IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v20y2017i1p61-75.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A life history approach to perceptions of global climate change risk: young adults’ experiences about impacts, causes, and solutions

Author

Listed:
  • Richard D. Besel
  • Krista Burke
  • Vana Christos

Abstract

Although the general acceptance of human-influenced global climate change within the technical sphere of science is important to consider, public perceptions of global climate change risks, impacts, causes, and solutions are as important to policy actions as scientific findings. Yet, studies analyzing climate change risk perceptions suffer from a number of limitations or use only a handful of approaches. Using a limited life history approach, this article answers calls for additional qualitative approaches in risk perception research. This article (1) introduces risk perception researchers to the limited life history method; (2) discovers that young adults articulate climate change solutions at the individual level, often as consumers, and blend their responses to climate change risks and advocacy for solutions with a general, environmentally friendly orientation, a ‘green posture;’ and (3) contends the key sources informing young adults’ perceptions about climate change risk have changed significantly from previous studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard D. Besel & Krista Burke & Vana Christos, 2017. "A life history approach to perceptions of global climate change risk: young adults’ experiences about impacts, causes, and solutions," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 61-75, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:20:y:2017:i:1:p:61-75
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1017830
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2015.1017830
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2015.1017830?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. N. W. Smith & H. Joffe, 2009. "Climate change in the British press: the role of the visual," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(5), pages 647-663, July.
    2. Lorraine Whitmarsh, 2008. "Are flood victims more concerned about climate change than other people? The role of direct experience in risk perception and behavioural response," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(3), pages 351-374, April.
    3. Robert E. O'Connor & Richard J. Bard & Ann Fisher, 1999. "Risk Perceptions, General Environmental Beliefs, and Willingness to Address Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 461-471, June.
    4. Gillian Hawkes & Gene Rowe, 2008. "A characterisation of the methodology of qualitative research on the nature of perceived risk: trends and omissions," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 617-643, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Yingying Sun & Ziqiang Han, 2018. "Climate Change Risk Perception in Taiwan: Correlation with Individual and Societal Factors," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-12, January.
    2. Riccardo Torelli & Federica Balluchi & Arianna Lazzini, 2020. "Greenwashing and environmental communication: Effects on stakeholders' perceptions," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(2), pages 407-421, February.
    3. Amy Savage & Hilary Bambrick & Danielle Gallegos, 2020. "From garden to store: local perspectives of changing food and nutrition security in a Pacific Island country," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 12(6), pages 1331-1348, December.
    4. Praneeta Mudaliar & Meaghan McElroy & Jacob C. Brenner, 2022. "The futility and fatality of incremental action: motivations and barriers among undergraduates for environmental action that matters," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(1), pages 133-148, March.
    5. 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.

    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. Jiuchang Wei & Weiwei Zhu & Dora Marinova & Fei Wang, 2017. "Household adoption of smog protective behavior: a comparison between two Chinese cities," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 846-867, July.
    2. Nicholas Smith & Anthony Leiserowitz, 2012. "The Rise of Global Warming Skepticism: Exploring Affective Image Associations in the United States Over Time," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(6), pages 1021-1032, June.
    3. Abdullah Tarinc & Gozde Seval Ergun & Arif Aytekin & Ali Keles & Ozlem Ozbek & Huseyin Keles & Ozgur Yayla, 2023. "Effect of Climate Change Belief and the New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) on Eco-Tourism Attitudes of Tourists: Moderator Role of Green Self-Identity," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-27, March.
    4. 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.
    5. Carla Rodriguez-Sanchez & Francisco J. Sarabia-Sanchez, 2020. "Does Water Context Matter in Water Conservation Decision Behaviour?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-16, April.
    6. Seol-A Kwon & Seoyong Kim & Jae Eun Lee, 2019. "Analyzing the Determinants of Individual Action on Climate Change by Specifying the Roles of Six Values in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-24, March.
    7. Abinash Bhattachan & Matthew D. Jurjonas & Priscilla R. Morris & Paul J. Taillie & Lindsey S. Smart & Ryan E. Emanuel & Erin L. Seekamp, 2019. "Linking residential saltwater intrusion risk perceptions to physical exposure of climate change impacts in rural coastal communities of North Carolina," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 97(3), pages 1277-1295, July.
    8. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    9. Schleich, Joachim & Alsheimer, Sven, 2024. "The relationship between willingness to pay and carbon footprint knowledge: Are individuals willing to pay more to offset their carbon footprint if they learn about its size and distance to the 1.5 °C," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C).
    10. Jae Young Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2020. "Perceived Environmental Threats and Pro-Environmental Behaviors: Investigating the Role of Political Participation Using a South Korean Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-16, May.
    11. Veysel Yilmaz & Pınar Guleç & Erkan Ari, 2023. "Impact of climate change information of university students in Turkey on responsibility and environmental behavior through awareness and perceived risk," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 7281-7297, July.
    12. Jae-Eun Lee & Seol-A Kwon, 2021. "A Study on the Public’s Crisis Management Efficacy and Anxiety in a Pandemic Situation—Focusing on the COVID-19 Pandemic in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-17, July.
    13. Agustin Robles Morua & Kathleen E. Halvorsen & Alex S. Mayer, 2011. "Waterborne Disease‐Related Risk Perceptions in the Sonora River Basin, Mexico," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(5), pages 866-878, May.
    14. Debra Javeline & Tracy Kijewski-Correa & Angela Chesler, 2019. "Does it matter if you “believe” in climate change? Not for coastal home vulnerability," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 155(4), pages 511-532, August.
    15. Frisch, L.C. & Mathis, J.T. & Kettle, N.P. & Trainor, S.F., 2015. "Gauging perceptions of ocean acidification in Alaska," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 101-110.
    16. Kevin Fox Gotham & Richard Campanella & Katie Lauve‐Moon & Bradford Powers, 2018. "Hazard Experience, Geophysical Vulnerability, and Flood Risk Perceptions in a Postdisaster City, the Case of New Orleans," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 345-356, February.
    17. van der Linden, Sander, 2014. "On the relationship between personal experience, affect and risk perception: the case of climate change," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 57689, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    18. Blanco, Esther & Baier, Alexandra & Holzmeister, Felix & Jaber-Lopez, Tarek & Struwe, Natalie, 2022. "Substitution of social sustainability concerns under the Covid-19 pandemic," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    19. Groh, Elke D. & Möllendorff, Charlotte v., 2020. "What shapes the support of renewable energy expansion? Public attitudes between policy goals and risk, time, and social preferences," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 137(C).
    20. Alberini, Anna & Ščasný, Milan & Bigano, Andrea, 2018. "Policy- v. individual heterogeneity in the benefits of climate change mitigation: Evidence from a stated-preference survey," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 565-575.

    More about this item

    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:taf:jriskr:v:20:y:2017:i:1:p:61-75. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    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.