APA - Psychology of Global Climate Change

8/7/2019 APA - Psychology of Global Climate Change

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/apa-psychology-of-global-climate-change 1/108

& Global Climate ChanG

PSyCholoGyssg c p s cg

A Reprt the American Psychlgical AssciatinTask Frce n the Interace Between Psychlgy & Glbal Climate Change





PSyCholoGy & Global Climate ChanGessg c p s cgs

Janet Swim, PhD, Chair

Pennsylvania State University

Susan Claytn, PhD

College o Wooster

Thmas Dherty, PsyD

Sustainable Sel, LLC

Rbert Gird, PhD

University o Victoria

Gerge Hward, PhD

University o Notre Dame

Jseph Reser, PhD

Griith University

Paul Stern, PhD

National Academies o Science

Elke Weber, PhD

Columbia University

memberS

A REPoRT oFthe American Psychlgical AssciatinTask Frce n the Interace BetweenPsychlgy and Glbal Climate Change

This reprt is available nline at the APA website

http://www.apa.rg/science/abut/publicatins/climate-change.aspx



table o ContentS

exeCutive Summary .......................................................6

PreaCe ............................................................................10

introduCtion ..................................................................13

Addressing Climate Change: Psychlgy’s Cntributin ......14

Mbilizing the Diverse Field Psychlgy

t Address Climate Change ...........................................15

Backgrund Inrmatin ........................................................16

Literature Review ..................................................................18

SeCtion 1: how do PeoPle underStandthe riSkS imPoSed by Climate ChanGe?........21

Detectin Climate Change ................................................21

Cncern Abut Climate Change ...........................................22

(Nt) Feeling at Risk .............................................................23

Discunting the Future and the Remte ................................24

The Rle Culture in Climate Change

Understanding and Reactins ........................................25

Research Suggestins ..........................................................27

Summary ..............................................................................27

SeCtion 2: what are the human behavioralContributionS to Climate ChanGe and

the PSyCholoGiCal and Contextual

driverS o theSe ContributionS?..................29

Ethical Cncerns ...................................................................29

overview ...............................................................................30

Quantitative Mdels ..............................................................30

Ppulatin .............................................................................32

Cnsumptin .........................................................................33


Frm Causes t Impacts .......................................................40



Summary and diSCuSSion .........................................80

Psychlgical Apprach t Studying Climate Change ..........80

Psychlgy’s Research Cntributins ...................................80

Culture and Human Diversity ................................................81

Ethical Cnsideratins ..........................................................81

Maximizing Psychlgy’s Cntributin ..................................82

reerenCeS .....................................................................85

liSt o iGureS ............................................................101

table ................................................................................101GloSSary .......................................................................102

reerenCeS uSed to ConStruCt

GloSSary deinitionS ........................................107

SeCtion 3: what are the PSyChoSoCial

imPaCtS o Climate ChanGe? ............................42

Psychscial and Mental Health Impacts

Climate Change .........................................................43

Scial and Cmmunity Impacts Climate Change ..............46

Mderatrs Cl imate Change Impacts ................................46

Psychscial Mediatrs Climate Change Impacts ............47

Glbal Climate Change in Cntext other Envirnmental

Challenges .....................................................................48Psychlgical Benets Assciated With

Respnding t Climate Change .....................................48

Research n Psychscial Impacts Climate Change ........49

The Relatinship Between Psychscial Impacts

and Cping ....................................................................49

SeCtion 4: how do PeoPle adaPt to and CoPe

with the PerCeived threat and unoldinG

imPaCtS o Climate ChanGe? ............................52

Climate Change Threat and Envirnmental Impacts

as Stressrs ...................................................................55Mediating Relatins Between Stressrs and

Cping Respnses ........................................................56

Types Cping Respnses .................................................59

Mderatrs Cping Prcess..............................................60

Interventins .........................................................................61

Summary ..............................................................................61

Research Recmmendatins ................................................62

Frm Adaptatin t Mitigatin ...............................................62

SeCtion 5: whiCh PSyCholoGiCal barrierS

limit Climate ChanGe aCtion? ..........................64

General Sequence Psychlgical Barriers ........................65

Summary ..............................................................................68


Frm Barriers t Change.......................................................69

SeCtion 6: how Can PSyCholoGiStS aSSiSt

in limitinG Climate ChanGe? ..............................71

What Psychlgy Can Cntribute .........................................71

What Psychlgy Has Learned .............................................73

What Psychlgy Can D t be Helpul ................................76



addressing climate change is arguably ne the mst

pressing tasks acing ur planet and its inhabitants. In

bi and gephysical terms, climate change is dened

as changes ver time in the averages and variability surace

temperature, precipitatin, and wind as well as assciated

changes in Earth’s atmsphere, ceans and natural water

supplies, snw and ice, land surace, ecsystems, and living

rganisms (Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC],

2007b). What is unique abut current glbal climate change,

relative t histrical changes, is the causal rle human activity

(als called anthrpgenic rcing) and the current and prjected

dramatic changes in climate acrss the glbe.

our primary aim in ur reprt is t engage members the

psychlgy cmmunity (teachers, researchers, practitiners,

and students) in the issue climate change. T this end, this

American Psychlgical Assciatin (APA) task rce reprt

describes the cntributins psychlgical research t an

understanding psychlgical dimensins glbal climate

change, prvides research recmmendatins, and prpsesplicies r APA t assist psychlgists’ engagement with this

issue.

rsc r rcs

This APA Climate Change Task Frce Reprt cnsiders

psychlgy’s cntributin t climate change by addressing the

llwing six questins:

Section 1: How do people understand the risks imposed by

climate change?

Lng-term climate is a phenmenn nt easily detected by

persnal experience, yet ne that invites persnal bservatin

and evaluatin. Cncern abut adverse cnsequences climate

change (e.g., extreme weather events like drughts r ds)

is lw n average in places such as the United States, in part

because small prbability events tend t be underestimated

in decisins based n persnal experience, unless they haverecently ccurred, in which case they are vastly verestimated.

Many think climate change risks (and thus the benets

mitigating them) as bth cnsiderably uncertain and as being

mstly in the uture and gegraphically distant, all actrs that

lead peple t discunt them. The csts mitigatin, n the

ther hand, will be incurred with certainty in the present r

near uture. Emtinal reactins t climate change are likely

t inuence perceptins risk. Yet, emtinal reactins t

climate change risks are likely t be cnicted and muted

because climate change can be seen as a natural prcess, andglbal envirnmental systems perceived as beynd the cntrl

individuals, cmmunities, and, quite pssibly, science and

technlgy. There is, hwever, signicant variability in peple’s

reactins t climate risks, much which is mediated by cultural

values and belies.

exeCutive Summary



Section 2: What are the human behavioral contributions

to climate change and the psychological and contextual

drivers o these contributions?

Human actins that inuence climate change include thse

resulting rm demands t accmmdate ppulatin grwth

and regin-specic types and patterns cnsumptin.

Psychlgists can help cnceptualize and better understand

psychscial predictrs these driving rces. Psychlgists

can prvide behaviral analyses cnsumptin by cusing n

behavirs that cntribute the mst t climate change. Individual

predictrs cnsumptin include ability (e.g., incme, skills)

and mtivatin (e.g., cnnectin t nature, perceptins

needs versus luxuries, cre psychlgical needs) t engage

in cnsumptin. Cntextual predictrs cnsumptin, ten

mediated by individual level predictrs, include the pprtunities

and cnstraints arded by cntexts (e.g., physical inrastructure,

climatedriving characteristics where a persn lives) and

mtivatrs cnsumptin primed by cntexts (e.g., scial and

cultural nrms, cnsumerism, cultural and scietal rientatin

tward time and nature).

Section 3: What are the psychosocial impacts o climate

change?

Althugh they cannt be described with certainty given current

research, the cumulative and interacting psychscial eects

climate change are likely t be prund. Heat, extreme weather

events, and increased cmpetitin r scarce envirnmental

resurcescmpunded by preexisting inequalities and

disprprtinate impacts amng grups and natinswill

aect interpersnal and intergrup behavir and may result

in increased stress and anxiety. Even in the absence direct

impacts, the perceptin and ear climate change may threaten

mental health. Hwever, there is reasn t believe that psitive

cnsequences are als pssibleas peple take cllective

respnsibility r a shared prblem.

Section 4: How do people adapt to and cope with perceived

threat and unolding impacts o climate change?

Adapting t and cping with climate change is an nging

and ever-changing prcess that invlves many intrapsychic

prcesses that inuence reactins t and preparatins r

adverse impacts climate change, including chrnic events

and disasters. Psychlgical prcesses include sense making;

causal and respnsibility attributins r adverse climate change

impacts; appraisals impacts, resurces, and pssible cping

respnses; aective respnses; and mtivatinal prcesses

related t needs r security, stability, cherence, and cntrl.

These prcesses are inuenced by media representatins

climate change and rmal and inrmal scial discurseinvlving scial cnstructin, representatin, amplicatin,

and attenuatin climate change risk and its impacts. These

prcesses reect and mtivate intrapsychic respnses (e.g.,

denial, emtin management, prblem slving) and individual

and cmmunity behaviral respnses. Individual and cultural

variatin inuences all aspects the prcess, prviding cntext,

wrldviews, values, cncerns, resilience, and vulnerability.



Section 5: Which psychological barriers limit climate change

action?

Many psychlgical and scial structural barriers stand in the

way behaviral changes that wuld help limit climate change.

Many peple are taking actin in respnse t the risks climate

change, but many thers are unaware the prblem, unsure

the acts r what t d, d nt trust experts r believe their

cnclusins, think the prblem is elsewhere, are xed in their

ways, believe that thers shuld act, r believe that their actins

will make n dierence r are unimprtant cmpared t thse

thers. They may be engaged in tken actins r actins

they believe are helpul but bjectively are nt. They have

ther wrthy gals and aspiratins that draw their time, ert,

and resurces, r they believe that slutins utside human

cntrl will address the prblem. Sme r all the structural

barriers must be remved but this is nt likely t be suicient.

Psychlgists and ther scial scientists need t wrk n

psychlgical barriers.

Section 6: How can psychologists assist in limiting climatechange?

Psychlgy can better the understanding the behavirs

that drive climate change by building better behaviral mdels

based n empirical analyses, prviding deeper understanding

individual and husehld behavir, and applying evaluatin

research methds t erts t develp and imprve

interventins. one psychlgy’s unique cntributins is t the

understanding behavir at the individual level. It has already

bradened understanding the interactive rles varius

persnal and cntextual actrs in shaping envirnmentally

signicant behavir and in cmprehending why peple d and

d nt respnd t the variety interventin types, including

persuasive messages, inrmatin, ecnmic incentives, and

new technlgies. It can cntribute mre in this area by helping

t design mre eective interventins. Psychlgy can als help

by illuminating the psychlgical actrs aecting behaviral

change in rganizatins, as well as cultural and plicy changes.

Tpic-specic research recmmendatins llw rm

ur illustratins hw psychlgists can help address these

questins. These recmmendatins cme at the end each

sectin. In many cases, research recmmendatins invlve

testing the generalizability inrmatin derived rm related

areas t the cntext glbal climate change. In ther cases,

the research recmmendatins highlight places where mre

research is needed t ully understand particular tpics

highlighted within each sectin.

Pc rcs

A secnd aim ur reprt was t make plicy recmmendatins

r APA. We rmulated the recmmendatins t assist and

encurage psychlgists’ engagement with climate change

issues as researchers, academics, practitiners, and students

and t ster the develpment natinal and internatinal

cllabratins with ther individuals and assciatins inside

and utside psychlgy. We als make recmmendatins t

encurage APA t “walk the talk” by addressing ur pressinal



rganizatin’s cntributin t the greenhuse gas emissins

discussin and t be a rle mdel r divisins within psychlgy.

The ull set plicy recmmendatins can be und at

http://www.apa.rg/science/abut/publicatins/plicy-

recmmendatins.pd.

Ccs

We cnclude by summarizing the value a psychlgical

apprach t studying climate change and research cntributins.

We discuss the imprtance being attuned t the diversity

human experience in climate change analyses because varius

understandings and respnses t climate change will be

inuenced by a persn’s wrldview, culture, and scial identities.

We als discuss hw APA ethical standards prvide mtivatin

r psychlgists’ engagement in climate change issues

and challenges. Finally, we recmmend that psychlgists

adpt the llwing principles t maximize the value and use

psychlgical cncepts and research r understandingand inrming eective respnses t climate change thereby

maximizing their cntributin t the science climate change:

1. Use the shared language and cncepts the climate

research cmmunity where pssible and explain dierences in

use language between this cmmunity and psychlgy;

2. Make cnnectins t research and cncepts rm ther scial,

engineering, and natural science elds;

3. Present psychlgical insights in terms missing pieces in

climate change analyses;

4. Present the cntributins psychlgy in relatin t imprtant

challenges t climate change and climate respnse;

5. Priritize issues and behavirs recgnized as imprtant

climate change causes, cnsequences, r respnses. Be

cgnizant the pssibility that psychlgical phenmena are

cntext dependent;

6. Be explicit abut whether psychlgical principles and best

practices have been established in climate-relevant cntexts;

7. Be explicit abut whether psychlgical principles and best

practices have been established in climate-relevant cntexts;

and

8. Be mindul scial disparities and ethical and justice issues

that interace with climate change.



PreaCe

the missin the American Psychlgical Assciatin

(APA) Climate Change Task Frce was t reprt n

the interace between psychlgy and glbal climate

change, rmulate research recmmendatins, and write plicy

recmmendatins r psychlgical science. In this reprt we

summarize research illustrating a psychlgically inrmed

understanding glbal climate change and its impacts,

mitigatin, and adaptatin. We als identiy areas r uture

research and plicy recmmendatins. The llwing paragraphsprvide sme backgrund n ur task rce reprt.

our rst challenge was t determine ur audience. We

believe that psychlgy has a crucial cntributin t make t

multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary erts in the cntext

glbal climate change, bth natinally and internatinallya

view that was shared by the external reviewers this reprt.

Further, psychlgy can assist plicymakers, unding agencies,

public and private rganizatins, lcal and reginal gvernment

bdies, nngvernment rganizatins, and the generalpublic. Yet, we als believe that it is imprtant t mre ully

engage the psychlgical cmmunity (teachers, researchers,

practitiners, and students) in issues related t glbal climate

change. Given the instructin t rmulate plicy and research

recmmendatins r psychlgical science, we decided

that ur primary target audience shuld be members the

psychlgy cmmunity. It is hped that this reprt can help

psychlgists becme mre knwledgeable abut hw their

eld can inrm the discurse n climate change. A deeper

engagement wuld be t incrprate the urgency and challenges glbal climate change int psychlgy research, inrm

students abut the psychlgical aspects climate change, and

incrprate climate change cnsideratins and public cncerns

in psychlgical interventins. Fr instance, psychlgists in

the cmmunity can help address envirnmental wrries and

anxieties r assist cmmunities and rganizatins in their erts

t address causes and cnsequences climate change. While

psychlgy has already cntributed much t cllabrative erts

addressing climate change, we believe that psychlgists can

d much mre. We als wuld be very pleased i this reprt

inspires a greater appreciatin psychlgy’s cntributins t

understanding and addressing climate change and acilitates

cllabrative initiatives with thers utside psychlgy.

Tw verriding cnsideratins guided the writing the

reprt. First, based n ur understanding scientic evidence,

we strngly believe that glbal climate change impacts cnstitute

a signicant threat and challenge t human health and well-being and that human behavirs are a primary driver climate

change. We believe that peple rm all walks lie need t wrk

tgether t prevent uture harm. We recgnize that psychlgists

address a number imprtant issues. We d nt mean t imply

that addressing glbal climate change is mre imprtant than

ther wrk psychlgists d and d nt see them as mutually

exclusive. At a pressinal level, sme psychlgists may

chse t cus n climate change in their practice, research,

r teaching; thers may cnsider ways in which their wrk and

basic research can inrm and be inrmed by research n glbalclimate change. Still thers may simply learn mre abut what

thers in their eld are ding.

The secnd cnsideratin was the critical need r inrmed

decisin making. In ur reprt, we sught, wherever pssible, t

identiy psychlgical knwledge derived rm and claried by

climate-relevant empirical research. In areas where there was a

dearth climate change-relevant research, we identied ndings

that culd be applied and evaluated in a climate change cntext.

our gal was t prvide a review psychlgical research thatwuld be a resurce r psychlgists (teachers, researchers,

and practitiners) and students psychlgy (undergraduate,

graduate, and pstdctral ellws).

We review psychlgical research within the cntext

central themes (i.e., causes, impacts, and respnsesincluding

adaptatin and mitigatin) that characterize current discurse

within climate change science and the human dimensins

glbal change literature. These themes were chsen, in part,

…human behaviors are a primary

driver o climate change.



t assist psychlgists in their interactins with thers studying

climate change and t structure the reprt, given the very diverse

nature relevant psychlgical research. Based upn these

themes, we ramed plain language questins that psychlgists

are currently addressing and culd mre ully address in the

uture. At the end each sectin answering each questin, we

prvide research recmmendatins. one t three task rce

members tk respnsibility r each sectin the reprt as well

as the preace, intrductin, and cnclusin. We did nt identiyauthrs r each sectin because there was much cllabratin

in the develpment, writing, and revisin each sectin.

As nted, we sught t identiy psychlgical research and

practice that has been specically applied and tested in the arena

climate change. As may be expected, this led us t begin

with research and practice in envirnmental and cnservatin

psychlgy, the literature n natural and technlgical disasters,

and clinical perspectives assciated with ecpsychlgy. our

cmmittee was nvel in that it included scial, cunseling,cgnitive, and clinical psychlgists in additin t envirnmental

psychlgists and thse specializing in glbal envirnmental

change. It als included representatin rm several cuntries

(the United States, Canada, Australia, Germany, as ne member

has dual citizenship in the United States and Germany).

Glbal climate change is a cmplex and multiaceted

phenmenn that can be understd rm a number

perspectives. In ur reprt, we were unable t give ull attentin

t all ptentially relevant areas research and practice.

These include the literature n place attachment and identity,

the restrative benets natural envirnments, and the

eectiveness envirnmental educatin prgrams. In additin, a

number existing psychlgical theries and interventins culd

be eectively applied in the arena climate change. Again, we

cused ur reprt n ndings that were empirically supprted in

a climate-relevant cntext.

Finally, we rmulated recmmendatins t assist and

encurage psychlgists’ engagement with climate change

in their rles as researchers, academics, practitiners, and

students. Amng thse recmmendatins, we sught t ster

the develpment natinal and internatinal cllabratins with

individuals and assciatins inside and utside psychlgy.

We als made recmmendatins t the gverning bdy

the APA t cnsider envirnmentally relevant behavir in the

rganizatin by examining the assciatin’s cntributin t thegreenhuse gas emissins discussin and t prvide leadership

n climate change-related activities r the special-interest

divisins within the rganizatin.

We wuld like t express ur appreciatin t all the

sta at APA that helped us develp this reprt. These sta

members include Niclle Singer, ur primary sta assistant;

Hward Kurtzman, Deputy Executive Directr the APA

Science Directrate; Steve Breckler, Executive Directr the

APA Science Directrate; and Bb Seward and Dean Pawley,wh made ur virtual meetings and sharing dcuments

pssible. We wuld als like t acknwledge the supprt and

encuragement we received rm APA Presidents Alan Kazdin,

2008, and James Bray, 2009.

We wuld like t thank the reviewers wh helped imprve

the rm and cntent this reprt. These include the llwing

reviewers wh were members APA bards and cmmittees:

Judith Blantn, Art Blume, Eve Brank, Rnald Brwn, David

DeMatte, Michael Edwards, Pamela Ebert Flattau, Sue Frantz,Rn Hambletn, Laura Jhnsn, Kathy McClskey, Kevin

Murphy, Kurt Salzinger, Richard Velay, and Maria Cecelia Zea.

The list als includes the llwing psychlgists with expertise

n envirnmental psychlgy and related tpics: Lisa Aspinwall,

Timthy Kasser, Ellen Matthies, Paul Slvic, Linda Steg, David

Uzzell, and Debrah Winter. The list als includes the llwing

experts rm elds utside psychlgy: Anne Ehrlich, Paul

Ehrlich, Susan Mser, Melissa Payne, and Brent Yarnal.





Climate change is mre than changes in weather. Climate

change is dened by the Intergvernmental Panel n

Climate Change (Intergvernmental Panel n Climate

Change [IPCC], 2007b) as “any change in climate ver time,

whether due t natural variability r as a result human

activity.” Changes in climate reer t changes in means and

variability , r instance, temperature, precipitatin, and windver the curse mnths t millins years. Mre bradly,

climate reers t changes in atmsphere (gaseus envelpe

surrunding the earth), hydrsphere (water n the surace the

earth), crysphere (snw, ice, and permarst n and beneath

the surace the earth and cean), land surace, and bisphere

(ecsystems and rganisms living in the atmsphere, land, and

ceans). Glbal climate change is undamentally a biphysical

phenmenn. Hwever, the recent and accelerating warming

the earth’s climate is largely attributable t human activity, and

its impacts are mediated by psychlgical and scial prcessesand can be limited primarily by human activity.

This American Psychlgical Assciatin (APA) task rce

reprt describes hw psychlgy can help better understand

the causes and cnsequences climate change and cntribute

t humanity’s respnse t the cntinuing prcess glbal

climate change. Psychlgists as members an intellectual and

practice cmmunity have relevant skills r understanding why

and hw humans act in ways that cntribute t climate change;

the psychscial impacts climate change; and ways t assist

sciety in respnding t current and anticipated impacts

climate change via bth adaptatin strategies t lessen impacts

and actins t reduce greenhuse gas emissins. T eectively

cntribute, psychlgists need t cmmunicate with ther

disciplines in the scial and natural sciences and develp mre

widely shared understandings relevant human phenmenaassciated with climate change that can be integrated with

understandings and ramewrks ther disciplines.

The mst recent majr internatinal scientic cnsensus

evaluatin cncluded that human activities are changing

the climate at a planetary level, that many gephysical and

biphysical impacts are already evident, and that urther such

eects are inevitable (IPCC, 2007c). The present reprt,

llwing the lead ther climate change summaries (e.g.,

Cnalnieri et al., 2007; Gilman, Randall, & Schwartz, 2007)wrks rm the ndings the Intergvernmental Panel n

Climate Change (IPCC) Wrking Grup II’s cnclusins abut

the high prbability (67 t 95% likelihd) that climate change

will result in the llwing:

• Higher maximum temperatures leading to increased heat-

related deaths and illnesses and heat-related impacts n

livestck, wildlie, and agriculture;

• Higher minimum temperatures contributing to an extended

range sme pest and disease vectrs;

introduCtion

The long-term good health o populations depends on the continued stability and unctioning o the biosphere’s ecological and physical systems, oten reerred to as lie-

support systems. We ignore this long-established historical truth at our peril: yet it is all

too easy to overlook this dependency, particularly at a time when the human species is

becoming increasingly urbanized and distanced rom these natural systems. The world’s

climate system is an integral part o this complex o lie-supporting processes, one o many

large natural systems that are now coming under pressure rom the increasing weight o

human numbers and economic activities. (McMichael, 2003)



• More intense precipitation events leading to increased

ds, land- and mudslides, and sil ersin;

• Increase in summer drying and drought associated with

decreases in crp yields and water resurce quality and

quantity and increased risk rest re; and

• Increase in tropical cyclone wind and precipitation

intensities leading t increased risk t human health,

risk inectius disease epidemics, castal ersin anddamage t castal inrastructure, and damage t castal

ecsystems.

The prjectins r eects climate change typically

are thrugh 2050 r 2100. It is imprtant t nte, thugh, that

sme believe climate change impacts are already ccurring

and the impacts will last r the next millennium and beynd.

Yet, cntinued research is needed t be able t identiy

the time curse varius impacts. The precise timing and

intensity these events are unknwn because, r instance,they are dependent upn hw peple respnd, there are likely

unpredictable impacts due t interdependence biphysical

phenmena, and there are likely dierent time curses r

dierent events.

Althugh ther envirnmental cncerns are als pressing,

climate change deserves cncerted attentin because

irreversible changes in earth systems due t climate change (n

a 1000-year time rame) will require prund adaptatin (IPCC,

2001, 2007c; Slmn, Plattner, Knutti, & Friedlingstein, 2009)and because preventing even mre severe changes will require

signicant alteratins in individual and cllective behavir.

Sme have argued that the impacts climate change

will nt be universally negative; there will be bth “winners”

and “lsers.” Sme regins may benet by, r instance, being

able t increase agricultural prductin and supprt human

inhabitants in areas (such as Nrthern Canada) that were

previusly inhspitable t humans, having access t il reserves

in previusly inaccessible areas (such as Siberia), and increasetheir wealth due t the abve changes and distribute psitive

cnsequences wealth t thers (Easterbrk, 2007) at a

greater gd r all.

Yet, this implies that the presence winners negates

cncern abut “lsers.” It neglects the interdependency amng

peple and assumes that the misrtunes sme will have little

r n negative impact n thse wh have benetted. Further,

it des nt take int accunt the ull range predictins abut

climate change and the ptential r eedback lps. The greater

the increase in temperatures, the ewer “winners” there will be;

and, irnically, i “winners” cntribute t climate change with

high levels emissins, perhaps due t their imprved lie

circumstances, many may becme lsers as the magnitude

changes increases. Further, attending t the adverse impacts

climate change is cnsistent with the psychlgical ethical

principle aviding harm and ensuring human welare and

psychlgists’ wrk with marginalized grups wh are mst apt

t experience negative impacts. Fr reasns such as these, we

cus n the risks and negative impacts climate change.

This reprt cnsiders psychlgy’s cntributin t

understanding and respnding t climate change by cusing

n psychlgical dimensins climate change. We d this

by reviewing what psychlgical research can tell us abut

perceptins and cnceptins glbal climate change, human

activities that drive climate change, the psychscial impacts

climate change, barriers t respnding t climate change,

and human respnses t climate change via adaptatin and

mitigatin. Ater a review the literature, we recmmend ways

that the APA can: (a) encurage psychlgists t becme

invlved in understanding human and psychlgical dimensins

glbal climate change; (b) create eective utreach prgrams

that assist the public in understanding climate change, mitigating

its human causes, and adapting t climate change impacts

and acilitate internatinal, crss-disciplinary, transdisciplinary

cllabratins that address a climate change; and (c) address

the rganizatin’s envirnmental impacts that cntribute tglbal climate change.

assg C Cg:Pscg’s C

There are a number qualities assciated with psychlgy

that psitin psychlgists t prvide meaningul cntributins

t addressing climate change and its impacts. These qualities

can be und in ther elds as well, particularly ther scial

sciences. Yet, they pint t the types cntributins thatpsychlgy can make; the necessity r thse in the scial

sciences, including psychlgy, t cntribute r prgress n

addressing climate change; and the reasns why sme have

argued that psychlgists have a respnsibility t cntribute t

erts t address climate change (e.g., Claytn & Brk, 2005;

Miller, 1969).

First, psychlgists prvide a theretically and empirically

based understanding human behavir at the individual level.



This level analysis is relevant r understanding the human

causes climate change because it is the cllective impact

human behavirs that is cntributing t climate change

(Claytn & Brk, 2005; Gird, 2008). An individual level

analysis is relevant r understanding the impacts climate

change and the ways individuals adapt t climate change

because impacts and cping respnses include psychlgical

respnses (e.g., anxiety), psychlgical prcesses (e.g.,

denial , emtin regulatin), and individual and interpersnal

behaviral prcesses (e.g., scial supprt seeking, civic

engagement). Further, erts t encurage mitigatin and

structural changes r adaptin t climate change will need

t attend t the decisin makers and members the general

public and scial grups. The eectiveness varius plicies

(e.g., cap and trade) requires the invlvement and supprt

peple. Psychlgists can help by prviding links between

envirnmental plicies and individuals by attending t the ways

that individuals and cmmunities may r may nt be receptive

t r even react against envirnmental plicies develped by

gvernment icials, including whether their reactin t plicies

is a unctin the plicies themselves r ther actrs, such

as their relatinship t gvernment and their preerences r

nngvernmental slutins (Gird, 2008; Spence, Pidgen, &

Uzzell, 2009).

Secnd, psychlgists, alng with thse in ther scial

science disciplines, have lng recgnized the imprtance

the prximal (e.g., the presence thers, structures

neighbrhds) and distal (e.g., cultural and ecnmic)cntexts r determining behavirs, and this is imprtant r

envirnmental behavirs as well (Claytn & Brk, 2005;

Wapner & Demick, 2002). The ability t attend t bth individual

level analyses and cntexts is necessary t ully address human

behavir in multiple cntexts. Further, a dening eature

envirnmental psychlgy has been attentin t the relatinships

individuals have with their envirnments.

Third, psychlgists have uncvered individual,

interpersnal, and scial rces capable changing humanbehavir that are nt therwise clearly r widely understd.

Althugh peple seem able t articulate their pinins,

belies, and preerences accurately, they are ntriusly

pr at recgnizing the causes their behavir (Nisbett

& Wilsn, 1977). In the realm energy cnsumptin, r

example, peple will requently misinterpret the true causes

actins that acilitate r retard their climate cntrl erts

(Nlan, Schultz, Cialdini, Gldstein, & Griskevicius, 2008).

Thrugh behaviral-investigatins emplying experimental and

nnexperimental methdlgies, psychlgists can identiy the

actual determinants energy cnsumptive behavirs, many

which are psychlgical in rigin, and can highlight them in

cmmunicatin campaigns t encurage peple t behave in

mre sustainable ways and t prmte energy cnservatin.

Furth, there are many current and predicted intrapersnal,

interpersnal, and intergrup cnsequences climate change.

Psychlgists are well psitined t design, implement, and

assess interventins t amelirate the psychscial impacts

climate change. This has been illustrated thrugh imprtant

service prvided t victims extreme weather events such

as Hurricane Katrina (Proessional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 2008). Intergrup rivalry and ethical cncerns abut

envirnmental justice are likely t becme mre salient as

envirnmental prblems are interpreted thrugh the lens

climate change (Claytn & Brk, 2005; Spence et al., 2009).

Psychlgists’ understanding hw idelgies, values, and

belies maniest n individual and grup levels can help explain

and address emtinal reactins t the scial justice issues

inherent in climate change impacts (Spence et al., 2009).

mzg ds Pscg ass C Cg

While envirnmental psychlgists have cntributed much

the wrk n envirnmental sustainability, there are pprtunities

r the brad eld psychlgy t cntribute t humanity’s

respnse t climate change. The subdiscipline envirnmentalpsychlgy began early in the 20th century, and its cus n

envirnmental degradatin increased in the 1960s. It was nt

until the 1980s, hwever, that research in this area expanded

t take n large-scale envirnmental prblems. As Gird

(2007) ntes: “Instead trying t understand territriality in the

ice r values as they inuence the perceptin landscapes,

the gals sme became trying t understand and slve

resurce dilemmas, traic prblems, urban blight, and crimes

against nature” (p. 200). Gird describes several themes in

envirnmental psychlgy that have emerged ver the last 50years that are relevant t climate change: (a) an interest in hw

envirnmental psychlgy can inrm and aid public plicy; (b)

attentin t technlgy bth as a cntributr t envirnmental

prblems and as a means t imprve sustainability; (c)

a tendency t value and benet rm multidisciplinary

cllabratins and theries rm ther elds; (d) expansin

interests t include multiple levels analyses rm small-scale

studies individuals and small grups t larger scale issues

sustainability, issues acing nnhuman bilgical wrld, and



large-scale eclgical prblems such as the impending wrld

water crises.

The multiple current and ptential impacts climate change

n individuals’ psychlgical health and unctining indicate

that psychlgy’s invlvement in addressing glbal climate

change shuld nt be let nly t an envirnmental subdiscipline

psychlgy. The expertise und in a variety elds

psychlgy adds t the discipline’s ability t cntribute slutins

t many prblems assciated with climate change. This includes

mbilizing psychlgists t address issues ranging rm cping

with perceived threats climate change t trauma stemming

rm experience climate-related weather disasters. Experts in

cmmunity, business, and rganizatinal behavir can address

changes necessary at the systemic and human behaviral

levels, as businesses and nnprt rganizatins adapt t

a changing envirnment. other psychlgists prvide an

understanding hw peple acrss the lie span can adapt t

climate change. Psychlgists can als design eective methds

t integrate an envirnmental cus int psychlgy and ther

curricula. Experts in internatinal and peace psychlgy can

intervene as intergrup cnicts develp due t decreasing

resurces and rced migratins assciated with a changing

climate. These are just a ew the ways that psychlgists’

knwledge and techniques interace with glbal climate change.

bcg i

Fundamentals o climate change

Earth’s temperature and climate have uctuated ver the

curse millins years. over the past century r s,

hwever, human activities have driven Earth’s climate ut the

temperature range within which human civilizatin develped

during the past 10,000 yearsand urther warming is inevitable

because the physical prperties the climate system (IPCC,

2007c).

This climate change, recent in gelgical terms, is a result

several changes in human activities that accelerated with

industrializatin in the 19th century and increased expnentially

since. These activities, smetimes called driving rces (Natinal

Research Cuncil, 1992), have prduced rapid increases in

climate rcing actrs, chiey releases greenhuse gases

(GHG) and land cver changes that alter Earth’s albed, r

reectivity energy cming rm the sun. The mst imprtant

GHG are carbn dixide (Co2; rm ssil uels, manuacturing,

derestatin, and decaying plants), methane (CH4; rm

prductin and transprt ssil uels, livestck, and ther

agricultural practices and decay rganic waste in municipal

slid waste landlls), and nitrus xide (N2o; rm agricultural

and industrial activities, cmbustin ssil uels, and slid

waste and urinated gases rm industrial prcesses) (U.S.

Envirnmental Prtectin Agency, 2009).

Climate mdels simulate the impact greenhuse gases

and ther rcing actrs n climate characteristics (e.g., average

wrld temperature). Lnger-term prjectins rely in part n

scenaris uture drivers, based n assumptins abut actrs

such as the size uture human ppulatin, uture ecnmic

grwth, and extent and success mitigatin erts. The IPCC

estimated that glbal mean temperature at the end the 21st

century wuld be between 0.3 and 6.4 degree C higher than

1980 t 1999 cnditins (IPCC, 2007c). other mre recent

mdels indicate greater likelihd mre extreme temperature

changes (e.g., 90% prbability 3.5 t 7.4 degree C changes

by 2100; (Sklv, et al., in press). It is imprtant t nte that

climatic change aects actrs ther than temperature (e.g.,

precipitatin patterns, ecsystem unctins, and resh water

supplies, t name just a ew). In additin, the temperature

changes can vary substantially rm the glbal mean value and

are prjected t be cnsiderably higher than average ver land

and in high latitudes.

The IPCC reprt utlines several dmains in whichcnsequences are ccurring r are expected rm climate

change. Figure 1 shws anthrpgenic drivers, impacts, and

respnses t climate change. It identies eects n average

precipitatin, temperatures, and sea levels and extreme events

that in turn aect ecsystems, d supplies, and security;

water supplies; and human health and settlements. Human

respnses t these changes and threats are usually classied as

mitigatin (human interventins t reduce anthrpgenic drivers

climate systems) and adaptatin (“adjustments in natural r

human systems in respnse t actual r expected climatic stimulr their eects, which mderates harm r explits benecial

pprtunities” (IPCC, 2007b). Finally, the drivers, impacts, and

respnses are all aected by sciecnmic changes, such as

in patterns prductin and cnsumptin, gvernment plicies,

and use technlgy. (S g 1 pg.)



Human dimensions o climate change

Human interactins with climate change include human drivers

r causes (e.g., ssil uels, land use, and land use change),

human impacts r cnsequences (e.g., changes in the intensity

and requency natural disasters, in water supplies, in d

prductin and threats t public health), and human respnses

(e.g., individual and grup attempts t mitigate climate change

r adapt in ways that reduce damage rm climate change that

were nt avided). These interactins ccur at multiple levels

invlving individuals, husehlds, rganizatins, gvernments,

and scieties. There is als a tempral dimensin t human

dimensins climate change. Human cntributin t climate

change has changed ver the curse histry as peple

alter Earth’s surace and use technlgies that release GHG.

The cnnectins between humans and climate change are

inseparable rm their cnnectins t ther animals and the

rest nature, thugh the extent t which peple attend t this

interactin varies acrss individuals, scieties, cultures, and

time. Psychlgists and ther scial scientists are wrking t

develp better understanding these human dimensins

climate change.

Psychological dimensions o climate change

Psychlgy can prvide insights int the meanings climate

change t individuals and scieties. Fr example, peple

d nt directly experience climate change. They experience

representatins climate change that are presented t them

via varius media and educatinal surces and persnal

interactins, and, inuenced by such presentatins, they may

interpret certain events they d experience, such as hurricanes

r wildres, as maniestatins climate change.

Generally, peple’s understandings climate change

underlie their willingness t act, and t supprt public plicies,

in respnse t it. As described belw, achieving an apprpriate

understanding is diicult r many reasns. The eects climate

are uncertain, and the eects that are knwn are diicult r lay

peple t discern. Climate change is nt a hazard per se, but

a ptential driver many dierent hazards. Many impacts are

place-specic due t variatin in eects reginally and natinally

related t gegraphic dierences as well as dierences in

resurces available r adaptatin. We can als expect t besurprised by climate-driven events, pssibly including having t

experience events that science has nt yet even warned abut.

Many ur expectatins abut climate may be utmded

because glbal temperature is mving utside the range within

which it has uctuated thrughut recrded human histry.

Climate change is als accelerating and des nt necessarily

llwing linear trends, s recently experienced events may be

bad guides as t what t expect. While many current eects are

urgent and cnsequential, sme mst serius impacts will

Climate Change

EARTH SYSTEMS

HUMAN SYSTEMS

Greenhouse Gases · Aerosols

Climate Process Drivers

Concentrations

Emissions

Impacts & Vulnerability

Socio-EconomicDevelopment

Mitigation Adaptation

Population · EquityProduction & Consumption Patterns

Trade · Governance · HealthSocio-Cultural Preferences

Technology · Literacy

Ecosystems · Food SecurityWater Resources

Settlements & SocietyHuman Health

Extreme Events

Sea Level RiseTemperature ChangePrecipitation Change

iGure 1: Scc

pgc c cg s,

pcs, spss ( iPCC, 2007).



cme ar in the uture, beynd the planning hrizns mst

individuals and rganizatins. Finally, as the climate changes,

the wrld will be changing, rendering cndence in predictins

even mre diicult.

Figure 2 elabrates the human dimensins climate

change and suggests what psychlgy can cntribute t climate

change analyses and discussins. At the tp the mdel is

climate change. Althugh climate change is a physical prcess,

it is driven by and understd thrugh scial prcesses,

including interpretatins events presented in the mass media.

Human behaviral cntributins t climate change (n the let

side the mdel) ccur via the use gds and services that

directly inuence the envirnment (envirnmental cnsumptin),

which is linked t ecnmic cnsumptin (expenditures n

gds and services). The impacts climate change (nted n

the right side the mdel) g beynd the bilgical, physical

health, and changes in human settlements. Climate change

impacts may als include individual and scial perceptins the

risks, psychscial well-being, aggressin, intergrup utcmes,

and cmmunity building. Individuals and cmmunities vary in

their vulnerability t climate change and capacity t adapt, and

these variatins can raise ethical issues. The impacts climate

change aect and are aected by the ways that individuals and

cmmunities adapt (as nted in the bttm right hand crner

the gure). Adaptatin includes a range cping actins that

individuals and cmmunities can take, as well as psychlgical

prcesses (e.g., appraisals and aective respnses) that

precede and llw behaviral respnses.

Erts t mitigate climate change (nted n the bttm

let-hand crner the gure) can bth decrease the human

cntributin t climate change and imprve individuals’

psychlgical well-being. Hwever, mitigatin plicies can

als meet resistance. A number institutinal, cultural, and

individual inuences (as nted n the bttm center the gure)

inuence patterns and amunt cnsumptin, the impacts

climate change n individuals and scieties, adaptatin

prcesses, and attempts at mitigatin. The review research

that llws this backgrund sectin elabrates n all these

pints. (S g 2.)

l r

In the literature review that llws, we discuss what current

psychlgical research can tell us abut human understanding

climate change, human behaviral cntributins t r drivers

climate change, psychlgical aspects the impacts

climate change, and respnses and lack respnses t the

anticipatin and experience climate change. We d this by

addressing the llwing six questins:

iGure 2: Pscgc pspcs

pgc c cg

s, pcs, spss

Climate Change

ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS

HUMAN SYSTEMS

· Human behaviors:Economic & environmentalconsumption

Climate Process Drivers Impacts on Individuals & Societies

Institutional, Societal, & Cultural Context

Mitigation Adaptation

· Public representations of climate change· Norms & patterns of consumption & population

· Community resources

· Perceptions of risk · Emotional responses, stress, & mental health· Aggression, intergroup tensions, & conict· Galvanize pro-environmental action

· Threats & changes to cultures

· Cataclysmic events· Ambient stressors

Individual Factors· Demographic drivers· Psychological drivers (e.g., aective responses to

risks, needs, ideologies, perceptions)· Resistance to change· Individual resources

· Behavior change toreduce GHG emissions

· Individual & communitycoping processes



1. Hw d peple understand the risks impsed by climate

change?

2. What are the human behaviral cntributins t climate

change and the psychlgical and cntextual drivers

these cntributins?

3. What are the psychscial impacts climate change?

4. Hw d peple adapt t and cpe with the perceived

threat and unlding impacts climate change?

5. Which psychlgical barriers limit climate change actin?

6. Hw can psychlgists assist in limiting climate change?

These questins llw mental mdels hazards that

include identicatin the prblem, causes, cnsequences, and

cntrls r slutins (Bstrm & Lash, 2007).

The rst questin examines psychlgical prcesses that

inuence answers t the remaining questins. The secndquestin addresses psychlgical understanding human

causes r drivers climate change. The third questin

addresses a psychlgical understanding the impacts

climate change. The remaining questins address psychlgical

respnses t climate change via adaptatin (Questin 4) and

mitigatin (Questins 5 and 6). Tgether these questins inrm

the psychlgical dimensins climate change.

Althugh climate change is glbal, much the relevant

psychlgical research has been dne in Nrth America,Eurpe, and Australia. There are ntable dierences amng

these cuntries, r instance, in the extent t which impacts

climate change have been salient. Perhaps mre imprtantly,

thugh, are pssible dierences amng these and ther

cuntries in extent ecnmic develpment and assciated

wealth. other ptentially imprtant dierences emerge when ne

cnsiders dierent cultural views abut nature acrss cuntries

and within cuntries. Little psychlgical research, hwever,

has addressed these types dierences. When we are aware

research that has dne s, we mentin it. Hwever, it is alimitatin the literature review.





the understanding climate change, bth in its causes

and in its likely eects, by the average citizen acrss

dierent regins the wrld is limited. Psychlgical

research has started t examine reasns r this shrtcming.

Analgies rm ailures t ully understand and take actin

in ther dmains prvide hyptheses abut cgnitive and

mtivatinal challenges that need t be vercme, but tests these hyptheses applied t climate change are nly starting

t emerge, and much wrk remains t be dne t illuminate the

special questins and challenges that the prper understanding

and its actin implicatins bring.

dc C Cg

Climate is a statistical and thus technical cncept and is

described by the distributins such variables as temperature

and precipitatin in a regin, cllected ver time. The averagepersn is rarely cncerned abut the climate in her regin, but

thinks a lt abut the weather. Hwever, climate inrmatin

is smetimes used r planning and decisin making, as r

example, when a armer decides which crp variety t plant, r

a student cnsiders average March temperatures in dierent

regins the wrld t determine where t g r spring break.

While a regin’s climate and changes in its climate

bviusly determine its weather patterns, weather eventseven

extreme nesare nt necessarily diagnstic changes in the

climate. Climate change is a trend in averages and extremes

temperature, precipitatin, and ther parameters that are

embedded in a lt variability, making it very diicult t identiy

rm persnal experience. Peple ten alsely attribute unique

events t climate change and als ail t detect changes in

climate.

Expectatins either change r stability play a large rle

in peple’s ability t detect trends in prbabilistic envirnments,

as illustrated by the llwing histric example (Kupperman,

1982, as reprted in Weber, 1997, and NRC, 1999). English

settlers wh arrived in Nrth America in the early clnial perid

assumed that climate was a unctin latitude. Newundland,

which is suth Lndn, was thus expected t have a mderate

climate. Despite repeated experiences ar clder temperatures

and resulting deaths and crp ailures, clnists clung t theirexpectatins based n latitude and generated ever mre

cmplex explanatins r these deviatins rm expectatins. In

a mre recent example, armers in Illinis were asked t recall

salient temperature r precipitatin statistics during the grwing

seasn seven preceding years (Weber & Snka, 1994). Thse

armers wh believed that their regin was underging climate

change recalled temperature and precipitatin trends cnsistent

with this expectatin, whereas thse armers wh believed in

a cnstant climate recalled temperatures and precipitatins

SeCtion 1:

how do PeoPle underStandthe riSkS imPoSed by ClimateChanGe?



cnsistent with that belie. Bth grups shwed similar degrees

errr in their weather event memries, but armers’ belies and

expectatins biased the directin the errrs.

