & Erin L. Seekamp, 2019. "Linking residential saltwater intrusion risk perceptions to physical exposure of climate change impacts in rural coastal communities of North Carolina," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(3), pages 1277-1295, July.
    15. Helena Fornwagner & Oliver P. Hauser, 2022. "Climate Action for (My) Children," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 81(1), pages 95-130, January.
    16. Tianlong Yu & Hao Yang & Xiaowei Luo & Yifeng Jiang & Xiang Wu & Jingqi Gao, 2021. "Scientometric Analysis of Disaster Risk Perception: 2000–2020," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-19, December.
    17. Lars Mewes & Leonie Tuitjer & Peter Dirksmeier, 2024. "Exploring the variances of climate change opinions in Germany at a fine-grained local scale," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-14, December.
    18. Theodoros Skevas & Ray Massey & Jasper Grashuis, 2022. "Farmer adoption and intensity of use of extreme weather adaptation and mitigation strategies: evidence from a sample of Missouri farmers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 174(1), pages 1-23, September.
    19. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    20. George Cunningham & Brian P. McCullough & Shelby Hohensee, 2020. "Physical activity and climate change attitudes," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 61-74, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:12:p:4861-:d:371533. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.