Thinking structures of climate delay: internal deliberations among Swedes with sustainable ambitions

Abstract

AbstractIt is important to understand how individuals in affluent societies reason around their own actions in relation to climate change. However, much of the research has focused on sceptics and those who have little interest in change. Studying those who want to contribute to a transition and why they fail is also of interest. This study is qualitative and deals with the internal reasoning of a self-selected sample of Swedes with sustainable values who argue in relation to a failed intention. Ca 400 responses were analysed. We used topos theory to identify thinking structures that guide the arguments used to deal with the cognitive dissonance that acting against knowledge and intention results in. The most common ways to argue were to imagine a climate account with possible deposits and withdrawals, or a budget which you strive to keep. Also common was to compare with something or someone that was ”worse”. Redirecting responsibility was also an argument, albeit complicating the issue of responsibility. The limits of reality were used as an excuse for action, whereas articulating the goal conflicts of a less emitting life made choices visible. Finally, the human condition of not always meeting your own standards was mentioned. These arguments only partly overlap common discourses of delay in the public sphere.