The full paper is now available at
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1981907
Abstract:
We conducted a two-nation study (United States, n = 1500; England, n =
1500) to test a novel theory of science communication. The cultural
cognition thesis posits that individuals make
There is an saying that goes something like *To get along one needs to go
along.* and I believe this old saying encapsulates the issue of 'Cultural
Theory of Risk'. The general issue loosely known as 'The Moral Hazard' is
not an overly complicated scenario and core guidance in understanding
Dear Dan,
Views of nature
I've read through the Thompson paper of 2003 (Chapter 8) and your paper of
2012, attached to the email sent by Jesse Reynolds a few days ago. Neither
paper tackles geoengineering, but both help to define four camps rather
than the two I had assumed in my last email.
John,
Yes buck up = cheer up over here, sorry or the cowboy colloquialism.
Psychology is indeed at the root of behavior, a little detail they didn't teach
us in Earth Science grad school. That's why we need the professionals in human
behavior on our side - Madison Ave, Mark Zuckerberg, etc ;-)
I think oversimplifies things a bit.
There's a component of society, certain very large corporations, who would
be delighted to see major CC impacts that require massive geoengineering
efforts. They're the companies that will do the work. And, as I argued
recently on my blog
Hi Greg,
The theory is that people tend to be polarised into two camps. One camp is
against the idea that climate change can have anything to do with our
greenhouse gas emissions; and therefore (subconsciously) this camp is
against geoengineering because it would admit of a massive problem to be
My understanding is that many conservatives are rather fond of
geoengineering as it allows the continuing BAU pathway (at least
superficially).
Further, as David Keith has pointed out, a degree of moral hazard is
entirely rational. However, what's surprising is that a degree of negative
or
Buck up, John. Once the real hazards of rising sea level, failed crops, and
acidified oceans materialize, the decision-makers just might yearn for some
hazards of the moral kind. And you and I might still be around when that
happens. Even then there is no guarantee that any countering action
FYI, the lead author of that paper, Dan Kahan, posted two additional blog
posts on culture, values, and geoengineering:
http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2014/2/24/geoengineering-the-cultural-plasticity-of-climate-change-ris.html
This observation may bear repeating:
To be effective, science communication must successfully negotiate both
channels. That is, in addition to furnishing individuals with valid and
pertinent information about how the world works, it must avail itself of the
cues necessary to assure individuals
10 matches
Mail list logo
