Global Warming: The Psychology of Long Term Risk
Global Warming: The Psychology of Long Term Risk
复制标题
全球变暖：长期风险的心理学
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. Todorov
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. Oppenheimer;A. Todorov
除了自然科学的客观基础之外，对“全球变暖”政策问题的理解、讨论和解决还取决于各种团体（哈斯，1992）对它的框架，并最终取决于普通公众的看法。因此，有几个棱镜，不完全独立，通过考虑全球变暖问题。在公开讨论中，自然科学家倾向于通过回答诸如“到2100年全球平均气温将上升3摄氏度的概率是多少？”部分基于由此产生的科学图景，经济学家提出了额外的问题，如“到2010年减少10%的二氧化碳排放量对国民经济的成本是多少？”政策制定者关注这两个参考框架（和其他），但考虑进一步的问题，如“气候变化和减排将如何影响我的政党的主要选民？”如果认为物理科学家和经济学家提出的是基本问题，而政策制定者和其他人只是在提出其他问题之前吸收答案，那就错了。随着时间的推移，每一组都着眼于回答其他组提出的问题（Funtowicz和Ravetz，1992）。但是，专家们似乎经常提出和回答这样的问题，几乎与公众的观点无关。这种脱节必须引起任何对解决全球变暖问题感兴趣的人的关注。至少就民主国家而言，不太可能强加一种在没有广泛公众参与的情况下制定和实施的隐形解决方案。公众如何看待全球变暖问题？公众如何看待温室气体排放带来的风险？如果科学观点和公众观点之间，以及对风险的专业评估和普通公众的看法之间存在任何对应关系，那么这种对应关系是什么？虽然评估气候变化长期风险的社会、伦理和文化背景的考虑正在出现，但对心理方面的关注相对较少（Dessai等人，2004; Lorenzoni等人，2005年）。这期《气候变化》特刊是2004年11月12日在普林斯顿大学1举行的一次研讨会的后续，研讨会的目的是探讨心理方面的问题。该研讨会的动机是这样一个概念，即针对人类行为的环境政策应纳入对行为变化和决策的见解，这些主题是行为科学的核心。研讨会的目的是向气候科学家通报目前的状况，
Beyond its objective basis in natural science, understanding, discussion, and resolution of the policy issue labeled “global warming” also depends on the way it is framed by various groups (Haas, 1992), and ultimately, viewed by members of the general public. Accordingly, there are several prisms, not entirely independent, through which to consider the global warming problem. In public discussion, natural scientists tend to frame the issue through the answers to questions like “what is the probability that global mean temperature will increase by 3 ◦C by 2100?” Based in part on the resulting scientific picture, economists pose additional questions like “what is the cost to the national economy of reducing carbon dioxide emissions by 10% by year 2010?” Policy makers are attentive to both these frames of reference (and others) but consider further issues like “how will climate change and emissions mitigation affect the major constituencies of my political party?” It would be a mistake to assume that physical scientists and economists ask the basic questions while policy makers and others simply absorb the answers before developing additional questions. Over time, each group frames the issue with an eye toward responding to the questions raised by the other groups (Funtowicz and Ravetz, 1992). But experts in particular often seem to ask and answer such questions almost independent of the views of the general public. This disconnection must be of concern to anyone seriously interested in solving the global warming problem. At least with regard to democracies, it is unlikely that a stealth solution, developed and implemented without broad public engagement, could be imposed. What does the general public make of the global warming problem? How does the public view the risks entailed by greenhouse gas emissions? What is the correspondence, if any, between the scientific picture and the public view, between the professional assessment of risk and the lay public’s perception? While considerations of the social, ethical, and cultural context for evaluating the long term risk of climate change are emerging, relatively little attention has been paid to psychological aspects (Dessai et al., 2004; Lorenzoni et al., 2005). This special issue of Climatic Change follows from a workshop that was convened on 12 November 2004 at Princeton University1 with a view toward addressing the psychological dimension. The workshop was motivated by the notion that environmental policies that target human behavior should incorporate insights about behavioral change and decision-making, topics central in behavioral sciences. The objective of the workshop was to inform climate scientists about the current state