Because climate change is s hard t detect rm persnal

experience, it makes sense t leave this task t climate

scientists. This makes climate change a phenmenn where

peple have t rely n scientic mdels and expert judgment

and/r n reprts in the mass media, and where their wn

persnal experience des nt prvide a trustwrthy way t

cnrm the reprts. Fr mst peple, their expsure t and

experience “climate change” has been almst entirely indirect

and virtual, mediated by news cverage and lm dcumentaries

events in distant regins (such as melting glaciers in

Greenland) that describe these events in relatin t climate

change.

A lng traditin psychlgical research in risk

cmmunicatin (e.g., DiMent & Dughman, 2007; Leiserwitz,

2004, 2006; Mser & Dilling, 2007a; o’Cnnr, Brd, Yarnal,

& Wieek, 2002) has included studies ten apcalyptic risk

messages abut impending and unlding climate change

impacts. Scial representatins envirnmental threats

can themselves have dramatic psychscial impacts, and

the psychlgical and interdisciplinary literature n risk

cmmunicatin and n risk appraisal and respnse is prviding

imprtant pinters t the nature such media impacts (Bartsch,

Vrderer, Mangld, & Vieh, 2008; Gird et al., 2009;

Pidgen, Kaspersn, & Slvic, 2003; Slvic, Finucane, Peters,& MacGregr, 2006; Weber, 2006). These research ndings

suggest urther research n hw media cverage and ther

risk cmmunicatins can aect individuals’ and cmmunities’

understandings climate change and their respnses t the

risks, including cping, scial amplicatin, and willingness t

embrace scial, liestyle, and technlgical changes (Reser,

2009).

The distinctin between persnal experience pssible

utcmes and statistical descriptin pssible utcmeshas received much recent attentin because the stensibly

same inrmatin abut the cnsequences decisins and

their likelihds can lead t dierent perceptins and actins,

depending n hw the inrmatin is acquired (Hertwig, Barrn,

Weber, & Erev, 2004). Decisins rm repeated persnal

experience with utcmes invlve assciative and ten aective

prcesses, which are ast and autmatic (Weber, Shar, & Blais,

2004). Prcessing statistical descriptins, n the ther hand,

requires analytic techniques that need t be learned and require

cgnitive ert.

Peple’s chices can dier dramatically under the tw

inrmatin cnditins, especially when the small-prbability

events are invlved, which is certainly the case with climate

risks. The evaluatin risky ptins under repeated sampling

llws classical reinrcement learning mdels that give recent

events mre weight than distant events (Weber et al., 2004).

Such updating is adaptive in dynamic envirnments where

circumstances might change with the seasns r accrding

t ther cycles r trends. Because rare events have a smaller

prbability having ccurred recently, they tend (n average)

t have a smaller impact n the decisin than their bjective

likelihd ccurrence wuld warrant. But when they d ccur,

recency weighting gives them a much larger impact n the

decisin than warranted by their prbability, making decisins

rm experience mre vlatile acrss respndents and past

utcme histries than decisins rm descriptin (Yechiam,

Barrn, & Erev, 2004).

Fr mst peple in the United States, perceptins the

risks climate change that rely n persnal experience will lead

t the judgment that the risks are lw. The likelihd seriusly

and nticeably adverse events as the result glbal warming is

bund t be small r the reseeable uture r many regins

the wrld. Even individuals whse ecnmic livelihd depends

n weather and climate events (e.g., armers r shers) might

nt receive suicient eedback rm their daily r yearly persnal

experience t be alarmed abut glbal warming, thugh recent

surveys cnducted in Alaska and Flrida (tw states in which

residents in sme regins have increasingly been experiencingclimate-change driven changes persnally) shw that such

expsure greatly increases their cncern and willingness t take

actin (Arctic Climate Impact Assessment, 2004; Leiserwitz

& Brad, 2008). Climate scientists have experience-based

reactins t the risks climate change. Hwever, by virtue

their educatin and training, they can als be expected t place

greater reliance than members the general ppulatin n

their analytical prcessing systems, and their cnsideratin

statistical descriptins and mdel utputs will thus make them

mre likely t cnsider glbal climate change t be a mreserius risk than typical nnscientists.

Cc a C Cg

Human perceptins and judgments abut climate change are

imprtant because they aect levels cncern and, in turn,

the mtivatin t act. Public pinin data in the United States

indicate that climate scientists are mre cncerned abut the

pssibly severe eects climate change n human ppulatins



ecsystems, and inrastructures than average citizens and

gvernmental icials (Dunlap & Saad, 2001). one natinal

representative pinin pll shws that 47% peple plled

view glbal warming as a “very serius” prblem, and anther

28% view it as a “smewhat serius” prblem (Pew Prject,

2006). This level cncern75% peple in the United States

assessing glbal warming as a “very” r “smewhat” serius

prblemis similar t the level in Russia (73%) and lwer than

that in many ther natins: 87% Canadians, 81% Mexicans,

95% French, 88% Chinese, 97% Japanese, 96%

Brazilians, and 94% Indians assess glbal warming as a

“very” r “smewhat” serius prblem. Regardless the stated

level cncern hwever, ew peple in the United States see

climate change as an immediate risk and tend t rank it as less

imprtant than many ther scial issues, like the ecnmy and

terrrism (Krsnik, Hlbrk, Lwe, & Visser, 2006; Leiserwitz,

Kates, & Parris, 2005). This cmparative lack cncern abut

climate change cnsequences is strngly related t plitical

idelgy (Dunlap & Saad, 2001) and pses a prblem r

eective cmmunicatin abut these risks (Cmeau & Gird,

2008; Marx et al., 2007).

(n) g rs

Evidence rm cgnitive, scial, and clinical psychlgy

indicates that risk perceptins, in a brad range dmains,

are inuenced by assciative and aect-driven prcesses

as much r mre than by analytic prcesses (Chaiken &

Trpe, 1999; Epstein, 1994; Slman, 1996). our assciativeprcessing system is evlutinarily lder, autmatic, and ast.

It maps experienced, uncertain, and adverse aspects the

envirnment int aective respnses (e.g., ear, dread, anxiety)

and thus represents risk as a eeling (Lewenstein, Weber,

Hsee, & Welch, 2001). Analytic prcessing, n the ther hand,

wrks by algrithms and rules (e.g., the prbability calculus,

Bayesian updating, rmal lgic, and utility maximizatin) that

must be taught explicitly. It is slwer and requires cnscius

ert and cntrl. The perceptins climate change and its

risks by climate scientists are based in large part n analyticprcessing, as these experts have been trained as scientists in

the necessary analytic tls and have the necessary inrmatin

required by them. Nnscientists, n the ther hand, typically

rely n the mre readily available assciative and aective

prcessing. I risk perceptins were driven mstly r exclusively

by analytic cnsideratins cnsequences, they wuld nt be

inuenced by the way a particular hazard is labeled. Yet, reprts

abut incidences “mad cw disease” elicit greater ear than

reprts abut incidences bvine spngirm encephalitis

(BSE) r Creutzeld-Jacb disease, the mre abstract, less

aect-laden scientic labels r the same disrder (Sinaceur,

Heath, & Cle, 2005).

The tw types prcesses typically perate in parallel and

interact with each ther. Analytic reasning cannt be eective

unless it is guided and assisted by emtin and aect (Damasi,

1994). In cases where the utputs rm the tw prcessing

systems disagree, hwever, the aective, assciatin-based

system usually prevails, as in the case phbic reactins, r

which peple knw perectly well that their avidance behavir

is at best ineective and pssibly harmul t them, but cannt

suspend it (Lewenstein et al., 2001). Glbal climate change

appears t be an example where a dissciatin between the

utput the analytic and the aective systems results in less

cncern than is advisable, with analytic cnsideratin suggesting

t mst peple that glbal warming is a serius cncern, but the

aective system ailing t send an early warning signal (Weber,

2006).

Psychlgical r aective risk dimensins strngly inuence

judgments the riskiness physical, envirnmental,

and material risks in ways that g beynd their bjective

cnsequences (Slvic, Fischh, & Lichtenstein, 1986; Hltgrave

& Weber, 1993). Peple’s judgments the similarities between

pairs dierent health and saety risks can be placed int

a tw-dimensinal space (shwn in Figure 1) that has been

replicated acrss numerus studies in multiple cuntries (Slvic,

1987). The rst dimensin this space, “dread risk,” capturesemtinal reactins t hazards like nuclear weapns allut,

nuclear reactr accidents, r nerve gas accidents that speed

up peple’s heart rate and make them anxius because

perceived lack cntrl ver expsure t the risks and due

t their catastrphic cnsequences. The secnd dimensin,

“unknwn risk,” reers t the degree t which a risk (e.g., DNA

technlgy) is new, with unreseeable cnsequences nt yet

tested by time. Hw much is knwn abut the hazard and hw

easily are expsure and adverse cnsequences detectable?

(S g 3 pg.)

T the extent that individuals cnceive climate change

as a simple and gradual change rm current t uture values

n variables such as average temperatures and precipitatin,

r the requency r intensity specic events such as reezes,

hurricanes, r trnades, the risks psed by climate change

wuld appear t be well knwn and, at least in principle,

cntrllable and therere nt dreaded (“mve rm Miami t

Vancuver when things get t ht r dangerus in Flrida”). o



curse, in mst cases, peple d nt mve away rm hazards

even when they are aware them, as the Nvember 2008

devastating res in suthern Calirnia demnstrate (a very

similar destructive re ccurred 30 years earlier, and almst

every resident knew abut that. In act, at least ne resident

lst his hme in bth res. one driver this inactin may be

place attachment (Gird, 2007), i.e., cntinued attachment t

amily, jb, and cmmunity, a gal that can be mre salient in

the atermath adverse events, when ears have aded, than

the gal aviding a small-prbability uture disaster. Hwever,

status qu biases r change inertia have been dcumented in

many ther situatins (e.g., r rgan dnatins; Jhnsn &

Gldstein, 2003) and insurance decisins (Jhnsn, Hershey,

Meszars, & Kunreuther, 1993), where they have been shwn t

have cgnitive rather than mtivatinal causes.

The perceived ability r inability t take crrective actin

is an imprtant determinant emtinal reactins. Ptential

catastrphes rm climate change ( the kind graphically

depicted in the lm The Day ater Tomorrow ) have the ability t

raise visceral reactins t the risk (Leiserwitz, 2004). Climate

change that is cnstrued as rapid is mre likely t be dreaded.

Perceived behaviral cntrl and its absence can bth wrk

against behavir change. That is, it sters the (prbably

unwarranted) belie that ne wuld mve rm the hazard zne,

and thus need nt ear the hazard. At the same time, when

peple believe that they have n cntrl ver climate change, it

acilitates such mechanisms as denial (e.g., Gird, Iglesias, &

Casler, 2008).

While analgies abut the rle psychlgical risk

dimensins in peple’s eeling being “at risk” are suggestive,

these cnjectures abut pssible causes r the absence a

widespread sense alarm abut climate change will need t be

tested in a direct ashin and acrss a range cultures.

dscg r

Mst the risks climate change and thus the benets

mitigating it lie many years int the uture and are distant

als gegraphically (see Sectin 2 this reprt). Ecnmic

analysts typically discunt uture and distant csts and benets

iGure 3: lc 81 zs

-s spc c

ss cs 15 s

ccscs. ec c s p

c ccscs, s c

g (Sc, 1987).

Laetrile·Microwave Ovens·

Water Fluoridation·Saccharin·

Water Chlorination·Coal Tar Hairdyes·Oral Contraceptives·

Valium·

Auto Lead·

·Nitrates

·Caeine

·Aspirin

·Vaccines ·Lead Paint

·Darvon·IUD

·HexachlorophenePolyvinyl··Chloride

DiagnosticX-rays

·RubberMfg.

Antibiotics·

·Nerve Gas Accidents

Nuclear Weapons (War)·

·Electric Fields·DES·Nitrogen Fertilizers

·Cadmium Usage·Mirex ·Trichloroethylene·2,4,5-T

·SST

·DNA Technology

·Radioactive Waste

·Pesticides

·PCBs·AsbesetosInsulation

·DDT·Mercury

·Fossil Fuels

·Coal Burning (Pollution)

·Satellite Crashes

·Uranium Mining·Nuclear Reactor

Accidents

·Nuclear WeaponsFallout

·LNG Storage &Transport·Auto Exhaust (CO)·D-Con

·Coal Mining (Disease)

·Large Dams

·SkyScraper Fires

·UnderwaterConstruction

·Sport Parachutes·General Aviation

·High Construction

·Coal Mining Accidents

·Railroad Collisions

·Commercial Aviation

·Auto Racing

·Handguns·Dynamite

·Auto Accidents

·AlcoholAccidents

·Skateboards

·Power Mowers ·Snowmobiles

·Tractors

·Alcohol·Chainsaws

·Elevators

·Electric Wir & Appl (Fires)·Smoking

Motorcycles·

Trampolines·

Home Swimming Pools·Downhill Skiing·

Recreational Boating·Electric Wir & Appl (Shock)·

Bridges·Fireworks·

·Bicycles

Smoking (Disease)·

Factor 2Unknown Risk

Factor 1Dread Risk

Factor 2

ControllableNot Dread

Not Global CatastrophicConsequences Not Fatal

EquitableIndividual

Low Risk to Future GenerationsEasily Reduced

Risk DecreasingVoluntary

Not ObservableUnknown to Those ExposedEfect DelayedNew Risk Risk Unknown to Science

ObservableKnown to Those ExposedEfect ImmediateOld Risk Risk Known to Science

UncontrollableDreadGlobal CatastrophicConsequences FatalNot EquitableCatastrophic

High Risk to Future GenerationsNot Easily ReducedRisk IncreasingInvoluntary

Factor 1



by sme amunt (e.g., by the current rate interest ered

by banks) as a unctin the time delay, a mechanism that is

described mathematically by an expnential discunt unctin. In

cntrast, peple ten apply sharp discunts t csts r benets

that will ccur in the uture (e.g., a year rm nw) relative t

experiencing them immediately, but they discunt much less

when bth time pints are in the uture, with ne ccurring

arther in the uture than the ther (e.g., tw years versus ne

year in the uture and even six versus ve years int the uture)

and shw ther deviatins rm ratinal-ecnmic discunting

(Ainslie, 1975; Lewenstein & Elster, 1992).

Tw theries related t preerence cnstructin attempt

t understand the reasns and mechanisms r these

incnsistencies in discunting and the large impatience when

immediate rewards are an ptin. Trpe and Liberman (2003)

suggest that peple cnstrue uture events dierently rm

events in the present. In particular, events in the distant uture

(an invitatin t give a paper at a cnerence tw years rm

nw, r the prspect castal ding 30 r 50 years rm

nw) are cnstrued in abstract terms, whereas events clser in

time (the upcming trip n Mnday t attend the lng-scheduled

cnerence r the prspect a majr hurricane passing thrugh

twn tmrrw) are cnstrued in mre cncrete terms. one

dierence between the abstract versus cncrete representatin

the cnsequences pssible actins lies in the discrepancy

in their aective strength and impact. Abstract representatins

cnsequences in the distant uture usually lack the cncrete

assciatins cnnected t present r near-present eventsand thus may nt be eared as much, althugh this may nt

hld in the case envirnmental risks (Gird et al., 2009).

While the csts mitigating actins are incurred immediately,

their uncertain and uture benets get discunted, making the

deliberative cnsideratin such actins unlikely t arrive at

scially respnsible and lng-term sustainable behavir.

Dierences in the usual representatin current and

uture events can have implicatins r hw peple respnd t

climate change. This dierence in the richness and cncreteness the representatin temprally clse versus distant

cnsequences may well lie at the rt bserved prblems

sel-cntrl, whether they are impatience and impulsivity in

btaining desirable utcmes (Mischel, Grusec, & Masters,

1969; Laibsn 1997) r prcrastinatin with undesirable

tasks (o’Dnghue & Rabin, 1999). Prtective r mitigating

actins against glbal climate change require the sacrice

cncrete, immediate benets r the sake abstract, distant

gals. The strng negative aect assciated with the cncrete,

immediate csts and sacrices may well drive eclgically

damaging cnsumptin decisins and actins. Hwever, this

tendency is mderated by the way that peple think abut

changing their cnsumptin. When asked t delay cnsumptin,

peple rst generate arguments r the status qu, immediate

cnsumptin, and nly then later generate arguments r

delaying cnsumptin. Yet, generating arguments r the rst

actin cnsidered (e.g., immediate cnsumptin) tends t

interere with the subsequent generatin arguments r ther

actins (Jhnsn, Jhnsn-Pynn, & Pynn, 2007). Weber et

al. (2007) succeeded in drastically reducing the intertempral

discunting in peple’s chice by prmpting them t rst

generate arguments r deerring cnsumptin, then prmpting

them t generate arguments r immediate cnsumptin. Scial

nrms and/r psitive r negative aective reactins t a chice

ptins typically determine which ptin is cnsidered rst.

Thus, Hardisty, Jhnsn, and Weber (2009) und that 65%

Republicans were willing t pay a Co2

emissin reductin ee

n such purchases as airline tickets when the ee was labeled

as a carbn set (and rst generated arguments r purchasing

it), but that this percentage drpped t 27% when the ee was

labeled as a carbn tax, a label that generated negative visceral

reactins in this grup and led them t rst generate arguments

r nt purchasing it.

Analgies can perhaps be drawn t the slwly but steadily

changing perceptins and attitudes tward the risks

smking, which have similar characteristics t climate change

risks in the distant uture ill health and premature death andin immediate sacrices r the sake uture and uncertain

benets. In the case smking, it has seemed pssible t

mtivate behavir chices (quitting smking) that have vercme

the strng tendency t discunt them. T the extent that peple’s

assessments the uture risks climate change can be

changed t becme similar t thse smking (with the aid

educatinal erts r the reraming chice ptins), peple

might becme mre willing t undertake liestyles changes

that lead t mitigatin. As r ther analgies used t mtivate

research hyptheses r pssible interventin strategies, the deviis undubtedly in the details such translatins, and research is

needed t wrk ut such details.

t r C C Cgusg rcs

The assumptin that risky decisins can and shuld be reduced

t a prbability distributin pssible utcmes and that n

ther characteristics the decisin cntext are relevant has



rightly been criticized (Gldstein & Weber, 1995). Instead,

hazards have been shwn t interact with psychlgical,

scial, institutinal, and cultural prcesses in ways that may

ampliy r attenuate public respnses t the risk (see Sectin

5). Scial and cultural amplicatins risk (Kaspersn et al.,

1988) by the scientists wh cmmunicate the risk assessment,

the news media, cultural grups, interpersnal netwrks, and

ther grups and institutins ccur in the transer inrmatin

abut the risk and in the prtective respnse mechanisms

sciety (Weinstein, Lyn, Rthman, & Cuite, 2000; Taylr, 1983).

Evidence rm the health literature, the scial psychlgical

literature, and the risk cmmunicatin literature suggests that

these scial and cultural prcesses serve t mdiy perceptins

risk in ways that can bth augment r decrease respnse in

ways that are presumably scially adaptive.

Several lines research implicate undamental wrldviews

in shaping hw peple select sme risks r attentin and ignre

thers. Fr example, Duglas and Wildavsky (1982) identiy

ve distinct “cultures” (labeled “hierarchical,” “individualist,”

“egalitarian,” “atalist,” and “hermitic,” respectively) that are said

t dier in their patterns interpersnal relatinships in ways

that aect perceptins risk. Hierarchically arranged grups,

they claim, tend t perceive industrial and technlgical risks

as pprtunities and thus less risky, whereas mre egalitarian

grups tend t perceive them as threats t their scial structure

(see als Dake, 1991). Leiserwitz (2006) prvides evidence

r the value this apprach t understanding dierences in

perceptins the risks glbal warming, llwing earlierwrk by o’Cnnr, Brd, and Fisher (1998, 1999) that shwed

that dierences in wrldview aected perceptins the risk

climate change. other researchers assciate such dierences in

risk perceptins with dierences in undamental value pririties,

llwing the wrk Schwartz (1992, 1994) r wrldviews such

as adherence t the New Eclgical Paradigm (Dunlap & Van

Liere, 1978, 1984).

Dierences in experience, as a unctin cultural rles,

seem t aect risk perceptins by mderating peple’s aectivereactins. Familiarity with a risk (e.g., acquired by daily

expsure) lwers perceptins its riskiness, with the result that

technical experts, all ther things being equal, perceive the risk

such technlgies as nuclear pwer generatin t be much

lwer than members the general public (Fischh, Slvic,

Lichtenstein, Read, & Cmbs, 1978). Numerus studies reprt

dierences in risk perceptin between men and wmen, with

wmen judging health, saety, and recreatinal risks (Slvic,

1987) and als risks in the nancial and ethical dmain (Weber,

Blais, & Betz, 2002) t be larger and mre prblematic than

men. This gender dierence in perceived riskiness reverses nly

in the scial dmain, in which wmen arguably have greater

amiliarity (Weber et al., 2002). Thus, greater amiliarity with

climate change and its risks, unless accmpanied by alarmingly

large negative cnsequences, may actually lead t smaller

rather than larger perceptins its riskiness. Psychlgists’

rles may als have inuenced their perceptins risks. Fr a

number reasns, members the psychlgical cmmunity

have traditinally nt seen themselves as having a central

rle in addressing envirnmental issues (see Kidner, 1994;

Gird, 2008) despite having many skills and rles that create

pprtunities r inuencing pr-envirnmental behavirs

(Dherty, 2008).

Public plicy trades between present and uture csts are

strngly aected by the rate at which uture csts and benets

are discunted (Weitzman, 2007), and the chice discunt

rate is in large part an ethical judgment. Ethical issues als

arise ver which principles airness t apply t distributive

decisins, hw t dene ingrup and utgrup membership, hw

t trade human against nnhuman welare, and hw much value

t place n the well-being animals, plants, and ecsystems.

Identicatin with subcultural grups may als inuence

perceptins the risk psed by climate change. Fr example,

grup ailiatins (e.g., ranchers and envirnmentalists) are likely

t predict pinins and belies abut envirnmental risks and

interventins (optw & Brk, 2003). Similarly, Leiserwitz(2007) describes several distinct “interpretive cmmunities”

(p.51) within the U.S. public wh share mutually cmpatible risk

perceptins, aective imagery, values, and scidemgraphic

characteristics. Risk perceptins are scially cnstructed with

dierent cmmunities predispsed t attend t, ear, and scially

ampliy sme risks while ignring, discunting r attenuating

thers. Leiserwitz distinguished climate change naysayers, wh

perceived climate change as a very lw r nnexistent danger,

and climate change alarmists, wh held high-risk perceptins

and extreme images catastrphic climate change. Thesegrups held signicantly dierent values and belies n scial

and plitical issues and necessity individual behavir change

and gvernmental interventin. Peple in the United States

wh are climate change naysayers have substantially lwer risk

perceptins than the rest U.S. sciety. Fr example, plitical

ailiatin is strngly related t attitudes and belies abut climate

change: Belie in the existence and relative threat climate

change has shwn an increasing relatinship t plitical party

ailiatin in the United States (Dunlap & McCright, 2008).



rsc Sggss

Belw are examples types research questins that culd be

addressed:

• Research is needed to test the applicability of

psychlgical risk dimensins such as perceived

cntrllability t the dmain climate change;

• Research is needed to better understand discounting

envirnmental csts and benets relative t the

discunting ecnmic r scial csts and benets;

• Research is needed on the nite pool of worry eect, i.e.,

interactins between perceptins ther classes risk

(e.g., ecnmic decline r natinal cmpetitiveness) and

perceptins envirnmental risks like climate change;

• Research is needed to assess the eects of climate-change risk perceptins n the perceptin the risks and

benets energy-generatin technlgy ptins like cal

r nuclear pwer and n carbn-capture and sequestratin

technlgy.

S

Feeling (r nt eeling) vulnerable and at risk in the ace

climate change seems t be instrumental in mving (r nt

mving) peple t actin (see Sectin 4), and thus the surces

these eelings are in need urther study. Research

in cgnitive psychlgy suggests that certain perceived

characteristics climate change (e.g., that it is “natural,” nt

new, and in principle cntrllable) may lead citizens as well

as plicymakers t underestimate the magnitude the risks.

other psychlgical research prvides additinal hyptheses

related t emtinal reactins t climate change such that the

absence eeling at risk may be a psychdynamic reactin (see

Sectin 3), the result psychic numbing r denial in the ace

verwhelming and uncntrllable risk (see Sectins 4 and

5). These explanatins are nt necessarily mutually exclusive,

thugh smetimes cntradictry in elements their hyptheses

(e.g., is climate change seen as a cntrllable r uncntrllable

risk?). Such cntradictins need t be reslved by empirical

investigatins.

The ability dierent educatinal interventins in shaping

perceptins, attitudes, and actin related t climate change

shuld als be a tpic empirical research (see sectin 6).

Existing knwledge abut the relative impact direct persnal

experience versus mre abstract statistical inrmatin n the

perceptins risk in dmains like nancial decisins r with the

relative eectiveness emtinal versus analytic prcesses

in prmpting prtective actin can guide the design dierent

educatinal interventins abut likely climate change scenaris

and their repercussins and abut the prs and cns dierent

curses adaptatin t climate change and/r mitigatin

greenhuse gas emissins.

This sectin the reprt prvided a psychlgical

understanding hw peple perceive the risk climate

change. The next sectin the reprt examines a psychlgical

understanding human actins that inuence climate change

by examining psychscial predictrs tw anthrpgenic

drivers climate change: ppulatin grwth and cnsumptin.





much data supprt the argument that current levels

human cnsumptin, in cmbinatin with grwing

ppulatin, are having a signicant negative impact n

the natural envirnment and are cntributing t climate change

(Dietz & Rsa, 1994; Myers & Kent, 2003; Dietz, Rsa, & Yrk,

in press; Stern, Dietz, Ruttan, Sclw, & Sweeney, 1997).

Cntinuing the current rate emissins is expected t yielda great variety undesirable cnsequences, increasing ver

time (IPCC, 2007c). Hlding per capita emissins cnstant,

ppulatin increases expected in the next hal century wuld

increase the glbal emissins rate by abut hal. A much

larger increase wuld result i per capita emissins rm

energy cnsumptin in develping cuntries, 2.2 metric tns

Co2

in 2005, increased t the U.S. level 19.5 metric tns

(Internatinal Energy Agency, 2007). Psychlgy can help

understand what drives ppulatin grwth and cnsumptin

and clariy the links rm ppulatin and cnsumptin t climate

change while attending t glbal and reginal inequities.

ec Ccs

A number ethical cncerns emerge when discussing

ppulatin and cnsumptin. With respect t ppulatin, these

include cncerns abut reprductive rights and chices (hw

many children t have, whether t use cntraceptives, and

whether t have abrtins), an unbrn child’s right t lie, and an

elderly individual’s right t die. Mrever, cncerns are raised

when slutins t ppulatin grwth target pr cuntries that

are prducing ew GHG emissins and when slutins uel

anti-immigratin rhetric (Hartmann & Barajas-Rman, 2009).

other cncerns surrunding ppulatin grwth and distributin

invlve the rights human and eclgical cmmunities that

are detrimentally aected by the increasing size and spread human ppulatins. Dilemmas emerge when these rights are

ramed as being in cmpetitin with each ther.

With regard t cnsumptin levels, ethical cncerns arise rm

unequal well-being acrss the glbe and within regins the

wrld assciated with dierent levels energy cnsumptin.

Erts t curb cnsumptin, depending n hw the reductins

are distributed, can maintain r exacerbate existing inequalities.

Many lw-incme cuntries and regins want, and sme say

shuld have the right, t develp ecnmically in ways that rely

n industry and that have always increased emissins in the

past. Technlgical slutins that prvide energy’s services

withut using ssil uel might maintain afuent liestyles

and raise well-being r pr peple, while simultaneusly

decreasing greenhuse gas emissins. Hwever, technlgical

slutins are nt withut prblems. Nt all peple are able

t ard the slutins. Even i they can ard technlgical

slutins, these slutins, while decreasing GHG emissins,

can still negatively aect the envirnment directly in ther ways,

SeCtion 2:

what are the human behavioralContributionS to Climate ChanGeand the PSyCholoGiCal andContextual driverS o theSeContributionS?



r example, rm the prcesses and envirnmental impacts

required t create the slutins r, indirectly, by encuraging

human habitats t encrach upn natural habitats. The benets

may als be cunteracted by increases in ppulatin r

ecnmic activity.

The presence such issues makes it mre imperative t

understand hw peple make decisins that inuence climate

change thrugh their behavirs and their supprt r plicies

inuencing ppulatin and cnsumptin and t examine the

values underlying behavir and plicy supprt. Increasing

ppulatin size and cnsumptin represent classes behavirs

that explain the ways that human behavir cntributes t climate

change. These classes behavirs are embedded in larger

cntexts that inuence them. In rder t understand and address

the links rm ppulatin and cnsumptin t climate change,

it is useul t understand psychlgical, scial, and cultural

drivers ppulatin and cnsumptin and t understand what

it is abut ppulatin and cnsumptin that inuences climate

change.

o

We rst present quantitative mdels that prvide evidence

the link rm ppulatin and cnsumptin t climate change.

Ater establishing this link, we examine characteristics and

predictrs ppulatin grwth. Much this research has been

dne utside psychlgy, r example, by demgraphers; we

suggest ways in which psychlgy culd cntribute mre t thisdiscussin.

The link between ppulatin and climate change ws

thrugh the cllective impact envirnmentally signicant

patterns cnsumptin. Therere, ater discussing ppulatin

grwth, we prvide a psychlgical analysis cnsumptin

via a mdel that includes predictrs and cnsequences

envirnmental cnsumptin. We then elabrate n the mdel

by rst disaggregating cnsumptin behavirs int thse that

have direct (envirnmental cnsumptin) and indirect (ecnmiccnsumptin) impact n climate change. Then we illustrate

what psychlgy can cntribute t understanding psychlgical

and cultural predictrs cnsumptin while recgnizing

structural, ecnmic, and physical cnstraints n cnsumptin

decisins. By prviding examples predictrs ppulatin

size and cnsumptin and the means by which ppulatin

and cnsumptin inuences climate change, we illustrate hw

psychlgy has and culd urther ur understanding human

cntributin t climate change via ppulatin and cnsumptin.

Q ms

Varying quantitative mdels describe and predict the impact

ppulatin and cnsumptin n the envirnment. A widely

knwn rmula rm the 1970s is I= PxAxT, where I = Impact,

P = Ppulatin, A = Afuence per capita, and T = Technlgy

(Ehrlich & Hldren, 1971; Cmmner, 1972; Hldren & Ehrlich,

1974). Althugh T has been used t reer t technlgy, in

practice, it served as an errr term, representing all surces impact nt captured by P and A. other details have been

included in ther versins the rmula. Fr instance,

ppulatin has been disaggregated int bth number

individuals and husehlds (Dietz & Rsa, 1997; Liu, Daily,

Ehrlich, & Luck, 2003), and the IPCC versin the rmula

makes specic reerence t greenhuse gas (ghg) emissins:

(Population) x (per capita GDP ) x (Intensity ghg

) = Emissionsghg

(Bldgett & Parker, 2008; Yamaji, Matsuhashi, Nagata, & Kaya,

1991). A particularly ntewrthy new rmula is STIRPAT

(stchastic impacts by regressin n ppulatin afuence, andtechnlgy; Dietz, Rsa, & Yrk, 2007). It emplys advanced

statistical methds that can take int accunt the prbabilistic

nature the variables in the equatin.

Acrss the dierent mdels, a cnsistent nding is that grwing

cnsumptin and ppulatin are majr cntributrs t the impac

humans n the envirnment and n Co2levels in particular.

This can be seen by examining results rm STIRPAT analyses

(Dietz & Rsa, 1997). The results illustrate that cuntries

with larger ppulatins (s g 4) and greater per capita

cnsumptin (s g 5) have greater Co2

emissins.

The relatins with afuence are imprtant t cnsider in

mre detail. Figure 2 illustrates a cmmnly und U-shaped

relatin between afuence and utcmes (Hanley, 2008). This

pattern has been used as evidence a delinking carbn

dixide emissins and ecnmic grwth at higher levels

incme. Prpsed explanatins r this pattern include the

pssibility that places with greater per capita GNP spend mre

n services than gds, are invested mre in energy eiciency,

live in mre energy-eicient urban areas, and relcate their

cntributin t emissins t ther parts the wrld via trade

that decreases industrializatin in their wn cuntries (Hanley,

2008; Dietz & Rsa, 1997).

The abve illustrate that mre is needed t better

understand the relatin between afuence and Co2 emissins.

Further, individual level analysis is als necessary t knw

why there is a relatin between cnsumptin and emissins.

Psychlgy can help clariy mechanisms by which ppulatin



Afue

nce Eect Multiplier

Gross Domestic Product Per Capita

70 100 200 500 25,00010,0005,0002,5001,000

20

5

1

.1

.01

iGure 5: t p cp

c Co2

sss. ns

gp ps

cs s

ss (dz & rs,

1997).

iGure 4: t

pp Co2

sss. ns

gp ps

cs s

ss (dz &

rs, 1997).

1000

100

10

1

.1

Population Efect Multiplier

Population

1,000,000 10,000,000 100,000,000 1000,000,000



and afuence inuence climate change by prviding a behaviral

analysis dierent types cnsumptin behavirs that

peple chse t engage in and the reasns why peple select

particular behavirs.

PpCncerns abut ppulatin include cncerns abut ppulatin

size, distributin, and density. Here we cnsider ppulatin

size because the demnstrated relatin between size and

greenhuse gas emissins. Ppulatin distributin and density

are als relevant t envirnmental impact, but the relatinship is

mre cmplicated.

The size the human ppulatin has grwn expnentially

ver the last 100 years (see Figure 6). It required hundreds

thusands years t g rm the rst handul humans t

a ppulatin 3 billin. A secnd 3 billin-persn increaseccurred in nly 33 years (rm 1960 t 1993). We nw have

apprximately 6.6 billin humans n the planet, and we are

still grwing. Yet, it is als imprtant t cnsider variatin in

ppulatin grwth rates which reect cmbinatins birth and

death rates. The rate increase in ppulatin grwth in the

United States is decreasing, and the wrld’s ppulatin grwth

rate is prjected t be less than ne percent by 2020 (U.S.

Census, 2008). Als, ppulatin change is nt cnsistent acrss

regins. Fertility rates are currently lwest in Eurpe, East Asia,

and the Pacic, with abut 2.1 children r less per wman,

and highest in Sub-Saharan Arica, with abut 5.2 children per

wman (Lule, Singh, & Chwdhury, 2007). (S g 6.)

With regard t climate change, the eect ppulatin

grwth is much greater in cuntries with high per capita

emissins (Wrld Energy outlk, 2007; 2008). Fr example,

Arica has sme the highest ppulatin grwth rates, but

the lwest reginal per-capita greenhuse gas emissins.

Prjected increases in energy use in Arica in the next 25 years

are expected t result in much smaller ttal emissins than in

ther regins. The United States nw prduces seven times

mre Co2

emissins than Arica, and in the next 25 years, is

prjected t cntribute abut ve t six times mre emissins

than Arica. Althugh mst the wrld’s increase in energy

demand prjected ver the next 25 years cmes rm develping

cuntries, led by China and India, the United States is stillprjected t cntinue t cntribute the mst per capita at abut

tw t three times mre per persn than China. Many argue

that increases in per capita energy cnsumptin are necessary

r ecnmic develpment in places such as Arica, China, and

India.

Thus, decreasing ppulatin r ppulatin grwth des nt

address climate change in any straightrward way. Decreasing

ppulatin grwth culd have a much greater eect n the

Annual increments (bars)

100

80

60

40

20

0

Millions

Population

size (line)

10

8

6

4

2

0

Billions

8000 BC

AD 1*

1650*

1750

1800*

1850

1900*

1930*

1960*

2000

2050

* AD 1 Population takes 1600 years to double* 1650 Population takes 200 years to double

* 1800 Population takes 130 years to double

* 1900 Population takes 65 years to double* 1930 Population takes 45 years to double

* 1960 Population takes 40 years to double

iGure 6: w

pp sz

cs:

8000 bC 2050 ad

(pjcs s

ssp; u

ns, 1998).



climate in regins and in ppulatins that have high per capita

GHG emissins. Yet, ppulatin decrease des nt guarantee

decrease in emissins. In the United States, average husehld

sizes are decreasing, but husehlds are living in larger hmes,

which use mre energy (U.S. Hme Size, 2007; Whipps,

2006). Given cnsideratins such as these, sme have argued

that it is mre imprtant t cus n decreasing cnsumptin

rather than ppulatin (Diamnd, 2008). Yet, while arguably

less immediate imprtance, stabilizing r reducing ppulatin

size can be an imprtant element in erts t mitigate GHG

emissins because ppulatin is ne driver GHG emissins.

Psychlgists can cntribute t understanding predictrs

ppulatin grwth by understanding links amng psychlgical,

scial, and cultural rces that inuence birth and death rates

while attending t justice issues (e.g., Bth & Cruter, 2005;

Flbre, 1983; Harmann & Baragas-Rman, 2008; Lesthaegh

& Surkyn, 1988; Sen, 2003). Individual and cultural religius

belies, belies abut gender rles, belies abut individual

versus gvernment cntrl reprductin and health care are

intertwined with decisins that inuence reprductive decisins

(such as when t start having children, hw many children t

have, and time between children; inant mrtality; and lngevity).

The imprtance scial and cultural rces n reprductive

decisins is implied by evidence that wmen ten have mre

children than what they reprt ideally wanting (Lule, et al.,

2007). Culture and immediate scial cntext inuence wmen’s

prcreatin chices thrugh mechanisms such as nrms (e.g.,lcal nrms abut amily size and acceptability cntraceptin

and abrtin, value educating wmen), plicies (e.g., access

t cntraceptives, abrtin, and recvery rm abrtin), and

laws (e.g., restrictins n number children allwed, nancial

incentives t have mre children). There may als be implicit r

explicit belies that a grwing ppulatin is desirable because it

indicates that a sciety has access t d and adequate health

care (Livi-Bacci, 2007) and because cncerns abut inverted

pyramidal distributins where the elderly utnumber the yuth

(Bth & Cruter, 2005). The benets t individuals and cultures increased ppulatin grwth alngside the csts t human

and eclgical cmmunities have been described as a type

cmmns dilemma (Hardin, 1968; Gardner & Stern, 2002). In

cmmns r scial dilemmas, many cultural and psychlgical

actrs inuence decisins abut whether individuals pay

attentin t their persnal benets r a grup’s csts (ostrm et

al., 2002; Gird, 2008).

Psychlgists’ knwledge abut belies and hw they

inuence individual and plicy decisins, causes and ways

t address scial dilemmas, decisin making in interpersnal

relatinships, and a variety gender-related belie systems

culd all prvide useul inrmatin r discussins that invlve

individual and scial decisins that inuence ppulatin size.

Fr instance, restrictive gender rles that dene wmen’s status

by the number children they have, limit wmen’s access t

alternative rles, give thers cntrl ver wmen’s decisins

t have children, and devalue emale children, creating greater

demand r mre children t ensure having male children,

have been implicated as causes ppulatin grwth in India

(Bhan, 2001; Sen, 2003). Psychlgical research int belies

abut sexuality, the acceptance birth cntrl, masculinity and

male dminance and psychlgists’ expertise n the increasing

sexualizatin girls, the eects abrtin n wmen’s well-

being, and varius types subtle and implicit sexist belies are

relevant t discussins abut ppulatin.

It is als imprtant t cnsider regin-specic causes r

variatin in ppulatin size. Regins vary in cultural and scial

belies, patterns immigratin and emigratin, and extent

destabilizing inuences such as eminine spread diseases

such as AIDS, wars, and ethnic cnicts that result in gencide

and rape. Psychlgists’ knwledge abut acculturatin and

treatment immigrants culd aid in understanding variatin

in reginal ppulatin grwth (Sam & Berry, 2006). Peace

psychlgy can cntribute t ur understanding and addressing

the impact war and cnict n deaths and pregnancy via rape(Cstin, 2006).

Csp

The term “cnsumptin” has multiple meanings in dierent

disciplines and intellectual cmmunities (Stern, 1997). The IPAT

and STIRPAT rmulatins peratinalize it in mnetary terms,

with a measure aggregate ecnmic activity r aggregate

cnsumer purchases. Hwever, a ull understanding hw

cnsumptin cntributes t climate change requires a mredetailed thery. Figure 7 presents a cnceptual mdel that

helps illuminate predictrs cnsumptin and dierentiates

between cnsumptin dened in terms mney spent versus

cnsumptin dened in terms envirnmental impact and the

mechanisms by which cnsumptin inuences climate change.

Each level illustrated in g 7 can aect variables at

the ther levels, either directly r indirectly, but it is imprtant t

recgnize the distinctins amng them. Level 5 sets the cntext



Institutional· Physical infrastructure(e.g., urban design)

· Laws & regulations· Media & advertising

Social & Cultural· Prescriptive & descriptive norms· Direct personal contactwith inuence agents

· Family, organizational,& community structures

Physical Environment · Climate demanding

characteristics of residence(e.g., temperature)

LEVEL 5: CONTEXT

Demographic Drivers· Age, income, household size

Psychological Drivers · Intrapersonal factors (e.g., needs, wants, goals) · Ideologies, beliefs, attitudes & worldviews about

the environment · Perceptions of prescriptive & descriptive norms

LEVEL 4: INDIVIDUAL FACTORS

Organization Behaviors· Purchase goods & services· Investment in equipment, production facilities,& means of distribution of goods

Individual Behaviors · Purchase goods & services· Investment in housing & transportation

LEVEL 3: ECONOMIC CONSUMPTION

Organization Behaviors

· Climate-driving characteristics & use ofgoods & services· Climate-driving characteristics & use ofequipment, production facilities & distributionof goods & services

Individual Behaviors

· Climate-driving characteristics & use ofgoods & services

LEVEL 2: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSUMPTION

Carbon Dioxide Methane Nitrous Oxide

LEVEL 1: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

LEVEL 0: CLIMATE CHANGE

TemperatureChange

PrecipitationChange

Sea LevelRise

ExtremeEvents

iGure 7: eps

pcs

c-cg

csqcs

csp.



r individual behavirs and decisins, smetimes encuraging

and directing behavirs and ther times cnstraining behavirs.

Level 4 includes characteristics individuals that inuence

their ability and mtivatin t engage in cnsumptin including

many psychlgical cnstructs related t envirnmental

cnsciusness, such as attitudes and values, which have been

the cus much research n predictrs envirnmentally

respnsible behavirs. Cntexts (Level 5) can inuence

individual drivers cnsumptin (Level 4). Cultural practices

inuence psychlgical actrs, r instance, by dening what

is cnsidered “needs” versus merely “desires” and making

particular behaviral ptins pssible, easible, and desirable.

Individual cnsumptin decisins can be made alne r

within grups (e.g., amilies r bards directrs representing

particular cntexts r decisins; Level 5). Levels 2 and 3

represent tw dierent aspects cnsumptin. Ecnmic

cnsumptin is the mney individuals and rganizatins spend;

it is represented by per capita GNP used in the quantitative

mdels described abve. Level 2 represents envirnmental

cnsumptin“human and human-induced transrmatins

materials and energy” (p. 20, Stern, 1997). Ecnmic and

envirnmental cnsumptin are crrelated but separable.

A persn can spend mney n a amus painting, which

wuld cst a lt mre than the gas paid t drive t the pint

purchase, but the latter will have mre an envirnmental

impact. Chices abut hw t spend mney, r instance the

chice t spend mney n a lw- rather than a high-mileage

car (ecnmic cnsumptin), als inuence envirnmentalcnsumptin. Hwever, envirnmental cnsumptin is als

aected by ther actrs, such as driving distances.

Sme analyses examine nly certain levels in this mdel.

Fr instance, researchers using the IPAT and STIRPAT

rmulatins g directly rm Level 3 t Level 1, withut

examining the links that prvide critical mediatrs. Psychlgy

can help: (a) understand the relatinships amng and between

variables in Levels 4 and 5, (b) explain the links rm Level 4 t

Levels 3 and 2, and (c) explain hw interventins (incentives,inrmatin, persuasin, etc.) directly aect behavir at Levels 3

and 2. These links are als imprtant psychlgically because

cnsumptin chices may reect peple’s knwledge r cncern

abut links between envirnmental cnsumptin (Level 2) and

greenhuse gas emissins (Level 1), r example i they try t

buy prducts that use less energy r use their prducts in mre

energy-eicient ways. A lt the psychlgical research agenda

is in the links and the mediating prcesses.

As nted abve, evidence the impact cnsumptin

n the envirnment and specically n GHG emissins is

typically assessed with natinal-level data n each cuntry’s

grss dmestic prduct. This makes sense, r example, rm

a lie cycle analysis a prduct, with mney being invested at

all stages prductin, rm “cradle t grave” (Lvins, Lvins,

& Hawkens, 1999). A prblem r a behaviral analysis is that

GDP aggregates a wide variety dierent types cnsumptin

behavirs. Disaggregatin these behavirs int specic types

behavirs can help clariy which behavirs cntribute the mst

t climate change and which behavirs can, therere, be mst

eectively targeted r reductin emissins. Great ert can

be put int behavirs that have little eect (Gardner & Stern,

2008; Vandenbergh, Barkenbus, & Gilligan, 2008). Mrever,

individuals wh lack knwledge abut the relative cntributin

behavirs t emissins may priritize a relatively ineective

behavir ver a mre eective ne (see Sectin 5 this reprt).

Disaggregatin can als help t understand the actrs that

encurage r discurage particular behavirs. Sme behavirs

may be mtivated by hednic reasns and thers by scial

nrms (Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). Further, sme behavirs may

be mre diicult than thers, perhaps because they require mre

skill r mre mney, r they are nt available t peple.

