IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v159y2020i1d10.1007_s10584-019-02584-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Climate change beliefs shape the interpretation of forest fire events

Author

Listed:
  • Karine Lacroix

    (University of Victoria)

  • Robert Gifford

    (University of Victoria)

  • Jonathan Rush

    (University of Victoria)

Abstract

Using a naturalistic quasi-experimental design and growth curve modeling techniques, a recently proposed climate change risk perception model was replicated and extended to investigate changes in climate change risk perception and climate policy support in relation to exposure to forest fires. At the start of the study, above-average indirect exposure to forest fires (e.g., through media and conversations) was associated with stronger climate change risk perception, but direct exposure to forest fires (e.g., seeing smoke) and other types of extreme weather events was not. Over time, changes in climate change risk perception were positively associated with changes in climate policy support. However, individual differences in growth trajectories occurred. For example, in this naturalistic setting without any intervention, the climate change risk perceptions of individuals with weaker perceptions of scientific agreement on climate change were less likely to be positively influenced by fire exposure than those of individuals with stronger perceptions of scientific agreement. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring climate change communication.

Suggested Citation

  • Karine Lacroix & Robert Gifford & Jonathan Rush, 2020. "Climate change beliefs shape the interpretation of forest fire events," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 159(1), pages 103-120, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:159:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02584-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-019-02584-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-019-02584-6
    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/s10584-019-02584-6?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. Chad Zanocco & Hilary Boudet & Roberta Nilson & Hannah Satein & Hannah Whitley & June Flora, 2018. "Place, proximity, and perceived harm: extreme weather events and views about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 349-365, August.
    2. Stephan Lewandowsky & Gilles E. Gignac & Samuel Vaughan, 2013. "The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 399-404, April.
    3. Peter D. Howe, 2018. "Perceptions of seasonal weather are linked to beliefs about global climate change: evidence from Norway," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 148(4), pages 467-480, June.
    4. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    5. Matthew J. Hornsey & Emily A. Harris & Paul G. Bain & Kelly S. Fielding, 2016. "Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(6), pages 622-626, June.
    6. David M. Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles H. Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    7. Aaron M. McCright & Riley E. Dunlap & Chenyang Xiao, 2014. "The impacts of temperature anomalies and political orientation on perceived winter warming," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(12), pages 1077-1081, December.
    8. Matthew R. Sisco & Valentina Bosetti & Elke U. Weber, 2017. "When do extreme weather events generate attention to climate change?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 143(1), pages 227-241, July.
    9. E. M. Fischer & R. Knutti, 2015. "Anthropogenic contribution to global occurrence of heavy-precipitation and high-temperature extremes," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 5(6), pages 560-564, June.
    10. Teresa A. Myers & Edward W. Maibach & Connie Roser-Renouf & Karen Akerlof & Anthony A. Leiserowitz, 2013. "The relationship between personal experience and belief in the reality of global warming," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 3(4), pages 343-347, April.
    11. Wen Xue & Donald W. Hine & Anthony D. G. Marks & Wendy J. Phillips & Patrick Nunn & Shouying Zhao, 2016. "Combining threat and efficacy messaging to increase public engagement with climate change in Beijing, China," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 137(1), pages 43-55, July.
    12. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa L. & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2007. "The affect heuristic," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1333-1352, March.
    13. Ahmad Saleh Safi & William James Smith & Zhnongwei Liu, 2012. "Rural Nevada and Climate Change: Vulnerability, Beliefs, and Risk Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1041-1059, June.
    14. Dan M. Kahan & Hank Jenkins-Smith & Donald Braman, 2011. "Cultural cognition of scientific consensus," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 147-174, February.
    15. Aaron Drummond & Lauren C. Hall & James D. Sauer & Matthew A. Palmer, 2018. "Is public awareness and perceived threat of climate change associated with governmental mitigation targets?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(2), pages 159-171, July.
