Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Climate change mitigation AK

No description
by

Alexia Koletsou

on 28 May 2012

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Climate change mitigation AK

Previous research has tried to investigate conditions that encourage cooperating behaviour (Milinski, et al., 2006), but work is underdeveloped in the context of climate change:
focuses on individuals who are already engaged in special interest groups, but most of us are not!
often lacks a strong theoretical basis.
fails to effectively combine the science with the social science.
Climate change mitigation -
Communicating for behavioural change in social dilemmas

HUMAN ACTIONS
SOCIAL DILEMMA
Communication
Trust
Iteration & identifiability
Group size
Group identity
EFFICACY
Individual goal efficacy
TASK
GOAL
- Can I do it?
- Can I achieve my goal?
Social dilemmas are situations in which personal & collective interests are in direct conflict.
Each individual benefits more by pursuing a selfish individual choice.


Collectively individuals will be better off if all choose to cooperate.
"Judgements of how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations” (Bandura 1982)
Task efficacy
- Can I do it?
Goal efficacy
- Can my task help contribute to the collective goal?
Task efficacy
- Can we do it?
Goal efficacy
- Can we achieve collective goal?
People may not be aware of the negative consequences of their energy-intensive lifestyles.
All the energy saved in switching off your charger for one day is used up in one second of car-driving (MacKay 2009).
There may be a tendency to overestimate one's contribution to mitigating climate change.
Energy consumption in the UK has continued to rise in recent years
In the UK, a study by the BBC in 2004 revealed that 54% of the public believed that “changing their own behavior would not have any impact on climate change” (Ockwell, et al., 2009).
PROBLEMS
PROBLEMS
PROBLEMS
DONE!
OUR QUESTIONS
our research questions
OUR QUESTIONS
efficacy
social dilemma
actions
group
collective
members
goals
trust
communication
1. Group vs. Collective efficacy
Terms are intermixed
2. No clear distinction of hierarchical nature of efficacy
e.g. "how does my individual task contribute to the collective goal?
Clarified the hierarchical nature of efficacy and distinguished tasks & goals.
Communication among participants results in higher levels of cooperation
enhances group identity
elicits commitents to cooperate
allows us to gather information about choices by others
Seeing oneself as part of a "group" - even a randomly assigned one! - leads to higher levels of cooperation
single & autonomous
sharing membership
Higher levels of cooperation are achieved when people trust others to cooperate
1. Trust others to cooperate
2. Trust in shared goal
Repeated engagement when individuals are identifiable leads to higher cooperation
People cooperate less in larger groups than in smaller ones.
makes it easier to defect anonymously
makes it harder to communicate and also coordinate actions
efficacy and visibility of one’s actions become diluted
diffusion of responsibility
1. Awareness of the dilemma
2. More than one dimension of conflict
(time and space)
3. High levels of uncertainty
vs.
1.
2.
Want to establish:
Climate change is a large scale dilemma involving many people
Group size large
No group identity
Low identifiability
Low trust
Little communication
People are confused about which actions are most effective.
1.
2.
3.
51% of the total energy use of the UK is due to individual energy consumption
(Lorenzoni 2007).
“turning out lights when leaving the room” is often suggested as a way to save energy, but it actually saves very little (MacKay 2009).
..who together can take action
But people are part of groups and collectives..
"The Tragedy of the Commons," Garrett Hardin (1968)
Background
Problems
Importance of this project
This project
1.
2.
4.
&
individual
collective
1.
2.
Which actions are most effective?
Which actions are people taking?
How well do these align?
3.
3.
social dilemma
efficacy
actions
How effective are communication strategies that manipulate factors known to encourage cooperation (communication, trust, identifiability, group identity) in such a large scale dilemma? (empirical)
1.
2.
Which actions matter most? (literature)
Which actions are people taking? (literature)
How does knowing which actions are effective change their behaviour? (empirical)
3.
How do levels of individual and collective (task & goal) efficacy relate to behaviour in social dilemmas? (empirical)
Three frameworks used
- The UK public is regularly exposed to messages about climate change. As a result, people have become more aware of climate change. However, the UK public is taking little action (Ockwell, et al., 2009).

- A survey by the University of East Anglia found that although 91% of respondents thought that the climate is changing, most respondents did NOT think individuals have the main responsibility (Poortinga, et al., 2006).

Our aim is to understand the conditions under which people participate in "cooperative" climate change mitigation behaviours.
- Our ability to effectively mitigate climate change relies on a combination of developments in science, technology and their application.

- The engagement of individuals with these developments is required in order to ensure that they are accepted and employed to best effect (Whitmarsh & Lorenzoni 2010).

- In order to meet carbon reduction targets, there is a need to identify strategies to encourage positive behaviours at individual and collective levels (Moser 2006).
This project uses three carefully-selected frameworks to determine how to effectively communicate climate change mitigation actions to the public.
Social dilemmas: as it helps us to understand why choosing not to participate in climate change mitigation seems like such a sensible choice.
Efficacy (Bandura 1982): as much research has shown this to be necessary for behavioural change.
Effectiveness of actions: because focusing on actions that make the most difference makes the best use of resources (e.g. Whitmarsh 2009).
How effective are communication strategies that manipulate factors known to encourage cooperation (communication, trust, identifiability, group identity) in such a large scale dilemma? (empirical)
How do levels of individual and collective (task & goal) efficacy relate to behaviour in social dilemmas? (empirical)
STILL TO DO
GOAL
TASK
Alexia Koletsou
& Dr. Rebecca Mancy - School of Education
Individual task efficacy
Full transcript