Yet, behaviral analyses need t cnsider mre than

individual actins that directly emit greenhuse gases. First,

actins can be interdependent. Changing ne behavir can lead

t changes in ther behavirs (e.g., switching t hybrid carsmay encurage peple t drive arther, which culd neutralize

emissins reductins). Secnd, indirect eects behavir can

be very imprtant. Using a prduct may use little energy but its

prductin and distributin may require cnsiderable energy

(McKibben, 2007). Fr example, cnsuming d btained rm

supermarkets r restaurants uses cnsiderably less energy than

prducing, transprting, packaging, and distributing it. Similarly,

using the Internet requires mre energy than that required t run

ne’s cmputer.

Third, individual behavirs that have little eect may add

up t a lt acrss behavirs and acrss individuals (e.g.,

putting electrnics n standby uses minuscule amunts

energy, but energy used acrss devices and husehlds can be

cnsiderable, Vandenbergh et al., 2008). Furth, behavirs can

inuence nt just GHG emissins, but their absrptin and the

direct reectivity Earth (e.g., changes in land use, such as

thrugh derestatin, can decrease absrptin greenhuse

gases (Millennium Ecsystems Assessment, 2005). This



analysis pints t the need t understand individuals’ chices

amng behavirs and their verall patterns cnsumptin,

especially the ttal eects in climate terms. We start by

examining types cnsumptin behavirs (Levels 2 and 3),

then cnsider individual drivers cnsumptin (Level 4), and

end with a cnsideratin brader inuences (Level 5) n

cnsumptin decisins.

Types o consumption behaviors

Researchers have prpsed dierent classicatins cnsumptin and cnsumptin-reducing behavirs. one

classicatin distinguishes investment in equipment and

technlgy, management the equipment, and its use (c.

Kemptn, Darley, & Stern, 1992; Kemptn, Harris, Keith,

& Weihl, 1985). The rst these represents ecnmic

cnsumptin that drives energy use while the latter tw

represent mre direct envirnmental cnsumptin. orthgnal

t these categries are specic dmains energy use such

as transprtatin, space heating and cling, and husehld

appliances and electrnics (see the Table, “Types behavirsand examples” r examples). It is als imprtant t distinguish

the abve behavirs, which aect direct energy use in the

husehld, rm cnsumer behavirs with indirect eects n

energy use thrugh the investment, management, and chices

made by thse wh supply cnsumer prducts and services.

Fr instance, recycling and reusing materials reduces emissins

because it reduces the need t prcess and transprt virgin

materials. Hwever, these eects are nt entirely within the

cnsumer’s cntrl because the chice t replace virgin

materials with recycled gds is made by manuacturers. Finally,

behavirs that inuence the emissin greenhuse gases can

be distinguished rm thse that inuence the absrptin

emissins r that change Earth’s albed. Thrugh these types

behavirecnmic and envirnmental cnsumptin

adptin, management, and use equipment and technlgy

aect the net rcing climate change. Varius dierences

amng behavirs may inuence the likelihd that individuals,

husehlds, r rganizatins will engage in them.

Perceptins the eectiveness dierent behavirs r

reducing emissins may be imprtant, even thugh they ten

d nt match the research data (Kemptn et al., 1985; De

Yung, 1986). Perceptins and actual ability t engage in

the behavirs als inuence whether peple engage in these

behavirs (Sia, Hungerrd, & Tmera, 1985). Investments,

which require nly very inrequent actins (e.g., insulating ne’s

hme), ace nancial and ther barriers that d nt exist r

management and use actins. Hwever, they generally save

mre energy than changes in management r use equipment,which usually require repeated erts (Stern & Gardner, 1981;

Gardner & Stern, 2008).

It can als be imprtant t examine patterns behavirs.

Fr example, evidence is incnclusive at best abut whether

engaging in ne type envirnmentally riendly behavir

predispses ne t engaging in ther types envirnmentally

riendly behavir (Crmptn & Thøgersn, 2009). Further

research is needed t understand such patterns. (S t.)

Investment inequipment &technology

Management ofequipment &technology

Intensity ofequipment &technology use

Transportation Number and fueleiciency of personal &public transportationvehicles.

Miles traveled invehicles.

Number of people invehicles; enginemaintenance.

Heating and coolingof buildings

Size of buildings,eiciency of furnaces &air conditioners; amountof insulation.

Temperature settings.Maintenance offurnaces; caulking ofwindows.

Householdappliances &electronics

Energy eiciency ofwater heaters,televisions, refrigerators.

Amount of hot waterused; time spent withtelevision on.

Cleaning freezer coils;reducing standbypower use.

table: tps s

ps



Individual drivers o consumption (Level 4)

There is much individual variatin in patterns cnsumptin.

Sme variatin is due t dierences in the cntext in which

individuals live (Level 5). other variatin is due t dierences

in ability and mtivatin (Level 4). Ability can be inuenced by

incme available t ard dierent cnsumptin behavirs,

knwledge abut hw t act t change the climate impacts

cnsumer behavir, and physical and mental health. Mtivatincan be inuenced by many pssible psychlgical drivers,

which we cus upn belw. Demgraphic dierences such as

husehld size and amily lie cycle als inuence cnsumptin

patterns because their assciatin with dierent cntext,

their assciatin with abilities (e.g., gender and minrity status

can inuence incme), and, smetimes, their assciatin with

mtivatins (e.g., ethnic grup membership can help explain

individual dierences in wrldviews).

Financial incentives are imprtant mtivatrs

envirnmental cnsumptin. Incentives can create r help

vercme nancial barriers t investment in energy-eicient

equipment and technlgy and can avr prducts and

services that cntribute either mre r less t greenhuse

gas emissins, thus mtivating behaviral changes. other

drivers cnsumptin can ptentiate r attenuate the eects

ecnmic inuences. Psychlgical actrs such as needs,

wants, gals, values, idelgies, belies, attitudes, wrldviews,

perceptins prescriptive and cultural nrms, and identicatin

with nature may als aect cnsumptin. Fr instance, research

has shwn psitive assciatins between engaging in sme

envirnmentally respnsible behavirs and varius measures

envirnmental cnsciusness (e.g., pr-envirnmental belies;

Milnt, Duckitt, & Camern, 2006). Hwever, researchers

have nt always dierentiated amng types envirnmentally

respnsible behavirs. In terms relevance t climate change,

it is imprtant t assess the extent t which these relatinships

invlve cnsumptin behavirs with signicant eects n GHG

emissins r ther climate.

A cnsiderable bdy psychlgical literature n predictrs cnsumptin cuses either implicitly r explicitly n ecnmic

cnsumptin, usually withut regard t the envirnmental

cnsequences. This literature is relevant t understanding

human cntributins t climate change because the general

assciatin between ecnmic cnsumptin and greenhuse

gas emissins (as illustrated abve with research n GDP) and

because nnenvirnmental prduct attributes are imprtant t

cnsumptin decisins that aect GHG emissins.

A requently studied psychlgical predictr cnsumer

behavir is the presumed happiness that purchasing prducts

will prvide. Many advertisements prmise t bring varius

persnal and scial rewards, including sel-satisactin, un, and

praise rm thers. Thus, individuals may seek happiness via

cnsumptin. Yet, the presumed relatin between cnsumptin

and happiness is nt ully supprted by data, particularly in

wealthier cuntries where cnsumptin is already high. I the

relatin were straightrward, then thse wh have mre shuld

be happier than thse wh d nt. Subjective well-being is

higher in wealthier cuntries, but within cuntries, there is little

relatin between increasing GDP ver time and subjective

well-being (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002). In ecnmically

develped cuntries, there is nly a small psitive crrelatin

between individual incme and sel-reprted subjective well-

being (Diener & Biswas-Diener, 2002), and incme is nly

weakly related t daily md (Kahneman, Krueger, Schkade,

Schwarz, & Stne, 2006). Relative incme is mre strngly

assciated with sel-reprted happiness than actual incme

(Clark, Frijters, & Shields, 2008), and the relatin between

incme and well-being is strnger in prer cuntries. This

suggests that nce basic needs are satised, increasing incme

and assciated increases in ecnmic cnsumptin are less

relevant r happiness.

Research indicates that rather than prmting well-being,

materialismthat is, priritizing acquisitin and pssessin

material bjectshinders well-being and is mre detrimental

t the envirnment than alternative aspiratins. Thse whendrse materialistic values (such as believing that nancial

success is imprtant) are mre likely t scre prly n

measures subjective well-being, including glbal adjustment,

scial prductivity, and behaviral disrders (Kasser, Ryan,

Cuchman, & Sheldn, 2004; Kasser & Ryan, 1993). Further,

U.S. adults and adlescents wh d nt endrse materialistic

values cnsume less energy by sme measures, such as riding

bicycles, using bth sides the paper, turning lights in

unused rms, etc. (Richins & Dawsn; 1992; Kasser, 2005).

Finally, cultural values aspiring tward mastery and hierarchy(which include specic values relevant t cnsumerism) are

crrelated with higher levels Co2

emissins, even ater

cntrlling r GDP (Kasser, in press).

Cre psychlgical needs, such as relatedness,

cmpetence, and autnmy, may als drive cnsumptin (Deci

& Ryan, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Cnsumptin aects sel-

cncepts and public identities because prducts are imbued

with meaning, ten acilitated by marketing, and that meaning



is then transerred t the cnsumer (McCracken, 1986). The

clthes we wear, the cars we drive, the way we decrate ur

hmes, and the gits we give thers allw us t t in with scial

trends, raise ur status, carve ut ur wn unique subcultures

and individual identity, and display ur grup membership. Thus,

prducts may prvide a sense belnging and sel-esteem.

Finally, cnsumptin can als be prmted as a way t satisy

a need r autnmy and cmpetence and t reach ne’s

individual ptential (i.e., becme sel-actualized; Berger, 2006;

Curtis, 2002; Lavine, 2006). Fr instance, target marketing that

cuses n psychgraphic characteristics (ne’s liestyle, values,

aesthetic styles, and lie visins) has been described as a way

that cmpanies make cnnectins between a particular prduct

and ne’s persnal ambitins (Chen, Ch, & Sutherland, 2007;

Vyncke, 2002).

Research like that dne examining happiness and

materialism can mre ully illuminate relatins between cre

psychlgical needs and cnsumptin. Research n intrinsic

and extrinsic gals suggests that cnsumptin wuld be a pr

means satisying many cre psychlgical needs. Extrinsically

riented gals (e.g., ppularity and having an appealing

appearance), including materialism, relative t ther gals (sel-

acceptance, persnal grwth, intimacy and riendship, scietal

cntributins) share a greater cus n lking r a sense

wrth utside nesel by cusing n rewards and praise

rm thers. Fcusing n extrinsic gals can interere with ther

gals that are mre likely t lead t mre avrable subjective

well-being. Fr instance, ne reasn r the lack crrelatinbetween incme and well-being is that peple with incmes

greater than $100 K spend less time n leisure activities

(Kahneman et al., 2006). Still, ecnmic cnsumptin may als

be driven by intrinsic gals (Vargas & Yn, 2006). Fr instance,

spending mney t btain lie experiences rather than btaining

material gds is assciated with greater happiness (Vanbven

& Gilvich, 2003).

Frm the standpint the need t reduce envirnmental

cnsumptin in cuntries such as the United States, it isimprtant t cnsider hw psychlgical needs can be satised

with less than current levels such cnsumptin. Sme

research suggests that rather than pursuing materialistic

gals and passive rms entertainment (e.g., watching

televisin), peple wuld be better served t wrk n tasks

that require greater engagement, particularly thse that lead t

w experiences (e.g., experiences that are s engaging ne

lses track time while ding them) (Csikczentmihalyi, 2004;

2006). Sme evidence indicates that engaging in eclgically

respnsible behavir is assciated with higher subjective well-

being and endrsing mre intrinsic and less extrinsic values

(Brwn & Kasser, 2005).

Thus, althugh psychlgical needs drive cnsumptin,

cnsumptin may be a pr methd satisying thse needs,

particularly subjective well-being. Mre research is needed t

ully understand the relatins amng dierent types mtives

r cnsumptin and well-being and relatins amng dierent

types psychlgical needs, such as relatedness, autnmy

and cntrl, and dierent types cnsumptin behavirs. A key

research need cncerns identiying ways t satisy psychlgica

needs thrugh behavirs that have less eect n the climate.

Context and consumption (Level 5)

As nted in Figure 7, a number cntextual eatures (Level 5)

inuence individual drivers cnsumptin (Level 4). Behaviral

ptins are shaped by whether individuals live in temperate

versus very ht r cld envirnments, physical inrastructure that

aects the ptins r travel r the energy eiciency hmes,

and varius laws and regulatins. Behavir is als aected by

marketing cnsumer gds and services and prducers’

chices which gds and services t make available. Further,

there are a number scial-cultural eatures cntexts that

direct behavirs. It is the latter that we will cnsider in mre

detail.

Scial and cultural cntexts can inuence cnsumptin

in many ways. Fr instance, scial and cultural nrms identiyapprpriate and desirable behavirs, and scial structures

inuence and regulate individual and grup behavirs. Ecnmic

and envirnmental cnsumptin in the United Sates needs t

be understd within a wealthy, individualistic, and capitalistic

culture (Kasser, Chn, Kanner, & Ryan, 2007). A particularly

imprtant cntextual eature is the extent t which cultures

value cnsumerism. Whereas envirnmental cnsumptin is

the use resurces and energy, and ecnmic cnsumptin

is spending mney t acquire gds, cnsumerism is “a belie

and value system in which cnsumptin and acquisitin rituals(e.g., shpping) are naturalized as surces sel-identity and

meaning in lie, gds are avidly desired r nn-utilitarian

reasns such as envy prvcatin and status seeking, and

cnsuming replaces prducing as a key determinant scial

relatins” (p. 231; Zha & Belk, 2008). Cnsumerism can

smetimes help satisy basic psychlgical needs, but it als

cntributes t chices that drive climate change. Cnsumerism

is widely assciated with the United States, but it is becming

glbal. It has becme a part Chinese culture, with sme



arguing that it is verpwering cmmunism (Zha & Belk,

2008). There has been little psychlgical research n hw

cnsumerism and related cultural belie systems inuence

envirnmental cnsumptin (see Heath & Gird, 2006 r an

exceptin).

Cultures can aect cnsumptin by inuencing perceptins

what is a necessity versus a luxury. This bundary can shit

ver time. Fr instance, in 1996, 32% peple in the United

States thught that a micrwave was a necessity, whereas in

2006, 68% believed this (Pew Research Center, 2006). These

perceived needs vary acrss dierent demgraphic grups. In

particular, the mre incme a persn has, the mre likely he r

she will view the items examined in the survey (clthes dryers,

hme and car air-cnditining, micrwaves, televisin sets,

etc.) as necessities. Althugh we knw n specic research

n cultural actrs that inuence these perceptins, it seems

likely that culturally dened reerence pints are imprtant r

establishing these perceptins. Fr instance, i a certain level

cnsumptin is seen as nrmal, cnsumptin levels belw

this may be perceived as insuicient. Reductins in this nrm

wuld be seen as lsses, rather than as gains rm a state n

pssessins (reerence prspect thery). Further, upward scial

cmparisns with thse wh cnsume a lt (“the rich and the

amus”) likely encurage peple t cnsume mre and lead

them t perceive their current state as relatively deprived (c.

relative deprivatin thery).

Culture can als create real needs. Prducts that werence luxuries, such as cars, have becme necessities r many

peple because human settlements have develped in ways that

make it very diicult t engage in necessary activities, such as

getting d and emplyment, withut a car.

A cultural attribute that may inuence cnsumptin

resurces is the perceptin time. Research has dcumented

dierences in perceptins time acrss cultures and the

implicatins perceptins time r nrms abut hw peple

interact with and treat each ther (Levine, 1997). on the nehand, uture time perspective, a perspective ten held in

western cultures (Jnes, 2003), is assciated with endrsing the

need r envirnmental preservatin (Milnt & Guveia, 2006).

on the ther hand, western culture is built t a great extent n

treating time as a resurce that is maximized at the expense

natural resurces. Energy is used t imprve eiciency (e.g.,

t decrease time n any particular task and increase ur ability

t multitask) and expand time s that we can have activities

ccurring arund the clck (Stephens, 2002). Increases in the

investment time may be required t reduce ur use natural

resurces. These changes can be impractical r individuals t

make n their wn and may require a mre general cultural shit

in perceptins needs and the value time and hw we use it

(Kasser & Brwn, 2003; Kasser & Sheldn, 2009).

It may be useul t cnsider the ways that dierent

eatures cultures inuence actual and perceived needs and

the implicatins these cultural eatures r cnsumerism

and patterns cnsumptin. Pssible imprtant cultural

cnsideratins include variatin in hw members dierent

cultures rient tward, experience, and perceive time and hw

they understand and assess rhythms behavirs within time

perids (Jnes, 2003). Given these cnsideratins, it is likely

imprtant t examine the rle that identicatin with particular

scial grups (e.g., ethnic grups) and internalizatin cultural

wrldviews has n cnsumerism and patterns cnsumptin.

Counter-consumerism movements

Individuals and grups peple have made erts t alter

their liestyles as a way t what they see as the prblems with

cnsumerism and a culture that they perceive supprts it. Fr

instance, sme peple jin vluntary simplicity mvements,

prmte erts t allw peple t take “take back their time,”

jin cmmunity-supprted agricultural grups, and participate

in “reecycling grups” (Bekin, Carrigan, & Szmigin, 2005;

Craig-Lees & Hill, 2002; Thmpsn & Cskuner-Balli, 2007).

When undertaken vluntarily, the activities these mvements

may cntribute t well-being, which they may nt i they areexperienced as asceticism, sel-deprivatin, r dne r

invluntary reasns (Lavine, 2006). The extent t which these

mvements ultimately inuence climate change will depend

upn hw widespread they becme and the extent t which their

altered patterns cnsumptin reduce GHG and ther climate

drivers.

Yet, this is a phenmenn wrth explring mre because

its relatinship t patterns cnsumptin. Many individuals

wh have becme “dwnshiters” (estimated in 1998 t be19% the U.S. ppulatin; Schr, 1998; and in 2003 t be

abut 25% in Britain; Hamiltn, 2003) are simpliying their

liestyles by repairing, reusing, sharing, and making their wn

gds and changing their cus t ullling rles such as civic

engagement, including using the cnsumer culture t ght the

culture by byctts and “buyctts” (Elgin, 2000). Many their

behaviral chices invlve less envirnmentally taxing patterns

cnsumptin that include behavirs that prduce ewer

greenhuse gases. It is argued that individuals jining these



mvements have und ways t satisy their needs r esteem,

autnmy, and belngingness that still make them happy

perhaps even better than cnsumerism des, althugh that is a

questin r urther research. Brwn and Kasser (2005) prvide

evidence this. They und that, relative t a matched grup

mainstream peple in the United States, sel-identied vluntary

simpliers were signicantly happier and living mre eclgically

sustainably.

rsc SggssBelw we list a ew, many pssible, research directins that

llw rm the abve review. Sme the suggestins build

what we already knw, r instance, abut peple’s tendency

t engage in envirnmentally respnsible behavir; thers

challenge researchers t attend t the envirnmental utcmes

cnsumptin behavirs they examine, and, particularly, thse

envirnmental utcmes that are related t human drivers

climate change; and still thers test areas that have received

little attentin within psychlgy.

Psychlgists culd:

1. Cntribute t research abut ppulatin size, grwth,

reginal density, etc. Psychlgists have examined

research n ppulatin in terms crwding. Hwever,

psychlgists culd cntribute mre t the area given the

imprtance tpics such as gender rles and relatins

t this dmain. Further, a number belie systems may

inuence evaluatin and supprt r ppulatin plicies.

2. Examine ecnmic cnsumptin at the individual and

husehld levels and envirnmental cnsumptin,

particularly energy use, as these types cnsumptin

relate t the scial cntexts husehlds and husehld

members’ values, psychlgical needs, gals, and

subjective well-being and cnduct this research

cmparatively acrss cuntries and subcultural and

demgraphic grups in the United States.

3. Cnduct research n peple’s judgments the eects

varius mdes decreased envirnmental cnsumptin

n their ability t satisy their needs, gals, and

mtivatins.

4. Develp a better understanding characteristics

cultures (e.g., belies abut time, cnsumerism, persnal

space, cntinuity, cmmunity, and views n nature) that

may aect patterns envirnmental cnsumptin.

5. Develp a better understanding cunter cnsumerism

mvements: mtivatins r jining them, the shrt- and

lng-term psychscial cnsequences invlvement,

and the extent t which the mvements ultimately

inuence envirnmental cnsumptin.

Css ipcs

Human actins that inuence climate change include activities

arising rm ppulatin grwth and regin-specic types and

patterns cnsumptin. This sectin described ways that

psychlgy can help understand these causes climate change

by identiying specic types cnsumptin and researching

individual and cntextual predictrs cnsumptin. The

next sectin examines cnsequences climate change by

examining psychlgical impacts such as emtinal reactins

and mental health implicatins and scial and cmmunity

impacts, including aggressin and intergrup cnict as well as

psitive cnsequences gained rm peple wh take cllective

respnsibility r a shared prblem.





the ptential impacts climate change n human health

and well-being have received cnsiderable attentin

(Climate Change Science Prgram, 2009; IPCC, 2007c).

Less attentin has been given t ptential psychlgical and

scial impacts glbal climate change and t actrs that

mderate and mediate thse impacts. Althugh sme lcalized

and/r immediate cnsequences, such as injury r stressresulting rm mre extreme weather events, may be perceived

t result rm climate change, mst psychscial eects are

likely t be gradual and cumulative, and the cnnectin t glbal

climate change may be less clear in the minds thse aected.

These include heat-related vilence (Andersn, 2001), cnicts

ver resurces (Reuveny, 2008), threats t mental health

(Fritze, Blashki, Burke, & Wiseman, 2008), and anxiety and

despair (Kidner, 2007; Macy & Brwn, 1998; Nichlsen, 2002).

In additin, climate change is likely t have a disprprtinate

impact n thse less ecnmic privilege r scial status(Agyeman, Bullard, & Evans, 2003; Kaspersn & Dw, 1991),

and thus, like ther envirnmental issues, have scial justice

implicatins that demand cnsideratin (Bullard & Jhnsn,

2000).

Available research suggests that the psychscial impacts

climate change are likely t be mderated by a number

individual and cntextual actrs that increase r decrease the

severity the impact as well as the perceptin the impact.

Mderatrs impacts may include prximity t climate-related

events (Neutra, Lipscmb, Satin, & Shusterman, 1991) and

surces vulnerability and resilience (Brklacich, Chazan, &

Dawe, 2007; Bullard, 2000; Peek & Mileti, 2002). An individual’s

perceptins climate change impacts can be mderated by

scial nrms (Cialdini, Ren, & Kallgren, 1990; Leiserwitz,

2005) and by the individual’s envirnmental identity (Claytn &optw, 2003). The impacts climate change are als likely

t be mediated by varius types cgnitive appraisals, such

as estimates persnal risk and attributins respnsibility

(Leiserwitz, 2007) and media representatins health impacts

(Dunwdy, 2007; Reser, 2009).

In human terms, the mst salient aspects glbal

climate change may be extreme biphysical envirnmental

eventsgenerally ramed as “disasters” r “catastrphes”

(e.g., hurricanes, trnads, ds, res, drught, tsunamis).Multiple studies examine psychlgical and scial impacts

acrss the spectrum natural and technlgical disasters (see

Bell, Greene, Fisher, & Baum, 2001; Gird, 2007; Reyes &

Jacbs, 2006). The disaster research literature has develped

methdlgies, measures, an interdisciplinary rientatin,

and many mdels and tls ptentially useul in researching

psychlgy and climate change. o particular salience are recent

surces addressing hurricane Katrina, the past decade natura

disasters in Nrth America, and the Asian Tsunami (e.g., Adela

SeCtion 3:

what are the PSyChoSoCial imPaCtSo Climate ChanGe?



2000; Burque, Siegel, Kan, & Wd, 2006; Daniels, Kettle, &

Kunreuther, 2006; Elrd, Hamblen, & Nrris, 2006; Gheytanchi

et al., 2007; Haskett, Sctt, Nears, & Grimmett, 2008; Nrris et

al., 2002; Waugh, 2006). These large-scale reginal disaster

impacts (particularly in psychlgical, scial, and scietal terms)

are increasingly seen and discussed as prgnstic the wrld

that climate change is ushering in. The literature describing

impacts ther well-publicized disasters (such as the Three

Mile Island nuclear accident) and envirnmental hazards in

general (e.g., living in prximity t txic waste sites) is als

relevance (e.g., Bell et al., 2001; Baum, 1987; Haskett et al.,

2008; Neutra et al., 1991; Reyes & Jacbs, 2006).

The impacts glbal climate change shuld als be

situated in the cntext ther envirnmental challenges.

Resurce depletin and lss bidiversity are prbable

cnsequences climate change (IPCC, 2007c), and related

issues such as verppulatin and envirnmental pllutin will

cmbine with climate change t accelerate the trend tward

increased cmpetitin r decreased envirnmental resurces.

Given research evidence n the benecial eects restrative

natural envirnments (De Vries, Verheij, Grenevegen, &

Spreeuwenberg, 2003; Maas, Verheij, Grenewegen, de Vries, &

Spreeuwenberg, 2006; Takan, Nakamura, & Watanabe, 2002;

Ku & Sullivan, 2001; Ku, Sullivan, Cley, & Brunsn, 1998;

Krenichyn, 2004; Maller, Twnsend, Pryr, Brwn, & St. Leger,

2006; Shinew, Glver, & Parry, 2004), decreased access t

thriving ecsystems may als have psychlgical cnsequences.

Finally, there is the ptential r psychlgical benets rm

taking actin abut climate change, including pprtunities r

psitive cping (Kates, 2007) and enhanced persnal meaning

and satisactin rm engaging in climate change mitigatin

r adaptatin activities (DeYung, 1996; Jhnsn, Haeuble, &

Keinan, 2007).

Pscsc m h ipcs

C CgThe psychscial and mental health implicatins climate

change have gained attentin in the cntext disaster recvery

rm extreme weather events (Few, 2007). Fritze and clleagues

(2008) nte that direct impacts, such as extreme weather events,

are likely t have immediate eects n the prevalence and

severity mental health issues in aected cmmunities and

signicant implicatins r mental health services; vulnerable

cmmunities will experience nging disruptins t the scial,

ecnmic, and envirnmental determinants that prmte mental

health in general; and, nally, climate change as a glbal

envirnmental threat may create emtinal distress and anxiety

abut the uture.

Emtinal reactins are critical cmpnents inrmatin

prcessing and als have a direct relatin t physical and

psychlgical health (Dillard & Pau, 2002 in Mser, 2007;

Slvic, Finucane, Peters, et al., 2004; Grpman, 2004). It is

hypthesized that certain strng emtinal respnses, such as

ear, despair, r a sense being verwhelmed r pwerless,

can inhibit thught and actin (Macy & Brwn, 1998; Mser,

2007; Nichlsn, 2002). As Mser and Dilling (2004) illustrate,

well-meaning attempts t create urgency abut climate change

by appealing t ear disasters r health risks requently lead

t the exact ppsite the desired respnse: denial, paralysis,

apathy, r actins that can create greater risks than the ne

being mitigated. Fr an example a general review research

n emtinal respnses t inrmatinal messages abut

climate change, see Mser (2007).

Mental health issues associated with natural and

technological disasters

Persnal experience extreme weather events can lead t

psychlgical and mental health utcmes assciated with lss,

disruptin, and displacement and cumulative mental health

impacts rm repeated expsure t natural disasters (Few,

2007; Peek & Mileti, 2002). These utcmes include acute and

psttraumatic stress disrder; ther stress-related prblems,

such as cmplicated grie, depressin, anxiety disrders,smatrm disrders, and drug and alchl abuse; higher

rates suicide attempts and cmpletins; elevated risk child

abuse; and increased vulnerability thse with preexisting

severe mental health issues. (Fr a review, see Fritze, et al.,

2008.)

Stress and emotional outcomes associated with natural and

technological disasters

In a review mental health treatment guidelines r victims

natural and human-caused disasters, Stein and Meyers(1999) nte that psychlgical respnses t disasters invlve

distinct phases characterized by symptms changing ver

time. These include eelings disbelie, shck, denial, r

utrage immediately llwing the event, as well as altruistic

eelings assciated with saving lives and prperty. Emtinal

supprt and ptimism r the uture have the ptential t give

way t disillusinment, intrusive thughts and images, anger,

and disappintment as lng-term implicatins and emtinal

impacts the event becme apparent. This disillusinment



phase may last mnths t years and is mst likely assciated

with autnmic (stress) arusal and physical and psychlgical

cmplaints (e.g., headaches, atigue, gastrintestinal symptms,

psttraumatic stress disrder, and cardiac symptms).

Stress-related impacts assciated with actual r perceived

envirnmental threats can be lng lasting. Studies at the site

the Three Mile Island nuclear accident taken a year and a hal

ater the riginal accident und that individuals living near the

site demnstrated higher levels nrepinephrine and sme

impairment in cgnitive ability (as measured by eectiveness

at prreading) cmpared t individuals living near anther

nuclear plant, a cal red plant, r an area with n energy plant

at all (Baum, Gatchel, & Schaeer, 1983). The indirect eects

n stress due t disruptin the cmmunity and scial supprt

netwrks may last r years r decades (Stein & Meyers, 1999).

Lessons rom Hurricane Katrina

The experience mental health pressinals intervening in the

atermath Hurricane Katrina cnrmed evidence that prviding

assistance with basic needs and psychlgical rst aid are the

ptimal interventin in the immediate atermath a disaster.

In general, these interventins cus n individual needs and

unctinal recvery rather than psychpathlgy. Interventins

include cntact and engagement, stabilizatin, inrmatin

gathering, practical assistance, inrmatin n cping, and

cnnectin with cllabrative services ( Gheytanchi et al., 2007;

Haskett et al., 2008).

The disprprtinate impact Hurricane Katrina’s eects

n the pr, largely Black cmmunities New orleans’ Ninth

Ward cnrmed that race and sciecnmic actrs shuld be

cnsidered in psychlgical respnse and preventin erts.

As a grup, these residents lacked access t quality educatin,

husing, and emplyment pprtunities available in surrunding

cmmunities. These disparities were assciated with a lack

essential resurces, shelter, transprtatin, and inrmatin

abut evacuatin plans during the strm ( Gheytanchi et al.,

2007). A survey Hurricane Katrina’s impacts n physical andmental health revealed that elderly peple were substantially

verrepresented amng the dead and that the preexisting

circumstances the evacuees made them particularly

vulnerable t a high level psychlgical distress that was

exacerbated by severe disaster expsure and lack ecnmic

and scial resurces (Burque, Siegel, Kan, & Wd, 2006).

Dierentiating between normal and pathological worry

regarding climate change

There are challenges in measuring anxiety related t climate

change and dierentiating between nrmal and pathlgical

wrry regarding climate change impacts. Traditinally, in areas

such as envirnmental medicine (Rabinwitz & Pljak, 2003),

“envirnmental anxiety” (p. 225) has been characterized as

bsessive and ptentially disabling wrry abut risks that areactually nt signicant (e.g., cmpared t well-recgnized

hazards such as mtr vehicle accidents and smking). In

this case, clinicians have been instructed t cmmunicate the

relative imprtance such risks in the cntext ther health

pririties. Given the unlding evidence abut ptential human

health impacts climate change and the diused nature

thse impacts, especially n emtins and mental health, what

cnstitutes an apprpriate level wrry remains in questin.

In clinical terms, anxiety is a uture-riented md state

assciated with a sense that events are prceeding in an

unpredictable, uncntrllable ashin. It is accmpanied bth by

physilgical arusal and by a number cgnitive respnses,

including hypervigilance r threat and danger and, at intense

levels, ear and panic (Barlw, 2002). The principal unctin

wrry is t prepare t cpe with uture threats. Thus, wrry

is a nrmal, adaptive prcess unless it is s driven by anxiety

that it becmes intense and uncntrllable. It is in this sense

that wrry can becme chrnic and maladaptive (Barlw,

2002). Media accunts “ec-anxiety” abut climate change

describe symptms such as panic attacks, lss appetite,

irritability, weakness, and sleeplessness (Nbel, 2007). Thugh

anecdtal, these symptms are remarkably similar t thse

reprted in cntrlled studies symptms reprted by thse

living in prximity t hazardus waste sites and are likely t

have a genesis in autnmic stress respnses and behaviral

sensitizatin. Fr instance, research n respnses t hazardus

waste sites and perceived envirnmental txins indicates that

symptm cmplaints are likely t be subjective and mediated

by autnmic stress respnses, behaviral sensitizatin, and

cnunding actrs such as envirnmental wrry (Neutra etal., 1991). Extraplating rm current diagnstic guidelines

(American Psychiatric Assciatin, 2000), dierentiating

between nrmal and pathlgical wrry regarding climate

change wuld include examining the cntent and pervasiveness

climate-related wrries, intererence with unctining as a

result wrry, and the degree perceived cntrl ver the

wrry prcess.



Uncertainty and despair

Fritze et al. (2008) discuss hw “at the deepest level, the

debate abut the cnsequences climate change gives rise t

prund questins abut the lng-term sustainability human

lie and the Earth’s envirnment” (p. 9). These questins may, in

turn, prmte a sense despair r hpe r uture generatins

and aect a sense individual and cllective meaning

and purpse r individuals in the present day. In this vein,Kidner (2007) has described the lss security in the uture

engendered by uncertainty abut the health and cntinuity the

larger, natural wrld. Furthermre, as Kidner ntes, the impact

these emtins tends t be underappreciated due t the lack

recgnitin subjective eelings envirnmental lss in

traditinal scientic r ecnmic ramewrks. Macy and Brwn

(1998) have prpsed a set cmmn barriers that prevent

individuals rm expressing emtins and cncerns related

t envirnmental degradatin that may be useul in a climate

change cntext. These barriers include ears being seen as

mrbid, unpatritic, r lacking in inrmatin.

Research on climate change-related emotions

In a qualitative study using an existential-phenmenlgical

ramewrk, Langrd (2002) identied respnses t the risks

psed by climate change including: (a) active denial assciated

with a strng reliance n ratinality ver emtin and intlerance

r scientic uncertainty; (b) disinterest assciated with external

lcus cntrl and atalism; and (c) engagement assciated

with a preerence r emtin and intuitin t justiy pinins and

actins, a sense empwerment and persnal respnsibility,

and belie in cmmunal eicacy. Maiteny (2002), alng similar

lines, identied three respnses t chrnic anxiety abut

eclgical and scial prblems:

1. An uncnscius reactin denial in which individuals

stave anxiety by seeking graticatin thrugh

cntinued and perhaps increased material acquisitin and

cnsumptin;

2. A “green cnsumer” respnse (p. 300) that reects

greater cncern r the envirnment (e.g., by shpping

in a way that is mre thughtul abut ptential

envirnmental impacts prduct chices), but withut

majr changes in liestyle; and

3. Heightened cnscience and eelings cnnectedness

with wider eclgical and scial prcesses that lead

individuals t take respnsibility r liestyle changes and

stimulate change and awareness in thers.

Numbness or apathy

Envirnmental prblems have lng been assciated with

numbness r apathy (e.g., Macy & Brwn, 1998; Gird, 1976;

Searles, 1972). Mser (2007) dierentiates numbness as a

secndary reactin llwing realizatin the magnitude

climate change threats and perceived inability t aect their

utcmes. Apathy is seen as a primary emtinal respnse

that prevents individuals rm learning abut the threat andrming a mre inrmed reactin. The apathy is likely t

stem rm a “drumbeat news abut varius verwhelming

envirnmental and scietal prblems” (p. 68) and the demands

daily lie. Speaking rm a psychanalytic perspective,

Lertzman (2008) has cuntered that the public’s apparent

apathy regarding climate change is actually paralysis at the

size the prblem. Lertzman rerames the issue in terms

psychlgical deense mechanisms such as denial and splitting

(i.e., retaining intellectual knwledge the reality, but divesting

it emtinal meaning), bth strategies t manage and cpe

with such experiences by deending against them. Apparent

apathy regarding envirnmental issues may als be a unctin

adaptatin t existing cnditins. In a prcess Kahn (1999)

has called “envirnmental generatinal amnesia,” peple tend t

make their experience a baseline r envirnmental health, and

thus ail t recgnize, ver years and generatins, the extent t

which the envirnment has degraded.

Guilt regarding environmental issues

Guilt is the emtinal respnse t a sel-perceived shrtall with

respect t ne’s wn standards cnduct, and peple wh eel

guilty eel a mral respnsibility t behave dierently (Mser,

2007) r are mtivated t make amends. The issue “ec-guilt”

has received cverage in the ppular media (e.g., Fderar,

2008). Hwever, attempts t shame individuals int adpting

prenvirnmental behavirs can be ineective in changing

behavirs particularly when they t lead t ratinalizatins

behavir and rejectin, resentment, and annyance at such

perceived manipulatins (o’Keee, 2002, in Mser, 2007).

Research in ther areas and a recent research n reactins t

“guilt appeals” indicate that it is imprtant t make distinctinsbetween messages that lead t eelings guilt versus

shame, with the rmer resulting rm reectins n ne’s wn

behavir and the latter resulting rm reectins n persnal

characteristics (Tangney, 2003; Lickel, Schmader, Curtis,

Scarnier, & Ames, 2005); distinctins between peple eeling

guilty r their wn behavir versus the behavir r their grup’s

behavir (Mallett, 2009; Mallett & Swim, 2004), and distinctins

amng the recipients messages, with sme recipients being

mre receptive and thers mre deensive (Brk & Graham,



2009; Mallett, 2009; Mallett, Huntsinger, Sinclair, & Swim, 2008).

Mrever, it is pssible that peple may nt like messages that

make them eel guilty, but the messages may nnetheless be

eective (Czpp, Mnteith, & Mark, 2006).

Sc C ipcs C Cg

Heat and violence

Climate change is mst cncretely represented in the public

mind as “glbal warming.” The warming that is predicted is

likely t have sme direct impacts n human behavir. Based

n extensive research, bth experimental and crrelatinal,

Andersn (2001) has cncluded that there is a causal

relatinship between heat and vilence. He argues that

any increase in average glbal temperature is likely t be

accmpanied by an increase in vilent aggressin. Indeed, he

suggests that current mdels predict a rise abut 24,000

assaults r murders in the United States every year r every

increase 2 degrees Fahrenheit in the average temperature.

Intergroup relations

Glbal climate change is als likely t have an eect n

intergrup relatins. Diminishing resurces set the stage r

intergrup cnict, either when tw grups directly cmpete r

the remaining natural resurces r when eclgical degradatin

rces ne grup t migrate ut its wn territry and becme

an immigrant int anther grup’s territry (Reuveny, 2008),

thus cmpeting r rights and wnership the space. The

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change has estimatedthat by 2030, as much as 42% the wrld ppulatin will live

in cuntries with insuicient reshwater r their agricultural,

industrial, and dmestic use, setting the stage r cnict

ver hw t allcate water supplies. The Pentagn and ther

institutinal members the intelligence cmmunity have

begun t attend t the destabilizing eects climate change

n dmestic stability and internatinal tensins (e.g., Yeman,

2009).

Displacement and relocationLss cnnectin t place and sense belnging assciated

with displacement rm ne’s hme place can als undermine

ne’s mental health (Fullilve, 1996). Cmmunities are already

being rced t relcate because current r anticipated

climate changes (Agyeman, Devine-Wright, & Prange, 2009).

Such rced relcatins can invlve ne’s severing emtinal

ties t place and disrupt ne’s existing scial netwrks. These

disruptins gegraphic and scial cnnectins may lead t

grie, anxiety, and a sense lss, particularly amng thse with

a strng place identity.

Reactions to socioeconomic disparities

The grwing recgnitin that sme (primarily western) cuntries

have cntributed mre than their “share” t a glbal crisis that

will be mst strngly elt by ther, less-develped cuntries

will als exacerbate intergrup tensins. one cnsequence

climate change may be an increase in the disparity between the

“haves” and the “have-nts” bth within and between natins.

Because the have-nts are mre likely t be ethnic minrities

(Bullard & Jhnsn, 2000), this disparity may increase ethnic

tensins and intergrup hstility. Intergrup relatins suered

in the atermath Hurricane Katrina, r example, when

Arican Americans were mre likely than Whites t interpret

the gvernment’s respnse as indicating racism (Adams,

o’Brien, & Nelsn, 2006); the lss key resurces due t the

strm highlighted grup dierences in nancial and gegraphic

security. Issues justice becme mre relevant when a

resurce is limited, and a threat t ne’s grup identitysuch as

may be represented by a lss hmeland, r a reductin in the

envirnmental resurces needed r survivaltends t increase

dergatin the utgrup (Hgg, 2003).

Social justice implications

As Mser and Dilling (2007b) nte, the ethical implicatins

sharing ne atmspheric cmmns are that sme regins are

disprprtinately aected by climate change, and scietal

vulnerability t thse negative impacts is als highly uneven duet dierential levels expsure and sensitivity t the risks and

dierential ability t cpe and adapt. Natins that benet mst

rm the status qu and perceive themselves t be less severely

aected have less incentive t push r actin n climate change

(Agyeman et al., 2003; Kaspersn & Dw, 1991), while ther,

mre vulnerable natins recgnize that their very existence is

threatened by the pssibility, e.g., rising sea levels. The result

is that respnse t climate change may be seen as nt airly

allcated n the basis respnsibility r the change.

ms C Cg ipcs

Proximity

Psychscial mderatrs are thse variables that aect the

intensity r strength climate change impacts. Persnal

experience with nticeable and serius cnsequences glbal

warming is still rare in many regins the wrld. Prximity

can be a mderatr climate change impacts when ne



directly experiences an extreme weather event (Few, 2007).

Extraplating rm earlier research regarding perceived

envirnmental hazards (e.g., research n individuals living within

sight a hazardus waste acility; see Neutra et al., 1991),

prximity t visual r sensry cues climate change impacts

may mderate physilgical and psychscial impacts. Hwever,

it is als likely that the time-delayed, abstract, and ten

statistical nature the risks glbal warming will nt evke

strng visceral reactins (i.e., wrry) and, thus, diminish alarm

and urgency abut risk management (Weber, 2006). The rle

media narratives as mediatrs the psychscial impacts

climate change is discussed belw and in the Adaptatin sectin

this reprt.

Vulnerabilities and resilience

A research ramewrk n scial vulnerability t glbal

envirnmental changes can begin with lessns learned rm

scial vulnerability research in areas amine, envirnmental

hazards, and public health (Brklacich et al., 2007). Scial

vulnerability can be dened as a lack capacity within

individuals and cmmunities t respnd t (e.g., cpe with,

recver rm, and adapt t) external stresses placed n their

livelihds and well-being. Vulnerability is inherent in all human

systems, and it is expsed by rather than caused by external

stressrs, with repeated impacts increasing uture vulnerabilities.

Scial vulnerability is dierentiated within and between

places and grups and is linked with brader issues scial,

ecnmic, and plitical inequality.

While ramewrks guiding climate change plicy requently

articulate a dichtmy between mitigatin r adaptatin (as is

discussed in ther sectins this reprt), Brklacich et al. (2007)

assert that a scial vulnerability perspective encurages an

understanding the relatinship between expsure t stresses

and capacity t respnd and recgnitin the cmmn drivers

bth. They argue that the same prcesses that psitin sme

peple and grups in harm’s way (i.e., living in marginal, lw-

lying areas and having precarius, resurce based livelihds)

als limit their ptin r aviding adverse utcmes. Whendetermining thse mst vulnerable t psychscial impacts

climate change, previus research n disaster interventin

identied grups likely t be at greater psychscial risk,

including children, the elderly, rural and urban pr, racial and

ethnic minrities, thse with a previus histry emtinal

disability, and, in general, thse with a marginalized predisaster

existence (Gheytanchi et al., 2007; Burque et al., 2006; Peek &

Mileti, 2002).

Social norms

Scial respnses t climate change can als be cnsidered

a type mderatr. A sense impact r alarm is likely t

be mderated by scial reerents and lcal scial nrms. Fr

example, sme grups perceive that sciety will be able t adapt

t any adverse changes related t climate change nce thse

changes arrive (Mser, 2007). Knwing that peple believe this

culd alter ther peple’s respnses t climate change.

Pscsc ms C Cg ipcs

Mediatrs such as cgnitive appraisals r media representatins

explain why climate change can have psychscial impacts n

individuals and cmmunities that have nt experienced direct

physical impacts. That is, the eects climate change ccur

because the impact climate change n the mediating

variables.

Relative risk appraisals

Relative risk cnstitutes an individual’s assessment the

degree threat and harm they perceive rm climate change

and the assessment the individual and scial resurces

they have t deal with the perceived threat r harm. As in

the develpment the terrrism-related ears llwing the

September 11 attacks (Marshall et al., 2007), perceptin

persnal risk is likely t mediate hw individuals experience

impacts climate change. Sense risk r empwerment

regarding the impacts climate change may als be mediated

by attributins respnsibility (Leiserwitz, 2007).

Mental models

Individuals’ preexisting rames reerence r mental mdels

will als aect their understanding, perceptin, and reactin

t inrmatin abut climate change (Kemptn, 1991). Fr

example, climate change impacts ramed as weather disasters

in media images may trigger a “weather” rame. Since weather

is generally seen as beynd humans’ cntrl, this view in turn

may lead t a sense helplessness r resignatin abut climatechange (Bstrum & Lash, 2007). And, because climate change

is nt typically experienced directly, its eect is als mediated

thrugh this interpretive mdel.

