IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v32y2012i6p1033-1040.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions

Author

Listed:
  • Sabine Roeser

Abstract

This article discusses the potential role that emotions might play in enticing a lifestyle that diminishes climate change. Climate change is an important challenge for society. There is a growing consensus that climate change is due to our behavior, but few people are willing to significantly adapt their lifestyle. Empirical studies show that people lack a sense of urgency: they experience climate change as a problem that affects people in distant places and in a far future. Several scholars have claimed that emotions might be a necessary tool in communication about climate change. This article sketches a theoretical framework that supports this hypothesis, drawing on insights from the ethics of risk and the philosophy of emotions. It has been shown by various scholars that emotions are important determinants in risk perception. However, emotions are generally considered to be irrational states and are hence excluded from communication and political decision making about risky technologies and climate change, or they are used instrumentally to create support for a position. However, the literature on the ethics of risk shows that the dominant, technocratic approach to risk misses the normative‐ethical dimension that is inherent to decisions about acceptable risk. Emotion research shows that emotions are necessary for practical and moral decision making. These insights can be applied to communication about climate change. Emotions are necessary for understanding the moral impact of the risks of climate change, and they also paradigmatically provide for motivation. Emotions might be the missing link in effective communication about climate change.

Suggested Citation

  • Sabine Roeser, 2012. "Risk Communication, Public Engagement, and Climate Change: A Role for Emotions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1033-1040, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:6:p:1033-1040
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01812.x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01812.x
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01812.x?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Anneloes L. Meijnders & Cees J. H. Midden & Henk A. M. Wilke, 2001. "Role of Negative Emotion in Communication about CO2 Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(5), pages 955-955, October.
    2. Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2005. "American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1433-1442, December.
    3. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521727327.
    4. 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.
    5. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    6. Wolff, Jonathan, 2006. "Risk, Fear, Blame, Shame And The Regulation Of Public Safety," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(3), pages 409-427, November.
    7. Susanne C. Moser, 2010. "Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 31-53, January.
    8. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521898690.
    9. Ali Siddiq Alhakami & Paul Slovic, 1994. "A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(6), pages 1085-1096, December.
    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. Nathaniel Geiger & Anagha Gore & Claire V. Squire & Shahzeen Z. Attari, 2021. "Investigating similarities and differences in individual reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic and the climate crisis," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(1), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Philippe Odou & Marie Schill, 2020. "How anticipated emotions shape behavioral intentions to fight climate change," Post-Print hal-02929920, HAL.
    3. Douglas L. Bessette & Lauren A. Mayer & Bryan Cwik & Martin Vezér & Klaus Keller & Robert J. Lempert & Nancy Tuana, 2017. "Building a Values‐Informed Mental Model for New Orleans Climate Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(10), pages 1993-2004, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Wiarda, Martijn & Sobota, Vladimir C.M. & Janssen, Matthijs J. & van de Kaa, Geerten & Yaghmaei, Emad & Doorn, Neelke, 2023. "Public participation in mission-oriented innovation projects," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    6. Susanne Stoll-Kleemann & Susanne Nicolai & Philipp Franikowski, 2022. "Exploring the Moral Challenges of Confronting High-Carbon-Emitting Behavior: The Role of Emotions and Media Coverage," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-19, May.
    7. Jing Shi & Vivianne H. M. Visschers & Michael Siegrist, 2015. "Public Perception of Climate Change: The Importance of Knowledge and Cultural Worldviews," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(12), pages 2183-2201, December.
    8. Wamsler, Christine & Brink, Ebba, 2018. "Mindsets for Sustainability: Exploring the Link Between Mindfulness and Sustainable Climate Adaptation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C), pages 55-61.
    9. Alexandra Jiricka-Pürrer & Thomas F. Wachter & Patrick Driscoll, 2019. "Perspectives from 2037—Can Environmental Impact Assessment be the Solution for an Early Consideration of Climate Change-related Impacts?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Lejla Dervisevic & Leigh Raymond & Linda J. Pfeiffer & Jessica V. Merzdorf, 2021. "Trade-offs versus reassurance: framing competing risks in the 2016 Zika outbreak," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(4), pages 729-747, December.
    11. Tai-Yi Yu & Tai-Kuei Yu, 2017. "The Moderating Effects of Students’ Personality Traits on Pro-Environmental Behavioral Intentions in Response to Climate Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, November.
    12. Moon, Won-Ki & Kahlor, Lee Ann & Olson, Hilary Clement, 2020. "Understanding public support for carbon capture and storage policy: The roles of social capital, stakeholder perceptions, and perceived risk/benefit of technology," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    13. Buah, Eric & Linnanen, Lassi & Wu, Huapeng, 2020. "Emotional responses to energy projects: A new method for modeling and prediction beyond self-reported emotion measure," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    14. Kirtika Deo & Abhnil Amtesh Prasad, 2020. "Evidence of Climate Change Engagement Behaviour on a Facebook Fan-Based Page," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-16, August.
    15. Neide P. Areia & Alexandre O. Tavares & José Manuel Mendes, 2021. "Environment Actors Confronting a Post Climate-Related Disaster Scenario: A Feasibility Study of an Action-Based Intervention Aiming to Promote Climate Action," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(11), pages 1-14, June.
    16. Siyao Liu & Bin Yu & Chan Xu & Min Zhao & Jing Guo, 2022. "Characteristics of Collective Resilience and Its Influencing Factors from the Perspective of Psychological Emotion: A Case Study of COVID-19 in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-19, November.
    17. Tobia Spampatti & Ulf J. J. Hahnel & Evelina Trutnevyte & Tobias Brosch, 2024. "Psychological inoculation strategies to fight climate disinformation across 12 countries," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(2), pages 380-398, February.
    18. Jeryl L. Mumpower & Xinsheng Liu & Arnold Vedlitz, 2016. "Predictors of the perceived risk of climate change and preferred resource levels for climate change management programs," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(6), pages 798-809, June.
    19. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014. "The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 937-948, May.
    20. 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.
    21. Odou, Philippe & Schill, Marie, 2020. "How anticipated emotions shape behavioral intentions to fight climate change," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 243-253.

