Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy
Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy
复制标题
DOI：
10.1038/nclimate2948
复制
发表时间：
2016-07-01
影响因子：
30.7
通讯作者：
McGrath, Liam F.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bernauer, Thomas;McGrath, Liam F.
限制气候变化的雄心勃勃的政策需要强有力的公众支持（1-8）。然而，正如在大多数国家所观察到的那样，公众对此类政策的兴趣相当有限（2，9）。加强公众支持的一种可能性是，将减少温室气体的公共政策论述中的主要理由从减少气候变化风险的好处（传统理由）转向其他类型的好处。技术创新、绿色工作、社区建设和健康福利被广泛讨论（10-19）。直觉是，重新定义温室气体减排工作及其在这些方面的好处可以使他们更个人相关，以及更多的情感参与和吸引公民（20，21）。基于两个调查嵌入式实验（合并N = 1，675）的结果，并与一些早期的研究相比，我们得出结论，简单地重新制定气候政策不太可能增加公众的支持，并概述了这一发现的原因。由于其他理由的附加值充其量仍不清楚，甚至可能为零，因此坚持将减少气候风险作为主要理由似乎是值得的。
Ambitious policies for limiting climate change require strong public support(1-8). However, the public's appetite for such policies, as observed in most countries, is rather limited(2,9). One possibility for enhancing public support could be to shift the main justification in the public policy discourse on greenhouse gas mitigation from benefits of reducing climate change risks (the conventional justification) to other types of benefit. Technological innovation, green jobs, community building and health benefits are widely discussed candidates(10-19). The intuition is that reframing greenhouse gas mitigation efforts and their benefits in such terms could make them more personally relevant as well as more emotionally engaging and appealing to citizens(20,21). On the basis of results from two survey-embedded experiments (combined N = 1,675), and in contrast to some earlier studies, we conclude that simple reframing of climate policy is unlikely to increase public support, and outline reasons for this finding. As the added value of other justifications remains unclear at best and potentially nil, sticking to climate risk reduction as the dominant justification seems worthwhile.