Media representations

Media representatins are a pwerul and arguably primary

mediatr climate change impacts r mst individuals. Reser

(in press) stresses that what peple experience and respnd

t in the cntext climate change are principally indirect and



virtual media representatins climate changent changes in

glbal weather patterns r nging envirnmental impacts, per

se. Further, Stkls, Misra, Runnerstrm, & Hipp (2009) describe

hw cntinual expsure t inrmatin engendered by mdern

technlgies (e.g., vivid and instantaneus Internet images)

raises the salience glbal crises and can engender anxiety r

passivity in the ace seemingly verwhelming threats.

Past respnses t media prtrayals crises illustrate the

way in which public alarm and media attentin can play a rle

in psychscial impacts. Fr example, investigatins int the

aerial spraying malathin during the Mediterranean Fruit Fly

(Medy) crisis in Calirnia in the 1980s und that reprts

anxiety and physical symptms were higher bere the spraying

began when n chemical agent was present, and symptms

decreased signicantly ater the spraying began and attentin

by the public and media subsidedsuggesting that the media

attentin rather than the spraying was the primary cause

the health eects (Jacksn, 1981, in Neutra et al., 1991).

Mre recently, investigatrs have dcumented strng psitive

assciatins between anxiety and PTSD symptms related t

the 9/11 bmbings and expsure t televisin cverage the

disaster in persns acrss the United States nt directly expsed

t the attacks (Marshall et al., 2007). Media representatins

are likely t remain a useul variable r understanding the

psychscial impacts climate change as varius ramings and

the messages regarding the issue are presented (Dunwdy,

2007).

Anxiety

Althugh anxiety is a pssible utcme climate change, it als

can be a mediatr t the extent that it leads t ther utcmes.

Fr example, individuals living within sight a hazardus waste

site r sensitive t drs perceived t emanate rm the sites

reprt a variety physical symptm cmplaints assciated

with perceived envirnmental pllutin (e.g., nervusness,

headache, sleeplessness, atigue, dizziness, nausea) even

when the presence health prblems (e.g., txic expsure,

higher rates cancer r birth deects) are nt brne ut bycareul study (Neutra et al., 1991). This nding suggests that

the envirnmental cues stimulated anxiety which in turn led t

physical symptms.

G C Cg C oe Cgs

Glbal climate change is generally discussed in the cntext

ther envirnmental challenges. Sme these are causally

cnnected t climate change, such as resurce depletin and

lss bidiversity; thers, like verppulatin and pllutin, are

mre separable rm climate change, but will cmbine with it t

accelerate the trend tward increased cmpetitin r decreased

envirnmental resurces.

In terms human health and wellness, an underappreciated

cnsequence climate change may be the pprtunity csts

represented by decreased access t thriving ecsystems.

The rapid pace change pses a threat t bidiversity and

eclgical health (Wilsn, 2002), and an accumulating bdy

research suggests that nearby nature has psitive eects n

physical and mental health (De Vries et al., 2003; Maas et al.,

2006; Takan et al., 2002) and n scial unctining (Ku &

Sullivan, 2001; Ku et al., 1998; Krenichyn, 2004; Maller et al.,

2006; Shinew et al., 2004).

Climate change may be assciated with a reductin in

the health varius green spaces, including public parks, as

ecsystems decline and there is increased demand r the

resurces required t maintain them. Imprtantly, ne recent

study (Fuller, Irvine, Devine-Wright, Warren, & Gastn, 2007)

und that psychlgical benets were psitively crrelated

with the bilgical diversity represented in lcal parks. Access

t nature may be particularly imprtant r thse wh are mst

vulnerable. Ku and Faber Taylr (2004), r example, und that

parents a natinally representative sample children with

ADHD reprted that their children shwed reduced symptms

ater activities in natural settings as cmpared with indr andbuilt utdr settings. Unrtunately, minrity and lw SES

citizens are less likely t live near parks and may nd it mre

diicult t reach them. A side eect envirnmental degradatin

is likely t be increased inequality, nt nly in expsure t

envirnmental hazards, but in access t envirnmental benets.

Pscgc bs assc wrspg C CgThe challenges climate change “may galvanize creative ideas

and actins in ways that transrm and strengthen the resilienceand creativity cmmunity and individuals” (Fritze et al., 2008,

p. 9). A psitive scenari is that a number actrs will cmbine

t accelerate public actin n climate change mitigatin and

adaptatin: vivid cusing events, changes in public values and

attitudes, structural changes in institutins and rganizatins

capable encuraging and stering actin, and creatin

practical and available slutins t the prblems requiring

change (Kates, 2007).



Evidence the impacts climate change n health and

well-being may increase pr-envirnmental behaviral nrms

and persnal respnsibility r actin (r a mechanism, see

Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnan, & Kal, 1999; Stern, 2000). Frm

the perspective stage mdels behavir change (Prchaska,

DiClemente, & Nrcrss, 1992), individuals and rganizatins

may prgress rm cntemplatin t actin regarding pre-

envirnmental and sustainable behavirs (Dppelt, 2008). As

De Yung (1996) has nted with regard t recycling, there are

intrinsic benets t be gained rm pr-envirnmental behavir,

including a sense rugality, participatin, and cmpetence.

Finally, there may be ptential r enhanced persnal meaning

and satisactin regarding eective erts at climate change

adaptatin r mitigatin. Research n sme yuth cnservatin

prgrams has shwn preliminary evidence that participants

gain in sel-eicacy, scial cmpetence, and sense civic

respnsibility (Jhnsn et al., 2007). As nted abve, qualitative

analyses by Langrd (2002) and Maiteny (2002) suggest that

sme individuals respnd t the threat climate change with an

increased emphasis n cllective engagement and assciated

psitive emtins. We emphasize, hwever, that these

psychlgical benets invlvement derive rm actins that

peple believe address the climate prblemeven i the actual

eect n climate is minimal r nnexistent.

rsc Pscsc ipcs C Cg

We need urther research that is explicitly directed ataddressing individual and scietal respnses t the reality

climate changethe anxieties, the extreme weather events,

the dislcatins, and the increased scial inequality. While

this reprt highlights many areas existing knwledge

(e.g., psychscial impacts natural disasters and attitudes

and behavirs tward perceived envirnmental threats), the

challenge is t test thery and interventins in the dmain

climate change. Research questins can include:

• How is the response to environmental problems that resultrm climate change similar t the respnse t natural

disasters, e.g., invlving the same distinct phases? Are

there dierences due t the perceived human causality

and/r nging nature the prblem?

• What are the eects of environmental disasters on sense

place and place attachment?

• How are dierent cultures likely to be aected by climate

change in ways that are cncrete (lss hmeland) and

mre abstract (changes in cultural practice and values)?

• What are the complex interrelationships between individua

and persnality variables (e.g., penness t experience,

ptimism, neurticism) and psychlgical prcesses

including cping and deense mechanisms (e.g., denial,

avidance), psychpathlgy (e.g., preexisting mental r

emtinal disrders), sciecnmic vulnerability, grup

nrms, and media and cultural messages regarding

climate change?

• What are the specic impacts of perceptions climate

change n individual respnses anxiety, ear, and guilt?

• What is the impact of climate change and associated

scarcity natural resurces n intergrup relatins?

• How does climate change aect perceptions of justice, and

hw d these perceptins mediate ther cnsequences?

• What are the most eective therapeutic interventions

targeting individual and cmmunity health impacts

climate change? In particular, we shuld attend t the

pssible dierential reactins t the interventins by

members dierent racial, ethnic, and gender grups and

cmmunities.

• How can educational interventions promote positive

respnses such as empwerment, invlvement, and

eicacy?

t rsp b Pscscipcs Cpg

While this sectin the review has addressed the impacts

the threat and unlding physical envirnmental eects

glbal climate change, such impacts cannt in act be separatedrm adaptatin r cping. Hw individuals and scieties

make sense climate change and hw the nature and threat

climate change are appraised in the service managing

anxieties bth cnstitute an imprtant aspect the psychscia

impact glbal climate change. Similarly individual and

cllective psychlgical respnses t the threat and physical

envirnmental impacts climate change can dramatically

inuence the nging psychscial impacts glbal climate

change. Yet, it is imprtant t examine impacts separately rm



adaptatin and cping prcesses in rder t bring clarity t the

cnstruct and prcesses adaptatin in the cntext climate

change. The next sectin will situate respnses t climate

change in terms a mdel cping that emphasizes internal

appraisals the prblem and ne’s wn ability t cpe. Such

appraisals will mderate the impact n bth individuals and

scieties.





adaptatin t the threat and unlding impacts climate

change has becme pressing and urgent, given the

alarming rapidity with which predicted climate changes

are taking place. It is imprtant nt nly t ensure the saety and

security human and nnhuman ppulatins in many regins

the wrld, but t ensure that immediate and pressing needs

d nt derail the still vital climate change mitigatin initiativesand prgressively stringent plicies that are either in place r are

being nalized natinally and internatinally.

The IPCC denes adaptatin as “adjustment in natural r

human systems in respnse t actual r expected climatic stimuli

r their eects, which mderates harm r explits benecial

pprtunities” (IPCC, 2007b). Accrding t this IPCC denitin,

adaptatin may include respnses made in anticipatin

climate change impacts, respnses that are a result deliberate

plicy decisins based upn awareness current r upcmingchanges, and “autnmus” r “spntaneus” respnses that

represent unplanned respnses “triggered by eclgical changes

in natural systems and by market r welare changes in human

systems” rather than by cnscius awareness changes and

specic adaptatin plans. Adaptatin t climate change in the

cntext science ten reers t structural changes (such

as building new structures r prviding ways t get access

t reshwater t address the physical impacts and impending

physical impacts climate change) and in terms micr- and

macrsystem adjustments, such as thse relating t husehlds

cmmunities, institutins, regins, and cuntries.

Psychlgical rms adaptatin are very inrequently

addressed in the current climate change adaptatin literature.

Adaptatin as a cnstruct has been used in a variety ways

in psychlgy. Like evlutinary bilgists, evlutinarypsychlgists have used adaptatin t reer t characteristics

that have increased human survival and reprductin (e.g.,

eatures that inuence mate selectin in humans; Halberstadt,

2006). Beynd this, adaptatin has been used t reer t specic

psychlgical respnses, such as sensry habituatin t varius

stimuli (e.g., nise) r specic types cping respnses

individuals can make t changes in their physical envirnments,

including natural disasters (e.g., Bell et al., 2001; Hlahan,

1982). Hwever, adaptatin is als cmmnly used t reer t

adaptatin prcesses that invlve, r instance, accmmdating,assimilating, r adjusting t varius cntexts and new r

diicult lie circumstances (e.g., wrk situatins, Hulin, 1991;

new cultures, Rudmin, 2003; adptin, Tan, Mar, & Dedrick,

2007; chrnic disease, Stantn, Revensn, & Tennen, 2007).

This mre encmpassing set meanings r adaptatin is

cnsistent with a psychlgical envirnmental stress apprach

t understanding peple’s respnses t diicult situatins

(Evans & Stecker, 2004; Stkls, 1978). Here, adaptatin

reers t a wide range respnses individuals can make t

SeCtion 4:

how do PeoPle adaPt to andCoPe with the PerCeivedthreat and unoldinG imPaCtSo Climate ChanGe?



diicult circumstances, including initial understandings, aective

respnses t situatins, behaviral respnses t situatins,

the prcess selecting respnses, and the reciprcating

impacts respnses n individuals, cmmunities, and the

physical envirnment (e.g., Gird, 2007; Stkls, Clithere,

& Zmuidzinas, 2000). What is distinctive abut psychlgists’

use the term adaptation, particularly when it’s used t reer t

adaptatin prcesses, is that it includes a cus n intrapsychic

cnditins (e.g., appraisals situatins, aective respnses,

and mtivatins) and scial prcesses (e.g., sense making,

scial cmparisn, scial cnstructin, and scial amplicatin

risk) that inuence hw individuals and cmmunities respnd

t challenging circumstances and includes a variety types

psychlgical respnses as adaptive respnses (e.g., cgnitive

reappraisals, disengagement, and emtin management).

An envirnmental stress perspective n the adaptatin

demands glbal climate prvides much value. It brings

an envirnmental and human eclgical perspective t the

cmplex phenmenn climate change. It includes the

requisite multiple levels analysis needed t adequately

rame the adaptatin challenges dramatic climate change

impacts and t strategically address planning cnsideratins

and interventins r enhancing individual and cmmunity

adaptatins. It brings in research n disaster preparedness,

respnse, and recvery (e.g., Reyes & Jacbs, 2006). Disaster

research is useul because many the prjected upcming

impacts climate change will take the rm disasters and, as

nted belw, climate change can be understd as straddlingtechnlgical and natural disasters. Finally, an envirnmental

stress perspective als makes cnnectins t research n

stress and cping that delineates individual level psychlgical

prcesses and has been extended t cmmunity-level cping

as well (Baum & Fleming, 1993; Hlahan & Wandersman,

1991; Lazarus & Chen, 1977). The useulness stress and

cping mdels, which have been mst requently examined in

health psychlgy, becme mre evident when cnsidering the

emphases n human health cnsequences climate change

that have been highlighted by grups such as the Wrld Healthorganizatin (Climate Change and Human Health, 2009).

The mdel illustrated in Figure 8 prvides an rganizatinal

ramewrk r the material presented in the remainder this

sectin the reprt. It derives rm a number related and

cnvergent psychlgical mdels (e.g., envirnmental stress,

stress and cping mdels, prtectin mtivatin thery, and the

health belie mdel [e.g., Glanz, Rimer, & Lewis, 2002; Lazarus

& Flkman, 1984; Rgers, 1975; Rgers & Prentice-Dunn,

1997]). We rst prvide an verview the mdel and then

g int mre detail abut each element the mdel. (S

g 8.)

The initiatrs the adaptatin prcess, nted n the ar

let the gure, are cnceptualized as stressrs, and, in this

cntext, they include direct, indirect, and mediated experiences

with the impacts climate change. Initial respnses t these

impacts include cgnitive respnses in the rm appraisals

the impacts relative t resurces (threat appraisals), appraisals

pssible respnses (cping appraisals), attributins r

events, aective respnses such as ear and hpe, and the

activatin mtivatinal prcesses such as sel-prtectin

mtives and uncertainty reductin. Fr instance, individuals

wh anticipate that they live in a regin where sea levels will

rise may assess the prbability the event and the extent t

which they and their amily will be aected by rising sea levels

and whether they have resurces t respnd t the rising sea

levels (threat appraisals). They may als assess what they

think they culd d abut rising sea levels and whether what

they can d wuld make a dierence (cping appraisal). Their

aective respnses, such as anxiety, ear, r wrry and their

attributins r the causes the rising sea levels will likely

inuence their appraisals (see Sectin 1). Further, a desire t

reduce uncertainty abut the likelihd that they will be aected

(a mtivatinal prcess) culd be activated.

These initial respnses inuence each ther and the

selectin intrapsychic and behaviral respnses at bth theindividual and cmmunity levels, which in turn aect individual

and cmmunity impacts. Fr instance, greater perceived

threat can lead t mre wrry. Tgether these respnses can

lead t aect regulatin r denial (intapsychic respnses) r

participatin in civic actin t encurage their cmmunity t

develp prtectins rm rising sea levels (behaviral respnse).

Dierent cping respnses result in dierent types impacts

n individuals and cmmunities. Sectin 3 describes the

psychlgical impacts climate change s we will nt elabrate

n them in this sectin. The impacts eed back int appraisals,aective respnses, attributins, and mtivatins already

mentined. Fr instance, civic engagement may eectively

address the perceived threat. Yet it may als be insuicient,

which wuld then result in ther cping respnses. As the

example illustrates, adaptatin prcesses can change ver time,

r instance, as particular prblems are addressed r as cping

resurces diminish (e.g., Lepre & Evans, 1996). Finally, many

mderatrs can inuence each step in the mdel, and examples

are listed at the bttm the gure. Fr instance, individuals



Threat Appraisal(aka primary or risk appraisals)

Assessing whetherImpacts on Self, Family,

Community, Cultures, &Society ExceedResources

· Perceived probability of risk · Perceived severity· Perceived vulnerability &resilience

Coping Appraisal(aka secondary appraisals)

Assessing Anticipated

Eects of PossibleResponses &Capacity to Respond· Self-eicacy· Response-eicacy· Costs & benets· Situation constraints· Strength of community

Direct, Indirect, &Mediated Experience

with Stressors

Cataclysmic events

Chronic events including

ambient stressors

Proactive & ReactiveCoping Responses

Intra-psychic Responsesexamples· Environmental numbness· Cognitive reappraisal such asaltering risk assessment

· Emotion regulation

Behavioral Responsesexamples· Seeking information· Seeking interpersonal orcommunity social support

· Compensatory behavior suchas changing structure ofhabitat

· Mitigation· Civic participation

Impacts

onIndividuals

&Communities

Examples of Moderators of Each Step in the Process

Characteristics of Individual· Resilience & vulnerability· Being sensitive to stressors

· Being an optimist

Characteristics of Incident& Physical Environment· Severity & intensity of impacts

· Region-specic biophysical impacts

Characteristics of Community· Social capital & social networks· Media representations

· Construal & reactions by others· Cultural norms· Neighborhood organizations

Attributions

Motivational Processes

Aective Responses

(e.g., Fear & Hope)

iGure 8: Pscgc pcsss c cpg c cg.



and cmmunities with ewer resurces are likely t be mre

vulnerable and less resilient t climate changes due t, r

instance, their inability t engage in eective cping respnses.

In what llws we extraplate rm research n

envirnmental stress t the cntext glbal climate change

and reer t research rm areas disaster preparedness,

respnse, and recvery, emplying stress and cping mdels.

Arguably, the disaster literature is particularly relevant t this

dmain because the types impacts prjected r climate

change. Yet, it must be kept in mind that the multiaceted nature

climate change makes it distinct rm ther stressrs and

disasters because its glbal scpe and magnitude, a duratin

which may encmpass many generatins i nt centuries, and

the unprecedented character these glbal changes in knwn

human histry.

C Cg t eipcs s Ssss

Stressrs are ten understd as the events r circumstances

that initiate the stress and cping prcess. Here, the stressrs

are direct, indirect, and mediated experiences with glbal

climatic patterns and regin-specic physical envirnmental

impacts. While sme, such as thse living in Alaska, Nrthern

Canada, and Nrthern Eurpe (Klbert, 2006), are currently

respnding t their direct cntact with current physical

envirnmental impacts climate change, many are respnding

t their understanding the glbal climatic patterns, asmediated, r instance, thrugh media representatins climate

change and scial cmmunicatin abut climate change. Much

the media cverage the recent bush res in Australia

and, indeed, disasters arund the wrld are being discussed,

ramed, and explained as maniestatins climate change

(e.g., Matthews, 2009). This suggests that the public in many

parts the wrld increasingly understands and sees such

disasters as dramatic, symblic, and unlding maniestatins

climate change. Thse wh directly experience the biphysical

envirnmental impacts climate change will likely experiencestress due bth t their immediate persnal experiences with

climate change and their expectatins abut uture impacts

climate change.

Stressrs can maniest themselves in many dierent

ways, including as discrete r chrnic events and as natural r

technlgical disasters. Further, dierent maniestatins can be

anticipated. As described next, these dierent types stressrs

can ptentially be generalized t dierent maniestatins

climate change. Distinctins amng types stressrs have

implicatins r the rest the stress prcess. Therere, it is

pssible that dierent types stressrs can ptentially explain

varius ways that climate change is experienced and a variety

anticipatry and preparatry respnses. Further, this suggests

that the dierent ways that media prtray climate change and the

way climate change is discussed in everyday discurse can have

implicatins r immediate and anticipatr respnses t climate

change impacts.

Types o stressors

Stressrs range rm discrete events t cntinuus events

(Wheatn, 1996; 1999). The rmer represent sudden traumas

r lie-changing events, including cataclysmic events, such

as hurricanes, that ccur with little r n warning and aect a

large number peple; and persnal stressrs (als knwn as

stressul lie events), such a death and illness, that aect ewer

peple and may r may nt be anticipated (Bell et al., 2001;

Evans & Chen, 1991). In the disaster literature, researchers

pint t bth natural and technical (human made) disasters that

are types cataclysmic events (Bell et al., 2001).

In cntrast, cntinuus events represent chrnic stressrs

and nnevents. Ambient stressrs are a type chrnic stressr

particularly relevant t envirnmental stressrs (Bell et al.,

2001). Ambient stressrs can represent reginal cnditins

the envirnment, such as pllutin r txicity, that aect a large

number peple but may nt be cnsidered acute because

they are like lw-level backgrund nise and may g unnticedeither because they are subtle r because peple habituate t

them (e.g., Adela, 2000; Edelstein, 2002).

Climate change can be experienced as and anticipated t

be bth discrete and cntinuus. Fr instance, climate change

experienced as discrete events warn climate researchers, culd

mean mre requent and severe weather-related incidents,

including increased requency and heightened intensity and

severity natural disasters such as strms, hurricanes,

trnades, ds, bush res, and ther rapid nset and largelyunpredictable events. At the ther end the stress cntinuum,

chrnic cnditins prjected by climate researchers culd

maniest, r instance, in the rm drught and ther mre

incremental and persistent envirnmental changes such as

sil lss and ersin, salinizatin, and gradual envirnmental

txicatin. Climate change can be understd as an ambient

stressr because it is maniested by changes that are ten in

the backgrund. Fr instance, i the change is embedded in

natural variatins in climate, the patterns are diicult t detect,



the prgressin the changes is relatively slw, which can lead

t a nrmalized habituatin and expectancy. or, climate change

can be understd as an ambient stressr because the eects

are perceived t be relevant mre r uture generatins than

current nes (see sectin n perceptins climate change in

this reprt).

Natural and technological disasters

An imprtant distinctin exists in the disaster literature between

natural and technlgical disasters (e.g., Baum, 1987; Baum,

Fleming, & Davidsn, 1983; Baum & Fleming, 1993; Bell et al.,

2001; Quarantelli, 1998). Natural disasters are mre sudden,

cataclysmic, uncntrllable, acute (as distinct rm chrnic), and

characterized by enrmus destructive pwer and magnitude.

Technlgical disasters are attributed t human behaviur (nt

the prduct natural rces) and are less predictable. They

typically have n warning, are ten chrnic, and ten have n

visible maniestatin. They are als less amiliar; mre likely t

threaten eelings cntrl; mre likely t have cmplex impacts;

less likely t elicit supprtive and chesive cmmunity respnse;

and mre likely t ster anger, rustratin, resentment, elt

helplessness, and blame, etc. (see Bell et al., 2001 r a

summary).

Glbal climate change straddles this classicatin in a

number ways, as the human rcing naturally ccurring

climate change is largely the prduct technological prcesses

and prducts, thugh the cnsequent meterlgical and

climate change phenmena maniest as natural disasters.Indeed, climate change elicits sme the same respnses

und in the case technlgical disasters, including distrust

gvernment, crpratins, regulatry authrities, and science

itsel (e.g., Earle, 2004; Earle & Cvetkvich, 1995; Lang &

Hallman, 2005). Glbal climate change is als unique in that it

presents multiaceted glbal impacts that will be chrnic ver a

dramatic time rame and nt amenable t cnventinal natinal

r jurisdictinal agencies, r “disaster” plicies and prcedures

(Marshall et al., 2007). A number authrs have suggested that

raming glbal climate change in global disaster terms prvidesa clearer and mre realistic picture the interacting prcesses

and impacts, their true magnitude and extent, the nature and

scale human impacts, and the imperative t take immediate

disaster mitigatin and preparedness measures (e.g., Spratt &

Suttn, 2008; Reser et al., in press).

mg rs b Ssss Cpg rspss

Threat appraisals

Stress and cping mdels highlight the rle that cgnitive

prcesses play in individuals’ selectin cping respnses.

one cgnitive prcess identied in these stress mdels cuses

n appraising r evaluating the stressr and its impact nnesel and thse imprtant t nesel (e.g., riends, amily

members, clleagues). These appraisals include assessing

the perceived risk events, the severity current r uture

damage, and the peple wh are vulnerable t the risks (see

Sectin 1 this reprt). It is imprtant t nte that appraisals

include assessing perceived psychlgical and physical

cnsequences events. Fr instance, envirnmental stressrs

can inuence peple’s perceived ability t predict and cntrl

the envirnments in which they live. A perceived lack persnal

envirnmental cntrl is ne the mst ubiquitus determinants aversiveness, anxiety, and distress (e.g., Evans & Chen,

1991; Shapir, Schwartz & Astin, 1995). Climate changes can

als be appraised as threatening because their brader

envirnmental impacts n all lie n the planet (e.g., Hall et al.,

2004).

It is imprtant t nte that nt all appraisals upcming

incidents need t result in eelings threat. Sme appraisals

will result in peple’s eeling challenged (Tmaka, Blascvich,

Kelsey, & Leitten, 1993). Threat appraisals result when

anticipated adverse impacts are perceived t exceed ne’s

resurces, whereas challenge appraisals result when ne’s

resurces are perceived t be able t address the anticipated

adverse impacts. Althugh threat versus challenge respnses

have nt been studied in the cntext climate change, the

dierence between threat and challenge appraisals may have

imprtant implicatins, r instance, in whether individuals avid

versus apprach prblems.

Risk perceptin and appraisal are inuenced by scial

actrs. Much inrmatin abut climate and ptential threats

and prblems cmes mediated via the scial wrld (e.g., Berger

& Luckmann, 1967; Gergen, 1985). The scial wrld includes

interactins with riends; verheard cnversatins; bservatins

thers, including via inrmatin technlgies like the Internet

(e.g., olsn & Rejeski, 2005; Pettenger, 2007); media cverage;

and specic risk cmmunicatins rm health pressinals and

climate change scientistsall whse risk messages having

been aected by jurnalists and media rganizatins (e.g.,

Carvalh, 2007; Danesi, 2002). Such vicarius scial learning



includes the individual and cultural learning adaptive practices

and cmpetencies with respect t risk, danger, and uncertainty

(e.g., Bandura, 1999; Duglas & Wildavsky, 1982).

Scial cnstructin, scial representatin, and scial

amplicatin prcesses are three theretical ramewrks

describing the cmplex actrs that mediate and substantially

inuence the public’s appraisals risk, envirnmental threat,

and glbal envirnmental change (e.g., Bauer & Gaskell, 2002;

Flynn, Slvic & Kunreuther, 2001; Pidgen et al., 2003). These

perspectives help explain variatin in understandings and

respnses t climate change acrss cultures, regins, and

cmmunities and acrss envirnmental and plicy experts,

jurnalists, scientists, and laypeple.

Scial cnstructin as a prcess reers t hw peple

cllectively and thrugh scial interactin impse meaning

and rder n their wrld, hw they perceive and interpret,

and cnstruct and shape their shared reality (e.g., Berger &

Luckman, 1966; Burr, 1995; Gergen, 1985). Scial cnstructins

are als understd as cnsensual understandings and

perating cnstructs and classicatins, thughts and

ideals shared by members a sciety that emerge thrugh

everyday cnversatin and transactins with each ther and

with the envirnment and wrld they share and are a part .

Such entities as “nature,” “the envirnment,” “envirnmental

prblems,” “natural” and “technlgical” “disasters,”

“sustainability,” and “climate change,” itsel, are viewed by

many therists and researchers as, in substantial part, scialcnstructins and are particular relevance t climate change

(e.g., Jagtenberg & McKie, 1997; Macnaughten & Urry, 1998;

Pettenger, 2007; Rbertsn et al., 1996). A cnsiderable bdy

research helps us understand the nature and dynamics such

scially cnstructed and media disseminated envirnmental

threat representatins and understandings (e.g., Adam,

1998; Jhndn-Cartee, 2005; Luptn, 1999; Slvic, 2000;

Vaughan, 1993; Weber, 2006). Hence, this is an encmpassing

perspective particular relevance t adaptatin and cping and

public understandings and respnses t “climate change.”

Scial representations are shared assumptins and

understandings abut the scial and physical wrld. They

include material culture expressins, images, texts, ther

inrmatin technlgy prducts and inrmatin, and built

envirnments that invariably capture and reect a particular

wrldview. They prvide a ramewrk r interpreting and

cmmunicating ur experiences. It is thrugh these cmmnly

shared and cllectively elabrated scial representatins that we

make sense the wrld and cmmunicate that sense t each

ther (e.g., Deaux & Philgene, 2001; Flick, 1998; Mscvici,

2000). Scial representatins “climate change” include media

images, articles, bks, magazine cvers, dcumentary and

ppular culture lms, research ndings, and public discurse

and shared understandings abut “climate change” and its

nature, causes, and envirnmental and human cnsequences.

Many studies have been undertaken in Nrth America and

Eurpe that examine public risk perceptins climate change

(see Sectin 1 this reprt), but ewer studies have undertaken

in-depth investigatins the nature media representatins

climate change r the underlying risk dmain climate change

vis-à-vis ther knwn risks r hw r why climate change might

be quite dierent rm ther risks in representatin and with

respect t risk appraisal and psychlgical respnses.

Scial prcesses can bth ampliy and attenuate

understandings climate change (e.g., Flynn et al., 2001;

Pidgen et al., 2003; Sjberg, 2006). “The scial amplicatin

risk ramewrk hlds that, as a key part that cmmunicatin

prcess, risk, risk events, and the characteristics bth becme

prtrayed thrugh varius risk signals (images, signs, symbls),

which in turn interact with a wide range psychlgical,

scial, institutinal, r cultural prcesses in ways that intensiy

r attenuate perceptins risk and its manageability”

(Kaspersn et al., 2003, p. 15). The research challenge has

been t distill what these research ndings and past plicy

applicatins evidence-inrmed risk management principles

have t say abut hw individuals and cmmunities might bestprepare themselves r what will be, r many, a very changed

envirnmental and regulatry landscape in the cntext climate

change.

Coping appraisals

A secnd cgnitive respnse t experienced and anticipated

stressrs cuses n evaluating the respnse ne might make t

the stressr. This includes assessing ne’s ability t engage in a

behavir (i.e., sel-eicacy), the likelihd a behavir t result

in the desired utcme (i.e., respnse eicacy), cnstraints nrespnse ptins, and the relative perceived csts and benets

respnses. The csts and benets, r example, are ten

unknwn and therere reect a type risk assessment (see

Sectin 2 this reprt).

other cping appraisals invlve assessing characteristics

ne’s immediate scial cmmunity such as the strength

ne’s scial netwrks and neighbrhd rganizatin (Hlahan

& Wandersman, 1991). Cping respnses t varius climate



change impacts are likely inuenced by appraisals the specic

impacts experienced r anticipated and the public’s appraisals

the adaptatin and mitigatin respnses the public can make t

these impacts. Scial prcesses and media prtrayals are very

likely t inuence cping appraisals.

Attributions

Hw individuals respnd t the perceived threat climate

change is als likely inuenced by the causal and respnsibility

attributins they make r climate change. Psychlgical

research shws that peple’s willingness t restre r prevent

damage is driven by their perceptins the causes the

damage. These attributins can inuence appraisals the

impact events. Fr example, an imprtant dimensin is

whether the harm is seen as having been caused by natural

versus human-made prcesses (Brun, 1992; Slvic et al., 1986).

The distinctin between natural and human-made causes may

appear irratinal in the ace cnsequential cnsideratins, but

it plays a crucial rle in cnsideratins ethical respnsibility

and accuntability. These attributins culd als ptentially

inuence mtivatin t respnd. While nt the nly ethical

cnsideratin that cmes int play in the cntext climate

change, the principle “i yu break it, yu x it” has currency in a

wide range cultures.

Mrever, even i peple agree climate change is

anthrpgenic, they may nt take persnal respnsibility r

respnding t the current impacts r preventing uture impacts.

Indeed, research ndings suggest that they may see that glbaland distant thers are respnsible r the glbal and largely

distant prblem, thereby abnegating persnal respnsibility

(e.g., Uzzell, 2000; 2004). Finally, attributins inuence

cping appraisals by, r instance, suggesting whether cping

respnses shuld be directed at changing the sel r changing

the situatin. Research is needed t specically examine such

interrelatins in the cntext glbal climate change and hw

they might relate t assessing blame and accuntability r

disasters.

Aective responses

Aective respnses, r lack respnses, t climate change are

likely t inuence respnses t climate change (see Sectins

1 and 3 this reprt). Scietal emtinal respnses t media

images and cverage less-specic but menacing threats,

such as radiatin and cataclysmic uture scenaris, imbue and

reect strng aective and symblic respnses, inrmed by

culturally elabrated risk dmains (Adam, 1998; Eckersley, 2008;

Edelstein & Mackske, 1998; Whiteld, Rsa, Dan, & Dietz,

2008). While nly limited research (e.g., Twnsend, Clarke, &

Travis, 2004) has cnsidered the nature and status climate

change as a risk entity, it is particular imprtance t ask

hw emtinal and symblic aspects climate change risk

appraisals and sense making are inuencing the nature and

levels public cncern and underlying prtectin mtivatin

prcesses (e.g., Weinstein, 1989; Bhm, Nerb, McDaniels, &

Spada, 2001; Bhm, 2003).

Perhaps the mst requently studied aective respnse

t stressul events relates t anxiety, ear, and wrry, thugh

ther emtins culd be examined. Wrry is an imprtant

psychlgical impact climate change (see Sectin 3) and it

can als inuence ther parts the adaptatin prcess. Fear,

r instance, in prtectin mtivatin thery, is cnceptualized

as a respnse t and a predictr ne’s evaluatin the

stressr (Hass, Bagley, & Rgers, 1975; Rgers, 1975; Rgers

& Prentice-Dunn, 1997). Fear and anxiety, while adaptive

respnses t threat, can ten “get in the way” clear thinking

and necessary adaptive respnding in the cntext imminent

natural disaster warning situatins (Reser, 2004). other aective

respnses, such as hpe, may act like ptimism by encuraging

the likelihd that individuals will select cping that engages ne

with the situatin (Snyder, 2002).

Motivational processes

Mst stress and cping mdels assume that the reductin

appraised threats mtivates individuals t select cping

respnses. Hwever, ther mtivatinal prcesses can alscme int play. A undamental aspect adaptatin and

cping prcesses in general has t with the unctins served

and benets achieved. The very meaning “adaptive” in

an evlutinary r eclgical cntext is that a particular and

adventitius change cners a survival benet r advantage.

Such adaptive prgramming nds strng expressin in human

mtivatinal systems, with the survival prerequisites and

advantages saety, security, and deense being undamental

and verriding, particularly in the ace uncertainty, threat,

r envirnmental demands. Mtivatinal cnsideratins in thecntext risk r threat have received substantial psychlgical

attentin in the cntext instinctive ght r ight respnding,

psychanalytic deense mechanisms, and varius articulatins

prtectin mtivatin, be they attitudinal stance, value

expressin, avidance, deensive pessimism, r unrealistic

ptimism (e.g., Taylr & Brwn, 1988; Reser & Smithsn,

1988; Weinstein & Kline, 1996; see Sectin 4 this reprt).

other basic research n mtivatins, such as research n cre



psychlgical needs r gal setting, culd ptentially inrm

peple’s selectin cping respnses.

The eld risk perceptin and appraisal, including the scial

and cultural cnstructin risk (e.g., Jhnsn & Cvell, 1987;

Slvic, 2000; o’Rirdan, 1995) and individual dierences (e.g.,

Yates, 1992), is clearly direct relevance t climate change

respnses and impacts, with the perceptin and appraisal

risk including nt nly the perceived prbability and persnal

cnsequence an event, but its meaning(s), and cause(s),

acceptability, vluntary expsure, uncertainty, and perceived

cntrl r “management” ptins attached t the event (Arnld,

1970; Lazarus, 1966; Patersn & Neueld, 1987; Taylr, 2006).

The health belie mdel, in turn, is premised n the assumptin

that peple are prepared t undertake preventive behavir(s)

as a unctin their appraisal the severity a threat, the

perceived benets a recmmended health actin, and the

perceived barriers t taking such actin (e.g., Becker, 1974;

Janz & Becker, 1984). Cgnitive adaptatin appraches (e.g.,

Aspinwall, 2004; Lehman & Taylr, 1987; Taylr, 1983; Taylr

& Shepperd, 1998; Taylr & Stantn, 2007) and prtectin

mtivatin appraches in general (e.g., Milne, Sheeran, &

orbell, 2000; Rgers & Prentice-Dunn, 1997; Weinstein, 1988;

Weinstein et al., 2000) are premised n the kinds cgnitive

and emtinal appraisal and cping prcesses that are elicited

in the cntext health and ther risks that cntain implicit r

explicit threats and induce ear (Fiske & Taylr, 2008).

In the area envirnmental psychlgy (e.g., Bell etal., 2001; Bnnes & Bnaiut, 2002; Gird, 2007), a central

emphasis ver the past several decades has been that

envirnmental cncern and the rles that this risk appraisal

prcess, utcme, and mtivatinal state play in adpting pr-

envirnmental behavirs and pssibly mediating psychlgical

distress (e.g., Edelstein & Makske, 1998; Gird et al., 2009;

Hansla, Gamble, Juliussn, & Garling, 2008; Schmuck &

Schultz, 2002). This cus n cncern has als been typical

ppular culture cverage and debate with respect t the human

impacts n climate change (e.g., Carvalh, 2007; Kluger, 2006a;b; Myers, 2006; Lwe et al., 2006).

These cnvergent literatures are rutinely drawn upn by

psychlgists when addressing envirnmental risks and natural

and technlgical hazard preparedness and respnse (e.g.,

Cvetkvich & Earle, 1992; o’Rirdan, 1995). Such psychlgical

cnsideratins and research ndings are ten nt recgnized

r utilized in interdisciplinary cnsideratins and discurses,

with climate change being a particularly salient case in pint.

Mre recently a number psychlgy research teams have

begun t systematically cmpare and cntrast public risk

perceptins, appraisals, and psychlgical respnses t glbal

climate change as cntrasted with nuclear energy acilities (e.g.,

Pidgen, Lrenzni, & Prtinga, 2008; Spence, Pidgen, &

Uzzell, 2008).

This research draws n an extensive research base

cmpiled since 1979 in the wake Three Mile Island (TMI) and

ther nuclear pwer statin accidents (e.g., Baum & Fleming,

1993; Baum, Fleming, & Davidsn, 1983) and has since been

directed t many technlgical and natural envirnmental threats

(e.g., Bell et al., 2001). The research with nuclear acilities and

accidents, such as that at TMI, has cnclusively shwn that

inrmatin, itsel, abut technlgical risks can be threatening

and anxiety-inducing, leading t real mental and physical health

impacts. In this cntext, r example, emtinally cused cping

strategies were assciated with less stress than prblem-

cused cping and denial. In this and in many large-scale

disaster cntexts, being able t anticipate and manage ne’s

risk perceptins and psychlgical respnse in the cntext

largely uncntrllable external events and cnsequences cners

real and psychlgically adaptive benets (e.g., Taylr, 1983;

Aspinwall & Taylr, 1997; Reser & Mrrissey, 2008).

tps Cpg rspss

Cping respnses include actins r inhibitins single,

multiple, and repeated behavirs dne by individuals r grups(e.g., cmmunities) and intrapsychic respnses t climate

change. These respnses can be practive (als knwn as

anticipatry adaptatin and psychlgical preparedness), made

in anticipatin an event r reactive, r made ater an event

(Aspinwall & Taylr, 1997; Reser, 2009). The tw merge when

respnses are made t an event in rder t diminish the impact

an event in prgress and prevent the ccurrence uture

events. Fr instance, an individual wh rebuilds his r her

hme ater a natural disaster may be adapting t changes that

have ccurred and simultaneusly increasing prtectin rmuture disasters. Nnetheless, the dierentiatin is useul when

thinking abut cping with climate change because many peple

may be respnding t anticipated events rather than t events

in prgress attributable t climate change. Thus, addressing

successul cping in the cntext glbal climate change

requires serius cnsideratin preventin and preparedness

(e.g., Ball, 2008; Feldner, Zvlensky, & Leen-Feldner, 2004;

Keim, 2008; Nelsn, Lurie, & Wasserman, 2007).



Dierent literatures emphasize dierent types cping

respnses. The stress and cping literature has emphasized

individual cping respnses. Intrapsychic respnses t

experience r anticipatin experience include denial,

envirnmental numbness, cgnitive reappraisals, and emtin

regulatin (Carver & Scheier, 1998; see Sectin 5 this reprt).

other individual respnses are behaviral, such as seeking

inrmatin r scial supprt r engaging in prblem slving by

changing ne’s habitat t adjust t climate changes r engaging

in mitigatin. In cntrast research n envirnmental stressrs

and natural disasters has been mre likely t include cmmunity-

level respnses (e.g., Gw & Patn, 2008; Peek & Mileti,

2002). Cmmunity respnses t stressrs include, r instance,

vlunteerism and helping neighbrs cpe with lack water r

destructin ne’s hme. It is nt uncmmn r grups t

emerge ater disasters t help cmmunities cpe with crises

(Hlahan & Wandersman, 1991; Gw & Patn, 2008; Vrhees,

2008). These cmmunity respnses may be particularly

imprtant when cnsidering cping with the impacts climate

change, given the breadth and duratin the impacts. When

cnsidering climate change, additinal specic types

individual respnses that have nt typically been examined in

past research may need t be addressed, such as abandning

scial r mral rder, relying n dgmatic belies, r rejecting

cnsumer-driven liestyles (Eckersley, 2008).

There is a large and grwing literature n preparedness

and, in particular, “psychlgical preparedness” in the disaster

and public health literatures, which is arguably relevant tpractive cping respnses (e.g., “being prepared” and keeping

a “weather eye” n ptentially serius uture threats simply make

gd sense and is sund advice acrss many lie situatins

and circumstances). In challenging lie circumstances this

salutary advice takes n mre specic meaning in terms just

what ne shuld d “t be prepared” r emergency situatins

that may be particularly hazardus, extremely stressul, r

even lie threatening. In the disaster cntext, “preparedness”

is an essential cmpnent all disaster management mdels

and ramewrks, but typically cuses exclusively n whathousehold preparations and actions ne shuld take t prtect

nesel and amily and prevent r mitigate damage and human

and nancial csts and lss. Psychological preparedness

diers rm husehld r physical preparedness in that what

is reerred t is an intraindividual and psychlgical state

awareness, anticipatin, and readinessan internal, primed

capacity t anticipate and manage ne’s psychlgical respnse

in an emergency situatin (e.g., Mrrissey & Reser, 2003).

Psychlgical preparedness r emergency situatins and

disaster threats can be enhanced thrugh prcedures such as

stress inculatin, emtin management, and stress reductin

(e.g., Australian Psychlgical Sciety, 2007; Meichenbaum,

1996). The Australian Psychlgical Sciety, r example, has

develped a number disaster preparedness brchures and

tip sheets which use a stress inculatin apprach t assist

individuals t prepare themselves and their husehlds r

disasters (e.g., Mrrissey & Reser, 2007).

ms Cpg Pcss

Many persnal and cntextual variables have been therized

and tested as predictrs individual and cmmunity cping

respnses, and many these are likely t be imprtant

predictrs respnses t climate change. Several examples

are listed in Figure 8. Smetimes these variables predict

appraisals and preerences r cping respnses, such as when

ptimism predicts the tendency t use prblem-cused cping

in reactin t a stressr (Scheier, Weintraub, & Carver, 1986).

At ther times the cnstructs will mderate relatins between

the variables in the mdel, such as when the cnstructs predict

the impact these appraisals n the cping respnse (i.e.,

mderates the impact appraisals n cping respnses)

and when the cnstruct predicts the cnsequences cping

respnses (i.e., mderates the relatins between cping

respnses and utcmes; the latter are discussed in the

previus sectin in this reprt n psychlgical cnsequences

climate change). Fr instance, neurticism has been shwn

t inuence nt nly the chice cping respnses but als theimpact cping respnses n well-being (Blger & Zuckerman,

1995).

Tw cnstructs ten discussed in the climate change

literature are resilience and vulnerability. In this literature,

resilience typically reers t the adaptive capacity “resilient

scial-eclgical systems” (e.g., Nelsn et al., 2007). Within

psychlgy, in the case individuals, the cnstruct

“resilience” typically reers t inner strengths and cping

resurces r necessary adaptatin t situatinal demands.In the case cmmunities, it reers t scial strengths a

cmmunity, such as in the rm pled resurces, knwledge,

scial supprts, and scial capital (e.g., Bnann, 2004;

Haggerty, Sherrd, Garmezy, & Rutter, 1994; Luthar, 2003;

Masten, 2001; Rutter, 1987, 1999; Schn, 2006). “Resilience”

has, curse, becme the principal theme in the APA’s web-

based helpline and brchures relating t psychlgical advice

and guidance in the cntext disasters and terrrism (e.g.,

American Psychlgical Assciatin, 2007; Newman, 2005).



Vulnerability reers t the extent t which systems and

individuals are susceptible t, and unable t cpe with, adverse

eects climate change. Vulnerability is a unctin the

characteristics climate change impacts (e.g., its magnitude

and rate change) and variatin in systems and individuals

(e.g., degree expsure t climate change impacts, individual

and cmmunity adaptive capacity, and cnnectedness t

cmmunities).

