Our February Behavioural Meetup featured Prof. Lorraine Whitmarsh from the University of Cardiff: Despite scientific consensus about the reality and severity of climate change, the public appears to show relatively little concern about the issue and to be taking few actions to tackle it. In this talk, we will discuss what influences public perceptions and how they may be shaped by communication. Recent survey and interview data, and findings from psychological experiments will be used to expose the strong ideological and social influences on public attitudes to climate change. Research will also be presented on low-carbon lifestyles, along with insights into fostering behaviour change, including new research to achieve behavioural ‘spillover’ (i.e., when changing one behaviour leads to further behavioural changes).

1. Behavioural Meetup
Guest Speaker: Prof. Lorraine Whitmarsh
Think global, act local?
Perceptions of and behavioural responses to
climate change

2. Think global, act local?
Perceptions of and
behavioural responses to
climate change
Prof. Lorraine Whitmarsh
Cardiff University &
Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research

3. Climate change – far and near

4. Climate change and human behaviour
11%
13%
2%
1%
20%
18%
10%
8%
6%
4%
7%
Government expenditure
Capital investment
Education
Communications
Recreation and leisure
Food and catering
Space heating
Household
Clothing and footwear
Commuting
Health and hygiene
UK carbon footprint, by functional use (Druckman & Jackson, 2010)
•76% of UK emissions can be attributed to households

5. Climate change: political response

6. Climate change: public response
Capstick, Whitmarsh, Poortinga, Pidgeon & Upham, 2014
Worry about climate
change (US public)

7. Climate change is perceived as a distant risk
Q. How serious a threat is climate change to…
O’Neill & Nicholson-
Cole, 2009
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
you people in
local
community
people in
UK
people in
other
countries
animals
and plants
in local
area
an
and
in
not serious
very serious
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
you people in
local
community
people in
UK
people in
other
countries
animals
and plants
in local
area
an
and
in
not serious
very serious
• Optimism bias
• Temporal discounting, psychological distance

8. What influences our
perceptions of climate
change?

9. Direct experience and climate change perceptions
•Direct experience usually more important for shaping risk
perceptions than second-hand (mediated) information (Slovic, 2000)
•But… no difference between flood victims and non-flood victims in
perceptions of climate change (Whitmarsh, 2008)
•But we experience weather, not climate (change); and the issue is
highly politicised… so direct experience not persuasive by itself
Whitmarsh, 2008

10. Direct experience is mediated through values
Clayton et al., 2015. Nature Climate Change
“Much diversity in [public] understanding can be attributed not to what we learn
about climate change but to how, and from whom, we learn: the sources of our
information and how we evaluate those sources”
E.g.,
•People who believe
climate change is not
happening are less likely
to remember
(accurately) that they
had experienced a
warmer-than-usual
summer during the
previous year (Howe &
Leiserowitz, 2013)

11. Why are some people sceptical about
climate change?

13. Climate change attitudes are ideological
Whitmarsh, 2008; 2011; Corner et al, 2012; Lewandowsky & Whitmarsh, 2014; Xenias et al., submitted
Demographics0 1 2 3 4 5
Green
Lib Dem
Labour
Conservative
UKIP
SNP
BNP
F(12,1472)=10.85, p<.001
Climate scepticism score
Political affiliation:

14. • Values (individualism, right-of-centre politics) and behaviour (energy-
intensive lifestyles) are significantly correlated with scepticism
• Denial can be a coping response to threatening information (e.g., Carver et
al., 1989)
• Is climate scepticism an identity protective response to threatening
information. i.e., would people believe in climate change if it didn’t
threaten their way of life/identity?
• Two studies: hypothetical risk (student sample) and climate change (UK
sample), comparing risk info. with vs. without behaviour change message
Study 1. Is scepticism a defence against threatening info?
Xenias et al,
under review

