IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/aumajo/v21y2013i4p212-217.html

Targeting segments in the Australian community to increase support for climate change policy

Author

Listed:
  • Morrison, Mark
  • Duncan, Roderick
  • Parton, Kevin A.

Abstract

Public support for policies that address climate change, in Australia and elsewhere, has become polarised, and has declined in Australia. The polarisation and decline has occurred despite considerable efforts by government, non-government and scientific bodies to raise levels of support. In this research, therefore, we aim to better understand the preferences of politically salient household segments with the objective of more effectively communicating to those segments the desirability of addressing climate change. Replicating an American market segmentation study, we find that 26% of participants fell into the most politically salient household segment, labelled Cautious. This segment is relatively open to changing its views about climate change, and is supportive of both government and opposition policies. These findings suggest that segment members will potentially be influenced by targeted media campaigns by either side of politics. Additional findings relate to effective communication channels, and trusted sources including the use of celebrities.

Suggested Citation

  • Morrison, Mark & Duncan, Roderick & Parton, Kevin A., 2013. "Targeting segments in the Australian community to increase support for climate change policy," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(4), pages 212-217.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:aumajo:v:21:y:2013:i:4:p:212-217
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.09.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1441358213000402
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ausmj.2013.09.001?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Carson, Richard T. & Louviere, Jordan J. & Wei, Edward, 2010. "Alternative Australian climate change plans: The public's views," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 902-911, February.
    2. Tjernström, E. & Tietenberg, T., 2008. "Do differences in attitudes explain differences in national climate change policies?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 315-324, April.
    3. Dan M. Kahan & Ellen Peters & Maggie Wittlin & Paul Slovic & Lisa Larrimore Ouellette & Donald Braman & Gregory Mandel, 2012. "The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 2(10), pages 732-735, October.
    4. Edward W Maibach & Anthony Leiserowitz & Connie Roser-Renouf & C K Mertz, 2011. "Identifying Like-Minded Audiences for Global Warming Public Engagement Campaigns: An Audience Segmentation Analysis and Tool Development," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(3), pages 1-9, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    2. Jonathon P. Schuldt & Peter K. Enns & Victoria Cavaliere, 2017. "Does the label really matter? Evidence that the US public continues to doubt “global warming” more than “climate change”," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 271-280, July.
    3. Johansson, Alva & Berggren, Niclas & Nilsson, Therese, 2022. "Intolerance predicts climate skepticism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    4. Chankrajang, Thanyaporn & Muttarak, Raya, 2017. "Green Returns to Education: Does Schooling Contribute to Pro-Environmental Behaviours? Evidence from Thailand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 434-448.
    5. Cafferata, Alessia & Dávila-Fernández, Marwil J. & Sordi, Serena, 2021. "Seeing what can(not) be seen: Confirmation bias, employment dynamics and climate change," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 189(C), pages 567-586.
    6. repec:plo:pone00:0134868 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Donatella Baiardi, 2023. "What do you think about climate change?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1255-1313, September.
    8. Wolf, Ingo & Schröder, Tobias, 2019. "Connotative meanings of sustainable mobility: A segmentation approach using cultural sentiments," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 259-280.
    9. repec:rim:rimwps:21-16 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Kruse, Tobias & Atkinson, Giles, 2022. "Understanding public support for international climate adaptation payments: Evidence from a choice experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 194(C).
    11. Eugenio Verrina, 2023. "Upset but (almost) correct: a conceptual replication of Di Tella, Perez-Truglia, Babino and Sigman (2015)," Journal of the Economic Science Association, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(2), pages 327-336, December.
    12. Casey A. Klofstad & Joseph E. Uscinski & Jennifer M. Connolly & Jonathan P. West, 2019. "What drives people to believe in Zika conspiracy theories?," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-8, December.
    13. Michel, Hanno, 2020. "From local to global: The role of knowledge, transfer, and capacity building for successful energy transitions," Discussion Papers, Research Group Digital Mobility and Social Differentiation SP III 2020-603, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    14. Branden B. Johnson, 2017. "Explaining Americans’ responses to dread epidemics: an illustration with Ebola in late 2014," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(10), pages 1338-1357, October.
    15. Kevin Wong & Geoff Walton & Gavin Bailey, 2021. "Using information science to enhance educational preventing violent extremism programs," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(3), pages 362-376, March.
    16. Rebecca Page & Lisa Dilling, 2020. "How experiences of climate extremes motivate adaptation among water managers," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 161(3), pages 499-516, August.
    17. E. Keith Smith & Adam Mayer, 2019. "Anomalous Anglophones? Contours of free market ideology, political polarization, and climate change attitudes in English-speaking countries, Western European and post-Communist states," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(1), pages 17-34, January.
    18. Anthony Evans & Willem Sleegers & Žan Mlakar, 2020. "Individual differences in receptivity to scientific bullshit," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 15(3), pages 401-412, May.
    19. Leung, B. T. K., 2018. "Limited Cognitive Ability and Selective Information Processing," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1891, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    20. Guillaume Peterson St-Laurent & Shannon Hagerman & Robert Kozak, 2018. "What risks matter? Public views about assisted migration and other climate-adaptive reforestation strategies," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(3), pages 573-587, December.
    21. Lim, Sungmin & Choi, Syngjoo & Hong, Jong Ho & Kim, Booyuel & Lee, Heerae & Shin, Jinwook, 2025. "Promoting willingness to pay for environmental charges in electricity tariff: Evidence from a randomized survey experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
    22. Hye Kyung Kim & Yungwook Kim, 2019. "Risk Information Seeking and Processing About Particulate Air Pollution in South Korea: The Roles of Cultural Worldview," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(5), pages 1071-1087, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:eee:aumajo:v:21:y:2013:i:4:p:212-217. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/australasian-marketing-journal/ .

    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.