Cnsideratin scial grup membership illustrates hw

variatin in resilience and vulnerability can inuence the entire

adaptatin prcesses. Adaptive respnses t climate change

wuld be expected rm dierences in risk appraisals in part due

t actual dierence in vulnerability r dierent ppulatins (see

Sectin 3). one wuld expect lwer-status grups t appraise

impacts dierently because they are bjectively mre likely t

be aected by climate change impacts because where they

live, the resurces in their cmmunities, and the rles that they

ccupy (see Sectin 1). Dierences in appraisals may nt just be

a unctin characteristics assciated with lw-status grups

but als characteristics higher status grups. Althugh higher

status grups are less likely t be vulnerable t climate change

impacts, they culd verestimate the extent t which this is true

and under-prepare r impacts.

Grups wuld als be expected t have dierent cping

appraisals r several reasns. Lwer status grups may have

lwer sel-eicacy due t less adaptive capacity and the rles

they ccupy. Plus, their lesser pwer and status may result inexclusin rm interventin plans; this culd result in less cntrl

ver their utcmes. on the ther hand, high-status grups,

thugh they may bjectively have mre sel-eicacy and cntrl,

may verestimate the extent t which this is true.

Finally, grup dierences may aect the last stage the

mdel illustrated in Figure 8. That is, nt nly is it pssible

that individuals wuld have dierent adaptive respnses, but

the impacts individual and cmmunity respnses culd be

dierent. (Hartmann & Barajas-Rman, 2009).

is

Psychlgy can help acilitate adaptive respnses t climate

change by attending t the prcesses that inrm thse

respnses. As an example, interventins t aid adaptatin

culd be imprved nt nly by attending t actual dierences

in impacts and respnses between grups but als t grups’

appraisals impacts and respnses. Interventins may

be planned t address actual grup dierences. Assessing

appraisals can reveal gaps between the intended eects

and actual eects. Further, perceived grup dierences in

impacts, independent the extent t which they are true, culd

create dierences in adaptive respnses. Thus, it is useul t

understand and address the perceptins.

Research n actrs that impede practive cping can

ptentially imprve the success adaptive respnses because,

r many, adaptive respnses are a result anticipatin

climate change impacts. Fr instance, it can ptentially be useu

t assist individuals in setting small, achievable, and specic

gals and t highlight hw alternative gals may unexpectedly

interere with practive cping gals (Thlen, de Ridder,

Bensing, Grter, & Rutten, 2008).

Recmmended adaptatin respnses, including plicy

recmmendatins, can als be imprved by attending t

the target audiences via scial prcesses and netwrks that

establish and maintain tw-way cmmunicatin between

all stakehlders. By being inclusive, psychlgists can help

generate inrmatin and recmmendatins that are salient,

credible, readily understandable, and acceptable by their

intended users (e.g., Mertens, 2009). This can be critical when

there are grup dierences in appraisals incidents and

respnses, aective respnses and mtivatins, and impacts

respnses, as is true when cnsidering the inuence gender,

minrity status, and pverty n adaptatin prcesses.

S

We have attempted in this sectin t prvide a multiaceted

cnsideratin adaptatin and adaptatin prcesses that

illustrates the cntributins that psychlgy can make in the

cntext glbal climate change. Much the material in the

successive IPCC reprts and in climate change science is

ramed in terms adaptatin. Yet, this cverage and discurse

and emergent initiatives and plicy deliberatins reect very little

input rm psychlgy. Many the prevailing understandings adaptatin in this arena d nt tend t encmpass psychlgical

perspectives, cnsideratins, r variables described abve. Yet,

it is als the case that much the psychlgical literature and

research nted abve has nt been specically ramed in terms

climate change, thugh research such as that n disasters is

clsely related and pertinent. Psychlgy can play a crucial and

much-needed rle in cntributing t multidisciplinary erts t

address the adaptatin challenges climate change, and this

need has prvided a strng impetus r this current review.



rsc rcs

• Attain in-depth understanding o public comprehension o and

responses to the threat o global climate change that go beyond

current research on “what the public thinks about climate

change or global warming.”

This research wuld examine hw individuals are making

sense climate change and hw this sense making inuences

adaptatin prcesses. Accurate dcumentatin thesepublic understandings is crucial r genuinely helpul and

eective adaptatin advice and assistance t individuals and

cmmunities and r eective and strategic mitigatin plicies

and interventins.

• Establish comprehensive databases in diering impact regions

and policy jurisdictions relating to the above.

This database wuld rene a suite sensitive and

strategic indicatr measures and initiate a mnitring prgramthat culd reprt n imprtant changes and impacts taking

place in the human landscape in the cntext climate change

(cmmensurate with and in cllabratin with nging climate

change science mnitring) and culd assist in the evaluatin

the relative success varius climate change plicy and

interventin initiatives.

Determine the extent t which it is pssible t generalize

rm existing research, reviewed abve, the threat and unlding

impacts climate change.

• Examine how risk perceptions and psychological responses to

the threat o global climate change inuence and/or mediate

taking actions or initiatives related to adaptation and engaging

in environmentally signifcant behaviors.

When ding this, researchers shuld attend clsely

t spatial and tempral dimensins and the natural and

technlgical threat status climate change. It may be

particularly prductive t determine this with respect t research

rm bth natural and technlgical disaster phenmena.

• Document the mediating role o media coverage in public risk

perceptions and associated social processes, such as social

construction, social representation, and social amplifcation

and attenuation relative to direct exposure in the adaptation

process.

• Research contextual and dispositional and lie history actors

that oster resilience and sel-eicacy, as well as proactive

coping, and the eectiveness o such initiatives as APA’s “Road

to Resilience” program o individual and community advice and

assistance in the context o the global climate change threat

and impacts.

• Examine the interrelations between adaptation processes and

mitigation decisions and actions in the context o global climate

change.

This may well be ne the mst imprtant areas in which

psychlgy can cntribute, as these tw prcesses have

becme the prevailing ramewrk r climate change scientists

and researchers human dimensins glbal change in their

addressing climate change challenges.

ap mg

The abve review addressed the ways that past psychlgical

research n stress and cping and n respnding t disasterscan cntribute t understanding the ways that individuals and

cmmunities adapt t r cpe with current and impending

impacts climate change. Adaptatin and mitigatin are

related as illustrated by including mitigatin erts as types

cping respnses. The relatin becmes mre cmplicated

via the eedback lps included in the prcess. Individuals’

erts t cpe with climate change will change as the impacts

climate change ccur and change because the impacts

individuals’ cping respnses. Thus, the impacts and respnses

t climate change represent an unlding prcess. Having

said this, hwever, there is value in taking a clse lk at what

psychlgists knw abut inducing actin t limit climate change

and barriers t these changes which are the tpics the next

tw sectins this reprt.





Just as ne might puzzle ver the cllapse vanished

reginal civilizatins like the Maya Central America, the

Anasazi Nrth America, the Nrse Greenland, and

the peple Easter Island (Diamnd, 2005), uture generatins

may nd it incmprehensible that peple, particularly in

industrialized cuntries, cntinued until well int the 21 st

century t engage in behavir that seriusly cmprmised thehabitability their wn cuntries and the planet. This sectin

cnsiders psychlgical reasns peple d nt respnd mre

strngly t the risks climate change by changing the behavirs

that drive climate change.

Althugh sme peple in every sciety are changing

their behavir in respnse t climate change, humans in the

aggregate cntinue t prduce greenhuse gases in quantities

that drive urther change. Psychlgy can help explain this

pattern behavir. This sectin cuses n a number

imprtant psychlgical barriers r bstacles that may hinder

behavir change that wuld be adaptive r wuld help t mitigate

climate change withut meaning t diminish the majr rle that

structural barriers play. Amng these are institutinal barriers

that include split incentives in which ne actr pays the csts

actin while anther gets the benets (energy eiciency retrts

in rental husing is a classic example) and regulatry restrictins

(as when an electric utility cannt get credit r investments in

energy eiciency and must instead suer a lss n revenue).

A typical cultural barrier t change is the widespread scial

expectatins in sme cuntries and cmmunities abut what

kind huse r car ne must have t be seen as successul.

Barriers in the physical envirnment include the diiculties

reducing hme heating in a cld climate, aviding car use in a

sprawling suburb, and increasing the energy eiciency certain

lder buildings. Ecnmic barriers include the diiculty lw-incme husehlds and small businesses have in getting the

capital needed r retrtting their hmes and ices. In additin

btaining useul inrmatin abut hw mst eectively t reduce

emissins in an individual’s r rganizatin’s specic situatin

(a particular building, r example), can be diicult. These and

ther structural barriers t change (that is, barriers that exceed

a persn’s inuence) can restrict the ability t engage in actins

that wuld mitigate climate change.

In additin t these structural barriers, and smetimes

cmbining with them, are barriers that are cmpletely r largely

psychlgical. As discussed urther in the next sectin, bth

structural and psychlgical bstacles need t be remved r

signicant behaviral change t ccur. The gap between attitude

(“I agree this is the best curse actin”) and behavir (“but I

am nt ding it”) is caused by bth structural and psychlgical

barriers t actin. Many the psychlgical barriers t climate

change behavirs are less well dcumented than the structural

nes. Hwever, evidence r many them exists in the cntext

SeCtion 5:

whiCh PSyCholoGiCal barrierSlimit Climate ChanGe aCtion?



ther pr-envirnmental behavirs, s they may als perate

in relatin t limiting climate change.

The psychlgical bstacles t adequate (carbn-neutral)

climate-change adaptatin are described in this sectin. They

begin with genuine ignrance and prgress thrugh increasing

awareness t an intentin t act. All these, hwever, are

hampered by psychlgical prcesses, scial, and ther

bstacles. This sequence psychlgical bstacles t actin

has nt been tested. Like ther prpsed psychlgical

sequences, the bstacles may nt always ccur in the same

rder, and they may nt perate the same way in every culture

r cntext. We use this sequence as a way t rganize and

prvide structure t the list barriers.

G Sqc Pscgc bs

Ignorance

Fr a prprtin the ppulatin, ignrance climate change

may be a barrier t actin, just as peple ten are unaware

ther aspects their surrundings (e.g., Gird, 1976). The

pll (Pew Research Center, 2006) described earlier shwed

that in many cuntries, respndents answer “dn’t knw” t

questins abut climate change. In the United States and sme

ther cuntries, signicant minrities the ppulatin d nt

see climate change as a signicant prblem, and many these

peple may simply remain unaware the issue. This prprtin

the glbal ppulatin is nt likely t take actins aimed atamelirating climate change.

A secnd dimensin ignrance is lack knwledge

abut which specic actins t take. Mst peple in mst

cuntries are nt ignrant the prblem, in the sense the

previus paragraph, but many r even mst thse wh are

aware the prblem may nt knw which specic actins they

can take. Taking this a step urther, a very large number

peple may nt knw which actins will have the mst benecial

impacts.

Uncertainty

Experimental research n resurce dilemmas demnstrates

that perceived r real uncertainty reduces the requency pr-

envirnmental behavir (e.g., de Kwaadsteniet, 2007; Hine &

Gird, 1996). Participants, perhaps acting in shrt-term sel-

interest, tend t interpret any sign uncertainty (r example,

the size a resurce pl r the rate at which the resurce

regenerates) as suicient reasn t act in sel-interest ver that

the envirnment. Uncertainty abut climate change prbably

unctins as a justicatin r inactin r pstpned actin

related t climate change. Mrever, presentatins level--

cndence phrases rm the mst recent IPCC assessment

led many individuals t interpret the phrases as having a lwer

likelihd than the IPCC reprt intended (Budescu, Brmell,

& Pr, 2009). Thus, well-meant erts by climate change

experts t characterize what they knw and d nt knw led

t systematic underestimatin risk. Yet, a certain degree

uncertainty is an inescapable element any hnest climate

mdel. Scientists are let with the prblem hw t present

the risk hnestly while nt prmting misguided ptimism and

justiying inactin.

Mistrust and reactance

Ample evidence suggests that many peple distrust risk

messages that cme rm scientists r gvernment icials

(e.g., MacGregr, Slvic, Masn, Detweiler, 1994). Mrever,

reactance, the reactin against advice r plicy that seems t

threaten ne’s reedm, is based in part n a lack trust

thse wh give the advice r set the plicy (Eilam & Suleiman,

2004). Testing scientic mdels can be diicult because in many

cases they make predictins abut the distant uture. Mrever,

certain rganized interests seek t prmte mistrust the

scientic cnsensus n climate change and create ppsitin

t mitigatin (c.. McCright, 2007). Psychlgists can help by

increasing understanding the bases mistrust scientists

and scientic inrmatin and by helping t crat messages

that address cncerns. Trust, n the ther hand, is imprtantr changing behavir, particularly when a persn believes that

change invlves a cst. Behavir change requires that ne trusts

thers nt t take advantage and that the change is eective,

valuable, and equitable (e.g., Brann & Fddy, 1987; Fddy &

Dawes, 2008).

Denial

Uncertainty, mistrust, and reactance easily slide int active

denial (as ppsed t denial in the psychdynamic sense

the term). This culd be denial the existence climatechange and human cntributin t climate change and culd

include mre specic denial the rle that ne’s behavir r

ne’s grup’s behavirs has in harming thers. Plls vary, but

a substantial minrity peple believes that climate change

is nt ccurring r that human activity has little r nthing t

d with it. In the case climate change, sme peple actively

deny that climate presents any prblem. Fr example, a news

stry in USA Today abut several envirnmental presentatins

at the APA 2008 Annual Cnventin in Bstn (Jaysn, 2009)



drew 115 reader respnses. A cntent analysis the cmments

shwed that abut 100 the respnses essentially denied that

a prblem existed; tw typical explanatins were that climate

change is a prblem invented by “scientists wh are pursuing a

phantm issue,” and that they are ignring research that clearly

shws that the prblem is verestimated r des nt exist.

one reader’s cmments are typical the emtinal intensity

experienced by sme deniers:

“It fgures that a bunch o psychologists need to mess

with people's heads to get them to all in line with this

'eco-riendly' nonsense… ‘News stories that provided

a balanced view o climate change reduced people's

belies that humans are at ault.’ Yep, there ain't nothing

more that enviro-crazies hate than balanced news

reporting.”

This sample 115 cmments is nt representative the

whle ppulatin, but it des represent that a vluble segment

U.S. sciety. Hw des a mre representative sample think?

Many say that climate change is imprtant, but when asked t

rank it against ther issues, they assign it lw imprtance. Vasi

(2009) characterizes public supprt r sustainable develpment

and the actins and sacrices necessary t curtail climate

change as “a mile wide, but an inch deep,” adpting a phrase

rst used by Smillie & Helmich (1999) t describe public supprt

r reign develpment assistance. This is cnsistent with the

results the tw Pew Prject plls mentined earlier: As many

as 75%-80% U.S. respndents say that climate change isan imprtant issue, yet they place it 20 th ut 20 cmpared t

ther issues. In sum, many U.S. citizens “dn’t seem t mind

addressing the ecnmic cst climate change, as lng as it

desn’t cme ut their wn pckets” (“Warming t the tpic,”

2009, p. 4).

The ideas terrr management thery (e.g., Gldenberg,

Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & Slmn, 2000) suggest that peple

may deny the prblem because it is a reminder ne’s mrtality

and enhances erts t validate ne’s belies and erts tblster sel-esteem. Research applying this t cncerns abut

the envirnment illustrated that increased mrtality salience

resulted in decreased cncern abut prtecting the envirnment

amng thse wh did nt derive their sel-esteem rm the

envirnment and had the ppsite eect n thse wh derived

their sel-esteem rm the envirnment (Vess & Arndt, 2008).

Better knwledge abut the emtinal element t sme

peple’s rejectin climate risks is needed (see Sectin 1

this task rce reprt) and reasns r denial. It shuld help in

the design mre eective ways t characterize these risks

(Cmeau & Gird, 2008; Mser & Dilling, 2007a).

Judgmental discounting

Discunting in this sense means undervaluing uture r distant

risks (see Sectin 1 r reasns r this prcess). In the current

cntext, it means discunting the imprtance climate change

in tempral and spatial terms. A study ver 3000 respndents

in 18 cuntries shwed that envirnmental cnditins are

expected by everyday individuals t becme wrse in 25 years

than they are tday (Gird et al., 2009). This trend held in every

cuntry except tw. Althugh this belie crrespnds t scientic

assessments the impacts climate change, it can als justiy

inactin because a belie that changes can be made later. The

same study und that individuals in 15 the cuntries believed

that envirnmental cnditins are wrse in places ther than

their wn. This study and thers (e.g., Uzzell, 2000) demnstrate

that tempral and spatial discunting envirnmental prblems

ccurs. Althugh cnditins ten may be bjectively wrse in

ther areas the glbe, this tendency ccurs even in places

that are bjectively similar, such as amng inhabitants English

villages a ew kilmeters apart (Mussn, 1974). I cnditins are

presumed t be wrse elsewhere, individuals might be expected

t have less mtivatin t act lcally.

Place attachment

Individuals may be mre likely t care r a place t which

they eel attachment than r ne they d nt. I s, weakerplace attachment shuld act as an bstacle t climate-psitive

behavir, and ppulatins with a histry gegraphic mbility

wuld be expected t care less r their present envirnments.

The evidence is mixed: Place attachment is nt always

assciated with pr-envirnmental behavir (Claytn, 2003;

Uzzell, Pl, & Badenas, 2002; Gird et al., 2009). The rle

place attachment is likely t be cmplex, but prbably acts as

an impediment t actin in sme ppulatins, as is perhaps

indicated by lcal ppsitin t wind arms in sme areas,

even where there is strng supprt r ther pr-envirnmentalplicies.

Habit

Individuals exhibit what might be called behaviral mmentum.

William James (1890) called habit the “enrmus ywheel

sciety,” althugh he viewed this stability actin in psitive

terms; in terms climate change, current habits are less

benign. Habit may be ne the mst imprtant bstacles t the

mitigatin climate change impacts (e.g., Hbsn, 2003).



Many habitual behavirs are extremely resistant t

permanent change (e.g., eating habits), and thers are slwly

changed (e.g., use seat belts) (Mai et al., 2007). Enscnced

habits d nt change withut a substantial push; priming and

even attitude change ten d nt lead t behaviral change. Fr

sme peple, behavirs that rm part the human cntributin

t climate change (e.g., the use cars) are habitual and diicult

t change (e.g., Aarts & Dijksterhuis, 2000; Bamberg & Schmidt,

2003; Klöckner, Matthies, & Hunecke, 2003; Lukpuls,

Jakbssn, Gärling, Meland, & Fujii, 2006), althugh nt

impssible (e.g., Matthies, Klöckner, & Preissner, 2006). Fr

example, temprarily rcing car drivers t use alternative

travel mdes has induced lng-term reductins in car use (e.g.,

Fujii & Gärling, 2003). Fr many peple, curse, car use is

nearly essential because the structure human settlements.

But very large numbers peple d a have chice, and

chse nt t purchase a lw-carbn car r t take alternative

transprtatin. Fr thers, simple habit is the barrier t change.

Perceived behavioral control

Because climate change is a glbal prblem, many individuals

understandably believe that they can d nthing abut it. This is

the well-knwn cllective actin prblem (olsn, 1965). Stated in

psychlgical language, peple smetimes d nt act because

they perceive that they have little behaviral cntrl ver the

utcme. Fr example, perceived behaviral cntrl can be a

very strng predictr (r = .50-.60) whether r nt a persn

chses t take public transprtatin instead a private car

(e.g., Heath & Gird, 2002; Kaiser & Gutscher, 2003).

Perceived risks rom behavioral change

What might happen t individuals wh decide t cnsider

changing their behavir as a step tward reducing their

greenhuse gas emissins? Ptentially, changing behavir

any srt hlds at least six kinds risk (Schiman, Kanuk, &

Das, 2006). First, unctinal risk reers t whether the adaptatin

will wrk: I ne purchases, r example, a plug-in electric

vehicle (PHEV) it may, as a new technlgy, have battery

prblems. Secnd, physical risk reers t the danger that nemight ace: Is this PHEV as crash-sae as the SUV traded in t

buy it? Third, nancial risk reers t the ptential r csts that

are nt utweighed by benets: The PHEV’s purchase price

includes a premium ver equivalent gas-pwered vehicles; will

the mney t buy and perate it be lst? Furth, scial risk

reers t ptential damage t ne’s eg r reputatin: I ne

buys a PHEV, will riends laugh? They may invke any the

rst three risks as my ailure t reckn careully. The th risk,

which llws the urth clsely, is the psychlgical risk. once

rebuked, teased, r criticized by ne’s signicant thers, ne’s

eg may suer sme damage. Sixth, time (lst) can be a risk.

I the time spent planning and adpting the adaptatin des nt

result in persnal r envirnmental benets, it wuld have been

wasted.

Tokenism and the rebound eect

once individuals mve rm envirnmental numbness, denial,

discunting, and habit tward impactul changes because they

believe that they d have sme behaviral cntrl and sense

that their wn cmmunity, t which they eel sme attachment,

might be threatened and the risks behaviral change are nt

verly threatening, they may begin t engage in sme behaviral

changes. Apart rm this is the act that sme climate-change-

related behavirs are easier t change than thers but have

little useul imprt. Sme peple will avr these actins ver

higher-cst but mre eective actins. This has been called

the lw-cst hypthesis (e.g., Diekmann & Preisendörer, 1992;

see als Kemptn et al., 1985). Sme will undertake lw-cst

actins that have relatively little eect in terms mitigatin. Pr-

envirnmental intent may nt crrespnd with pr-envirnmental

impact (Stern, 2000). A urther prblem is the rebund eect,

in which ater sme saving r ert is made, peple erase the

gains. Fr example, persns wh buy a uel-eicient vehicle

may drive urther than when they wned a less-eicient vehicle.

The phenmenn has been called the Jevns paradx (Jevns,

1865) and the Khazzm-Brkes pstulate (Brkes, 1990;

Khazzm, 1980).

Social comparison, norms, conormity, and perceived equity

Peple rutinely cmpare their actins with thse thers

(Festinger, 1954) and derive subjective and descriptive nrms

rm their bservatins (e.g., Heath & Gird, 2002) abut what

is the “prper” curse actin. This phenmenn has been

recgnized in the thery planned behavir (Ajzen, 1991), and

applied t pr-envirnmental interventins (e.g., Cialdini, 2003).

It can create a barrier t actin. Fr example, in experimental

resurce dilemmas, when any srt inequality r inequity

(real r perceived) exists, cperatin declines (e.g., Aquin,Steisel, & Kay, 1992). The many criticisms Al Gre’s large

residence, rted in scial cmparisn, have been emplyed as

a justicatin r inactin by thers.

Similarly, peer nrms are a strng inuence. Fr example,

when hmewners are tld the amunt energy that average

members their cmmunity use, they tend t alter their use

energy t t the nrm (Schultz, Nlan, Cialdini, Gldstein,

& Griskevicius, 2007), increasing r decreasing their energy



use accrdingly. The increases can be prevented by giving lw

energy users psitive eedback abut using less energy.

Conicting goals and aspirations

Everyne has multiple gals and values (e.g., Schwartz,

1992; Lindenberg & Steg, 2007), and gals that invlve mre

prductin greenhuse gases can trump gals that supprt

using less. Fr example, many parents drive their children t

schl t prtect them, when walking is an ptin. Many peple

want t relax and rest and d s ater ying t an attractive

vacatin spt. The cmmn gal “getting ahead” ten means

engaging in actins that run cunter t the gal reducing

ne’s climate change impacts: buying a very large huse r

ying requently by chice.

Belie in solutions outside o human control

Sme peple take n climate-related actin because they

believe that ne the traditinal religius deities r Mther

Nature either will nt let them dwn r will d what he/she/it

wishes anyway. Fr example, interviews with Pacic Islanders

wh live n very lw-lying atlls und that ne grup is already

purchasing higher grund in Australia, while anther trusts that

Gd will nt break the Biblical prmise never t d the Earth

again ater the d that Nah and his enturage endured

(Mrtreux & Barnett, 2009). one als hears mre secular belies

expressed by sme peple that Mther Nature will take a curse

that mere mrtals cannt inuence.

S

Many structural and psychlgical barriers stand in the way

behaviral changes that wuld help limit climate change. Many

peple are taking actin in respnse t the risks climate

change, but many thers are unaware the prblem, unsure

the acts r what t d, d nt trust experts r believe their

cnclusins, think the prblem is elsewhere, are xed in their

ways, believe that thers shuld act, r believe that their actins

will make n dierence r are unimprtant cmpared t thse

thers. They may be engaged in tken actins r actinsthey believe are helpul but bjectively are nt. They have ther

wrthy gals and aspiratins that draw their time, ert, and

resurces, r they may believe that external actrs beynd

human actins r cntrl will address the prblem. Sme r all

the structural barriers must be remved, but this is nt likely

t be suicient. Psychlgists and ther scial scientists need t

wrk n psychlgical barriers.

rsc Sggss

1. Many these barriers are derived rm studies pr-

envirnmental behavir, resurce management studies,

r sustainability studies, rather than specically rm

climate-related studies, which are still nt numerus

in the psychlgical literature. Each barrier shuld be

studied in the climate cntext.

2. This sectin the reprt presumes r prpses that thebarriers ccur in a brad sequence. T what extent d the

barriers ccur in sequence? What sequence? Hw des

this vary r dierent ppulatin segments, particular

behavirs, and in varius cultures?

3. Are the barriers cumulative? That is, i a persn is aced

with mre the barriers, is he r she less likely t

engage in climate adaptatin and mitigatin?

4. Which appraches will be mst eective in vercming

each barrier, and r which segments the ppulatin,which particular climate-related behavir, in which

cultures? These appraches might include varius

plicy incentives, plicy disincentives, mdeling, and

cmmunicatin strategies.

5. outright denial the prblem remains the psitin a

small but vcal segment U.S. and ther scieties. What

is the basis this denial? Hw is it best dealt with?

6. Hw can perceived behaviral cntrl, which is

understandably lw r this prblem, be increased?

7. A paradx exists in that scientic assessments must, t

have integrity, be cuched in terms that include sme

measure uncertainty, while laypersns have a tendency

t interpret uncertainty bradly enugh t justiy inactin.

Hw can this uncertainty paradx be reslved s that

needed actins are undertaken by laypersns?

8. Changing behavir ten is perceived as risky, at least

scially r nancially. Hw can climate-related behavir

changes be made t seem (and t be) less risky?

9. Mistrust science and gvernment is nt uncmmn andten leads t reactance. Hw can trust be built?

10. Behavir change in the climate cntext ten is

presented and viewed in terms needed sacrices.

Which behavir changes, presented in which ways,

might be viewed in mre psitive terms, as persnal

gain r sel and sciety?



bs Cg

Althugh there are extensive structural and psychlgical

barriers t change, psychlgists, smetimes alne but ten

and in cllabratin with thers, have dne much research

and participated in many interventins designed t encurage

envirnmentally signicant and respnsible behavirs. oten

knwledge the barriers nted abve can help vercme

them. The next sectin reviews ways that psychlgists canassist in limiting climate change by encuraging envirnmentally

signicant and respnsible behavirs, ne imprtant element

mitigating climate change.





Climate change nw ccurring glbally is driven by a

variety human actins. The prximate causes include

burning ssil uels, clearing rests, raising cattle,

and perrming ther actins that release greenhuse gases

r change the reectivity Earth’s surace. These actins in

turn result rm ther human activities, including gvernment

plicies, increases and migratins ppulatin, ecnmicdevelpment, and the behavir individuals and husehlds

as cnsumers, members rganizatins, and citizensand

in turn rm underlying human attitudes, predispsitins, scial

and ecnmic structures, and belies. Psychlgical science

wuld seem indispensible r understanding and nding ways t

change at least sme these human behavirs. Nevertheless,

psychlgists have rarely been cnsulted by climate plicy

decisin makers. This sectin discusses what psychlgy can

cntribute t changing the human activities that drive climate

change, briey summarizes what psychlgy has learned, and

sets ut a list research activities thrugh which psychlgical

science can be useul.

w Pscg C C

Psychlgy can cntribute by imprving the implementatin

each the majr appraches t changing envirnmentally

signicant behavir. The llwing typlgy, based n the

wrk Kauman-Hayz and Gutscher (2001), suggests the

pssibilities:

• C c (e.g., envirnmental regulatins;

appliance and autmtive uel eiciency standards)

• ecc ss (e.g., energy taxes, slar energy tax

credits)

• isc ss (e.g., new energy-eicient

technlgy, mass transit, zer net energy building design)

• is gs (e.g., establishing markets r

emissin permits, creating certicatin r labeling systems,

rging public–private agreements)

• Cc fs cqs s

(e.g., prviding inrmatin, using persuasin, advertising,

making persn-t-persn cntact)

Psychlgy is a majr surce insight int the ways

cmmunicatin and diusin instruments wrk, and it can

als ptentially er insights int the ways peple, especiallyindividuals and husehlds, respnd r ail t respnd t the

ther kinds plicy appraches. Fr instance, it can illuminate

the surces citizen supprt r ppsitin t regulatins,

taxes, and new energy technlgies; help estimate the market

penetratin new cnsumer technlgies and building designs

and help in making them mre useul and attractive; identiy

behavirs that culd acilitate r rustrate new institutinal

arrangements. Bere summarizing what psychlgy has learned

and culd learn, we nte three general kinds cntributins the

discipline can make t mitigating anthrpgenic climate change.

SeCtion 6:

how Can PSyCholoGiStSaSSiSt in limitinGClimate ChanGe?



Better models o behavior based on empirical analysis

All the abve plicy appraches embdy implicit theries

behavir change (e.g., that peple can be cunted n t

llw regulatins, that they d what is ecnmically mst

advantageus, that useul technlgies are readily adpted,

etc.). Plicies are ten undertaken based n implicit

assumptins that ne r anther these theries adequately

captures behaviral reality. Althugh they all cntain grains truth, nne is nearly cmplete, and they can mislead (see

e.g., Stern, 1986; Wilsn & Dwlatabadi, 2007; Lutzenhiser,

2009). Fr example, ecnmic plicy instruments such as

plicies that create changes in energy prices r prvide nancial

incentives r investing in energy-eicient appliances r mtr

vehicles d change behavir in the expected directins, but the

eect is usually much smaller than ecnmic mdels predict.

This s-called energy eiciency gapthe dierence between

actual behavir and what a simple ecnmic thery cst

minimizatin wuld predictis quite large (McKinsey, 2007)

and als varies widely with the behavir (e.g., which appliance

is being purchased; Ruderman, 1985). Psychlgy can help

explain this phenmenn because many the pssible

explanatins r it invlve cgnitive and aective prcesses

(see belw). In additin, research methds rm psychlgy are

useul r understanding the chice prcesses. Plicymakers

are increasingly cming t recgnize that the dminant physical-

technical-ecnmic mdel energy use is incmplete and are

turning t behaviral scientists r better cnceptual mdels and

advice n hw t implement them s as t make plicies and

prgrams mre eective (Wilsn & Dwlatabadi, 2007; Darntn,

2008; Lutzenhiser, 2009).

Psychlgy can help develp bth descriptive mdels and

mdels behaviral change. Descriptive mdels individual

behavir delineate the rle internal actrs (e.g., knwledge,

eelings, values, attitudes) and external actrs (e.g., physical

and technlgical inrastructure; plitical, scial, and cultural

actrs; ecnmic incentives; scial inuences and mdels)

in envirnmentally signicant behavir (e.g., Black, Stern, &

Elwrth, 1985; Kllmuss & Agyeman, 2002; Gardner & Stern,2002; Guagnan, Stern, & Dietz, 1995). Descriptive mdels

behavir in grups may explicate the cnditins under which

grups will r will nt prvide public gds r all prey t the

cmmns dilemma (e.g., Messick & Rutte, 1992; Williams,

Harkins, & Karau, 2003).

Mdels change can address the eects erts t

inuence behavir in individual r grup settings. Fr example,

respnses t persuasive messages depend in part n

characteristics the individuals receiving them. Fr instance,

“guilt appeals” (inrmatin that indicates that a persn r

ne’s scial grup have caused harm t the envirnment) have

dierent aective cnsequences depending upn the extent t

which the envirnment is imprtant t the recipients (Mallett,

2009) and can even backre r individuals whse sel-esteem

is nt dependent upn their impact n the envirnment (Brk &

Graham, 2009).

Generally, when psychlgical cnstructs are included

in mdels change, they can shw hw the eects plicy

interventins depend n scial inuences n behavir and by

characteristics the target actrs, including their mtives,

values, belies, and cgnitive and aective prcesses.

Psychlgy can thus increase the practical useulness

empirical analyses. It can help replace simplistic assumptins

with empirically supprted nes (Gardner & Stern, 2002; Nlan

et al., 2008) and uncver imprtant pprtunities r interventin

that have nt been revealed by the dminant plicy theries.

Fr example, empirical analysis incentive prgrams r hme

weatherizatin has shwn that althugh the size the incentive

makes a dierence, the eect a particular incentive is strngly

aected by the way the incentive prgram is marketed and

implemented (see belw).

Better understanding o individuals and households

While much natinal plicy is cused n the behavirs

large rganizatins such as pwer and manuacturing

cmpanies, individuals and husehlds are a majr surce envirnmental damage and accunt r nearly 40% direct

energy cnsumptin in the United States thrugh activities in

hmes and nnbusiness travel (Vandenbergh, 2005; Gardner

& Stern, 2008), and an additinal share indirectly thrugh their

purchases nn-energy gds and services that take energy

t prduce and distribute. Implicit theries behavir change

that may apply well t large crpratins may nt apply s

well t individuals and husehlds r varius reasns, such

as individuals’ aective respnses t available chices and

the relatively high cst t individuals getting actinableinrmatin cmpared t the ptential benets. Fr example, it

may cst almst as much in time and ert t nd cmpetent

pressinals t retrt a hme r energy eiciency as it des

r a large cmmercial buildingbut the energy savings rm the

imprvements will be much greater in a large building.

Attentin t individuals is imprtant because the

eectiveness interventins may depend n the match with

characteristics individuals and husehlds. There are a variety



imprtant individual and husehld dierences: incme;

husehld size and lie cycle stage; gegraphical relatinships

between hme and travel destinatins; hme wnership status;

and cgnitive, aective, and persnality dierences, amng

thers. Market researchers are amng thse wh think abut

such individual and husehld dierences. Psychlgical

research can rene market research categries by investigating

which these dierences matter mst r changing which

behavirs and hw scial, ecnmic, and technlgical cntexts

aect behavir.

Better understanding individuals als matters because

their behavir in rganizatins as citizens (e.g., plitical actin)

and as participants in cultural changes can have eects beynd

their individual use energy. Psychlgy, alng with ther

scial science disciplines, can cntribute t understanding

these srts actins. Fr example, public acceptance can be

a serius barrier t the deplyment new technlgies t limit

climate change (e.g., nuclear and wind energy, “geengineering”

planetary systems). on the ther hand, pr-envirnmental

values and wrldviews regarding prtectin the envirnment

r respnsibilities t uture generatins that are held by

individuals r shared within cultural r subcultural grups can

prvide a basis r supprt plicies and technlgies r

limiting climate change.

Evaluation methods

Psychlgists have pineered evaluatin methdlgy. Prgram

evaluatin invlves the systematic way testing the eects prgrams and their implementatin n intended and unintended

utcmes. Recent develpments in evaluatin research, such

as lgic mdels (e.g., http://meera.snre.umich.edu), allw r

analysis interventins thrugh a ull chain events, rm

available resurces t utcmes, cnsidering planned and

desired activities, targeted audiences, utputs, and utcmes, in

relatin t shrt-, intermediate-, and lng-term bjectives (e.g.,

changes in knwledge in the target audience, increases in the

number hmes taking targeted actins, and decreases in

energy cnsumed). Evaluatin can be applied at each step in amdel.

Evaluatin methds can help thse designing interventins

t avid pitalls and learn rm past experience. Reviews

interventins in public health can prvide useul insights

because what has been learned abut cmmunity-based

interventins (e.g., Merzel & D’Afitti, 2003) and because sme

the behavirs (e.g., biking rather than driving) are relevant t

climate change (e.g., Sallis, Bauman, & Pratt, 1998).

w Pscg hs l

Mre than a century psychlgical research has cnsidered

a great variety intrapsychic actrs, such as values, mtives,

emtins, persnality traits and states, and cgnitive styles,

which might explain variatins in envirnmentally signicant

behavir (ESB). Numerus interpersnal actrs have als

been identied, including scial nrms, scial cmparisn,

ailiatin, and interpersnal persuasin. Sme researchers haveemphasized the rles external rewards and punishments. Still

thers use cmbinatins these types explanatry actrs.

Many these variables have ptential explanatry value r

ESB (see Wilsn & Dwlatabadi, 2007; Darntn, 2008).

A bdy research since the 1970s has cused n

develping and testing theries pr-envirnmental behavir.

Much this wrk can be gruped under tw brad rubrics that

emphasize the rle individualistic and altruistic mtives.

Theries based n individualism presume that individualsmaximize their material welare, subjective well-being, r utility.

Early psychlgical research in this mde applied perant

cnditining thery t husehld energy use (e.g., Geller,

Winett, & Everett, 1982; r a recent review, see Lehman &

Geller, 2004). Mre recently, psychlgists have applied the

thery reasned actin, later develped int the thery

planned behavir (Ajzen, 2005; Ajzen, & Fishbein, 1975; 1980).

Altruism-based theries ten prceed rm the bservatin that

the glbal envirnment is a cmmns in which pr-envirnmenta

actins generally present greater csts than benets t the

individual, suggesting that mtives beynd individualism may be

necessary t engage such behavir. These appraches cus n

variables such as envirnmental cnsciusness (e.g., the New

Eclgical Paradigm; Dunlap & Van Liere, 1978; Dunlap, Van

Liere, Mertig, & Jnes, 2000), prscial mral nrms (Schwartz,

1992), and sel-transcendent values (e.g., the Value-Belie-Nrm

thery prpsed by Stern et al., 1999). These tw perspectives

are nt mutually exclusive. Sme denitins utility are

expansive enugh t include internalized altruistic cncerns. In

act, a recent meta-analysis und that variables rm bth types

theries had unique explanatry value acrss a set ESBs

(Bamberg & Möser, 2007).

Many ther mdels behavir are als ptential value

r understanding the adptin new ESB. Sme these

investigate the rles the ull set human values and scial

mtives as dened in value thery (Schwartz, 1992) and in

research n scial value rientatin (e.g., Van Lange, Rusbult,

Semin-Gssens, Görts, & Stalpers, 1999; Van Lange &

Jireman, 2008). Sme emphasize scial nrmative inuences



(Cialdini, 2003; Gldstein, Griskevicius, & Cialdini, 2007). Sme

cus n stages intentinal behaviral change (e.g., pre-

cntemplatin, cntemplatin, preparatin, actin, maintenance,

terminatin; see Pallnen, Prchaska, Velicer, Prkhrv, &

Smith, 1998).

others apply scial netwrk and innvatin-diusin

theries that describe hw ideas and actins spread thrugh

ppulatins (e.g., Rgers, 2003), mdel prcesses change in

habits (Hbsn, 2003; Mai et al., 2007), and elabrate systems

theries that mdel transrmatinal and incremental changes

that may ten be prmpted by encuntering prblems

(Darntn, 2008).

Much research has been empirically cused n particular

types ESB r n ESB in general, withut necessarily

testing thery. Althugh sme these analyses presume

that ESB is a single cherent entity (e.g., Kaiser, 1998; Kaiser

& Gutscher, 2003), cnsiderable evidence pints t the

value distinguishing subclasses ESB that have dierent

determinants (e.g., Black et al., 1985; Stern, 2000). In this

discussin, we distinguish ur tpics that have been studied

separately: (1) the determinants aggregate envirnmentally

signicant cnsumptin by husehlds; (2) the determinants

variatin in adptin envirnmentally signicant behavirs

(ESB), and particularly in behavirs that reduce greenhuse

gas emissins by individuals and husehlds; (3) respnses

t interventins t change these behavirs; and (4) the

determinants supprt r rganizatinal actins, publicplicies, and cultural changes. The available evidence suggests

that these distinctins matter, in the sense that psychlgical

cnstructs that are enlightening in sme these areas

smetimes have little explanatry value r thers.

Determinants o environmentally signifcant consumption

The verall level envirnmentally signicant cnsumptin in

husehlds is largely determined by nnpsychlgical actrs

such as husehld incme, size, and gegraphic lcatin, whichin turn aect ther majr determinants verall cnsumptin,

such as hme size and wnership mtr vehicles and

appliances (Gatersleben, Steg, & Vlek, 2002; Hunecke,

Haustein, Grischkat, & Böhler 2007). Psychlgical actrs can

aect verall cnsumptin levelsthere are husehlds that

lead much “greener” lives than their neighbrs because strng

envirnmental values cmmitmentsbut at present, these

husehlds are nt numerus enugh t aect natinal analyses

(Abrahamse, Steg, Vlek, & Rthengatter, 2005). At present, the

main value psychlgical explanatry cnstructs lies in the

llwing areas.

Variations in environmentally signifcant behaviors (ESB)

As already nted, sme researchers study ESB as a single

class, while thers cnsider dierent types ESB separately.

Many studies have cused n specic in-hme energy use

behavirs, travel behavirs, investments in hme weatherizatin

and ther ESBs. We bserve that the amunt research

attentin given t ESBs has related mre clsely t ease

measurement than t the envirnmental imprtance the

behavir. Cnsequently, sme behavirs that make majr

cntributins t a husehld’s carbn tprint, such as chices

hme lcatin and size, mtr vehicles, and majr appliances

have received very little attentin in behaviral research.

A great many studies have demnstrated the explanatry

value varius psychlgical cnstructs r varius climate-

related behavirs. Fr example, a recent meta-analytic

review 57 datasets (Bamberg & Möser, 2007) und that

pr-envirnmental behaviral intentins were strngly and

independently predicted by perceived behaviral cntrl,

attitude, and persnal mral nrms. Eects n sel-reprted

behavirs were indirect and weaker than eects n intentins.

The review did nt speciy the behavirs cvered in the datasets

Sme research has attempted t develp mdels that can be

applied t integrate acrss multiple behaviral types (e.g., Black

et al., 1985) r t incrprate multiple theretical perspectives

(e.g., Harland, Staats, & Wilke, 2007; Klöckner, Matthies, &Hunecke, 2003; Wall, Devine-Wright, & Mill, 2007). Cnsidering

that sme very imprtant ESBs have been rarely studied, it is

premature t draw cnclusins abut the relative imprtance

variables r theries r explaining ESB generally.

There is evidence that the imprtance psychlgical

and psychscial (smetimes called persnal) variables is

behavir specic. Black et al. (1985) presented evidence that

the mre strngly cnstrained an energy-saving behavir is

by husehld inrastructure, nancial cst, r ther cntextualvariables, the weaker the explanatry pwer persnal

actrs. In a renement that argument, Guagnan, Stern,

and Dietz (1995) cncluded rm evidence n recycling that

cntextual cnstraints can push behavir strngly in either pr-

r antienvirnmental directins and that persnal actrs such

as values, belies, and nrms have the greatest explanatry

pwer when external cnstraints are weak in either directin.

In this view, the explanatry value psychlgical variables is

cntext-dependent, and the greatest explanatry value these



actrs is likely t be und in niches where behavir is relatively

uncnstrained by strnger rces (Gardner & Stern, 2002).

The issue remains pen r urther research. Psychlgical

cnstructs are als relevant r understanding envirnmentally

imprtant citizenship actins, such as public supprt r,

ppsitin t, and activism abut envirnmental plicies (see

belw).

In sum, many psychlgical cnstructs have been shwn t

have explanatry value r at least sme ESBs. Hwever, this

des nt demnstrate their explanatry value r dierences in

GHG emissins. Many the mst GHG-intensive cnsumer

behavirs have been little studied, and they may be strngly

aected by cntextual actrs. We d nt yet knw hw much

explanatry value psychlgical cnstructs can add in explaining

these behavirs beynd the explanatry value cntextual

variables. Thus, it is imprtant r psychlgical research t

expand its cus t include mre studies envirnmentally

imprtant behavirs.

Responses to interventions

Psychlgical research n interventins has cused mainly n

cmmunicatin and diusin instruments such as inrmatin

and persuasive appeals, and secndarily n nancial incentives.

Knwledge abut hw cmmunicatin and diusin instruments

wrkr ail t wrkis imprtant because mass media

persuasin and inrmatin campaigns have been ntably

ineective as they have nrmally been emplyed. Inrmatin

eects have been studied in residential energy cnsumptin(e.g., Abrahamse et al., 2005) and travel mde chice (e.g.,

Bamberg & Möser, 2007). Studies generally nd that inrmatin

techniques increase knwledge but have minimal eects

n behavir. Hwever, immediate r requent (e.g., daily)

energy-use eedback has yielded energy savings 5-12% in

hmes, ten lasting 6 mnths r mre (Fischer, Greitemeyer,

& Frey, 2008). This kind inrmatin is believed t be mre

eective because it is specic t the individual’s situatin and

is cnducive r learning hw t achieve the savings. The

behaviral psychlgists wh pineered eedback researchin the 1970s (Geller et al., 1982) emphasized that it links the

nancial cnsequences energy use mre clsely t behavir

by shwing the csts immediately r daily, rather than via the

delayed cnsequences represented in a mnthly energy bill. The

act that eedback eects are bserved very quickly suggests

that they are achieved by changes in the use husehld

equipment rather than by the adptin mre energy-eicient

equipment.