15. Study 1. Materials
Scientists warn of UK climate risks
Britain will experience water shortages and flooding by the end of the
century if temperatures are left unchecked, analysis shows.
Nearly 18 million British people will experience more water shortages
and 160,000 will be affected by coastal flooding by the end of the
century if temperatures are left unchecked, according to new analysis.
The data, which was launched at the UN climate talks in Durban, shows
all 24 countries included in the report have warmed since the 1960s
and the frequency of extremely warm temperatures has increased,
while very cold temperatures have become less frequent.
The latest warning on the impacts of climate change comes in the wake
of one of the driest years on record in some parts of Britain. Many
areas are likely to see an increase in the frequency of droughts and
water scarcity, the report says.
In the worst-case scenario painted in the report, food production could
decline dramatically in many parts of the world.
The new analysis suggests climate change could be worse than
previously thought. By the end of the century, it says, about 49 million
more people could be at risk from coastal flooding due to sea level
rises.
"Life for millions of people could change forever. This makes the
challenge of reducing emissions ever more urgent," said UK climate and
energy secretary, Chris Huhne.
Substantial cuts in carbon emissions could come from changing our
behaviour. Ministers are currently considering proposals to drastically
reduce transport and energy consumption. These proposals could
mean 80% reduction to travel and similar cuts in energy used in homes.
Prices for many products will probably increase under the new plans,
while certain products will be phased out altogether.
“Britain will experience water shortages and
flooding by the end of the century if temperatures
are left unchecked, analysis shows... Food
production could decline dramatically …”
Behaviour change [no BC] condition:
“Substantial cuts in carbon emissions could come
from changing our behaviour [changing the way
products are made]. Ministers are currently
considering proposals to drastically reduce
transport and energy consumption [transform
transport and energy supply].
These proposals could mean 80% reduction to
travel and similar cuts in energy used in homes.
Prices for many products will probably increase
under the new plans, while certain products will
be phased out altogether [introduce new
transport technologies and home appliances.
These new plans will mean alternative energy
sources will be funded and industry processes will
be transformed].”
N=1,505, UK representative sample

16. Study 1. Scepticism as identity threat response
• Perception of climate risks DECREASED and climate scepticism
INCREASED when given risk information mentioning need for
behaviour change
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
5.5
6
6.5
7
7.5
How bad are climate risks? Climate change claims are
exaggerated
No change
Behaviour change
F(2,1477)=3.86, p<.05
F(2,1477)=4.79, p<.05
Xenias, Whitmarsh, & Corner, under review

17. Does it matter what
other people are doing
(and who they are)?

18. Climate change as a collective problem
Most psychological research on climate change perceptions
and action has focused at the individual level
• Policy / campaigns also often focus on individual responsibility
Yet climate change is a fundamentally collective problem
• Social / commons dilemma; cf. diffusion of responsibility
• Perceived lack of action by others and low self-efficacy
Sweetman &
Whitmarsh, 2016

19. Climate change as a moral problem
Perceived fairness is key to perceptions of climate change action
• Qual. work on climate change perceptions shows morality and esp.
equity are central themes (Whitmarsh, 2009) - those with more power,
wealth, liability (industry, US, rich…) should take more responsibility
• Acceptability of (climate change) policies determined by equity and
fair distribution of costs (Upham et al., 2009); cf. psychological models of
political action (van Zomeren et al., 2008)
• Progressive policies which require more from those more
responsible/able to act expected to be fairer, thus more acceptable
Research Questions:
1. Is willingness to act on climate change predicted by perceived
fairness or efficacy of the behaviours?
2. Do others’ actions influence willingness to act via the fairness and
efficacy pathways? Does social status or group membership of these
others matter?
Sweetman &
Whitmarsh, 2016

20. Study 2. Methods
• 2 x 2 between-subjects (Study 1: N=129; Study 2:
N=333; Study 3: 229):
• Exemplar status (high = business CEOs vs. low =
homeless people) x
• Exemplar group identity (ingroup = British vs.
outgroup = US)
Latest scientific findings provide further evidence of the
significant risks posed by climate change for humans and
ecosystems. We are interested in your views on actions to
tackle climate change. Recently the US chamber of
commerce, a body representing US business [The Big
Issue UK, a street newspaper sold by homeless individuals
in Britain] has introduced a climate change scheme whereby
CEOs and other well-paid US business executives
[homeless individuals selling the newspaper] will pay 15%
of their annual salaries to the US CC [Big Issue] action on
climate change project. The project has received broad support
from US CC members [the homeless individuals selling the
Big Issue]. Importantly, this project invests in developing
technologies and services (e.g., renewable energy technology,
energy efficiency projects, environmental management
services) that are vital to tackling climate change.
Sweetman &
Whitmarsh, 2016

21. Study 2. Results
Sweetman &
Whitmarsh, 2016

22. How can we encourage low-
carbon, climate-resilient
lifestyles?

23. Attitude-behaviour gap… and HUGE challenge
•99% awareness of climate change
•Most understand the role of human behaviour in causing climate change,
and think it should be tackled
•BUT very limited behaviour change (mostly ‘small and painless’)
Whitmarsh, 2009; cf.
Lorenzoni et al., 2007

24. Individual behaviour and climate change
Whitmarsh & O’Neill, 2010
0 20 40 60 80 100
Write to your MP about an
environmental issue
Avoid eating meat
Cut down on the amount you fly
Buy environmentally-friendly products
Walk, cycle or take public transport for
short journeys (<3 miles)
Recycle
% always or often taking action