    16. David Konisky & Llewelyn Hughes & Charles Kaylor, 2016. "Extreme weather events and climate change concern," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 134(4), pages 533-547, February.
    17. 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.
    18. Sander Linden & Anthony Leiserowitz & Geoffrey Feinberg & Edward Maibach, 2014. "How to communicate the scientific consensus on climate change: plain facts, pie charts or metaphors?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 126(1), pages 255-262, September.
    19. Irene Lorenzoni & Nick F. Pidgeon & Robert E. O'Connor, 2005. "Dangerous Climate Change: The Role for Risk Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1387-1398, December.
    20. Aaron McCright & Riley Dunlap & Chenyang Xiao, 2013. "Perceived scientific agreement and support for government action on climate change in the USA," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 119(2), pages 511-518, July.
    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. Joseph P. Reser & Graham L. Bradley, 2020. "The nature, significance, and influence of perceived personal experience of climate change," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(5), September.
    2. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    3. Stephanie Shepard & Hilary Boudet & Chad M. Zanocco & Lori A. Cramer & Bryan Tilt, 2018. "Community climate change beliefs, awareness, and actions in the wake of the September 2013 flooding in Boulder County, Colorado," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 8(3), pages 312-325, September.
    4. Matias Spektor & Guilherme N. Fasolin & Juliana Camargo, 2023. "Climate change beliefs and their correlates in Latin America," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    5. Lawrence C. Hamilton, 2016. "Public Awareness of the Scientific Consensus on Climate," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(4), pages 21582440166, November.
    6. Christopher Crellin & Robert MacNeil, 2023. "Extreme weather events and public attention to climate change in Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(9), pages 1-7, September.
    7. P. Stahlmann-Brown & P. Walsh, 2022. "Soil moisture and expectations regarding future climate: evidence from panel data," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Mason, Charles F. & Wilmot, Neil A., 2024. "On climate fat tails and politics," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    9. Charles Adedayo Ogunbode & Yue Liu & Nicole Tausch, 2017. "The moderating role of political affiliation in the link between flooding experience and preparedness to reduce energy use," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 145(3), pages 445-458, December.
    10. Yi-Hsien Lin & Tsung-Hung Lee & Chiu-Kuang Wang, 2021. "Influence Analysis of Sustainability Perceptions on Sense of Community and Support for Sustainable Community Development in Relocated Communities," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-17, November.
    11. Chad Zanocco & Hilary Boudet & Roberta Nilson & Hannah Satein & Hannah Whitley & June Flora, 2018. "Place, proximity, and perceived harm: extreme weather events and views about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 149(3), pages 349-365, August.
    12. Brown, Pike & Walsh, Patrick & Booth, Pam, 2020. "Environmental signalling & expectations of future drought: Evidence from panel data," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305239, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    13. Llewelyn Hughes & David M. Konisky & Sandra Potter, 2020. "Extreme weather and climate opinion: evidence from Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 163(2), pages 723-743, November.
    14. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2022. "Drought exposure and accuracy: Motivated reasoning in climate change beliefs," Working Papers 2022.02, FAERE - French Association of Environmental and Resource Economists.
    15. Daniel Nohrstedt & Jacob Hileman & Maurizio Mazzoleni & Giuliano Baldassarre & Charles F. Parker, 2022. "Exploring disaster impacts on adaptation actions in 549 cities worldwide," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-10, December.
    16. Lea Gärtner & Harald Schoen, 2021. "Experiencing climate change: revisiting the role of local weather in affecting climate change awareness and related policy preferences," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-20, August.
    17. Sander L van der Linden & Anthony A Leiserowitz & Geoffrey D Feinberg & Edward W Maibach, 2015. "The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change as a Gateway Belief: Experimental Evidence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(2), pages 1-8, February.
    18. Kaitlin T Raimi & Paul C Stern & Alexander Maki, 2017. "The Promise and Limitations of Using Analogies to Improve Decision-Relevant Understanding of Climate Change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, January.
    19. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    20. Baiardi, Donatella & Morana, Claudio, 2021. "Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).

    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:climat:v:159:y:2020:i:1:d:10.1007_s10584-019-02584-6. 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.