Abstract
AbstractScientists and the media are increasingly using the terms ‘climate emergency’ or ‘climate crisis’ to urge timely responses from the public and private sectors to combat the irreversible consequences of climate change. However, whether the latest trend in climate change labelling can result in stronger climate change risk perceptions in the public is unclear. Here we used survey data collected from 1,892 individuals across Taiwan in 2019 to compare the public’s reaction to a series of questions regarding climate change beliefs, communication, and behavioural intentions under two labels: ‘climate change’ and ‘climate crisis.’ The respondents had very similar responses to the questions using the two labels. However, we observed labelling effects for specific subgroups, with some questions using the climate crisis label actually leading to backlash effects compared with the response when using the climate change label. Our results suggest that even though the two labels provoke similar reactions from the general public, on a subgroup level, some backlash effects may become apparent. For this reason, the label ‘climate crisis’ should be strategically chosen.
Funder
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Physics and Astronomy,General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Chemistry
Reference51 articles.
1. Hodder, P. & Martin, B. Climate Crisis? The Politics of Emergency Framing. Econ Political Wkly. 44, 53–60 (2009).
2. Archer, D. & Rahmstorf, S. The climate crisis: An introductory guide to climate change. (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
3. Crist, E. Beyond the climate crisis: a critique of climate change discourse. Telos 141, 29–55 (2007).
4. IPCC. Global Warming of 1.5 oC. (IPCC, 2018).
5. Lenton, T. M. et al. Climate tipping points — too risky to bet against. Nature 575, 592–595 (2019).
Cited by
12 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献