Psychlgists have als studied interventins that emply

scial mtives, r instance by mdeling energy-cnserving

behavir (Winett et al., 1982; Arnsn & o’Leary, 1983), using

messages rm riends (e.g., Darley, 1978), emplying scial

marketing techniques (e.g., McKenzie-Mhr & Smith, 1999),

and making appeals t prscial gals (Krantz & Kunreuther,

2007) r scial nrms (e.g., Cialdini, 2003). Such studies have

demnstrated eects in cntrlled eld settings with requently

repeated energy-using actins, but have nt been studied as

ptential inuences n actins that accunt r large prtins

husehld energy budgets.

Knwledge the prcesses that determine the eects

cmmunicatin instruments can help design these interventins.

Fr instance, an inrmatin campaign may be assumed t

wrk by increasing the sense sel-eicacy in thse receiving

inrmatin. I the interventin ails, empirical analysis culd

determine whether the campaign ailed t build this sel-eicacy

r because changes in sel-eicacy were insuicient t change

behavir. Knwing which part the prcess ailed can help in

designing a mre eective campaign.

Psychlgists and ther researchers have als studied

the eects interventins that change nancial incentives,

r example, by time--use electricity pricing, rewards r

reduced energy use, and nancial incentives r investments

in residential energy eiciency (e.g., Heberlein & Baumgartner,

1978; Staats, Harland, & Wilke, 2004; Abrahamse et al., 2005).

An imprtant cntributin this wrk has been t imprve nsimple ecnmic mdels that presume a cnstant respnse

t changes in nancial cst (i.e., price elasticity) regardless

their rm r implementatin. In act, price respnses vary with

the particular chice (e.g., which appliance is being purchased;

Ruderman, 1985) and with the ways incentive prgrams are

implemented. Husehld adptin hme weatherizatin

measures in respnse t incentives cmmnly varies by a actr

10 r mre r the same incentive, depending n prgram

implementatin (Stern et al., 1986). Amng the nnnancial

actrs that accunt r this variatin are the cnvenience theprgram and the degree t which it reduces cgnitive burdens

n husehlds, such as thse impsed by the need t nd a

cmpetent cntractr (Gardner & Stern, 2002).

Perhaps the highest-impact cntributin t limiting climate

change that has been bserved rm the kinds nnnancial

interventins psychlgists typically cnsider was achieved by

cmbining them with nancial incentives in hme weatherizatin

prgrams. Multiprnged interventins that cmbined strng



nancial incentives, attentin t custmer cnvenience and

quality assurance, and strng scial marketing have led t

weatherizatin 20% r mre eligible hmes in a cmmunity

in the rst year a prgramresults ar mre pwerul than

achieved by the same nancial incentives withut strng

nnnancial prgram elements (Stern et al., 1986; Hirst, 1987).

Behaviral research n interventin suggests that the

barriers t husehld behavir change vary with the behavir

and the individual. The mst eective interventins, therere,

are thse that are tailred t the target individual r husehld

r that address all the signicant barriers that matter in a

target ppulatin by cmbining interventin strategies, such as

inrmatin, persnal cmmunicatin, mass-media appeals,

cnvenience, nancial incentives, and ther strategies as the

situatin requires (Gardner & Stern, 2002; McKenzie-Mhr,

2006; Stern, 2008). Many the shrtcmings plicies based

n nly a single interventin type, such as technlgy, ecnmic

incentives, r regulatin, may be surmuntable i plicy

implementers make better use psychlgical knwledge.

Similarly, the shrtcmings cmmunicatin and diusin

instruments can be addressed by cmbining them with ther

plicy instruments. It is pssible t plan eective interventins n

the basis the multiple-barriers principle and cntext-specic

knwledge barriers t a target behaviral change (e.g.,

Matthies & Hansmeier, 2008).

Organizational, policy, and cultural change

Psychlgists have nt yet cnducted much empirical researchrelated t reducing greenhuse gas emissins resulting rm

rganizatinal actins r n psychlgical actrs aecting

change at the levels plicy and culture that can mitigate

climate change. Hwever, individual attitudes, belies, values,

and emtinal reactins can aect rganizatinal and cllective

actins in rms, cmmunities, and gvernments and have

been shwn t aect acceptance plicy measures and

technlgies (e.g., Jakbssn, Fujii, & Gärling, 2000; Clark,

Ktchen, & Mre, 2003; Schade & Schlag, 2003; Nilssn, vn

Brgstede, & Biel, 2004; Steg, Dreijering, & Abrahamse, 2005;Matthies, 2008). In the lnger term, varius rmal and inrmal

educatinal experiences may als cntribute t cultural changes

and increased public supprt r plicies t limit climate change.

only a ew psychlgical studies s ar have examined

energy cnservatin in rganizatins (e.g., Sier, Bakker,

Dekker, & Van Den Burg, 1996; Daamen, Staats, Wilke, &

Engelen, 2001; Griesel, 2004; Matthies & Hansmeier, 2008).

Hwever, a grwing bdy research cncerns the eects

values, attitudes, belies, and wrldviews n public supprt

r and activism abut envirnmental plicies. These studies

shw that public supprt r plicies t limit climate change is

assciated with envirnmental values and wrldviews (Dunlap

& Van Liere, 1978; Dunlap et al., 2000; Stern et al., 1999) and

suggest that erts t rame the climate prblem in terms

widely held supprtive values might increase plicy supprt.

A large bdy psychlgical research n risk perceptin

is als relevant t the public acceptance technlgies that

may signicantly limit climate change (Slvic, 2000; see Sectin

1 this task rce reprt). Past research n perceptins the

risks nuclear pwer and ther technlgies (e.g., Fischh

et al., 1978; Slvic, Flynn, & Layman, 1991) can shed light

n ptential public acceptance large wind energy prjects,

“geengineering” prpsals, bienergy prjects, and ther plicy

prpsals r limiting climate change. Attitudes, belies, and

values als may underlie, as well as be inuenced by, cultural

changes such as the develpment green cmmunities, which

can create scial nrms that shape individual behavir (e.g.,

Kntt, Muers, & Aldridge, 2008).

Emtinal reactins t the threat climate change may

als aect plicy supprt, either psitively r negatively.

Scientists’ warnings abut the dire cnsequences expected rm

unchecked climate change can generate aective respnses

(ear, guilt, despair, sel-directed and ther-directed anger, hpe,

pride) that can in turn aect willingness t act n the inrmatin

The respnses t aect may nt always be as intended, rinstance, when ear appeals backre (. Messages abut the

climate prblem may als be ramed in ways that activate

varius gals and may indirectly aect climate-relevant behavir

(e.g., a hednic gal eeling better right nw, a gain gal

maximizing persnal resurces, r a nrmative gal acting

apprpriately; Lindenberg & Steg, 2007). Such raming eects

may inuence willingness t act bth t limit and adapt t climate

change.

w Pscg C d hp

The abve discussin what has been learned suggests a lng

agenda r uture research. A ew prmising research directins

are listed belw:

Developing behavioral understanding o ESBs

• Analysis of the household-level behaviors that can have

the greatest impact r limiting climate change. Generally,

the highest-impact behavirs invlve investments in



energy-eicient equipment, particularly uel-eicient

vehicles, hme insulatin, and energy-eicient appliances

(Gardner & Stern, 2008). Hwever, the highest-impact

behavirs are dierent in dierent ppulatins and

cmmunities (climatic regins, urban vs. rural, etc.).

• Analysis of variation in, and barriers to change in,

individual and husehld purchase decisins with majr

climate eects (e.g., purchases hmes and energy-eicient vehicles and appliances).

• Analysis of the barriers to changes in the use of personal

and husehld equipment that culd yield sizable

emissins reductins, such as lwering driving speeds and

slwing acceleratin rm stps; resetting thermstats n

heating and air cnditining systems and water heaters;

and replacing urnace lters.

• Behavioral studies of the determinants of choices by

the suppliers cnsumer prducts that have imprtant

indirect eects climate (e.g., appliance retailers and

installers, hme builders and develpers, hme repair

cntractrs, autmbile dealers). Psychlgical research

can clariy hw the attitudes, belies, knwledge, incentive

structures, and scial and rganizatinal relatinships

these peple aect their chices and, wrking with thers,

use this knwledge t inrm interventins t change

behavir amng these imprtant actrs.

• Studies to quantify the climate eects of household

actins that aect climate indirectly thrugh the prductin

and distributin d and ther husehld prducts.

Existing carbn calculatrs need imprvement (Padgett,

Steinemann, Clarke, & Vandenbergh, 2008). Psychlgists

can help in classiying behavirs and with understanding

their determinants and the barriers and pssibilities r

change.

• Studies to improve understanding of the bases for public

supprt and ppsitin t technlgies and plicies

prpsed r limiting climate change.

Developing and testing interventions to limit

climate change:

• Testing information and communication campaigns for

changing husehld equipment use and travel behavir

(e.g., eedback mechanisms and tls, appeals t scial

and persnal nrms, cmmunity-based prgrams).

• Studies exploring the most eective uses of

cmmunicatin and diusin instruments and prgram

implementatin methds t imprve the eectiveness

nancial incentives r energy-eicient investments.

• Studies to explore human factors design options for

imprving the attractiveness t users energy eiciency

and energy inrmatin technlgies.

• Intervention studies aimed at important understudied

individual behavirs (e.g., travel mde chice, appliance

purchases, vehicle driving behavir).

• Studies of community-based eorts to diuse climate-

riendly technlgies and practices and t establish and

enrce scial nrms.

• Evaluation research addressed to intervention programs to

limit climate change.

Working with others

Many these lines research wuld invlve psychlgists

in wrk with gvernment agencies, utility cmpanies, andtechnical experts in designing and evaluating specic practical

interventins (e.g., human actrs designed r eedback

devices and displays; designing and testing better rating and

labeling systems r energy eiciency and carbn tprint

r cnsumers; designing the implementatin incentive

prgrams). Psychlgists can be invlved as cnsultants and

as members evaluatin teams. There is increasing interest in

these kinds cllabratins amng gvernment agencies in the

United States and Eurpe.

Psychlgy can help in the develpment and

implementatin new technlgies that can reduce GHG

emissins by imprving energy eiciency, prviding GHG-ree

energy surces, and redesigning human settlements. A ew

examples illustrate the pssibilities. S-called smart meters

are being designed mainly t meet needs energy supply

cmpanies, but they culd als prvide very valuable energy-

use eedback t cnsumers i they had the apprpriate displays

and human actrs design. Zer-energy buildings are nw being

develped and tested r their engineering characteristics, but

i they are t apprach their technical ptential, they need t be

designed s that ccupants will nt cunteract the engineering,

as many husehlds nw d with prgrammable thermstats.

Similar issues arise with the design “green” cmmunities,

i they are ever t becme attractive t mre than cmmitted

envirnmentalists. Psychlgy can help with these design

issues, which require an interdisciplinary apprach r ptimal

eect.



on the energy supply side, psychlgy has already

cntributed t understanding the bases public reactins t

nuclear pwer develpment (e.g., Slvic et al., 1991) and green

electricity (Clark et al., 2003), as well as t develp prcesses

t better inrm decisins abut risky r hazardus technlgies

(Natinal Research Cuncil, 1989, 1996, 2008). Similar issues

are sure t arise in cming years ver the many prpsals

being advanced t address the climate prblem by expanding

nuclear pwer prductin, building large wind and bimass

energy systems, capturing emissins rm cal burning and

sequestering them in gelgical rmatins, engineering new

rganisms t capture carbn dixide rm the air and turn it int

uel, and s rth. Psychlgists can wrk with ther scientists

t anticipate public cncerns and develp prcesses by which

sciety can cnduct inrmed debate abut whether and hw t

prceed with such prpsals and hw t weigh their risks and

benets (Natinal Research Cuncil, 2009).

Psychlgy can als help with cused research related t

lnger-run strategies r limiting climate change. Tw examples

will illustrate. Calirnia and sme ther states are beginning

t mandate that new buildings will use “zer net energy”

technlgies (cmmercial buildings by 2020; residential by

2030). Engineers and architects are designing buildings t have

the desired energy prperties, but they will nt becme the nrm

unless peple want t buy and ccupy them. Psychlgists

can wrk with building design pressinals t study peple’s

reactins t designs and prttypes and develp designs that

will be attractive as well as technlgically advanced. Similarpprtunities arise with designs at the cmmunity level t reduce

the need r mtrized travel in new cmmunities, with ptential

benets r public health as well as the envirnment. These

designs will require numerus changes in peple’s daily rutines

and perhaps in their scial relatinships, and these changes

culd be made mre r less attractive by design chices. T

make new designs practical and attractive, research is needed

n peple’s respnses t a new gegraphy cmmunities.

In additin t the abve research areas cused n airlyspecic questins, there remains a need r mre undamental

psychlgical research related t limiting climate change. Fr

example, it is cmmnly remarked that a culture cnsumptin

underlies demand r energy-using gds and servicesbut a

much mre nuanced understanding cnsumptin is needed t

inrm change.

As nted abve, ecnmic cnsumptin is nt the same

as envirnmental cnsumptin$500 spent n cmputer

stware has a much dierent eect n the climate than $500

spent n an airline ticketeven thugh they are the same in

ecnmic accunts. Peple’s wantst visit their amilies, heat

their hmes, impress their neighbrs, and s nare related t

energy use nly indirectly, thrugh the technlgies available

t ulll them. Psychlgical research can help unpack the idea

cnsumptin and can eventually help identiy ways t satisy

peple’s needs while reducing GHG emissins. It may als

help by building undamental understanding hw peple’s

desires changea line knwledge that may becme critically

imprtant in the lnger run.





Psychlgy has imprtant cntributins t make tward

understanding, limiting, and cping with climate change.These cntributins can be develped rm knwledge

and cncepts in many subelds psychlgy and enhanced by

cllabratins with psychlgists wrldwide and with a number

ptential stakehlders, including cmmunity members,

plicymakers and clleagues rm ther elds, including

the natural and scial sciences. Belw we summarize sme

characteristics assciated with psychlgy and the research that

has been cnducted that are useul r prgress t be made n

climate change, discuss the imprtance attending t crss-

cultural issues and ther rms human diversity, and discussways that psychlgists can maximize their ability t meet the

challenge climate change.

Pscgc appc Sg C Cg

There are several qualities assciated with psychlgical

appraches t understanding and appraching scial prblems

and issues that make them valuable r advancing sciety’s

ability t address the glbal prblem climate change andits eects. These qualities include, but are nt limited t the

llwing: Psychlgy prvides a theretically and empirically

based understanding human behavir at the individual level

analysis.

Psychlgists, alng with ther scial science disciplines,

have lng recgnized the imprtance and interrelatins

amng prximal (e.g., the presence thers, structures

neighbrhds) and distal (e.g., cultural and ecnmic)

predictrs behavirs. Psychlgical research methdsuncver individual, interpersnal, and scial rces capable

changing human behavir that are nt therwise clearly

r widely understd. Psychlgists are well-psitined t

design, implement, and assess interventins t amelirate the

psychscial impacts climate change. These qualities have

resulted in literature and research that is already use by

thers, thugh mre culd be dne.

Pscg’s rsc CsThis reprt illustrates many ways that psychlgists can

cntribute t understanding and respnding t glbal climate

change.

• Psychology can help illuminate how people form

understandings the risks climate change and hw

thse understandings aect individual’s cncerns and

respnses.

• Psychologists can help clarify and identify interrelations

amng individual (e.g., belies, skills, needs) and

cntextual (e.g., structural, scial, cultural) predictrs

ppulatin grwth and ecnmic and envirnmental

cnsumptin.

• Psychologists can describe behaviorally based links

between ppulatin grwth, cnsumptin and climate

change.

• Psychologists can identify psychosocial impacts of climate

change including: a) emtinal, cgnitive and behaviral

Summary and diSCuSSion



respnses t anticipated threats and experienced impacts,

b) mental health utcmes, and c) scial and cmmunity

impacts.

• Psychologists can explain how stress and coping

respnses mderate and mediate the psychscial

impacts climate change and the ability individuals and

grups t respnd adaptively.

• Psychologists can help identify structural, cultural,

institutinal, cgnitive, and emtinal barriers inhibiting

behaviral change and prpse methds r vercming

them.

• Psychologists can provide empirically supported models

behavirs that drive climate change and help design

eective and culturally relevant behavir change prgrams.

• Psychologists can help understand public and

rganizatinal behavir that cntributes t eective

scietal respnses t climate change,• Psychologists can assist in the design of eective

technlgies and inrmatin systems r respnding t

climate change by applying their knwledge cgnitin,

cmmunicatin, and human actrs engineering.

C h ds

An imprtant cnsideratin in a review paper such as this is

t reect n the representativeness and selectivity bth

the authrs and the research cvered. We cme rm diverseareas psychlgy and represent ur cuntries. We have

tried very hard t retain a mre glbal cus and crss-

disciplinary cllabrative rientatin, given ur cus n glbal

climate change and the need r psychlgy t have a mre

cllabrative invlvement in addressing the challenges climate

change. Yet, it can be argued that the dcument is primarily

representative research rm Nrth America and Eurpe

and shares general wrldviews and assumptins rm these

perspectives.

It is imprtant that cntinued research in this dmain be inclusive

the diversity human experiences. Varius understandings

and respnses t climate change will be inuenced by ne’s

wrldview, culture, and scial identities. Much research in

ther disciplines has taken place in regins the wrld such

as Arica, Asia, the Andes, and Alaska, where climate change

impacts are ar mre evident and salient. Lcal ppulatins

in these areas have cultural vantage pints, ecnmies, and

liestyles ar remved rm the largely urban-based, highly

industrialized, human settings much Nrth America and

Eurpe. The inuence the mass media and cntemprary

inrmatin technlgies vary cnsiderably acrss regins the

wrld. There is als diversity within all cuntries that is imprtant

t cnsider that reect demgraphic grup membership scial

identities, and intersectinality identity grup membership.

Intersectins between grups are imprtant t attend t

because, r instance, gender dierences in experiences with

climate change and climate change respnses can vary by race,

ethnicity, age, disabilities, religin, etc.

In the cntexts bth climate change adaptatin and mitigatin

cultural cntexts and dierences may prve t be sme the

mst imprtant cnsideratins t be addressed in the human

dimensins glbal climate change. Fr example, cultural

cnsideratins will be critical in prviding suitable interventins

and resurces r cmmunities experiencing dramatic

upheavals, such as ppulatin relcatins, as a result glbal

climate change.

Further, dierent cultural grups are likely t have strengths

and insights that can ptentially advance ur understanding the

human drivers climate change, its impacts, and means

respnding t it. Crss-cultural psychlgy is can cntribute t

cllabrative initiatives that inrm respnses t climate change

with cultural understanding.

ec CssRecgnitin the psychscial impacts climate change

prmpts a cnsideratin ptential ethical imperatives r

psychlgists and psychlgical plicy. APA ethical standards

prvide a ramewrk r understanding mtivatins r

psychlgists’ invlvement in this tpic. As with ther tpics n

which the American Psychlgical Assciatin (APA) has taken

a stand (e.g., pverty, discriminatin), climate change becmes

a cncern r psychlgists because it is likely t have prund

impacts n human well-being and because the anthrpgenic

causes climate change mean that human behaviral changeis required t address it. In additin, the magnitude and

irrevcability climate change demands ur attentin i we

are t cntinue t study and prmte healthy psychlgical

unctining.

The ethics cde the APA sets the standard pressinal

cnduct and training r psychlgists and cntains aspiratinal

guidelines as well as enrceable standards (Barnett & Jhnsn,

2008). While the cde serves “t guide and inspire psychlgists



tward the very highest ethical ideals the pressin”

(American Psychlgical Assciatin, 2002), there is n explicit

reerence in the ethics cde t the natural envirnment r the

inuence eclgical and bisystemic variables n human

health. The cde’s general ethical principles, hwever, reveal

ptential guidelines r psychlgists’ invlvement in the tpic

climate change. Fr example:

• Ethical Principle A, Benecence and Nonmalecence,recgnizes a cre value the pressin, that psychlgists

strive t benet thse with whm they wrk and take care t

d n harm. Because the prcess glbal climate change

presents bth direct and delayed threats t individual and

cmmunity health, including mental health, we recmmend

that climate change be cnsidered an apprpriate arena r

psychlgical examinatin and interventin.

• Ethical Principle B, Fidelity and Responsibility, highlights the

pressinal and scientic respnsibilities psychlgists t

sciety and t the specic cmmunities in which they wrk,and, thus, the need t cnsider the psychlgical and scial

implicatins climate change as a cus interventin,

plicy, and research.

• Ethical Principle D, Fairness and Justice, reminds us that

all persns are entitled t access and benet rm the

cntributins psychlgy and prvides a basis r addressing

scial justice issues, such as disparities and the ptential r

intergrup cnict, inherent in climate change impacts. This

principle als stresses that psychlgists exercise reasnable

judgment and recgnize the bundaries their cmpetenceessential in dealing with nvel and cmplex interdisciplinary

issues like glbal climate change.

• Ethical Principle E, Respect for People’s Rights and Dignity,

recgnizes the ptential need r special saeguards t prtect

the rights and welare persns r cmmunities wh may

be mst vulnerable, in this case recgnizing that sme are

particularly vulnerable t climate change impacts. Principle E

als mandates attentin t cultural and individual dierences

regarding perspectives n human-nature relatins, livelihd

and basic needs, and prper behavir tward the natural

envirnment.

mzg Pscg’s C Scc C Cg

Specic research recmmendatins can be und at the end

each the literature review sectins abve. Here we discuss

the issue hw psychlgists can maximize their cntributin

t the brader science climate change. Psychlgists can

be dramatically mre eective i they cnnect psychlgical

wrk t cncepts develped in the brader climate research

cmmunity and cllabrate with scientists rm ther elds.

Althugh psychlgists have been ding wrk n climate change

and related subjects r decades and the discipline has a unique

perspective and bdy knwledge t cntribute, the relevance

psychlgical cntributins is nt yet established r widely

accepted. We recmmend that psychlgists adpt the llwing

principles t maximize the value and use psychlgical

cncepts, research, and perspectives r understanding the

causes and impacts climate change and inrming eective

respnses t climate change:

1. Use the shared language and concepts o the climate

research community where possible and explain dierences

in use o language between psychology and this community.

Anthrpgenic climate change is an interdisciplinary issue

with a develping interdisciplinary language. Fr example, in

this dcument we use language climatlgists have used t

discuss human interactins with climate change in terms

human cntributins r drivers, impacts r cnsequences,

and respnses. Being knwledgeable and sensitive

t language and cncepts used by thers and using this

language and cncepts when apprpriate and pssible can

aid cmmunicatin. Thus, we advise adpting current usage

thers’ terms when pssible t aid in cmmunicatin.

Hwever, dierences between psychlgists’ and ther elds’

usages certain terms and cnstructs can als be critical. Ia psychlgist believes that reliance n the usual language

climate research wuld result in cnusin r a lss meaning

r clarity, it is imprtant t be explicit abut dierences in usage.

Further, attending t language dierences can help reveal

dierences in assumptins and appraches t understanding

climate change. Fr example, the term adaptation is ne that

has varying usages acrss disciplines that reect dierent

understandings human respnses. Clariying such dierences

is ne way psychlgists can help imprve verall understanding climate change, cmmunicatin between disciplines, and their

wn appraches t climate change.

2. Make connections to research and concepts rom other

social, engineering, and natural science felds. The eects

psychlgical variables smetimes depend n variables

that are mre thrughly understd in ther elds, and vice

versa. Fr example, the eectiveness inrmatin and

persuasin n GHG emitting behavirs depends n the csts



energy and the technical prperties energy-eicient

equipment. Further, a thrugh understanding the ptential

psychlgical cntributins t research and respnses

t climate change shuld take int accunt knwledge rm

ther scial sciences, such as scilgy, plitical science,

cmmunicatins research, and ecnmics, as well as

thse rm engineering, cnsumer prduct manuacturing

and distributin, and ther elds. Fr example, individuals’

understandings climate change depend n the peratin

psychlgical prcesses n inrmatin presented by

mass media, and are best understd by cmbining cncepts

rm psychlgy, cmmunicatins research, and ther scial

science elds. By the same tken, understanding human

drivers climate change, the impact climate change n

humans, and the eectiveness instruments that are central

t ther disciplines cannt be ully understd withut an

appreciatin psychlgical and scial prcesses.

3. Present psychological insights in terms o missing pieces

in climate change analyses. Psychlgists can prvide

climate researchers rm ther disciplines with psychlgical

cnstructs that are relevant r understanding prblems

thse ther disciplines already recgnize and can crrect

misunderstandings and misuse psychlgical cnstructs

when these are encuntered. Fr instance, they can

describe hw psychlgical prcesses risk perceptin and

stress management may alter peple’s willingness t make

anticipatry adaptatins t climate risks. As anther example,

disciplines vary in their tendency t cus n dierent levels analysis. Psychlgists can prvide insights int the

useulness and imprtance including psychlgical levels

analysis within climate change research.

4. Present the contributions o psychology in relation important

challenges to climate change and climate response. Within

psychlgical research, ndings are typically presented in

terms statistical signicance r eect size in behaviral

terms (the percentage peple whse behavir changed r

the amunt that change in requency r duratin). Whatmatters r the interdisciplinary climate issue is the strength

eects r causes in envirnmental terms. Fr example, a

gd indicatr the imprtance psychlgical variables r

understanding human cntributins t climate change is the

amunt GHG emissins they can explain. This depends n

the cmbined eects behavir explained and the impact

the behavir n emissins. A gd indicatr the imprtance

psychlgical variables r understanding human

cnsequences climate change is the extent t which majr

r widespread human cnsequences can be linked thrugh

these variables t the anticipatin r experience specic

aspects climate change.

A gd indicatr the imprtance psychlgical variables

r aecting climate respnses is the amunt GHG emissins

r impact reductin that can be achieved by interventins that

manipulate r aect thse variables.

5. Prioritize issues and behaviors recognized as important

climate change causes, consequences, or responses.

Fr example, in develping and describing psychlgical

cntributins t erts t mitigate climate change, emphasis

shuld be placed n changes that have large ptential eects

n emissins (e.g., reducing greenhuse gas emissins

rm persnal travel) in preerence t changes that have

smaller ptential eects (e.g., recycling husehld waste).

I ndings abut lwer-impact kinds behavir are deemed

imprtant, the imprtance shuld be described in terms

the implicatins r climate change verall, perhaps by

making the case that a principle established in studies lw-

impact behavirs is generalizable t higher-impact behavirs.

Similarly, in studying psychlgical cnsequences climate

change, psychlgists shuld be prepared t indicate the

brader imprtance and relevance these cnsequences.

Fr instance, the imprtance emtinal r aective

respnses may need t be explained t thse utside

psychlgy. This culd ptentially be dne in terms hw

these respnses inuence risk perceptins and subsequentwillingness t change behavirs r supprt plicies, hw

debilitating mental health utcmes aect preparatin r

r respnse t the impacts climate change, r hw the

magnitude these utcmes cmpares t the magnitude

ther scial phenmena.

6. Be cognizant o the possibility that psychological phenomena

are context dependent. Psychlgical principles are ten

established within narrwly dened cntexts: labratry

experiments, small-scale eld experiments, surveys particular ppulatins, and s rth. T apply these principles

t climate change, ne needs t take seriusly a set

questins abut external validity, such as whether the

principles are applicable in ther cultures r ecnmies,

in places with very dierent physical inrastructures r

gvernment regulatins, r in vastly changed technlgical

cntexts that might appear a generatin in the uture. Fr

example, studies have demnstrated the eectiveness

interventins t change cmmuting behavir and energy



use amng cllege students. Withut urther research and

analysis, it is nt pssible t knw hw much these ndings

are a unctin the interventin alne as ppsed t an

interactin the interventin and the cntext (e.g., drmitry

living, lw incme, yung single ppulatin, availability

mass transit, etc.).

Wider scial cntexts, such as the cuntry r culture in which

research is cnducted can als ptentially inuence ndings.

Psychlgists shuld be careul nt t claim that their ndings

have general applicability withut evidence r strng thery t

supprt such claims.

7. Be explicit about whether psychological principles and

best practices have been established in climate-relevant

contexts. As an example, the t-in-the-dr eect has been

established in many psychlgical experiments. Inducing

a small behaviral change ten sets in mtin changes

in attitude r sel-perceptin that lead, ver time, t larger

behaviral changes. The phenmenn has sme generality,

and it has been argued n that basis that erts t change

behavirs with small envirnmental impacts (e.g., recycling)

will therere lead t changes in mre envirnmentally

cnsequential behavirs (e.g., travel mde chice). But this

is reasning by analgy that has nt been tested empirically

with the behavirs mentined, and available evidence

raises questins abut such “spillver” eects (Crmptn

& Thøgersn, 2009). It is imprtant t be explicit abut the

extent t which psychlgical phenmena being discussedhave been shwn t perate in climate-relevant cntexts and,

i this has nt been shwn, abut the kinds extraplatin

that are being made rm cntexts in which the phenmena

have been established. In cnsidering the psychlgical

cnsequences climate change, extraplatin is usually

necessary because, except r the cnsequences warnings

abut climate change, the mst signicant cnsequences lie

in the uture. Such extraplatins shuld be explicit abut their

evidence base and its likely applicability t prjected uture

events.

8. Be mindul o social disparities and ethical and justice

issues that interace with climate change. C limate change,

adaptatin, and mitigatin respnses have the ptential

t have dierent impacts n dierent ppulatins (e.g.,

demgraphic and cultural grups). Further, dierent

ppulatins may have dierent scial cnstructins the

meaning climate change. Dierent cultural meanings and

scial justice cncerns are imprtant t address in rder t

recgnize the limits ne’s research and be able t speak

t and be heard by dierent ppulatins. Further, attending t

scial and cultural dierences can ptentially urther research

by suggesting new ways thinking abut basic psychlgical

prcesses and new ways addressing climate change.

In sum, a psychlgical perspective is crucial t understanding

the prbable eects climate change, reducing the human

drivers climate change, and enabling eective scial

adaptatin. By summarizing the relevant psychlgical research,

we hpe nt nly t enhance recgnitin the imprtant rle

psychlgy by bth psychlgists and nnpsychlgists,

but als t encurage psychlgists t be mre aware the

relevance glbal climate change t ur pressinal interests

and enable them t make mre the cntributins the discipline

can er.



reerenCeSAarts, H., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2000). The autmatic activatin gal-

directed behaviur: The case travel habit. Journal o

Environmental Psychology, 20, 75-82.

Abrahamse, W., Steg, L., Vlek, C., & Rthengatter, T. (2005). A

review interventin studies aimed at husehld energy

cnservatin. Journal o Environmental Psychology, 25 , 273-

291.Adam, B. (1998). Timescapes o modernity: The environment and

invisible hazards. Lndn, England: Rutledge.

Adams, G., o’Brien, L., & Nelsn, J. (2006). Perceptins racism

in Hurricane Katrina. Analyses o Social Issues and Public

Policy, 6, 215-235.

Adela, F. (2000). Endangered cmmunity, enduring peple: Txic

cntaminatin, health, and adaptive respnses in a lcal

cntext. Environment and Behavior, 32, 209-249.

Agyeman, J., Bullard, R. & Evans, B. (2003). Just sustainabilities:

Development in an unequal world. Lndn, England:Earthscan/The MIT Press.

Agyeman, J., Devine-Wright, P., & Prange, J. (2009). Clse t the edge,

dwn by the river? Jining up managed retreat and place

attachment in a climate changed wrld. Environment and

Planning A, 41, 509-513.

Ainslie, G. (1975). Specius reward: A behaviral thery

impulsiveness and impulse cntrl. Psychological Bulletin, 82 ,

463-496.

Ajzen, I. (1991). The thery planned behavir. Organizational

Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.

Ajzen, I. (2005). Attitudes, personality, and behavior (2nd ed.). Miltn-

Keynes, England: open University Press/McGraw-Hill.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1975). Belie, attitude, intention, and behavior:

An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA:

Addisn-Wesley.

Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting

social behavior . Englewd Clis, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

American Psychlgical Assciatin. (2002). Ethical principles

psychlgists and cde cnduct. American Psychologist,

47, 1597-1611.

American Psychlgical Assciatin. (2007). The road to resilience.

Retrieved rm http://www.APAHelpCenter.rg/resilience

American Psychiatric Assciatin. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical

manual o mental disorders (4th ed., text revisin).

Washingtn, DC: Authr.

Andersn, C. A. (2001). Heat and vilence. Current Directions in

Psychological Science, 10(1), 33-38.

Aquin, K., Steisel, V., & Kay, A. (1992). The eects resurce

distributin, vice, and decisin raming n the prvisin

public gds. Journal o Conict Resolution, 36 , 665-687.

Arctic Climate Impact Assessment. (2004). Impacts o a warming Arctic

Cambridge, UK; New Yrk, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Arnld, M. (1970). Perennial prblems in the eld emtin. In M.B

Arnld (Ed.), Feelings and emotions: The Loyola Symposium

(pp. 169-186). New Yrk, NY: Academic Press.

Arnsn, E., & o’Leary, M. (1983). The relative eectiveness mdels

and prmpts n energy cnservatin: A eld experiment in

a shwer rm. Journal o Environmental Systems, 12 , 219-

224.

Aspinwall, L. G. (2004). Dealing with adversity: Sel-regulatin, cping,

adaptatin, and health. In A. Tesser & N. Schwarz (Eds.),

Blackwell handbook o social psychology: Intraindividual

processes (pp. 591-614). oxrd, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylr, S. E. (1997). A stitch in time: Sel-regulatin

and practive cping. Psychological Bulletin, 121(3), 417-436

Australian Psychlgical Sciety. (2007). Preparing or and coping with

the threat and experience o natural disasters. Melburne,

Australia: Authr.

Ball, M. (2008). Preventin–psychlgy’s rgtten missin. The

Psychologist , 21, 602-603.

Bamberg, S., & Mser, G. (2007). Twenty years ater Hines,

Hungerrd, and Tmera: A new meta-analysis psych-

scial determinants pr-envirnmental behaviur. Journal

o Environmental Psychology, 27 , 14–25.

Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Incentives, mrality, r habit?

Predicting students' car use r university rutes with the

mdels Ajzen, Schwartz and Triandis. Environment and

Behavior, 35 , 264-285.

Bandura, A. (1999). Scial learning. In A. S. R. Manstead, M.

Hewstne, S. T. Fiske, M. A. Hgg, H. T. Reis & G. R. Semin

(Eds.), The Blackwell encyclopedia o social psychology (pp

576-581). oxrd, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Barlw, D. H. (2002). Anxiety and its disorders (2nd ed.). New Yrk, NY:

The Guilrd Press.

Barnett, J. E., & Jhnsn, W. B. (2008). Ethics desk reerence or

psychologists. Washingtn, DC: American Psychlgical

Assciatin.

Bartsch, A., Vrderer, P., Mangld, R., & Vieh, R. (2008). Appraisal

emtins in media use: Tward a prcess mdel meta-emtin and emtin regulatin. Media Psychology, 11(1),

7-27.

Bauer, M. W., & Gaskell, G. (Eds.). (2002). Biotechnology: The

making o a global controversy . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Baum, A. (1987). Txins, technlgy, and natural disasters. In G.

R. VandenBs & B. K. Bryant (Eds.), Cataclysms, crises,

and catastrophes (pp. 5-53). Washingtn, DC: American

Psychlgical Assciatin.



Baum, A., & Fleming, I. (1993). Implicatins psychlgical

research n stress and technlgical accidents. American

Psychologist, 48 (6), 665-672.

Baum, A., Fleming, R., & Davidsn, L. M. (1983). Natural disaster and

technlgical catastrphe. Environment and Behavior, 15 ,

333-354.

Baum, A., Gatchel, R., & Schaeer, M. (1983). Emtinal, behaviral,

and physilgical eects chrnic stress at Three Mile

Island. Journal o Clinical and Consulting Psychology, 51,

665-572.

Becker, M. H. (1974). The health belie mdel and persnal health

behavir. Thrare, NJ: Slack.

Bekin, C., Carrigan, M., & Szmigin, I. (2005). Deying marketing

svereignty: Vluntary simplicity at new cnsumptin

cmmunities. Qualitative Market Research: An International

Journal, 8 (4), 413-429.

Bell, P. A., Greene, T. C., Fisher, J. D., & Baum, A. (2001).

Environmental psychology (5th ed.). Frt Wrth: Harcurt

Cllege Publishers.

Berger, A. A. (2006). Media & society: A critical perspective (2nd ed.).

New Yrk, NY: Rwman and Littleeld.

Berger, P. L. & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction o reality .

Harmndswrth, UK: Penguin.

Bhan, G. (2001). India gender profle: Report commissioned or

Sida. Retrieved rm the University Sussex Institute r

Develpmental Studies website http://www.bridge.ids.ac.uk/

reprts/re62.pd

Black, J. S., Stern, P. C., & Elwrth, J. T. (1985). Persnal and

cntextual inuences n husehld energy adaptatins.

Journal o Applied Psychology, 70, 3-21.

Bldgett, J., & Parker, L. (2008). Greenhouse gas emissions drivers:

Population, economic development and growth, and energy

use. Cngressinal Research Service reprt r Cngress,

(order Cde RL33970).

Bhm, G. (2003). Emtinal reactins t envirnmental risks:

Cnsequentialist versus ethical evaluatin. Journal o


Bhm, G., Nerb, J., McDaniels, T., & Spada, H. (Eds.). (2001).

Envirnmental risks: Perceptin, evaluatin, and management[Special issue]. Research in Social Problems and Public

Policy, 9, xi-xx.

Blger, N., & Zuckerman, A. (1995). A ramewrk r studying

persnality in the stress prcess. Journal o Personality and

Social Psychology, 69(5), 890-902.

Bnann, G. A. (2004). Lss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we

underestimated the human capacity t thrive ater extremely

aversive events? American Psychologist, 59, 20-28.

Bnnes, M., & Bnaiut, M. (2002). Envirnmental psychlgy: Frm

spatial-physical envirnment t sustainable develpment.

In R.B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook o

environmental psychology (pp. 28-54). New Yrk, NY: Wiley.

Bth, A., & Cruter, A. C. (Eds.). (2005). The new population problem:

Why amilies in developed countries are shrinking and what

it means. The Penn State University amily issues sympsia

series. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Bstrm, A., & Lash, D. (2007). Weather r climate change? In S.

C. Mser & L. Dilling (Eds.), Creating a climate or change:

Communicating climate change and acilitating social change

(pp. 31-43). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Burque, L. B., Siegel, J. M., Kan, M. & Wd, M. M. (2006).

Weathering the strm: The impact hurricanes n physical

and mental health. Annals o the American Academy o

Political and Social Science, 604, 129-151.

Brann, P., & Fddy, M. (1987). Trust and the cnsumptin a

deterirating cmmn resurce. Journal o Conict

Resolution, 31, 615-630.

Brklacich, M., Chazan, M., & Dawe, A. (2007). Vulnerabilities

scieties under Glbal Envirnmental Change (GEC). In H.

Tiessen, M. Brklacich, G. Breulmann & R. S. C. Menezes

(Eds.), Communicating global change science to society (pp.

73-88). Washingtn, DC: Island Press.

Brk, A. T., & Graham, A. (2009). Eects eclgical tprint

eedback and envirnmental cntingency sel-wrth n

envirnmental behavir. Manuscript under review.

Brkes, L. (1990). The greenhuse eect: The allacies in the energy

eiciency slutin. Energy Policy, 18 , 199-201.

Brwn, K. W., & Kasser, T. (2005). Are psychlgical and eclgical

well-being cmpatible? The rle values, mindulness, and

liestyle. Social Indicators Research, 74, 349-368.

Brun, W. (1992). Cgnitive cmpnents in risk perceptin: Natural

versus manmade risks. Journal o Behavioral Decision

Making, 5 , 117-132.

Budescu, D. V., Brmell, S., & Pr, H. (2009). Imprving

cmmunicatin uncertainty in the reprts the

intergvernmental panel n climate change. Psychological

Science, 20, 299-308.Bullard, R. (2000). Dumping in Dixie: Race, class, and environmental

quality . San Francisc, CA: Westview Press.

Bullard, R., & Jhnsn, G. S. (2000). Envirnmental justice: Grassrts

activism and its impact n public plicy decisin-making.

Journal o Social Issues, 56 , 555-578.

Burr, V. (1995). An introduction to social constructionism. Lndn,

England: Rutledge.

Carvalh, A. (2007). Idelgical cultures and media discurses n

scientic knwledge: Re-reading news n climate change.

Public Understanding o Science, 16 , 223-243.



Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1998). On the sel-regulation o

behaviour . New Yrk, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Chaiken, S., & Trpe, Y. (1999). Dual-process theories in social

psychology . New Yrk, NY: Guilrd.

Chen, H. J., Ch, C., & Sutherland, J. (2007). A meta-analysis

studies n the determinants standardizatin and

lcalizatin internatinal marketing and advertising

strategies. Journal o International Consumer Marketing,

19(4), 109-147.

Cialdini, R. B. (2003). Crating nrmative messages t prtect the

envirnment. Current Directions in Psychological Science,

12 (4), 105-109.

Cialdini, R. B., Ren, R. R., & Kallgren, C. A. (1990). A cus thery

nrmative cnduct:

Recycling the cncept nrms t reduce littering in public places.

Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 1015-1026.

Clark, A. E., Frijters, P., & Shields, M. A. (2008). Relative incme,

happiness, and utility. Journal o Economic Literature, 95 ,

115-22.

Clark, C. F., Ktchen, M. J., & Mre, M. R. (2003). Internal and

external inuences n pr-envirnmental behavir:

Participatin in a green electricity prgram. Journal o


Claytn, S. (2003). Envirnmental identity: A cnceptual and an

peratinal denitin. In S. Claytn & S. optw (Eds.),

Identity and the natural environment: The psychological

signifcance o nature (pp.45-65). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Claytn, S., & Brk, A. (2005). Can psychlgy help save the wrld? A

mdel r cnservatin psychlgy. Analyses o Social Issues

and Public Policy (ASAP), 5 (1), 87-102.

Claytn, S., & optw, S. (Eds.). (2003). Identity and the natural

environment . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Climate Change Science Prgram. (2009). Thresholds o climate

change in ecosystems: A report by the U.S. Climate

Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on

Global Change Research. D. B. Fagre, C.W. Charles, C.D.

Allen, C. Birkeland, F. S., Chapin III, P. M. Grman, G. R.

Guntenspergen, A. K. Knapp, A. D. McGuire, P. J. Mulhlland,

D. P. C. Peters, D. D. Rby, & G. Sugihara (Eds.). Restn,VA: U.S. Gelgical Survey. Retrieved rm http: //www.

climatescience.gv/Library/sap/sap4-2/nal-reprt/

Cmeau, L., & Gird, R. (2009). Climate change: Message raming

and perceived competence to act. Unpublished manuscript.

Cmmner, B. (1972). The envirnmental cst ecnmic grwth. In

Population, resources, and the environment (pp. 339-363).

Washingtn, DC: U.S. Gvernment Printing oice.

Cnalnieri, U., Menne, B., Akhtar, R., et al. (2007). Human health.

In M. L. Parry, o. F. Canziani, J. P. Palutik et al. (Eds.),

Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation and vulnerability.

Contribution o Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment

Report o the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

(pp. 391–431). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Cstin, A. (2006). The eminist apprach. In H. H. Blumberg, A. P. Hare

& A. Cstin (Eds.), Peace psychology: A comprehensive

introduction (pp. 37-45). New Yrk, NY: Cambridge University

Press.

Craig-Lees, M., & Hill, C. (2002). Understanding vluntary simpliers.

Psychology & Marketing, 19(2), 187-210.

Crmptn, J., & Thøgersn, J. (2009). Simple and painless? The

limitations o spillover in environmental campaigning.

Gdalming, Surrey, UK: Wrld Wildlie Federatin. Retrieved

rm www.ww.rg.uk/strategiesrchange

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2004). Materialism and the evlutin

cnsciusness. In T. Kasser & A. D. Kanner (Eds.),

Psychology and consumer culture: The struggle or a good

lie in a materialistic world (pp. 91-106). Washingtn, DC:

American Psychlgical Assciatin.

Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Csikszentmihalyi, I. S. (Eds.). (2006). A lie

worth living: Contributions to positive psychology . New Yrk,

NY: oxrd University Press.

Curtis, A. (Prducer/Directr/Writer). (2002). Century o the sel

[Televisin bradcast]. United Kingdm: BBC Fur.

Cvetkvich, G., & Earle, T. C. (Eds.). (1992). Public respnses t

envirnmental hazards. Journal o Social Issues, 48 (4) [Entire

issue].

Czpp, A. M., Mnteith, M. J., & Mark, A. Y. (2006). Standing up r a

change: Reducing bias thrugh interpersnal cnrntatin.

Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 784-803.

Daamen, D. D. L., Staats, H., Wilke, H. A. M., & Engelen, M. (2001).

Imprving envirnmental behavir in cmpanies: The

eectiveness tailred versus nntailred interventins.

Environment and Behavior, 33(2), 229-248.

Dake, K. (1991). orienting dispsitins in the perceptin risk: An

analysis cntemprary wrldviews and cultural biases.

Journal o Cross-Cultural Psychology, 22 , 61-82.Damasi, A. R. (1994). Descartes’ error . New Yrk, NY: Avn Bks.

Danesi, M. (2002). Understanding media semiotics. Lndn, England:

Arnld.

Daniels, R. J., Kettle, D. F., & Kunreuther, H. (2006). On risk and

disaster: Lessons rom Hurricane Katrina. Philadelphia, PA:

University Pennsylvania Press.

Darley, J. M. (1978). Energy cnservatin techniques as innvatins

and their diusin. Energy and Buildings, 1, 339-343.



