Letter to the Editor:
Most people in advanced economies, which includes the U.S., are highly concerned about the personal impact of climate change and are willing to make changes to address the issue with personal and international action, according to a new Pew Research Center survey.
The climate change controversy is an example of conflict that arises between groups with different outlooks. It results from very different interpretations of what is happening (e.g. change has always happened, is it nature made or man made, etc) Within America the sharp ideological divides on climate change are greater than in other nations.
Why is this?
Some Americans consider the crisis language overblown, leading to added skepticism about climate change generally.
26% of US citizens say warming is mostly caused by natural patterns in the environment and another 14% do not believe there’s evidence the Earth is warming at all. (Pew)
A number of U.S. adults don’t think we can solve this problem.
We are sharply divided in our views of how or even if institutions or countries can effectively respond to climate change. This divide is sharply along partisan lines in the U.S. Just 23% of Republicans are confident the community’s actions will reduce the effects of climate change. (Pew)
Some say actions taken to combat climate change, like the Paris Agreement, will harm the economy. About a third of Americans say these actions will harm the economy, one-third believe they will benefit the economy and around a third say there will be no impact. (Pew)
Then there is the 47% of Americans who think we’re doing a good job of dealing with climate change, particularly compared to other countries. 67% of conservatives in the U.S. say the country is doing a good job, but only 26% of liberals agree. (Pew)
Many widely rejected the national news media as a credible source for climate information. They see these outlets as presenting information that suits their own agendas. Scientists' presentation of facts/data can be persuasive but only if viewed as not being tainted by who paid for the research or the scientists' beliefs.
For some, many actions taken are not respecting individual freedoms – and individual choice.
And the list goes on…..
What to do:
Government action that avoids financial burden, respects personal freedoms and stays local help to bridge the divide. Giving people the information needed for them to decide what they want to do can foster personal responsibility.
Presentation of local information by local scientists, who come across as experts without political leanings, can influence some.
And the list goes on.
Karen Burnett-Kurie
Comentarios