IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v26y2024i1d10.1007_s10668-022-02735-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate change versus the water–energy–food nexus: the oldness or newness of the scientific issues as a factor in the deficit model and the hierarchy of response model

Author

Listed:
  • Qingjiang Yao

    (Lamar University)

  • Chiung-Fang Chang

    (Lamar University)

  • Praphul Joshi

    (Sam Houston State University)

  • Chelsea McDonald

    (Independent Researcher)

Abstract

Environmental issues need public support to be solved. But the theoretical model that supports providing the public scientific information to enhance their support for scientific issues, the deficit model, is confirmed in some studies but disapproved in others. Hypothesizing that the difference lies partially in the topic of issues used in those studies, this study tests the deficit model (and the expanded linkage from knowledge to attitude to behavioral intention in the hierarchy of response model) with the complex issue of climate change (N = 379), which is entangled with political and ideological confounders, and the new water–energy–food nexus (N = 524), which is involved with few confounders. The survey on climate change, a hotly debated issue deeply entangled with many social, economic, and political factors, revealed a substantial positive correlation between attitude and behavioral intention and no correlation between knowledge and attitude or behavioral intention, producing no evidence to support the deficit model and partial evidence to support the hierarchy of response model. The partial correlation analysis of this data, controlling age, gender, and ideology, also identified a negative relationship between knowledge and behavioral intention, further calling researchers’ attention to the influence of the complexness of the scientific event on public information processing. The survey on the WEF nexus, a new scientific approach that systematically governs water, energy, and food as a nexus, showed positive correlations of knowledge with attitude and of attitude with behavioral intention, confirming the deficit model as well as the traditional response hierarchy model. The study suggests that when confounding variables do not intervene, the deficit model and the traditional response model hold to guide science communication projects and garner public support for science and the environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Qingjiang Yao & Chiung-Fang Chang & Praphul Joshi & Chelsea McDonald, 2024. "Climate change versus the water–energy–food nexus: the oldness or newness of the scientific issues as a factor in the deficit model and the hierarchy of response model," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 823-840, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02735-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02735-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-022-02735-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-022-02735-3?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 search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ariel Malka & Jon A. Krosnick & Gary Langer, 2009. "The Association of Knowledge with Concern About Global Warming: Trusted Information Sources Shape Public Thinking," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(5), pages 633-647, May.
    2. 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.
    3. Lawrence C Hamilton & Joel Hartter & Mary Lemcke-Stampone & David W Moore & Thomas G Safford, 2015. "Tracking Public Beliefs About Anthropogenic Climate Change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(9), pages 1-14, September.
    4. Lawrence Hamilton, 2011. "Education, politics and opinions about climate change evidence for interaction effects," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 104(2), pages 231-242, January.
    5. Christina Demski & Stuart Capstick & Nick Pidgeon & Robert Gennaro Sposato & Alexa Spence, 2017. "Experience of extreme weather affects climate change mitigation and adaptation responses," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 149-164, January.
    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. Andrew G. Meyer, 2022. "Do economic conditions affect climate change beliefs and support for climate action? Evidence from the US in the wake of the Great Recession," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 60(1), pages 64-86, January.
    2. Michael Hannon, 2022. "Are knowledgeable voters better voters?," Politics, Philosophy & Economics, , vol. 21(1), pages 29-54, February.
    3. Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2018. "Self-assessed understanding of climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 151(2), pages 349-362, November.
    4. Shoots-Reinhard, Brittany & Goodwin, Raleigh & Bjälkebring, Pär & Markowitz, David M. & Silverstein, Michael C. & Peters, Ellen, 2021. "Ability-related political polarization in the COVID-19 pandemic," Intelligence, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. 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.
    6. Whitney Fleming & Adam L. Hayes & Katherine M. Crosman & Ann Bostrom, 2021. "Indiscriminate, Irrelevant, and Sometimes Wrong: Causal Misconceptions about Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(1), pages 157-178, January.
    7. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    8. Baiardi, Donatella & Morana, Claudio, 2021. "Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    9. Johansson, Alva & Berggren, Niclas & Nilsson, Therese, 2022. "Intolerance predicts climate skepticism," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    10. Kathryn Stevenson & M. Peterson & Howard Bondell & Susan Moore & Sarah Carrier, 2014. "Overcoming skepticism with education: interacting influences of worldview and climate change knowledge on perceived climate change risk among adolescents," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 126(3), pages 293-304, October.
    11. Raya Muttarak & Thanyaporn Chankrajang, 2015. "Who is concerned about and takes action on climate change? Gender and education divides among Thais," Vienna Yearbook of Population Research, Vienna Institute of Demography (VID) of the Austrian Academy of Sciences in Vienna, vol. 13(1), pages 193-220.
    12. Lawrence C. Hamilton & Joel Hartter & Kei Saito, 2015. "Trust in Scientists on Climate Change and Vaccines," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, August.
    13. 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.
    14. Jessica E. Hughes & James D. Sauer & Aaron Drummond & Laura E. Brumby & Matthew A. Palmer, 2023. "Endorsement of scientific inquiry promotes better evaluation of climate policy evidence," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(6), pages 1-20, June.
    15. Adrienne R. Brown & Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2024. "Belief-neutral Versus Belief-linked Knowledge as Predictors of Climate-change Opinions," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, June.
    16. Grant R. McDermott, 2021. "Skeptic priors and climate consensus," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(1), pages 1-23, May.
    17. Monica Novackova & Richard S.J. Tol, 2018. "Climate Change Awareness and Willingness to Pay for its Mitigation: Evidence from the UK," Working Paper Series 0318, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    18. Toby Bolsen & James N. Druckman & Fay Lomax Cook, 2015. "Citizens’, Scientists’, and Policy Advisors’ Beliefs about Global Warming," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 658(1), pages 271-295, March.
    19. Hayam Elshirbiny & Wokje Abrahamse, 2020. "Public risk perception of climate change in Egypt: a mixed methods study of predictors and implications," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 10(3), pages 242-254, September.
    20. Ting Liu & Nick Shryane & Mark Elliot, 2022. "Attitudes to climate change risk: classification of and transitions in the UK population between 2012 and 2020," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.

    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:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02735-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.