Darntn, A. (2008). Reerence reprt: An verview behaviur change

mdels and their uses. UK: Gvernment Scial Research

Behaviur Change Knwledge Review.

Deaux, K., & Philgene, G. (Eds.). (2001). Representations o the

social . oxrd, UK: Blackwell Publishers.

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The “what” and “why” gal

pursuits: Human needs and the sel-determinatin

behavir. Psychological Inquiry, 11, 227–268.

De Kwaadsteniet, E. W. (2007). Uncertainty in social dilemmas.

Unpublished dctral dissertatin: Leiden University, The

Netherlands.

De Vries, S., Verheij, R., Grenevegen, P., & Spreeuwenberg, P. (2003).

Natural envirnmentshealthy envirnments? An explratry

analysis the relatinship between green space and health.

Environment and Planning A, 35 , 1717-1731.

De Yung, R. (1986). Sme psychlgical aspects recycling: The

structure cnservatin satisactins. Environment and

Behavior, 118, 435-449.

De Yung, R. (1996). Sme psychlgical aspects reduced

cnsumptin behavir: The rle intrinsic satisactin and

cmpetence mtivatin. Environment and Behavior , 28 (3),

358-409.

Diamnd, J. (2008, January 2). What is yur cnsumptin actr? The

New York Times opinin Editrial. Retrieved rm http://www.

nytimes.cm/2008/01/02/pinin/02diamnd.html

Diamnd, J. M. (2005). Collapse: How societies choose to ail or

succeed . New Yrk, NY: Viking.

Diekmann, A., & Preisendör er, P. (1992). Persnliches

umweltverhalten: Diskrepanzen zwischen anspruch

und wirklichkeit. Kölner Zeitschrit Für Soziologie Und

Sozialpsychologie, 44, 226-251.

Diener, E., & Biswas-Diener, R. (2002). Will mney increase subjective

well-being? Social Indicators Research, 57 (2), 119-169.

Dietz, T., & Rsa, E. A. (1994). Rethinking the envirnmental impacts

ppulatin, afuence and technlgy. Human Ecology

Review, 1, 277–300.

Dietz, T., & Rsa, E. A. (1997). Envirnmental impacts ppulatin

and cnsumptin. In P. C. Stern, T. Dietz, V. Ruttan, R. H.

Sclw, & J. Sweeney (Eds.), Envirnmentally signicantcnsumptin: Research directins (pp. 92-99). Washingtn

DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Dietz, T., Rsa, E. A., & Yrk, R. (2007). Driving the human eclgical

tprint. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 5 (1), 13-

18.

Dietz, T., Rsa, E. A., & Yrk, R. (in press). Human driving rces

glbal change: Dminant perspectives. In E. A. Rsa, A.,

Diekmann, T. Dietz, & C. Jaeger (Eds.), Human ootprints on

the global environment: Threats to sustainability. Cambridge,

MA: The MIT Press.

DiMent, J. F. C., & Dughman, P. (Eds.). (2007). Climate change:

What it means or our children, our grandchildren, and us .

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Dherty, T. J. (2008, August). The psychlgist as a cmmunity

resurce r sustainability. Paper presented at the American

Psychlgical Assciatin Annual Cnerence, Bstn, MA.

Dppelt, B. (2008). The power o sustainable thinking. Lndn,

England: Earthscan.

Duglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and culture: An essay on

the selection o technological and environmental dangers.

Berkeley: University Calirnia Press.

Dunlap, R., & McCright, A. (2008). A widening gap: Republican and

Demcratic views n climate change. Environment , 50(5),

26-35.

Dunlap, R. E., & Saad, L. (2001). Only one in our Americans are

anxious about the environment . Gallup News Service.

Dunlap, R. E, & Van Liere, K. D. (1978). The new envirnmental

paradigm: A prpsed measuring instrument and preliminary

results. Journal o Environmental Education, 9, 10-19.

Dunlap, R. E., & Van Liere, K. D. (1984). Cmmitment t the dminant

scial paradigm and cncern r envirnmental quality. Social

Science Quarterly, 65 (4), 1013-1028.

Dunlap, R. E., Van Liere, K. D., Mertig, A. G., & Jnes, R.E. (2000).

Measuring endrsement the new eclgical paradigm: A

revised NEP scale. Journal o Social Issues [Special issue].

Promoting Environmentalism, 56 (3), 425-442.

Dunwdy, S. (2007). The challenge trying t make a dierence

using media messages. In S. C. Mser & L. Dilling (Eds.),

Creating a climate or change (pp. 89-104). New Yrk, NY:

Cambridge University Press.

Earle, T. C. (2004). Thinking alud abut trust: A prtcl analysis

trust in risk management. Risk Analysis, 24, 169-183.

Earle, T. C., & Cvetkvich, G. (1995). Social trust: Toward a

cosmopolitan society . Westprt, CT: Praeger.

Easterbrk, G. (2007, April). Glbal warming: Wh lsesand wh

wins. The Atlantic. Retrieved rm http://www.theatlantic.cm/

dc/200704/glbal-warming

Eckersley, R. (2008). Nihilism, undamentalism, r activism: Three

respnses t ears the apcalypse. The Futurist, January-February, 35-39.

Edelstein, M. R. (2002). Cntaminatin: The invisible built envirnment.

In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook o

environmental psychology (pp. 559-588). New Yrk, NY:

Wiley.

Edelstein, M. R., & Makske, W. J. (1998). Radon’s deadly daughters:

Science, environmental policy, and the politics o risk .

Lanham, MD: Rwman & Littleeld.

Ehrlich, P. R., & Hldren, J. P. (1971). Impact ppulatin grwth.

Science, 171, 1212–1217.



Eilam, o., & Suleiman, R. (2004). Cperative, pure, and selsh

trusting: Their distinctive eects n the reactin trust

recipients. European Journal o Social Psychology, 34, 729-

738.

Elgin, D. (2000). Vluntary simplicity and the new glbal challenge. In

J. B. Schr & D. B. Hlt (Eds.), The consumer society reader .

New Yrk, NY: The New Press.

Elrd, C. L., Hamblen, J. L., & Nrris, F. H. (2006). Challenges in

implementing disaster mental health prgrams. Annals o the

American Academy o Political and Social Science, 604, 152-

170.

Epstein, S. (1994). Integratin the cgnitive and the psychdynamic

uncnscius. American Psychologist, 49, 709-724.

Evans, G. W., & Chen, S. (1991). Envirnmental stress. In D. Stkls

& I. Altman (Eds.), Handbook o environmental stress (Vl. 1,

pp. 571-610). Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Evans, G. W., & Stecker, R. (2004). Mtivatinal cnsequences

envirnmental stress. Journal o Environmental Psychology ,

24, 143-165.

Feldner, M. T., Zvlensky, M. J., & Leen-Feldner, E. (2004). A critical

review the empirical literature n cping and panic disrder.

Clinical Psychology Review, 24(2), 123-148.

Festinger, L. (1954). A thery scial cmparisn prcesses. Human

Relations, 7 , 117-140.

Few, R. (2007). Health and climatic hazards: Framing scial

research n vulnerability, respnse and adaptatin. Global

Environmental Change, 17, 281-295.

Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., & Frey, D. (2008). Sel-regulatin and

selective expsure: The impact depleted sel-regulatin

resurces n cnrmatry inrmatin prcessing. Journal o

Personality and Social Psychology, 94(3), 382-395.

Fischh, B., Slvic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Cmbs, B. (1978).

Hw sae is sae enugh? A psychmetric study attitudes

twards technlgical risks and benets. Policy Sciences, 9,

127-152.

Fiske, S. T., & Taylr, S. E. (2008). Social cognition: From brains to

culture. New Yrk, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Flick, U. (1998). Everyday knwledge in scial psychlgy. In U. Flick

(Ed.), The psychology o the social (pp. 41-59). Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.

Flynn, J., Slvic, P., & Kunreuther, H. (Eds.). (2001). Risk, media and

stigma: Understanding public challenges to modern science

and technology . Lndn, England: Earthscan.

Fddy, M., & Dawes, R. M. (2008). Grup-based trust in scial

dilemmas. In A. Biel, D. Eek, T. Gärling, & M. Gustasn

(Eds.), New issues and paradigms in research in social

dilemma (pp. 57-71). New Yrk, NY: Springer.

Fderar, L. W. (2008, octber 9). Pint-size ec-plice, making parents

prud and smetimes crazy. The New York Times. Retrieved

rm http://www.nytimes.cm/2008/10/10/nyregin/10green.

html

Flbre, N. (1983). o patriarchy brn: The plitical ecnmy ertility

decisins. Feminist Studies, 9, 261-284.

Fritze, J. G., Blashki, G. A., Burke, S., & Wiseman, J. (2008). Hpe,

despair and transrmatin: Climate change and the

prmtin mental health and wellbeing. International

Journal o Mental Health Systems, 2 (13). Retrieved rm

http://ijmhs.cm/cntent/2/1/13

Fuller, R., Irvine, K., Devine-Wright, P., Warren, P. & Gastn, K.

(2007). Psychlgical benets greenspace increase with

bidiversity. Biology Letters, 3(1), 390-394.

Fullilve, M. (1996). Psychiatric implicatins displacement:

Cntributins rm the psychlgy place. American Journal

o Psychiatry, 153, 1516-1523.

Fujii, S., & Gärling, T. (2003). Develpment script-based travel mde

chice ater rced change. Transportation Research Part F:

Traic Psychology and Behavior, 6 , 117-124.

Gardner, G. T., & Stern, P. C. (2002). Environmental problems and

human behavior (2nd ed.). Bstn, MA: Pearsn Custm

Publishing.

Gardner, G. T., & Stern, P. C. (2008). The shrt list: Mst eective

actins U.S. husehlds can take t limit climate change.

Environment, 50(5), 13-24.

Gatersleben, B., Steg, L., & Vlek, C. (2002). Measurement and

determinants envirnmentally signicant cnsumer

behavir. Environment and Behavior, 34(3), 335-362.

Geller, E. S., Winett, R. A. , & Everett, P. B. (1982). Preserving the

environment: New strategies or behavior change. Elmsrd,

NY: Pergamn Press.

Gergen, K. J. (1985). The scial cnstructinist mvement in mdern

psychlgy. American Psychologist, 40, 266-275.

Gheytanchi, A., Jseph, L., Gierlach, E., Kimpara, S., Huseley, J.,

Franc, Z. E., & Beutler, L. E. (2007). The dirty dzen:

Twelve ailures the Hurricane Katrina respnse and hw

psychlgy can help. American Psychologist, 62 , 118-130.

Gird, R. (1976). Envirnmental numbness in the classrm. Journal o Experimental Education, 44(3), 4-7.

Gird, R. (2007a). Envirnmental psychlgy and sustainable

develpment: Expansin, maturatin, and challenges. Journa

o Social Issues, 63(1), 199-212.

Gird, R. (2007b). Environmental psychology: Principles and practice.

Cleville, WA: optimal Bks.

Gird, R. (2008a). Envirnmental psychlgy. In J. B. Callictt & R.

Frdeman (Eds.), Encyclopedia o environmental ethics and

philosophy . MacMillan Reerence.



Gird, R. (2008b). Psychlgy's essential rle in alleviating the

impacts climate change. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie

Canadienne, 49(4), 273-280.

Gird, R., Iglesias, F., & Casler, J. (2009, June). Psychlgical

barriers t pr-envirnmental behavir: The develpment

a scale. Paper presented at the meeting the Canadian

Psychlgical Assciatin, Mntreal.

Gird, R., Scannell, L., Krms, C., Smlva, L., Biel, A., Bncu, S.,

et al. (2009). Tempral pessimism and spatial ptimism in

envirnmental assessments: An 18-natin study. Journal o


Gilman, N., Randall, D., & Schwartz P. (2007). Impacts o climate

change: A system vulnerability approach to consider the

potential impacts to 2050 o a mid-upper greenhouse

gas emissions scenario. Retrieved rm http://media.

washingtnpst.cm/wp-srv/pinins/dcuments/gbn_

impacts__climate_change.pd

Glanz, K., Rimer, B. K., & Lewis, F. M. (2002). Health behavior and

health education: Theory, research and practice. San

Francisc, CA: Wiley & Sns.

Gldenberg, J. L., Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., & Slmn, S.

(2000). Fleeing the bdy: A terrr management perspective

n the prblem human crpreality. Personality and Social

Psychology Review, 4, 200-218.

Gldstein, N. J., Griskevicius, V., & Cialdini, R. B. (2007). Invking

scial nrms: A scial psychlgy perspective n imprving

htels' linen-reuse prgrams. Cornell Hotel and Restaurant

Administration Quarterly, 48 (2), 145-150.

Gldstein, W. M., & Weber, E. U. (1995). Cntent and discntent:

Indicatins and implicatins dmain specicity in

preerential decisin making. In J. R. Busemeyer, R. Hastie,

& D. L. Medin (Eds.), Decision making rom a cognitive

perspective: The psychology o learning and motivation (Vl.

32, pp. 83-136). San Dieg, CA: Academic Press.

Gw, K., & Patn, D. (Eds.). (2008). The phoenix o natural disasters:

Community resilience. New Yrk, NY: Nva Science

Publishers.

Grpman, J. (2004). The anatomy o hope. New Yrk, NY: Randm

Huse.Guagnan, G., Stern, P. C., & Dietz, T. (1995). Inuences n attitude-

behavir relatinships: A natural experiment with curbside

recycling. Environment and Behavior, 27 , 699-718.

Haggerty, R. J., Sherrd, R., Garmezy, N., & Rutter, M. (1994). Stress,

risk, and resilience in children and adolescents: Processes,

mechanisms, and interventions. New Yrk, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Halberstadt, J. (2006). The generality and ultimate rigins the

attractiveness prttypes. Personality and Social

Psychology Review, 10(2), 166-183.

Hall, M. J., Ng, A., Ursan, R. J., Hllway, H., Fullertn, C., & Casper,

J. (2004). Psychlgical impact the animal-human bnd in

disaster preparedness and respnse. Journal o Psychiatric

Practice, 10(6), 368-374.

Hamiltn, C. (2003). Downshiting in Britain: A sea-change in the

pursuit o happiness. Retrieved rm https://www.tai.rg.au/

le.php?le=DP58.pd

Hanley, E. (2008, May). Ecnmic grwth and cl imate change:

Explring the relatinship between GDP and Co2 emissins.

In J. Nagel, T. Dietz, & J. Bradbent (Eds.), Presented at

Workshop on Sociological Perspectives on Global Climate

Change.

Hansla, A., Gamble, A., Juliussn, A., & Garling, T. (2008). The

relatinships between awareness cnsequences,

envirnmental cncern, and value rientatins. Journal o

Environmental Psychology, 28 , 1-9.

Hardin, G. (1968). The tragedy the cmmns. Science, 162, 1243-

1248.

Hardisty, D. H., Jhnsn, E. J., & Weber, E. U. (2009). A dirty wrd r

a dirty wrld? Attribute raming, plitical ailiatin, and Query

Thery. Manuscript under review.

Harland, P., Staats, H., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2007). Situatinal and

persnality actrs as direct r persnal nrm mediated

predictrs pr-envirnmental behavir: Questins derived

rm nrm-activatin thery. Basic and Applied Social

Psychology, 29(4), 323-334.

Harmann, B., & Barajas-Rman, E. (2009, January). Reproductive

justice, not population control: Breaking the wrong links and

making the right ones. Paper presented at the WE ACT r

Envirnmental Justice cnerence n Advancing Climate

Justice: Transrming the Ecnmy, Public Health and our

Envirnment, New Yrk, NY.

Haskett, M. E., Sctt, S. S., Nears, K., & Grimmett, M. A. (2008).

Lessns rm Katrina: Disaster mental health service in the

Gul Cast regin. Proessional Psychology: Research and

Practice, 39, 93-99.

Hass, J. W., Bagley, G. S., & Rgers, R. W. (1975). Cping with the

energy crisis: Eects ear appeals upn attitudes tward

energy cnsumptin. Journal o Applied Psychology, 60(6),754-756.

Heath, Y., & Gird, R. (2002). Extending the thery planned

behavir: Predicting the use public transprtatin. Journal

o Applied Social Psychology, 32 , 2154-2185.

Heath, Y., & Gird, R. (2006). Free-market idelgy and envirnmenta

degradatin: The case belie in glbal climate change.

Environment and Behavior , 38 (1), 48-71.

Heberlein, T. A., & Baumgartner, R. (1978). Factrs aecting respnse

rates t mailed questinnaires: A quantitative analysis the



published literature. American Sociological Review, 43(4),

447-462.

Hertwig, R., Barrn, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisins

rm experience and the eect rare events. Psychological

Science, 15 , 534-539.

Hine, D. W., & Gird, R. (1996). Individual restraint and grup

eiciency in cmmns dilemmas: The eects tw types

envirnmental uncertainty. Journal o Applied Social

Psychology, 26 , 993-1009.

Hirst, E. (1987). Individual and institutinal behavir related t energy

eiciency in buildings. Journal o Environmental Systems,

16 (1), 57-74.

Hbsn, K. (2003). Thinking habits int actin: The rle knwledge

and prcess in questining husehld cnsumptin practices.

Local Environment, 8 (1), 95-112.

Hgg, M. (2003). Scial identity. In M. Leary & J. Tangney (Eds.),

Handbook o sel and identity (pp. 462-479). New Yrk, NY:

Guilrd.

Hlahan, C. J. (1982). Environmental psychology . New Yrk, NY:

Randm Huse.

Hlahan, C. J., & Wandersman, A. (1991). The cmmunity psychlgy

perspective in envirnmental psychlgy. In D. Stkls & I.

Altman (Eds.), Handbook o environmental stress (Vl. 1, pp.

827-861). Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Hldren, J. P., & Ehrlich, P. R. (1974). Human ppulatin and the glbal

envirnment. American Scientist, 62 , 282-292.

Hltgrave, D., & Weber, E. U. (1993). Dimensins risk perceptin r

nancial and health risks. Risk Analysis, 13, 553-558.

Hulin, C. L. (1991). Adaptatin, persistence, and cmmitment in

rganizatins. Handbook o industrial and organizational

psychology, 2 , 445–505.

Hunecke, M., Haustein, S., Grischkat, S., & Böhler, S. (2007).

Psychlgical, scidemgraphic, and inrastructural actrs

as determinants eclgical impact caused by mbility

behavir. Journal o Environmental Psychology, 27 (4), 277-

292.

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC] (Watsn, R. T., &

the Cre Writing Team (Eds.)). (2001). Climate change 2001:

Synthesis report . IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved rmhttp://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreprts/assessments-reprts.htm

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC] (Pachauri, R.

K., & Reisinger, A. (Eds.). (2007a). Climate change 2007:

Synthesis report . IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland. Retrieved rm

http://www.ipcc.ch/pd/assessment-reprt/ar4/syr/ar4_syr.pd

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC]. (2007b). Glossary

o terms used in the IPCC Fourth Assessment report: Working

Group II (WG2). Retrieved rm http://www.ipcc.ch/glssary/

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC]. (2007c). Summary

r plicymakers. In S. Slmn, D. Qin, M. Manning, Z. Chen

M. Marquis, K. B. Averyt, M. Tignr, & H. L. Miller (Eds.)

Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Contribution

o Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report o the

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge

University Press: Cambridge, UK and New Yrk, NY. Retrieved

rm http://www.ipcc-wg2.rg/

Internatinal Energy Agency. (2007). World energy outlook 2007: China

and India insights. Retrieved rm http://www.iea.rg/textbase

nppd/ree/2007/we_2007.pd.

Internatinal Energy Agency. (2008). World energy outlook

2008: Executive summary. Retrieved rm http://www.

wrldenergyutlk.rg/dcs/we2008/WEo2008_es_

english.pd.

Jagtenberg, T., & McKie, D. (1997). Eco-impacts and the greening o

modernity: New maps or communication studies, cultural

studies, and sociology . Lndn, England: Sage.

Jakbssn, C., Fujii, S., & Garling, T. (2000). Determinants private

car users' acceptance rad pricing. Transport Policy , 7(2),

153-158.

James, W. (1890). Principles o psychology . New Yrk, NY: Henry Hlt.

Janz, N. K., & Becker, M. H. (1984). The health belie mdel: A decade

later. Health Education Quarterly, 11(1), 1-47.

Jaysn, S. (2009, March 20). Psychlgists determine what it means

t think green. USA Today. Retrieved rm http://www.

usatday.cm/news/natin/envirnment/2008-08-13-green-

psychlgy_N.htm.

Jevns, W. S. (1865). on the variatin prices and the value the

currency since 1782. Journal o the Statistical Society o

London, 28 (2), 294-320.

Jhndn-Cartee, K. S. (2005). News narratives and news raming:

Constructing political reality. Lanham, MD: Rwan & Littleeld

Jhnsn, B. B., & Cvell, V. T. (Eds.). (1987). The social and cultural

construction o risk . New Yrk, NY: D. Reidel.

Jhnsn, E. J., & Gldstein, D. (2003). D deaults save lives? Science

302 (5649), 1338-1339.

Jhnsn, E. J., Haeuble, G., & Keinan, A. (2007). Aspects

endwment: A query thery lss aversin. Journal o Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 33

(3), 461-474.

Jhnsn, E., Hershey, J., Meszars, J., & Kunreuther, H. (1993).

Framing, prbability distrtins and insurance decisins.

Journal o Risk and Uncertainty, 7 , 35-51.

Jhnsn, L. R., Jhnsn-Pynn, J. S., & Pynn, T. (2007). Yuth civic

engagement in China: Results rm a prgram prmting

envirnmental activism. Journal o Adolescent Research, 22 ,

355-386.



Jnes, J. M. (2003). TRIoS: A psychlgical thery the Arican

legacy in American culture. Journal o Social Issues, 59, 217-

242.

Kahn, P. H. (1999). The human relationship with nature. Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press.

Kahneman, D., Krueger, A. B., Schkade, D., Schwarz, N., & Stne,

A. A. (2006). Wuld yu be happier i yu were richer? A

cusing illusin. Science, 312 (5782), 1908-1910.

Kaiser, F. G. (1998). A general measure eclgical behavir. Journal

o Applied Social Psychology , 28 , 395-422.

Kaiser, F. G., & Gutscher, H. (2003). The prpsitin a general

versin the thery planned behavir: Predicting

eclgical behavir. Journal o Applied Social Psychology, 33,

586-603.

Kaspersn, R. E., & Dw, K. (1991). Develpmental and gegraphical

equity in glbal envirnmental change. Evaluation Review, 15,

149 -171.

Kaspersn, J. X., Kaspersn, R. E., Pidgen, N., & Slvic, P. (2003).

The scial amplicatin risk: Assessing teen years

research and thery. In N. Pidgen, R. E. Kaspersn, & P.

Slvic (Eds.), The social amplifcation o risk (pp. 13-46).

Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kaspersn, R. E., Renn, o., Slvic, P., Brwn, S., Emel, J., & Gble,

R. et al. (1988). The scial amplicatin risk: A cnceptual

ramewrk. Risk Analysis, 8, 177-187.

Kasser, T. (2005). Frugality, genersity, and materialism in children and

adlescents. In K. A. Mre & L. H. Lippman (Eds.), What

do children need to ourish? Conceptualizing and measuring

indicators o positive development (pp. 357-373). New Yrk,

NY: Springer Science.

Kasser, T. (in press). Cultural values and the well-being uture

generatins: A crss-natinal study. Journal o Cross-Cultural

Psychology .

Kasser, T., & Brwn, K. W. (2003). on time, happiness, and eclgical

tprints. In J. deGraa (Ed.), Take back your time: Fighting

overwork and time poverty in America (pp. 107-112). San

Francisc: Berrett-Kehler.

Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1993). A dark side the American dream:

Crrelates nancial success as a central lie aspiratin. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 65 (2), 410-422.

Kasser, T., Ryan, R. M., Cuchman, C. E., & Sheldn, K. M. (2004).

Materialistic values: Their causes and cnsequences. In T.

Kasser & A. D. Kanner (Eds.), Psychology and consumer

culture: The struggle or a good lie in a materialistic world

(pp. 11-28). Washingtn, DC: American Psychlgical

Assciatin.

Kasser, T., & Sheldn, K. M. (2009). Time afuence as a path tward

persnal happiness and ethical business practice: Empirical

evidence rm ur studies. Journal o Business Ethics, 84(2),

243-255.

Kates, R. W. (2007). Frward. In S. C. Mser & L. Dilling (Eds.),

Creating a climate or change. New Yrk, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Kaumann-Hayz, R., & Gutscher, H. (Eds.). (2001). Changing

thingsMoving people: Strategies or promoting sustainable

development at the local level. Basel, Switzerland: Birkhäuser

Verlag.

Keim, M. E. (2008). Building human resilience: The rle public health

preparedness and respnse as an adaptatin t climate

change. American Journal o Preventive Medicine, 35 , 508-

516.

Kemptn, W. (1991). Public understanding glbal warming. Society

and Natural Resources, 4, 331-345.

Kemptn, W., Darley, J. M., & Stern, P. C. (1992). Psychlgical

research r the new energy prblems: Strategies and

pprtunities. American Psychologist, 47 (10), 1213-1223.

Kemptn, W., Harris, C. K., Keith, J. G., & Weihl, J. S. (1985). D

cnsumers knw “what wrks” in energy cnservatin?

Marriage and Family Review, 9, 115-133.

Khazzm, D. J. (1980). Ecnmic implicatins mandated eiciency

standards r husehld appliances. The Energy Journal, 1,

21-40.

Kidner, D. (2007). Depressin and the natural wrld: Twards a critical

eclgy psychlgical distress. The International Journal o

Critical Psychology, 19, 123-146.

Kidner, D. W. (1994). Why psychlgy is mute abut the envirnmental

crisis. Environmental Ethics, 16, 359-376.

Klöckner, C. A., Matthies, E., & Hunecke, M. (2003). Prblems

peratinalizing habits and integrating habits in nrmative

decisin-making mdels. Journal o Applied Social

Psychology, 33, 396-417.

Kluger, J. et al. (2006a, April). Be wrried. Be very wrried. Earth at the

tipping pint. Time, 24-54.

Kluger, J. (2006b, April 3). Glbal warming. Time, 28-42.

Kntt, D., Muers, S., & Aldridge, S. (2008). Achieving culture change: A

plicy ramewrk. Lndn, England: UK Cabinet oice.

Klbert, E. (2006). Field notes rom a catastrophe: Man, nature and climate change. New Yrk, NY: Blmbury.

Kllmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why d peple

act envirnmentally and what are the barriers t pr-

envirnmental behavir? Environmental Education Research,

8 (3), 239-260.

Krantz, D. H., & Kunreuther, H. C. (2007). Gals and plans in decisin

making. Judgment and Decision Making, 2 (3), 137-168.

Krenichyn, K. (2004). Wmen and physical activity in an urban park.

Journal o Environmental Psychology, 24, 117-130.



Krsnik, J. A., Hlbrk, A. L., Lwe, L., & Visser, P. S. (2006). The

rigins and cnsequences demcratic citizens’ plicy

agendas: A study ppular cncern abut glbal warming.

Climatic Change, 77 , 7-43.

Ku, F., & Faber Taylr, A. (2004). A ptential natural treatment r

attentin-decit/hyperactivity disrder: Evidence rm a

natinal study. American Journal o Public Health, 94(9),

1580-1586.

Ku, F., & Sullivan, W. (2001). Aggressin and vilence in the inner city:

Eects envirnment via mental atigue. Environment and

Behavior, 33, 543-571.

Ku, F., Sullivan, W., Cley, R., & Brunsn, L. (1998). Fertile grund

r cmmunity: Inner-city neighbrhd cmmn spaces.

American Journal o Community Psychology, 26 , 823-251.

Laibsn, D. (1997). Glden eggs and hyperblic discunting. Quarterly

Journal o Economics, 112 , 443-477.

Lang, J. T., & Hallman, W. K. (2005). Wh des the public trust? The

case genetically mdied d in the United States. Risk

Analysis, 25 (5), 1241-1252.

Langrd, I. H. (2002). An existential apprach t risk perceptin. Risk

Analysis, 22, 101-120.

Lavine, J. (2006). Not buying it: My year without shopping. Lndn,

England: Simn & Schuster.

Lazarus, R. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process.

New Yrk, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Lazarus, R. S., & Chen, J. B. (1977). Envirnmental stress. In

I. Altman & J. F. Whlwill (Eds.), Human behavior and

environment: Advances in theory and research (pp. 90-127).

New Yrk, NY: Plenum.

Lazarus, R. S., & Flkman, S. (1984). (Eds.). Stress, appraisal and

coping. New Yrk, NY: Springer.

Lehman, P. K., & Geller, E. S. (2004). Behavir analysis and

envirnmental prtectin: Accmplishments and ptential r

mre. Behavior and Social Issues, 13(1), 13-32.

Lehman, D., & Taylr, S. E. (1987). Date with an earthquake: Cping

with a prbable, unpredictable disaster. Personality and Social

Psychology Bulletin, 13, 546-555.

Leiserwitz, A. (2004). Surveying the impact «The Day Ater

Tmrrw.» Environment, 46, 23-44.Leiserwitz, A. (2005). American risk perceptins: Is climate change

dangerus? Risk Analysis, 25 , 1433-1442.

Leiserwitz, A. (2006). Climate change risk perceptin and plicy

preerences: The rle aect, imagery, and values. Climatic

Change, 77 , 45-72.

Leiserwitz, A. (2007). Cmmunicating the risks glbal warming:

American risk perceptins, aective images, and interpretive

cmmunities. In S. C. Mser & L. Dilling (Eds.), Creating

a climate or change (p. 44-63). New Yrk, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Leiserwitz, A., & Brad, K. (2008). Flrida: Public pinin n climate

change. A Yale University/University Miami/Clumbia

University Pll. New Haven, CT: Yale Prject n Climate

Change. Retrieved rm http://envirnment.yale.edu/uplads/

FlridaGlbalWarmingopinin.pd

Leiserwitz, A. A., Kates, R. W., & Parris, T. M. (2005). D glbal

attitudes and behavirs supprt sustainable develpment?

Environment, 47 (9), 22-38.

Lepre, S. J., & Evans, G. W. (1996). Cping with multiple stressrs

in the envirnment. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.),

Handbook o coping: Theory, research and applications (pp.

350-377). New Yrk, NY: Wiley.

Lertzman, R. (2008, September). The myth apathy. The Ecologist.

Retrieved rm http://www.theeclgist.rg/pages/archive_

detail.asp?pen=y&cntent_id=1877#37060

Lesthaeghe, R., & Surkyn, J. (1988). Cultural dynamics and ecnmic

theries ertility change. Population and Development

Review , 24(1), 1-45.

Levine, R. (1997). A geography o time: The temporal misadventures o

a social psychologist, or how every culture keeps time just a

little bit dierently . New Yrk, NY: Basic Bks.

Lickel, B., Schmader, T., Curtis, M., Scarnier, M., & Ames, D. R. (2005).

Vicarius guilt and shame. Group Process and Intergroup

Relations, 8 , 145-157.

Lindenberg, S., & Steg, L. (2007). Nrmative, gain and hednic gal

rames guiding envirnmental behavir. Journal o Social

Issues, 63(1), 117-137.

Liu, J., Daily, G. C., Ehrlich, P. R., & Luck, G. W. (2003). Eects

husehld dynamics n resurce cnsumptin and

bidiversity. Nature, 421, 530-533.

Livi-Bacci, M. (2007). A concise history o world population (4th ed.).

Maldn, MA: Blackwell.

Lewenstein, G., & Elster, J. (Eds.). (1992). Choice over time. New

Yrk, NY: Russell Sage.

Lewenstein, G. F., Weber, E. U., Hsee, C. K., & Welch, E. (2001). Risk

as eelings. Psychological Bulletin, 127 , 267-286.

Lukpuls, P., Jakbssn, C., Gärling, T., Meland, S., & Fujii, S.

(2006). Understanding the prcess adaptatin t car-use

reductin gals. Transportation Research Part F: TraicPsychology and Behaviour, 9(2), 115-127.

Lvins, A. B., Lvins, L. L., & Hawken, P. (1999, May-June). A rad map

r natural capitalism. Harvard Business Review, 77 , 145-158

Lwe, T., Brwn, K., Dessai, S., DeFrancea, D. M., Haynes, K., &

Vincent, K. (2006). Des tmrrw ever cme? Disaster

narrative and public perceptin climate change. Public

Understanding o Science, 15, 435-457.

Lule, E., Singh, S., & Chwdhury, S. A. (2007). Fertility regulatin

behavirs and their csts: Cntraceptin and unintended

pregnancies in Arica and Eastern Eurpe and Central Asia.



Health Nutrition and Population (HNP) Discussion paper

(pp.165). Washingtn, DC: Wrld Bank.

Luptn, D. (1999). Risk . Lndn, England: Rutledge.

Luthar, S. A. (2003). Resilience and vulnerability: Adaptation in the

context o childhood adversities. New Yrk, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Lutzenhiser, L. (2009). Behavioral assumptions underlying Caliornia

residential sector energy eiciency programs. Berkeley, CA:

Calirnia Institute r Energy and Envirnment Behavir and

Energy Prgram.

Maas, J., Verheij, R., Grenewegen, P., de Vries, S. & Spreeuwenberg,

P., (2006). Green space, urbanity and health: Hw strng is

the relatinship? Journal o Epidemiology and Community

Health, 60, 587-592.

MacGregr, D., Slvic, P., Masn, R. G., & Detweiler, J. (1994).

Perceived risks radiactive waste transprt thrugh

oregn: Results a statewide survey. Risk Analysis, 14,

5-14.

Macnaghten, P., & Urry, J. (1998). Contested natures. Lndn, England:

Sage.

Macy, J., & Brwn, M. Y. (1998). Coming back to lie: Practices to

reconnect our lives, our world. Gabrila Island, British

Clumbia: New Sciety Publishers.

Mai, G. R., Verplanken, B., Manstead, A. S. R., Strebe, W., Abraham,

C. S., Sheeran, P., & Cnner, M. (2007). Scial psychlgical

actrs in liestyle change and their relevance t scial plicy.

Social Issues and Policy Review, 1, 99-138.

Maiteny, P. T. (2002). Mind in the gap: Summary research explring

“inner” inuences n pr-sustainability learning and behavir.

Environmental Education Research, 8, 299-306.

Maller, C., Twnsend, M., Pryr, A., Brwn, P., & St. Leger, L. (2006).

Healthy nature healthy peple: Cntact with nature as an

upstream health prmtin interventin r ppulatins.

Health Promotion International, 21, 45-54.

Mallett, R. K. (2009). Breaking the Pllutin Habit: Validatin Three

Ec-Emtin Scales. Manuscript under review.

Mallett, R. K., Huntsinger, J. R., Sinclair, S., & Swim, J. K. (2008).

Seeing thrugh their eyes: When majrity grup members

take cllective actin n behal an utgrup. Group Processand Intergroup Relations, 11(4), 451-470.

Mallet, R. K., & Swim, J. K. (2004). Cllective guilt in the United

States. In N. R. Branscmbe & B. Dsje. Collective guilt:

International perspectives (pp. 56-74). Cambridge, MA:


Marshall, R. D., Bryant, R. A., Amsel, L., Suh, E. J., Ck, J. M., &

Neria, Y. (2007). The psychlgy nging threat: Relative

risk appraisal, the September 11 attacks, and terrrism-

related ears. American Psychologist , 62, 304-316.

Marx, S. M., Weber, E. U., orlve, B. S., Leiserwitz, A., Krantz, D. H.,

& Rncli, C. (2007). Cmmunicatin and mental prcesses:

Experiential and analytic prcessing uncertain climate

inrmatin. Global Environmental Change, 17, 47-58.

Masten, A. S. (2001). ordinary magic: Resilience prcesses in

develpment. American Psychologist , 56 (3), 227-238.

Matthews, F. (2009, February 10). Sydney Morning Herald.

Matthies, E., Klöckner, C. A., & Preißner, C. L. (2006). Applying a

mdied mral decisin making mdel t change habitual car

use: Hw can cmmitment be eective? Applied Psychology:

An International Review, 55 (1), 91-106.

McCracken, G. (1986). Culture and cnsumptin: A theretical accunt

the structure and mvement the cultural meaning

cnsumer gds. Journal o Consumer Research, 13, 71-84.

McCright, A. M. (2007). Dealing with climate cntrarians. In S. C.

Mser & L. Dilling (Eds.), Creating a climate or change:

Communicating climate change and acilitating social change

(pp. 200- 212). New Yrk, NY: Cambridge University Press.

McKenzie-Mhr, D., & Smith, W. (1999). Fostering sustainable behavior

An introduction to community-based social marketing.

Gabrila Island, B.C., Canada: New Sciety Publishers.

McKibben, B. (2007). Deep economy . New Yrk, NY: Hlt.

McKinsey, M. (2007). Externalism and privileged access are

incnsistent. In B. P. McLaughlin, & J. Chen (Eds.),

Contemporary debates in philosophy o mind (pp. 53-65).

Blackwell Publishing: Malden.

McMichael, A. J. (2003). Glbal climate change and health: An ld

stry writ large. In A. J. McMichael, D. H. Campbell-Lendrum,

C. F. Crvalan, K. L. Ebi, A. Githel, J. D. Scheraga, &

A. Wdward (Eds.), Climate change and human health:

Risks and responses. Geneva, Switzerland: Wrld Health

organizatin.

Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transorming research and evaluation. New

Yrk, NY: Guilrd Press.

Merzel, C., & D’Afitti, J. (2003). Re-cnsidering cmmunity-based

health prmtin: Prmise, perrmance, and ptential.

American Journal o Public Health, 93, 557-574.

Messick, D. M., & Rutte, C. G. (1992). The prvisin public gds

by experts: The Grningen study. In W. B. G. Liebrand,D. M. Messick, & H. A. M. Wilke (Eds.), Social dilemmas:

Theoretical issues and research fndings (pp. 101-107).

Pergamn Press: Elmsrd.

Milnt, T. L., Duckitt, J., & Camern, L. D. (2006). A crss-cultural

study envirnmental mtive cncerns and their implicatins

r pr-envirnmental behavir. Environment and Behavior,

38 (6), 745-767.

Milnt, T. L., & Guveia, V. V. (2006). Time perspective and values: An

explratry study their relatins t envirnmental attitudes.

Journal o Environmental Psychology, 26 (10), 72-82.



Millennium Ecsystems Assessment. (2005). Ecosystems and human

well-being: Current state and trends: Findings o the Condition

and Trends Working Group o the Millennium Ecosystem

Assessment (Vl. 2). Washingtn DC: Island Press.

Miller, G. A. (1969). Psychlgy as a means prmting human

welare. American Psychologist, 24, 1063-1075.

Milne, S., Sheeran, P., & orbell, S. (2000). Predictin and interventin

in health-related behavir: A meta-analytic review

prtectin mtivatin thery. Journal o Applied Social


Mischel, W., Grusec, J., & Masters, J. C. (1969). Eects expected

delay time n the subjective value rewards and

punishments. Journal o Personality and Social Psychology,

11, 363-373.

Mrtreux, C., & Barnett, J. (2009). Climate change, migratin, and

adaptatin in Funauti, Tuvalu. Global Environmental Change,

19, 105-112.

Mscvici, S. (2000). Social representations: Explorations in social

psychology . Cambridge: Plity Press.

Mser, S. C. (2007). Mre bad news: The risk neglecting emtinal

respnses t climate change inrmatin. In S. C. Mser & L.

Dilling (Eds.), Creating a climate or change. New Yrk, NY:


Mser, S. C., & Dilling, L (2004). Making climate ht: Cmmunicating

the urgency and challenge glbal climate change.

Environment, 46, 32-46.

Mser, S. C., & Dilling, L (2007a). Creating a climate or change:

Communicating climate change and acilitating social change.

New Yrk, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Mser, S. C., & Dilling, L. (2007b). Tward the scial tipping pint:

Creating a climate r change. In S. C. Mser & L. Dilling.

(Eds.), Creating a climate or change: Communicating climate

change and acilitating social change (pp. 491-516). New

Yrk, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Mrrissey, S. A., & Reser, J. P. (2003). Evaluating the eectiveness

psychlgical preparedness advice in cmmunity cyclne

preparedness materials. Australian Journal o Emergency

Management , 18 , 44-59.

Mrrissey, S. A., & Reser, J. P. (2007). Natural disasters, climatechange and mental health cnsideratins in rural Australia.

Australian Journal o Rural Health, 15 , 120-125.

Mrtreux, C., & Barnett, J. (2009). Climate change, migratin, and

adaptatin in Funauti, Tuvalu. Global Envirnmental Change,

19, 105-112.

Myers, B. (2006). Welcome to Doomsday . New Yrk, NY: New Yrk

Review Bks.

Mussn, C. (1974). Lcal attitudes t ppulatin grwth in Suth

Buckinghamshire. In H. B. Perry (Ed.), Population and its

problems: A plain man’s guide (pp. 392-3). oxrd, UK:

Clarendn Press.

Myers, N., & Kent, J. (2003). New cnsumers: The inuence

afuence n the envirnment. Proceedings o the National

Academy o Sciences, 100(8), 4963-4968.

Natinal Research Cuncil, Cmmittee n Risk Perceptin and

Cmmunicatin (Ed.). (1989). Improving risk communication.

Washingtn, DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Natinal Research Cuncil. (1992). Global environmental change:

Understanding the human dimensions. Stern, P. C., Yung,

o. R., & Druckman, D. (Eds.). Washingtn, DC: Natinal

Academies Press.

Natinal Research Cuncil. (1996). Understanding risk: Inorming

decisions in a democratic society . Stern, P. C., & Fineberg, H.

V. (Eds.). Washingtn, DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Natinal Research Cuncil. (1999). Making climate orecasts matter ,

Stern, P. C., & Easterling, W. E. (Eds.). Washingtn, DC:

Natinal Academies Press.

Natinal Research Cuncil. (2008). Public participation in environmenta

assessment and decision making. Dietz, T., & Stern, P.C.

(Eds.). Washingtn, DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Natinal Research Cuncil. (2009). Understanding and responding to

climate change. Washingtn, DC: Natinal Research Cuncil/

The Natinal Academies.

Nelsn, C., Lurie, N., & Wasserman, J. (2007). Assessing public health

emergency preparedness: Cncepts, tls, and challenges.

Annual Review o Public Health, 28 , 1-18.

Neutra, R., Lipscmb, J., Satin, K., & Shusterman, D. (1991).

Hyptheses t explain the higher symptm rates bserved

arund hazardus waste sites. Environmental Health

Perspectives, 94, 31-38.

Newman, R. (2005). APA’s resilience initiative. Proessional Psychology

Research and Practice, 36 , 227-229.

Nichlsen, S. W. (2002). The love o nature and the end o the world.

Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Nilssn, A., vn Brgstede, C., & Biel, A. (2004). Willingness t accept

climate change strategies: The eect values and nrms.

Journal o Environmental Psychology, 24(3), 267-277.

Nisbett, R. E., & Wilsn, T. D. (1977). Telling mre than we can knw:Verbal reprts n mental prcesses. Psychological Review,

84(3), 231-259.

Nbel, J. (2007, April 9). Ec-anxiety: Smething else t wrry abut

[Electrnic versin]. The Philadelphia Enquirer .

Nlan, J. M., Schultz, P. W., Cialdini, R. B., Gldstein, N. J., &

Griskevicius, V. (2008). Nrmative scial inuence is

underdetected. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,

34(7), 913-923.



Nrris, F. J., Friedman, M. J., Watsn, P. J., Byrne, C. M., Diaz, E., &

Kaniasty, K. (2002). 60,000 disaster victims speak: Part 1.

An empirical review the empirical literature, 1981-2001.

Psychiatry, 65 , 207-239.

o'Cnnr, R. E., Brd, R. J., & Fisher, A. (1998). The curius impact

knwledge abut climate change n risk perceptins and

willingness t sacrice. Risk Decision and Policy, 3(2), 145-

155.

o'Cnnr, R. E., Brd, R. J., & Fisher, A. (1999). Risk perceptins,

general envirnmental belies, and willingness t address

climate change. Risk Analysis, 19, 461-471.

o’Cnnr, R., Brd, R., Yarnal, B., & Wieek, N. (2002). Wh wants t

reduce greenhuse gas emissins? Social Science Quarterly,

83, 1-17.

o’Dnghue, T., & Rabin, M. (1999). Ding it nw r later. American

Economic Review, 89, 103-124.

olsn, D. R. (1965). Nte n Haslerud and Meyers' transer--

principles experiment. Journal o Educational Psychology,

56 (2), 107-108.

olsn, R., & Rejeski, D. (2005). Environmentalism and the technologies

o tomorrow: Shaping the next industrial revolution.

Washingtn, DC: Island Press.

optw, S., & Brk, A. (2003). Identity and exclusin in rangeland

cnict. In S. Claytn & S. optw (Eds.), Identity and the

natural environment: The psychological signifcance o nature

( pp. 249-271). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

o’Rirdan, T. (Ed.). (1995). Perceiving environmental risks. New Yrk,

NY: Academic Press.

ostrm, E., Dietz, T., Dlsak, N., Stern, P. C., Stnich, S., & Weber, E.

U. (Eds.). (2002). The drama o the commons. Washingtn,

DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Padgett, J. P., Steinemann, A. C., Clarke, J. H., & Vandenbergh, M. P.

(2008). A cmparisn carbn calculatrs. Environmental

Impact Assessment Review, 28 ,106–115.

