Believing, Belonging
and Behaving: Exploring mismatch between
climate change perceptions and
individual mitigation behaviours
Raya Muttarak [email protected]
Our Common Future Under Climate Change,
Paris, Session 2240, 8th July 2015
Background
• Lifestyles and consumption patterns are
closely related to GHG producing sectors
• 60% of total GHG emission in the EU came
from residential, transportation and energy
sectors (European Commission 2014)
• Individual behavioural change is a quick
option in emission reduction
• What are underlying barriers to behavioural
change?
Integrated 3Bs model for assessing factors
determining mitigation behaviours
Individual
mitigation and
adaptation
behaviours
Macro level
factors - Technological
availability
- Climate policy
- Country socio-
demographic
characteristics
- Media
Meso level
factors - Social networks
- Social capital
- Community socio-
demographic
characteristics
- Risk exposure
- Values
- Knowledge
Individual
factors - Socio-
demographic
characteristics
e.g., age,
gender,
education,
income
Belonging
Environmental factors - Temperature, Rainfall, Extreme weather events
Climate change beliefs
Data
• Eurobarometer surveys 2008, 2009, 2011,
2013 (n=111,648)
• Multi-stage random probability sampling
• 27 EU member states + Croatia, Turkey,
Macedonia
• ~ 1,000 respondents per country
• Adults aged ≥15 years
Outcomes of interest
1. Climate change perception
“How serious a problem do you think climate
change is at this moment?” (scale 1-10)
2. Taking mitigation actions
“Do you totally agree, tend to agree, tend to
disagree or totally disagree that you personally
have taken actions aimed at helping to fight
climate change?” (0,1)
3. Specific actions taken (0,1)
Fig 1: Relationship between climate change
concern and undertaking mitigation actions
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZ
DE
DK
EE
ES
FI
FR
GBGR
HU
IE
IT
LT
LU
LV
MT
NL
PL
PT
RO
SESI
SK
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
% t
akin
g m
itig
ation
actio
n
50 60 70 80 90
% perceiving climate change as a very serious problem
Low concern, High action High concern, High action
Low concern, Low action
High concern, Low action
Fig.2: % taking mitigation actions by gender
64 64
53
41
29 31 26 28
19 21
9 8 6 3
70 67
60
48
36 33
31 27
16 19
10 7
5 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80 Male
Female
Fig.3: % using fuel-efficient car
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZDE
DK
EE
ES
FI
FR
GB
GR
HR
HU
IE
IT
LT
LU
LV
MT
NL PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
SK
30% up
20-29%
10-19%
0-9%
%Using efficient car
Fig.4: % separating waste for recycling
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZDE
DK
EE
ES
FI
FR
GB
GR
HR
HU
IE
IT
LT
LU
LV
MT
NL PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
SK
80-100%
60-79%
40-59%
20-39%
0-19%
%Recycling
Fig.5: % installing equipment generating
renewable energy
AT
BE
BG
CY
CZDE
DK
EE
ES
FI
FR
GB
GR
HR
HU
IE
IT
LT
LU
LV
MT
NL PL
PT
RO
SE
SI
SK
8% up
6-7.9%
4-5.9%
2-3.9%
0-1.9%
%Using renewable energy
Fig.6: % taking mitigation actions by concern
about climate change
61
40
29
58
48
25 26
8
29
21 17
7 5 3
69
46
33
65
55
30 27
10
33
19 17
7 5 3
70
48
35
69
64
31 28
10
34
20 17
7 5 3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80No concern
Concerned
Very concerned
Fig.7
% using fuel-efficient car by concern about
climate change
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
No concern Concerned Very concerned
Men
Primary Secondary Tertiary
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
No concern Concerned Very concerned
Women
Primary Secondary Tertiary
Next steps…
• Question remains:
- What factors matter in promoting behaviours?
• Multilevel-model with country random
intercept
- 14% between-country variance
- Women, older age, higher education, married,
children in household, satisfied with life,
manager/white collar take more mitigation actions
• Need to consider macro-level factors
- Climate variability, macro-economic conditions,
climate and environmental policies
THANK YOU
Recommended