    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. Felix J. Formanski & Marcel M. Pein & David D. Loschelder & John-Oliver Engler & Onno Husen & Johann M. Majer, 2022. "Tipping points ahead? How laypeople respond to linear versus nonlinear climate change predictions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Joshua Ettinger & Peter Walton & James Painter & Thomas DiBlasi, 2021. "Climate of hope or doom and gloom? Testing the climate change hope vs. fear communications debate through online videos," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 1-19, January.
    3. Harriet Hawkins & Anja Kanngieser, 2017. "Artful climate change communication: overcoming abstractions, insensibilities, and distances," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(5), September.
    4. Søren H. Wenstøp & Fred Wenstøp, 2016. "Operational research virtues in the face of climate change," EURO Journal on Decision Processes, Springer;EURO - The Association of European Operational Research Societies, vol. 4(1), pages 53-72, June.
    5. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014. "The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(5), pages 937-948, May.
    6. Michael Greenberg & Charles Haas & Anthony Cox & Karen Lowrie & Katherine McComas & Warner North, 2012. "Ten Most Important Accomplishments in Risk Analysis, 1980–2010," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(5), pages 771-781, May.
    7. Martina Raue & Lisa A. D'Ambrosio & Carley Ward & Chaiwoo Lee & Claire Jacquillat & Joseph F. Coughlin, 2019. "The Influence of Feelings While Driving Regular Cars on the Perception and Acceptance of Self‐Driving Cars," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(2), pages 358-374, February.
    8. Johnson Kakeu & Erik Paul Johnson, 2018. "Information Exchange and Transnational Environmental Problems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 71(2), pages 583-604, October.
    9. Richard S.J. Tol, 2019. "The elusive consensus on climate change," Working Paper Series 0319, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    10. Shoshana Shiloh & Gülbanu Güvenç & Dilek Önkal, 2007. "Cognitive and Emotional Representations of Terror Attacks: A Cross‐Cultural Exploration," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(2), pages 397-409, April.
    11. Judith I. M. de Groot & Linda Steg & Wouter Poortinga, 2013. "Values, Perceived Risks and Benefits, and Acceptability of Nuclear Energy," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(2), pages 307-317, February.
    12. Roger Jones, 2011. "The latest iteration of IPCC uncertainty guidance—an author perspective," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 108(4), pages 733-743, October.
    13. Paul Slovic, 2020. "Risk Perception and Risk Analysis in a Hyperpartisan and Virtuously Violent World," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2231-2239, November.
    14. Jochen Hinkel & Diana Mangalagiu & Alexander Bisaro & J. David Tàbara, 2020. "Transformative narratives for climate action," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 160(4), pages 495-506, June.
    15. Christopher L. Cummings & Sonny Rosenthal, 2018. "Climate change and technology: examining opinion formation of geoengineering," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 208-215, June.
    16. Ellen M. Peters & Burt Burraston & C. K. Mertz, 2004. "An Emotion‐Based Model of Risk Perception and Stigma Susceptibility: Cognitive Appraisals of Emotion, Affective Reactivity, Worldviews, and Risk Perceptions in the Generation of Technological Stigma," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5), pages 1349-1367, October.
    17. Ruxandra Malina Petrescu-Mag & Philippe Burny & Ioan Banatean-Dunea & Dacinia Crina Petrescu, 2022. "How Climate Change Science Is Reflected in People’s Minds. A Cross-Country Study on People’s Perceptions of Climate Change," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(7), pages 1-25, April.
    18. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    19. Joanna Sokolowska & Patrycja Sleboda, 2015. "The Inverse Relation Between Risks and Benefits: The Role of Affect and Expertise," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(7), pages 1252-1267, July.
    20. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wly:riskan:v:32:y:2012:i:6:p:1033-1040. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    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.