Pallnen, U. E., Prchaska, J. o., Velicer, W. F., Prkhrv, A. V., &

Smith, N. F. (1998). Stages acquisitin and cessatin

r adlescent smking: An empirical integratin. Addictive

Behaviors, 23(3), 303-324.

Patersn, R. J., & Neueld, R. W. J. (1987). Clear danger: Situatinaldeterminants threat appraisal. Psychological Review , 101,

494-416.

Peek, L. A., & Miletti, D. S. (2002). The histry & uture disaster

research. In R. B. Bechtel, R. B., & A. Churchman (Eds.),

Handbook o environmental psychology (pp. 511-524). New

Yrk, NY: Wiley.

Pettenger, M. E. (2007). The social construction o climate change.

Lndn, England: Ashgate.

Pew Research Center. (2006). Luxury or necessity? Things we can’t live

without: The list has grown in the past decade. Pew Research

Center: A Scial Trends Reprt.

Pidgen, N. F., Kaspersn, R. K., & Slvic, P. (2003). The social

amplifcation o risk. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Pidgen, N., Lrenzni, I., & Prtinga, W. (2008). Climate change

r nuclear pwerN thanks! A quantitative study public

perceptins and risk raming in Britain. Global Environmental

Change, 18, 69-85.

Prchaska, J. o., DiClemente, C. C., & Nrcrss, J. C. (1992). In

search hw peple change: Applicatins t addictive

behavirs. American Psychologist, 47 , 1102-1114.

Proessional Psychology: Research and Practice, 39 (2008). [Entire

issue].

Quarantelli, E. L. (1998). What is a disaster ? New Yrk, NY: Rutledge.

Rabinwitz, P. M., & Pljak, A. (2003). Hst–envirnment medicine: A

primary care mdel r the age genmics. General Internal

Medicine, 18 , 222–227.

Reser, J. P. (2004). The experience natural disasters: Psychlgical

perspectives and understandings. In J. P. Stltman, J.

Lidstne, & L. M. DeChan (Eds.), International perspectives

on natural disasters: Occurrence, mitigation, and

consequences (pp. 369-384). Drdrecht: Kluwer Academic.

Reser, J. P. (2009). “Climate change” is ar mre than climate change.

Manuscript under review.

Reser, J. P., & Mrrissey, S. A. (2008). Situating and raming individual

and cmmunity experience and respnse: A psychlgical

perspective. In K. Gw & D. Patn (Eds.), The phoenix o

natural disasters: Community resilience (pp. 47-72). New

Yrk, NY: Nva Science Publ ishers.

Reser, J. P., & Smithsn, M. J. (1988). When ignrance is adaptive: Nt

knwing abut the nuclear threat. Knowledge in Society, 1(4),

7-27.

Reuveny, R. (2008). Ecmigratin and vilent cnict: Case studies and

public plicy implicatins. Human Ecology, 36 , 1-13.

Reyes, G., & Jacbs, G. A. (Eds.). (2006). Handbook o international

disaster psychology (Vls.1-4). Westprt, CT: Praeger.

Richins, M. L., & Dawsn, S. (1992). A cnsumer values rientatin rmaterialism and its measurement: Scale develpment and

validatin. Journal o Consumer Research, 19, 303-316.

Rbertsn, G., Mash, M., Tickner, L., Bird, J., Curtis, B., & Putnam,

T. (Eds.). (1996). Future natural: Nature, science, culture.

Lndn, England: Rutledge.

Rgers, E. M. (2003). Diusion o innovations (5th ed.). New Yrk, NY:

Free Press.

Rgers, R. W. (1975). A prtectin mtivatin thery ear appeals

and attitude change. Journal o Psychology: Interdisciplinary

and Applied, 91(1), 93-114.



Rgers, R. W., & Prentice-Dunn, S. (1997). Prtectin mtivatin

thery. In D. S. Gchman (Ed.), Handbook o health behavior

research 1: Personal and social determinants (pp. 113-132).

New Yrk, NY: Plenum Press.

Ruderman, A. J. (1985). Restraint and irratinal cgnitins. Behaviour

Research and Therapy, 23(5), 557-561.

Rudmin, F. W. (2003). Critical histry the acculturatin psychlgy

assimilatin, separatin, integratin, and marginalizatin.

Review o General Psychology, 7 (1), 3-37.

Rutter, M. (1987). Psychscial resilience and prtective mechanisms.

American Journal o Orthopsychiatry , 57 , 316-331.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Sel-determinatin thery and the

acilitatin intrinsic mtivatin, scial develpment, and

well-being. American Psychologist, 55 (1), 68-78.

Sallis, J. F., Bauman, A., & Pratt, M. (1998). Envirnmental and plicy

interventins t prmte physical activity. American Journal o

Preventive Medicine, 15 (4), 379-397.

Sam, D. L., & Berry, J. W. (2006). The Cambridge handbook o

acculturation psychology. New Yrk, NY: Cambridge

University Press.

Schade, J., & Schlag, B. (2003). Acceptability urban transprt pricing

strategies. Transportation Research Part F: Traic Psychology

and Behaviour, 6 (1), 45-61.

Scheier, M. F., Weintraub, J. K., & Carver, C. S. (1986). Cping with

stress: Divergent strategies ptimists and pessimists.

Journal o Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1257-

1264.

Schn, I. (2006). Risk and resilience: Adaptations in changing t imes.


Schmuck, P., & Schultz, W. P. (Eds.). (2002). Psychology o sustainable

development . Bstn, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

Schr, J. (1998). The overspent Americans: Why we want what we don’t

need . oxrd, UK: Harper Perennial.

Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the cntent and structure

values: Theretical advances and empirical tests in 20

cuntries. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental

social psychology (Vl. 25, pp. 1-65). New Yrk, NY:

Academic Press.

Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Are there universal aspects in the structure andcntents human values? Journal o Social Issues, 50(4),

19–45.

Schiman, L. G., Kanuk, L. L., & Das, M. (2006). Consumer behaviour.

Trnt: Pearsn Educatin.

Schultz, P. W., Nlan, J. M., Cialdini, R. B., Gldstein, N. J., &

Griskevicius, V. (2007). The cnstructive, destructive, and

recnstructive pwer scial nrms. Psychological Science,

18 (5), 429-434.

Searles, H. F. (1972). Uncnscius prcesses in relatin t the

envirnmental crisis. Psychoanalytical Review, 59, 361-374.

Sen, R. (2003). We the billion: A social psychological perspective on

India’s population. Thusand oaks, CA: Sage Publicatins.

Shapir, D. H., Schwartz, C. E., & Astin, I. A. (1996). Cntrlling

urselves, cntrlling ur wrld. American Psychlgist, 51,

1213-1230.

Shinew, K. J., Glver, T. D., & Parry, D. C. (2004). Leisure spaces as

ptential sites r interracial interactin: Cmmunity gardens

in urban areas. Journal o Leisure Research, 36 , 336-355.

Sia, A. P., Hungerrd, H. R., & Tmera, A. N. (1985). Selected

predictrs respnsible envirnmental behavir: An analysis

Journal o Environmental Education, 17 (2), 31-40.

Sier, F. W., Bakker, A. B., Dekker, G. B., & Van Den Burg, M. T.

C. (1996). Changing rganizatinal energy cnsumptin

behaviur thrugh cmparative eedback. Journal o

Environmental Psychology, 16 (3), 235-246.

Sinaceur, M., Heath, C., & Cle, S. (2005). Emtinal and deliberative

reactins t a public crisis: Mad Cw Disease in France.

Psychological Science, 16 (3), 247-254.

Sjberg, L. (2006). As time ges by: The beginnings scial and

behaviral science risk research. Journal o Risk Research,

9(6) 601-604.

Slman, S. A. (1996). The empirical case r tw systems reasning.

Psychological Bulletin, 119(1), 3-22.

Slvic, P. (1987). Perceptin risk. Science, 236, 280-285.

Slvic, P. (2000). The perception o risk . Lndn, England: Earthscan.

Slvic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., & MacGregr, D. G. (2006). The

aect heuristic. European Journal o Operational Research,

177 , 1333-1352.

Slvic, P., Finucane, M. L., Peters, E., et al. (2004). Risk as analysis

and risk as eelings: Sme thughts abut aect, reasn, risk

and ratinality. Risk Analysis, 24, 311-322

Slvic, P., Fischh, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1986). The psychmetric

study risk perceptin. In V. T. Cvell, J. Menkes, & J.

Mumpwer (Eds.), Risk evaluation and management (pp.

3-24). New Yrk, NY: Plenum.

Slvic, P., Flynn, J., & Layman, M. (1991). Perceived risk, trust, and the

plitics nuclear waste. Science, 254, 1603-1607.Smillie, I., & Helmich, H. (1999). Stakeholders: Government-NGO

partnerships or international development. Lndn, England:

Earthscan.

Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hpe thery: Rainbws in the mind.

Psychological Inquiry, 13, 249-275.

Sklv, A. P., Stne, P. H., Frest, C. E., Prinn, R., Sarm, M. C.,

Webseter, M., et al. (in press). Prbabilistic recast r 21st

century climate-based uncertainties in emissins (withut

plicy) and climate parameters. Journal o Climate.



Slmn, S., Plattner, G. K., Knuttic, R., & Friedlingstein, P. (2009).

Irreversible climate change due t carbn dixide emissins.

Proceedings o the National Academy o Sciences, 106 , 1704-

1709.

Spence, A., Pidgen, N., & Uzzell, D. (2008). Climate change

psychlgy’s cntributin. The Psychologist , 21, 108-11.

Spence, A., Pidgen, N., & Uzzell, D. (2009). Climate change: Sparking

debate abut the ht tpic. The Psychologist , 22 (2), 118-

121.

Spratt, D., & Suttn, P. (2008). Climate code red: The case or a

sustainable emergency . Fitzry, Melburne: Friends the

Earth. Retrieved rm http://www.climatecdered.net/

Staats, H., Harland, P., & Wilke, H. A. M. (2004). Eecting durable

change: A team apprach t imprve envirnmental behavir

in the husehld. Environment and Behavior, 36 (3), 341-367.

Stantn, A. L., Revensn, T. A., & Tennen, H. (2007). Health

psychlgy: Psychlgical adjustment t chrnic disease.

Annual Review o Psychology, 58 , 565-592.

Steg, L., Dreijerink, L., & Abrahamse, W. (2005). Factrs inuencing the

acceptability energy plicies: A test VBN thery. Journal

o Environmental Psychology, 25 (4), 415-425.

Stein, B. D., & Meyers, D. (1999). Emtinal sequelae disasters:

A primary care physician’s guide. Journal o the American

Medical Women's Association 54, 60-64.

Stephens, C. E. (2002). On time: How America has learned to live lie

by the clock . Bstn: Little, Brwn, & Cmpany.

Stern, P. C. (1986). Blind spts in plicy analysis: What ecnmics

desn't say abut energy use. Journal o Policy Analysis and

Management, 5 (2), 200-227.

Stern, P. C. (1997). Tward a wrking denitin cnsumptin

r envirnmental research and plicy. In P. C. Stern, T.

Dietz, V. R. Ruttan, R. H. Sclw, & J. L. Sweeney (Eds.),

Environmentally signifcant consumption: Research directions

(pp. 12-35). Washingtn, DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Stern, P. C. (2000). Tward a cherent thery envirnmentally

signicant behavir. Journal o Social Issues, 56 (3), 407-424.

Stern, P. C., Arnsn, E., Darley, J. M., Hill, D. H., Hirst, E., & Kemptn,

W. et al. (1986). The eectiveness incentives r residential

energy cnservatin. Evaluation Review, 10(2), 147-176.Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Abel, T., Guagnan, G. A., & Kal, L. (1999). A

value-belie-nrm thery supprt r scial mvements:

The case envirnmentalism. Human Ecology Review, 6 ,

81-97.

Stern, P. C., Dietz, T., Ruttan, V., Sclw, R. H., & Sweeney, J. (Eds.).

(1997). Environmentally signifcant consumption: research

directions. Washingtn, DC: Natinal Academies Press.

Stern, P. C., & Gardner, G. T. (1981). Psychlgical research and

energy plicy. American Psychologist, 36 , 329-342.

Stkls, D. (1978). Envirnmental psychlgy. Annual Review o


Stkls, D., Clithere, H. C. & Zmuidzinas, M. (2000). Mdeling and

managing change in peple-envirnment transactins. In

W. B. Walsh, K. H. Craik, & R. H. Price (Eds.), Person-

environment psychology: New directions and perspectives (2n

ed., pp. 267-296). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Stkls, D., Misra, S., Runnerstrm, M. G., & Hipp, A. (2009).

Psychlgy in an age eclgical crisis. American

Psychologist, 64, 181-193.

Takan, T., Nakamura, K., & Watanabe, M. (2002). Urban residential

envirnment and senir citizens’ lngevity in megacity areas.

Journal o Epidemiology and Community Health, 56 , 913-918

Tan, T. X., Mar, K., & Dedrick, R. F. (2007). Special needs adptin

rm China: Explring child-level indicatrs, adptive amily

characteristics, and crrelates behaviral adjustment.

Children and Youth Services Review, 29(10), 1269-1285.

Tangney, J. (2003). Sel-relevant emtins. In M. Leary & J. Tangney

(Eds.), Handbook o sel and identity (pp. 384-400). New

Yrk, NY: Guilrd.

Taylr, K. M., & Shepperd, J. A. (1998). Bracing r the wrst: Severity,

testing, and eedback timing as mderatrs the ptimistic

bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 915-926

Taylr, S. E. (1983). Adjustment t threatening events: A thery

cgnitive adaptatin. American Psychologist , 38 , 1161-1173.

Taylr, S. E. (2006). Health psychology (6th ed.). New Yrk, NY:

McGraw-Hill.

Taylr, S. E., & Brwn, J. D. (1988). Illusin and well-being: A scial

psychlgical perspective n mental health. Psychological

Bulletin, 103(2), 193-210.

Taylr, S. E., & Stantn, A. L. (2007). Cping resurces, cping

prcesses, and mental health. Annual Review o Clinical


Thmpsn, C. J., & Cskuner-Balli, G. (2007). Enchanting ethical

cnsumerism: The case cmmunity supprted agriculture.

Journal o Consumer Culture, 7 (3), 275-303.

Thlen, B., de Ridder, D., Bensing, J., Grter, K., & Rutten, G. (2008).

Beynd gd intentins: The develpment and evaluatin

a practive sel-management curse r patients recentlydiagnsed with type 2 diabetes. Health Education Research,

23(1), 53-61.

Tmaka, J., Blascvich, J., Kelsey, R. M., & Leitten, C. L. (1993).

Subjective, physilgical, and behaviral eects threat

and challenge appraisal. Journal o Personality and Social

Psychology, 65 (2), 248-260.

Twnsend, E., Clarke, D. D., & Travis, B. (2004). Eects cntext and

eelings n perceptins genetically mdied d. Risk

Analysis, 24, 1369-1384.



Trpe, Y., & Liberman, N. (2003). Tempral cnstrual. Psychological

Review, 110, 403-421.

United Natins. (1998). World population prospects: The 1996 revision.

New Yrk, NY: United Natins Secretariat, Department

Ecnmic and Scial Aairs, Ppulatin Divisin.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Wrld ppulatin grwth rates. The

international data base. Retrieved rm http://www.census.

gv/ipc/www/idb/wrldgrgraph.php

U.S. Envirnmental Prtectin Agency. (2009). Climate change-

greenhouse gas emissions. Retrieved rm http://epa.gv/

climatechange/emissins/index.html#gg

U.S. Hme Size. (2007). Ask the Editors. Pearsn Educatin, publishing

as Inplease. Retrieved rm http://www.inplease.cm/

askeds/us-hme-size.html

Uzzell, D. L. (2000). The psych-spatial dimensins glbal

envirnmental prblems. Journal o Environmental

Psychology, 20(4), 307-318.

Uzzell, D. (2004). Frm lcal t glbal: A case envirnmental

hyperpia. IHDP Update, 4, 6-7.

Uzzell, D., Pl, E., & Badenas, D. (2002). Place identicatin, scial

chesin, and envirnmental sustainability. Environment and

Behavior, 34, 26-53.

Vandenbergh, M. P. (2005). The private li e public law. Columbia Law

Review, 105 (7), 2029-2096.

Van Lange, P...A. M., Rusbult, C. E., Semin-Gssens, A., Görts, C. A.,

& Stalpers, M. (1999). Being better than thers but therwise

perectly nrmal: Perceptins uniqueness and similarity in

clse relatinships. Personal Relationships, 6 (3), 269-289.

Van Lange, P. A. M., & Jireman, J. (2008). Hw we can prmte

behavir that serves all us in the uture. Social Issues and

Policy Review, 2, 127-157.

Vargas, P. T., & Yn, S. (2006). on the psychlgy materialism:

Wanting things, having things, and being happy. Advertising

& Society Review, 7 , Article 5. Retrieved rm http://muse.

uq.edu.au/jurnals/asr/v007/7.1vargas.html

Vasi, I. B. (2009). New heres, ld theries? Tward a scilgical

perspective n scial entrepreneurship. In R Ziegler (Ed.),

An introduction to social entrepreneurship (pp. 155- 173).

Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Vaughan, E. (1993). Individual and cultural dierences in adaptatin t

envirnmental risks. American Psychologist , 48, 673-680.

Vess, M., & Arndt, J. (2008). The nature death and the death

nature: The impact mrtality salience n envirnmental

cncern. Journal o Research in Personality, 42 (5), 1376-

1380.

Vrhees, W. R. (2008). New Yrkers respnd t the Wrld Trade

Center attack: An anatmy an emergent vlunteer

rganizatin. Journal o Contingencies and Crisis

Management, 16 (1), 3-13.

Vyncke, P. (2002). Liestyle segmentatin: Frm attitudes, interests and

pinins t values, aesthetic styles, lie visins and media

preerences. European Journal o Communication, 17 (4), 445

463.

Wall, R., Devine-Wright, P., & Mill, G. A. (2007). Cmparing and

cmbining theries t explain pr-envirnmental intentins:

The case cmmuting-mde chice. Environment and

Behavior, 39(6), 731-753.

Wapner, S., & Demick, J. (2002). The increasing cntexts cntext

in the study envirnment behavir relatins. In R. B.

Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook o environmental

psychology (pp. 3-14). Hbken, NJ: Jhn Wiley & Sns.

Warming t the tpic. (2009, May). Natural Hazards Observer, 23(5), 4.

Watsn, R. T., & the Cre Writing Team. (Eds.). (2001). Climate

change 2001: Synthesis report . Geneva, Switzerland:

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC].

Retrieved rm http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreprts/assessments-

reprts.htm

Waugh, W. L. (2006). Shelter rm the strm: Repairing the natinal

emergency management system ater Hurricane Katrina

[Special issue]. The Annals o the American Academy o

Political and Social Science, 604, 288-332.

Weber, E. U. (1997). Perceptin and expectatin climate change:

Precnditin r ecnmic and technlgical adaptatin. In M

Bazerman, D. Messick, A. Tenbrunsel, & K. Wade-Benzni

(Eds.), Psychological perspectives to environmental and

ethical issues in management (pp. 314-341). San Francisc:

Jssey-Bass.

Weber, E. U. (2006). Evidence-based and descriptin-based

perceptins lng-term risk: Why glbal warming des nt

scare us (yet). Climatic Change, 77 , 103-120.

Weber, E. U., Blais, A.-R., & Betz, N. (2002). A dmain-specic risk-

attitude scale: Measuring risk perceptins and risk behavirs .

Journal o Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 263-290.

Weber, E. U., Jhnsn, E. J., Milch, K., Chang, H., Brdschll, J., &

Gldstein, D. (2007). Asymmetric discunting in intertempral

chice: A query thery accunt. Psychological Science, 18,

516-523.

Weber, E. U., Shar, S., & Blais, A.-R. (2004). Predicting risk-sensitivityin humans and lwer animals: Risk as variance r ceicient

variatin. Psychological Review, 111, 430-445.

Weber, E. U., & Snka, S. (1994). Prductin and pricing decisins

in cash-crp arming: Eects decisin traits and climate

change expectatins. In B. H. Jacbsen, D. F. Pedersen,

J. Christensen, & S. Rasmussen (Eds.), Farmers’ Decision

Making: A Descriptive Approach (pp. 203-218). Cpenhagen,

Denmark: Eurpean Assciatin Agricultural Ecnmists.



on CO2 reduction and removal: Measures or the next century

Laxenburg, Austria: Internatinal Institute r Applied Systems

Analysis.

Yates, J. F. (Ed.). (1992). Risk-taking behaviour. Chicester, UK: Wiley.

Yechiam, E., Barrn, G., & Erev, I. (2005). The rle persnal

experience in cntributing t dierent patterns respnse t

rare terrrist attacks. Journal o Conict Resolution, 49, 430-

439.

Yeman, B. (2009). Tmrrw’s wars. On Earth, 31(2), 18-19.

Zha, X., & Belk, R. W. (2008). Pliticizing cnsumer culture:

Advertising’s apprpriatin plitical idelgy in China’s

scial transitin. Journal o Consumer Research, 35, 231-244

Weinstein, N. (1989). Eects persnal experience n sel-prtective

behavir. Psychological Bulletin, 105 , 31-50.

Weinstein, N. D., Lyn, J. E., Rthman, A. J., & Cuite, C. L. (2000).

Preccupatin and aect as predictrs prtectin

actin llwing natural disaster. British Journal o Health

Psychology, 5 , 351-363.

Weinstein, N. D., & Kline, W. (1996). Unrealistic ptimism: Present and

uture. Journal o Social and Clinical Psychology , 15 , 1-8.

Weinstein, N. H. (Ed.). (1988). Taking care: Understanding and

encouraging sel-protective behaviour. Cambridge, UK:


Weitzman, M. L. (2007). A review the Stern Review n the ecnmics

climate change. Journal o Economic Literature, 45, 686-

702.

Wheatn, B. (1996). The dmains and bundaries stress cncepts.

In H. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Psychosocial stress: Perspectives on

structure, theory, lie-course, and methods (pp. 29-70). San

Dieg: Academic Press.

Wheatn, B. (1999). The nature stressrs. In A. V. Hrwitz, & T. L.

Scheid (Eds.), A handbook or the study o mental health:

Social contexts, theories, and systems (pp. 176-197). New

Yrk, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Whipps, H. (2006, September 21). Census: U.S. husehld size

shrinking. MSNBC . Retrieved rm http://www.msnbc.msn.

cm/id/14942047/

Whiteld, S. C., Rsa, E. A., Dan, A., & Dietz, T. (2008). The uture

nuclear pwer: Value rientatins and risk regulatin. Risk

Analysis, 29, 425-437.

Williams, K. D., Harkins, S. G., & Karau, S. J. (2003). Scial

perrmance. In M. A. Hgg & J.

Cper (Eds.), Handbook o social psychology (pp. 328-346). Lndn,

England: Sage Publicatins.

Wilsn, E. o. (2002). The uture o lie. New Yrk, NY: Vintage.

Wilsn, C., & Dwlatabadi, H. (2007). Mdels decisin making &

residential energy use. Annual Review o Environment &

Resources, 32, 169-203.

Winett, R. A., Hatcher, J. W., Frt, T. R., Leckliter, I. N., Lve, S. Q.,

Riley, A. W., et al. (1982). The eects videtape mdeling

and daily eedback n residential electricity cnservatin,hme temperature and humidity, perceived cmrt, and

clthing wrn: Winter and summer. Journal o Applied

Behavior Analysis, 15 (3), 381-402.

Wrld Health organizatin. (2009). Climate change and human health.

Retrieved rm http://www.wh.int/glbalchange/climate/en/

Yamaji, K., Matsuhashi, R., Nagata, & Kaya, Y. (1991). An integrated

system r Co2/Energy/GNP analysis: Case studies n

ecnmic measures r Co2 reductin in Japan. In Workshop



FIGURE 1: Schematic ramewrk anthrpgenic climate

change drivers, impacts, and respnses (rm IPCC,

2007a)

FIGURE 2: Psychlgical perspectives n anthrpgenic climate

change drivers, impacts, and respnses

FIGURE 3: Lcatin 81 hazards in a tw-dimensinal space

derived by actr analysis rm the intercrrelatins 15 risk characteristics Each actr is made up

a cmbinatin characteristics, as indicated by the

lwer diagram (Slvic, 1987).

FIGURE 4: The relatin between ppulatin and Co2

emissins

Numbers in the graph represent cuntries used in the

analyses (Dietz & Rsa, 1997).

FIGURE 5: The relatin between per capita afuence and Co2

emissins Numbers in the graph represent cuntries

used in the analyses (Dietz & Rsa, 1997).

FIGURE 6: Wrld ppulatin size and annual increments: 8000

BC t 2050 AD (prjectins based n medium ertility

assumptin; United Natins, 1998)

FIGURE 7: Examples predictrs and climate-change relevant

cnsequences envirnmental cnsumptin

FIGURE 8: Psychlgical prcesses that inuence cping with

climate change.

TABLE: Types behavirs and examples

liSt o iGureS table



ac () sss: An immediate state arusal

during which a persn eels that he r she des nt have the

resurces available t meet the demands placed upn him r

her.

ap ( c cg): Adjustment t climate change,

by individuals, human systems (husehld, cmmunity, grup,

regin, sectr, cuntry) and/r natural systems, that mderatesharm r explits benecial pprtunity.

ap cpc ( c cg): Having the ability and

resurces (psychlgical, scial, cmmunity, ecnmic, etc.) t

adjust t, adapt t, and cpe with the impacts climate change.

ajs: Changing ne’s situatin r lie circumstances

t achieve a desired utcme in relatin t ne’s perceptin

threats and changing circumstances, particularly thrugh

direct actin and/r alteratin ne’s immediate envirnment.

oten adjustment is cntrasted with adaptatin, with the rmeremphasizing external changes and the latter emphasizing

internal respnses.

apgc: Made by peple r resulting rm human

activities. Usually used in the cntext emissins that are

prduced as a result human activities.

a s: Theretical appraches cncerning

individuals’ explanatins r why an event ccurred and/r wh

was respnsible r causing it. These theries examine the

kinds inrmatin peple use t determine causality, the kinds

causes they distinguish, and the rules and psychlgical

prcesses that lead rm inrmatin t inerred cause.

bp: “Psitive emtin tward, interest in, r a wish t

ailiate with living things.” The ppsite biphbia (Claytn &Myers, 2009, p. 207).

Cc () sss: A lng lasting state arusal

during which a persn eels that he r she desn’t have the

resurces available t meet the demands placed upn him r

her.

C: The mean and variability , r instance, temperature,

precipitatin, clud cver, and wind r bradly the state

the atmsphere (gaseus envelpe surrunding the earth),

hydrsphere (water n the surace the earth), crysphere

(snw, ice, and permarst n and beneath the surace the

earth and cean), land surace, and bisphere (ecsystems and

rganisms living in the atmsphere, land, and ceans).

C cg: In IPCC usage reers t any change in climate

ver time, whether due t natural variability r as a result

human activity. This usage diers rm that in the Framewrk

Cnventin n Climate Change, where climate change reers t a

GloSSary



change climate that is attributed directly r indirectly t human

activity that is in additin t natural climate variability bserved

ver cmparable time perids.

Cc cpg: Scial-based cping strategies such as

cmmunity respnses t draughts.

Cc fcc: A cllective’s r grup’s perceptin its

ability and capacity t meet envirnmental demands. (JR)

Cs ( g cs, sc

): one type scial dilemma in which an individual r

grup verexplits a cmmnly shared resurce.

Ccss : A sense an emtinal bnd with

the natural envirnment.

Cs pscg: A eld psychlgy that attempts

t apply psychlgical methds and theries t understand the

human relatinship t the natural envirnment and t prmte

envirnmentally sustainable behavir.

Cpg: The prcess managing specic external (e.g.,

envirnmental) pressures and/r internal demands that are

appraised as taxing r exceeding the resurces the persn.

Cpg ppss: Appraising r evaluating cping respnses

ne might make t the stressr in terms , r example, sel-

eicacy, the ability t carry ut the cping respnse, r respnse-eicacy, the likelihd that the respnse will have the desired

utcme.

Cpg spss: Behavirs, cgnitins, and regulatry

mechanisms that a persn uses t respnd t a stressr. Cping

respnses may be aimed at managing and reslving a stressr

r at amelirating its negative emtinal r bdily eects, r

example by re-appraising the signicance r persnal relevance

a threat r by cnrnting the perceived cause the prblem.

(JR)

Cpg scs: Prperties individuals (e.g., sel-eicacy),

their scial envirnment (e.g., scial supprt), and physical

envirnmental resurces (e.g., privacy ardances) that enable

them t respnd t stressrs.

dp cg: “A philsphical psitin that encurages a

sense identity that transcends the individual and encmpasses

the ecsystem, striving r a sense similarity r shared

cmmunity with the rest nature” Claytn & Myers, 2009, p.

208).

dscp s: Descriptins what mst peple d.

dscs: Extended discussin a tpic via written r verbal

cmmunicatin.

dscg: The tendency t reduce the imprtance

an utcme with greater ‘distance’ (temprally, scially,

gegraphically, and prbabilistically).

ecc csp: Paying r gds and services.

ecg: The reciprcal relatinship amng all rganisms and

their bilgical and physical envirnments. (JR)

ecgc Pscg: “Thery and research abut hw

individual experience (particularly perceptin) is cnstituted by

intimate and ten bilgically entrenched relatins t cnstant

envirnmental patterns” (Claytn & Myers, 2009, p. 210).

ecpscg: A amily hlistic appraches t

understanding human-nature relatinships and eclgical

degradatin, ten applying therapeutic theries and metaphrs

and using experiential methds. Als, psychtherapy based n a

link between mental and eclgical well-being.

e csp: The use gds and servicesthat directly inuence the envirnment.

e g s: The gradual lss

knwledge abut what shuld cmpse a healthy ecsystem,

as each generatin experiences a new level envirnmental

degradatin as the baseline against which changes are

assessed.

e zs: Extreme events r substances in

the earth and its eclgical system that may cause adverseeects t humans and things they value. Envirnmental hazards

include gephysical and meterlgical phenmena such as

earthquakes, drughts, and hurricanes, ten called ‘natural

hazards,’ as well as pllutin prblems and ther ‘technlgical’

hazards.

e : A sense emtinal and cnceptual

interdependence with nature; a belie that the natural

envirnment is imprtant t ne’s sel-cncept.



e s: “The prduct a hazard and the likelihd

its ccurring, using a simple rmula that denes a risk as the

prduct the prbability an event and its severity measured

in terms the ppulatin expsed, and the nature the

cnsequences” (Liverman, 2001, p. 4656).

e pscg: The study the transactins

between individuals and their physical settings. In these

transactins, individuals cllectively impact the built and natural

envirnment, and the built and natural envirnment impacts

them. Envirnmental psychlgy includes thery, research,

and practice aimed at better understanding and imprving ur

relatinship with the natural envirnment.

e sgc (eSb): Behavirs

that change the availability materials r energy rm the

envirnment r alters the structure and dynamics ecsystems

r the bisphere itsel. other behavirs are envirnmentally

signicant indirectly, by shaping the cntext in which chices are

made that directly cause envirnmental change.

e Sss: Adverse individual and cmmunity

impacts as a result bth acute and chrnic envirnmental

stressrs including multiple and interacting stressrs in the

extended envirnment (e.g., nise, crwding, traic cngestin,

pllutin, cntaminatin, natural and technlgical disaster

events, and envirnmental threat.) (JR)

cg: Any impsed mechanism that rces climate t change.Natural rcing climate change results rm vlcanic eruptins

and slar variability; human-made r anthrpgenic rcing

climate change cmes rm behavirs that inuence the

emissins greenhuse gases.

G g: Literally ne the mre salient and

cnsequential impacts and mediating prcesses current glbal

climate change, but used by many, particularly in Nrth America,

as a synnymus expressin r glbal climate change.

Gs fc: The warming the planet via the

absrptin inrared radiatin by the earth’s atmsphere. The

eect is similar t hw a plant warms when it is encased in a

huse glass r hw a blanket traps bdy heat. It prvides

that the average surace temperature the earth warms t 15

degrees Centigrade (59F). Greenhuse gases absrb thermal

radiatin emitted rm the earth’s surace and then reradiate this

energy back t the surace the earth – allwing temperatures

t be signicantly warmer than they wuld be in the absence

an atmsphere.

Gs gss: Gases in the atmsphere that cause

the Earth t retain thermal energy by absrbing inrared light

emitted by Earth’s surace. The mst imprtant greenhuse

gases are water vapur, carbn dixide, methane, nitrus xide,

and varius articial chemicals such as chlrurcarbns.

All but the latter are naturally ccurring, but human activity

ver the last several centuries has signicantly increased the

amunts carbn dixide, methane, and nitrus xide in Earth’s

atmsphere, causing glbal warming and glbal climate change.

h: A decrease in respnse t repeated stimulatin.

Respnse decrements due t altered sensitivity receptrs are

ten termed receptr adaptatin.

ig P C Cg (iPCC): The

main internatinal bdy established in 1988 by the Wrld

Meterlgical organizatin and the United Natins Envirnment

Prgram t assess climate change science and prvide advice t

the internatinal cmmunity. The IPCC is an internatinal grup

scientists wh summarize the current understanding climate

change and predict hw climate may evlve. The purpse the

IPCC reprts is t give plicymakers and ther interested parties

an in-depth, authritative view the state scientic knwledge

abut climate change, making pssible mre-inrmed climate-

related decisins. The IPCC des nt recmmend specic

plicies, but is restricted t describing scientic knwledge andits limitatins.

mg: With regard t climate change, any human actin

that reduces the surces r enhances the sinks greenhuse

gases. Emissins can be decreased by a variety means such

as lwering energy demands, making existing energy systems

mre eicient, increasing the cntributin renewable rms

energy prductin, and arestatin r stpping derestatin.

Pc c: Emtinal attachment t a place, which mayinclude the extent t which ne is dependent n that place t ul

ne’s gals.

Pc : The cmpnent identity that is assciated with

a particular lcale.

Pscp s: A descriptin behavirs that ne shuld

engage in as rmulated by ne’s reerence grup r the wider

sciety r culture.



Pc cpg: Practive cping is a rm anticipatry

cping in which anticipatin and planning play imprtant rles.

Pscgc ap: Internal adjustment t envirnmental

changes and disruptins, thrugh the management individual’s

cgnitive and emtinal respnses t perceived threats

and changing circumstances. In terms climate change,

psychlgical adaptatin can include cgnitive reappraisal, the

use prtectin mtivatin strategies, and erts at emtinregulatin.

Pscsc pcs: The cnsequences an intrduced

interventin r natural change in the envirnment. Psychscial

impacts ccur at the level individual r shared experience

(e.g., husehlds r cmmunity) and entail cnsequences such

as distress r anxiety, heightened envirnmental cncerns, and

ptimism r pessimism abut the uture.

rcc: “Resistance t bvius attempts at behaviral

cntrl, usually by ding the reverse the behavir that isdesired” (Claytn & Myers, 2009, p. 211).

rsc (Pscgc): Individual, cllective, r grup

patterns successul adaptatin (in the cntext signicant

risk r adversity.) Enduring the temprary upheaval lss r

ptentially traumatic events remarkably well, with n apparent

disruptin in ability t unctin, and mving n t new challenges

with apparent ease. Resilience typically arises rm the peratin

cmmn human adaptatin systems rather than rm rare r

extrardinary prcesses.

rsc (C cg, ss c): The ability

a system t respnd and recver rm disasters. It includes

inherent cnditins that allw the system t absrb impacts, cpe

with an event, re-rganize and change in respnse t a threat.

rs s: Envirnments whse qualities

reduce stress and restre cgnitive abilities. Natural

envirnments have been shwn t be particularly eective at this.

rs: A situatin r event in which smething human value

(including humans themselves) has been put at stake and where

the utcme is uncertain.

rs pps: Individual r public subjective evaluatins the

magnitude, prbability, r persnal vulnerability t a perceived

risk.

rs ssss: A mre rmal and bjective assessment

risk by experts, against established criteria, t an envirnment,

envirnmental attribute, r cmmunity r grup peple (e.g.,

Gird, 2007; o’Rirdan, 1995). (JR)

rs pcp: Subjective belie (whether ratinal r irratinal)

held by an individual, grup, r sciety abut the chance

ccurrence a risk r abut the extent, timing, r cnsequences

its eect(s).

Sc p: Cntinually adjusting grup r cmmunity-

level respnses t cncerns and perceptins threats and

changing circumstances. Examples include grup level sense-

making, adjusting explanatins, respnsibility attributins, meta-

narratives, shared accunts and scial cnstructins climate

change as a risk dmain.

Sc pc s: The intensicatin perceptins

risk and its management via cmmunicatin prcesses

including the way that risk signals (images, signs, symbls) aredisseminated via psychlgical, scial, institutinal, r cultural

prcesses. The theretical starting pint is that the assumptin

that ‘risk events’ which might include actual r hypthesised

accidents and incidents (r even news reprts n existing risks),

will be largely irrelevant r lcalised in their impact unless human

beings bserve and cmmunicate them t thers.

Sc : A situatin in which the pursuit individual’s

gals cnict with cllective gals.

Sc ps: “Systems values, ideas and practices”

that “enable individuals t rientate themselves in their material

and scial wrld and t master it” and “enable cmmunicatin

t take place amngst members a cmmunity by prviding

them with a cde r scial exchange and a cde r naming and

classiying unambiguusly the varius aspects their wrld and

their individual and grup histry.” Scial representatins are

built n shared knwledge and understanding cmmn reality.

In the cntext climate change, scial representatins include

media cverage, articles, bks, magazines, dcumentary andppular culture lms, research ndings, cllective knwledge,

and public discurse abut climate change and its nature,

causes and cnsequences.

Sss: “Cnditins threat, demands, r structural

cnstraints that, by the very act their ccurrence existence,

call int questin the perating integrity the rganism”

(Wheatn, 1996, p. 32).



Ss p: Develpment that meets the

needs the present withut cmprmising the ability uture

generatins t meet their wn needs.

Sc cpg: The prcess apprpriating the nvel and

unamiliar in rder t make it intelligible and cmmunicable. This

includes sense-making such as naming the nvel and attributing

characteristics which allw the phenmenn t be talked abut.

In this understanding symblic cping is the cllective activity

a grup struggling t maintain the integrity its wrldview which

is als crucial r scial identity.

t pps: Evaluating the extent t which an upcming

situatin exceeds the perceptins abilities r resurces

needed t cpe. Threat appraisals dier rm challenge

appraisals where ne anticipates that ne has suicient abilities

and resurces needed t cpe and diers rm harm/lss

appraisals that ccur ater an event ccurs.

u ns C C Cg:

An internatinal envirnmental treaty set ut t reduce emissins

greenhuse gases in rder t cmbat glbal climate change. It

was agreed upn at the Earth Summit, staged in Ri de Janeir,

Brazil, in June 1992.

v (C cg): The extent t which systems

and individuals are susceptible t, and unable t cpe with,

adverse eects climate change. Vulnerability is a unctin

the characteristics climate change impacts (e.g., its magnitudeand rate change) and variatin in systems and individuals

(e.g., degree expsure t climate change impacts, individual

and cmmunity adaptive capacity, and cnnectedness t

cmmunities).

w: “An integrated set belies abut what is real, what

is knwable, what is valuable, and what it means t be human,

typically learned as part a cultural scializatin” (Claytn &

Myers, 2009, p. 212).



Baird, A. (2010). Think psychology . Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice

Hall.

Baum, A., & Fleming, I. (1993). Implicatins psychlgical

research n stress and technlgical accidents. American

Psychologist , 48 , 665-672.

Benight, C. C. (2004). Cllective eicacy llwing a series natural

disasters. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 17 , 401-420.

Bnann, G. A. (2004). Lss, trauma, and human resilience: Have we

underestimated the human capacity t thrive ater extremely

aversive events? American Psychologist , 59, 20-28.

Brk, A., Claytn, S., Myers, G., Reser, J. et al. (2007, September 11).

The pwer vluntary actins. Gristmill .

Burdge, R. J., & Vanclay, F. (1995). Scial impact assessment. In F.

Vanclay & R. J. Burdge (Eds.), Environmental and social impact

assessment (pp. 31–65). Brisbane: Jhn Wiley.

Chapman, M. (2008). Mitigatin strategies. In B. Lerner & K. Lerner

(Eds.), Climate change in context (pp. 657-659). Detrit, MI:

Gale.

Claytn, S., & Myers, G. (2009). Conservation psychology:

Understanding and promoting human care or nature. oxrd,

UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Chen, S., Evans, G. W., Stkls, D. & Krantz, D. S. (1986). Behavior,

health and environmental stress. New Yrk, NY: Plenum.

Chen, S. (1980). Ater eects stress n human perrmance

and scial behavir: A review research and thery.

Psychological Bulletin, 88 , 82-108.

Cutter, S. L., Barnes, L., Berry, M., Burtn, C., Evans, E., Tate, E., &

Webb, J. (2008). A place-based mdel r understanding

cmmunity resilience t natural disasters. Global

Environmental Change, 18 , 598-606.

Cutter, S. L., & Mitchell, J. T. (2001). Envirnmental adaptatin

and adjustment. In N.J. Smelser & P.B. Baltes (Eds.),

International encyclopedia o the social and behavioural

sciences (pp. 4576-4580). oxrd, UK: Elsevier.

Dunlap, R. E., & Rsa, E. A. (2001). Envirnmental scilgy. In E.

F. Brgatta & R .J. V. Mntgmery (Eds.), Encyclopedia o

sociology (Vl. 2, pp. 800-813). New Yrk, NY: Macmillan.

Gardner, G. Y., & Stern, P. C. (2008). The shrt list: The mst eective

actins U.S. Husehlds can take t curb climate change.

Environment, 50, 13-24.

Gird, R. (2007). Environmental psychology: Principles and practice

(4th ed.). Cleville, WA: optimal Bks.

Gilmre, L. (2008). IPCC Climate Change 2007 Reprt: Impacts,

adaptatin and vulnerability. In B. Lerner & K. Lerner (Eds.),

Climate change in context (pp. 574-579). Detrit, MI: Gale.

Gilmre, L. (2008). Adaptatin. In B. Lerner & K. Lerner (Eds.), Climate

change in context (pp. 9-15). Detrit, MI: Gale.

Hallman, W. K. & Wandersman, A. (1992). Attributin respnsibility

and individual and cllective cping with envirnmental

threats. Journal o Social Issues, 48 , 101-118.

Hewstne, M. (1989). Causal attributin: Frm cgnitive prcesses t

cllective belies. oxrd, UK: Basil Blackwell.

Intergvernmental Panel n Climate Change [IPCC]. (2007). Glossary

o terms used in the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report:

Working Group II (WG2). Retrieved rm http://www.ipcc.ch/

glssary/

Kaspersn, J. X, Kaspersn, R. E., Pidgen, N., & Slvic, P. (2003).

The scial amplicatin risk: Assessing teen years

research and thery. In N. Pidgen, R. E. Kaspersn, & P.

reerenCeS uSed toConStruCt GloSSarydeinitionS



Slvic (Eds.), The social amplifcation o risk (pp. 13-46).


LePre, S. J., & Evans, G. W. (1996). Cping with multiple stressrs

in the envirnment. In M. Zeidner & N. S. Endler (Eds.),

Handbook o coping: Theory, research, applications. (pp. 350-

377). New Yrk, NY: Wiley.

Liverman, D. (2001). Envirnmental risk and hazards. In N. J.

Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), International encyclopedia

o the social and behavioural sciences (pp. 4655-4659).

oxrd, UK: Elsevier.

Mscvici, S. (1973). Frewrd. In C. Herzlich (Ed.), Health and

illness: A social psychological analysis (pp. ix–xiv). Lndn,

England/New Yrk, NY: Academic Press.

Parry, M., Canziani, o., Palutik, J., van der Linden, P. & Hansn, C.

(Eds.). (2007). Climate change 2007: Impacts, adaptation

and vulnerability . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Philgene, G. & Deaux, K. (2001). Intrductin. In K. Deaux & G.

Philgene (Eds.), Representations o the social (pp. 3-7).

oxrd, UK: Blackwell.

Reilly, W. M. (2008). United Natins ramewrk cnventin n climate

change (UNFCCC). In B. Lerner & K. Lerner (Eds.), Climate

change in context (pp. 870-873). Detrit, MI: Gale.

Reser, J. P., & Bentrupperbäumer, J. M. (2005). The psychscial

impacts visitatin and use in Wrld Heritage Areas:

Researching and mnitring sustainable envirnments and

encunters. In W. L. Filh (Ed.), Handbook o sustainability

research (pp. 235-263). New Yrk, NY: Peter Lang Scientic

Publishers.

Reser, J. P., & Bentrupperbäumer, J. M. (2001). Reraming the nature

and scpe scial impact assessment: A mdest prpsal

relating t psychlgical and scial (psychscial) impacts.

In A. Dale, N. Taylr, & M. Lane (Eds.), Social assessment

Werner, W., & Krnberger, N. (2001). Killer tmates! Cllective

symblic cping with bitechnlgy. In K. Deaux & G.

Philgene (Eds.), Representations o the social (pp. 147-164)

oxrd, UK: Blackwell.

Wheatn, B. (1996). The dmains and bundaries stress cncepts.

In H. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Psychosocial stress: Perspectives on

structure, theory, lie-course, and methods (pp. 29-70). San

Dieg: Academic Press.

Wrld Cmmissin n Envirnment and Develpment. (1987). Our

common uture [Knwn as ‘The Brundtland Reprt’]. oxrd,

UK: oxrd University Press.

Documents

APA - Psychology of Global Climate Change