25. Barriers to climate change action
• Climate change is a distant threat
• Other things are more important
• Uncertainty and scepticism
• Reluctance to change lifestyles
• Externalising responsibility and blame
• Lack of knowledge about causes, consequences, potential solutions
• Distrust in information sources
• “Drop in the ocean” feeling
• Fatalism (too late to act/ can’t do anything)
• Technology will save us
Individual barriers
Social and structural barriers
• Inaction by governments, business, industry
• Free-riding (policy preference for voluntary measures)
• Social norms and expectations
• Lack of enabling initiatives and facilities (e.g., regular public transport)
Lorenzoni, Nicholson-Cole & Whitmarsh. 2007

26. How can we change behaviour?
Downstream – influencing individuals
- information/advertising
- modelling (social learning) and norm-based approaches
Upstream – influencing context/situation of action
- economic measures
- education (and changing social norms)
- changes to available products and services
- changes to built environment
• Both downstream and upstream required to address multiple barriers to
lifestyle change (‘nudge’ techniques insufficient)
• Participatory democracy to involve public in policy design
Verplanken & Wood, 2006; Clayton et al., 2015

27. Towards low-carbon lifestyles
• Limited success of behaviour change policies
• Piecemeal, individualistic, consumer approaches dominate

28. Taking up a new environmental behaviour may lead to adoption
of additional, environmentally beneficial, behaviours
• From behaviour change to lifestyle change
• Theoretical support (e.g., self-perception theory) – but no coherent
theory
• Some empirical support in health (Ross & Thow 1997), consumption
(Simonin & Ruth 1998) and environmental (Whitmarsh & O’Neill, 2010)
behaviours – but small samples, correlational, geographically limited
Behavioural spillover

29. Study 3. Does installing insulation lead to spillover?
Postal survey
(N=736) of residents
in three socially
diverse wards in
Monmouthshire,
Wales, in January
2013
Whitmarsh et al., 2014
Yes No
p
(n=618) (n=104)
Energy-saving measures
A-rated appliances 51% 45% n.s.
Energy monitor 11% 6% n.s.
Low-energy light bulbs 91% 86% n.s.
Double glazing all windows 78% 43% ***
Double glazing some windows 16% 23% n.s.
Draught proofing on windows/doors 25% 12% **
Timer to control heating system 89% 67% ***
Thermostat for heating system 84% 63% ***
Heating in the home (% always/often)
Turn off heating when not in use 82% 77% n.s.
Put on more clothes rather than turning up heating 50% 50% n.s.
Electricity use in the home (%always/often)
Turn off lights when not in use 93% 83% ***
Only boil the kettle with as much water as you need 83% 72% **
Avoid using energy at peak times (e.g. evenings) 22% 27% n.s.

30. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Before After
Wales
England
Study 4. Impact of the Welsh carrier bag charge
‘How often do you take your own bag/s to the supermarket?’
%always
Poortinga et al., 2013 N=1000 pre + 1000 post; telephone survey Sept 2011 & April 2012

31. Other environmental behaviours (% saying ‘always’; Wales only)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Buy products with less packaging
Walk or cycle short distance
Repair or maintain an item to avoid
buying something new
Wash clothes at 30 degrees or less
Turn off tap while brushing your teeth
Buy energy-saving light bulbs
Recycle household waste
Before
After
Poortinga et al., 2013
Study 4. Impact of the Welsh carrier bag charge

32. Need for relational studies and holistic interventions
Targeting interventions
• High-emitting groups (e.g., high
earners, sub-urbanites)
• Leisure/recreation practices
• Organisations – e.g.,
telecommuting scheme led to 66%
drop in vehicle miles
• Context change moments (habit
discontinuity)
Relational approaches
• Avoiding rebound effects
• Behavioural spillover literature
highlights potential for broader
lifestyle change (e.g., Whitmarsh &
O’Neill, 2010)
Capstick et al., 2015

33. Need for relational studies and holistic interventions
Unexpected outcomes from
interventions
• Recent US study found taking
your own bags to the
supermarket led to increase in
purchase of organic food… and
of unhealthy snacks! (Karmarker &
Bollinger, 2014)
• Moral licensing effect??

34. Conclusions
• Climate change is a problem of human behaviour
• It is a political issue – values (not experience or knowledge) drive
perceptions
• More climate change information will not persuade the most sceptical
groups
• Climate change messages can be deeply threatening – need to reframe
• Willingness to act is influenced more by moral than ‘rational’ factors (e.g.,
efficacy)
• Willingness to act also depends on the actions of (high status) others
• Spillover may be a way to achieve more ambitious low-carbon lifestyle
change – if circumstances are right (e.g., priming identity)
• Contextual factors may still be a stronger influence – hence, need for
structural interventions to achieve radical change (including adaptation)
• Interventions should be targeted to high-emitting practices and sub-
groups, organisations and critical moments
• Lifestyles are a ‘system’ – consider unintended consequences from
interventions and dynamics/relationships across individual behaviours

35. Thank you
WhitmarshLE@cardiff.ac.uk

36. meetup.com/behavioural/
Brought to you by: