Advertisement

Culturing and Framing: Working on the Ills of the Past, in the Present, for Tomorrow’s Benefits

  • Laurence L. Delina
Chapter

Abstract

The proliferation of climate-related images and symbolisms, such as pictures of emasculated bears, drowned cities, and polluted air, had led to some climate action but was weakly received in general. This weak reception occurs for myriad reasons. The behavioral and brain sciences suggest that the human moral judgment system is poorly equipped to identify future, large-scale, and long-term hazards such as those brought about by climate impacts. Culturing and framing are essential in effective climate action communication and require a better understanding of human behaviors. Visceral experiences of trigger events, mostly in the form of some psychological tipping points remain important; but they are never guaranteed. Campaigns where individuals could care about a sustainable and just future and empathize with people affected by climate impacts are the ones that are well received. Culturing and framing, thus, would involve narratives of hope, the sense of the possible, pride, and gratitude that could be attached to many climate actions in spaces where people can contribute using their existing capacities.

Keywords

Culturing Framing Climate denial Climate symbols Dissonance Climate porn Climate justice Democracy 

References

  1. American Psychological Association (APA). (2009). Psychology and Global Climate Change: Addressing a Multi-faceted Phenomenon and Set of Challenges. A Report by the Task Force on the Interface Between Psychology and Global Climate Change. Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, K., & Bows, A. (2012). A new paradigm for climate change. Nature Climate Change, 2, 639–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bain, P. G., Horsey, M. J., Bongiorno, R., & Jeffries, C. (2012). Promoting pro-environmental action in climate deniers. Nature Climate Change, 2, 600–603.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bauhardt, C. (2014). Solutions to the crisis? The Green New Deal, degrowth, and the solidarity economy: Alternatives to the capitalist growth economy from an ecofeminist economics perspective. Ecological Economics, 101, 60–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Benford, R. D., & Snow, D. A. (2000). Framing processes and social movements: An overview and assessment. Annual Review of Sociology, 26, 611–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Björnberg, K. E., Karlsson, M., Gilek, M., & Hansson, S. O. (2017). Climate and environmental science denial: A review of the scientific literature published in 1990–2015. Journal of Cleaner Production, 167, 229–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boyle-Baise, M. (2003). Doing democracy in social studies methods. Theory & Research in Social Education, 31, 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bradshaw, E. A. (2015). Blockadia rising: Rowdy greens, direct action and the Keystone XL pipeline. Critical Criminology, 23, 433–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cattaneo, C., D’Alisa, G., Kallis, G., & Zografos, C. (Eds.). (2012). Special issue: Politics, democracy and degrowth. Futures, 44, 515–654.Google Scholar
  10. Center for Research on Environmental Decisions (CRED). (2009). The Psychology of Climate Change Communication: A Guide for Scientists, Journalists, Educators, Political Aides, And the Interested Public. New York, CRED: Columbia University.Google Scholar
  11. Chapman, D. A., Lickel, B., & Markowitz, E. M. (2017). Reassessing emotion in climate change communication. Nature Climate Change, 7, 850–852.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Crane, D. (1994). Introduction: The challenge of the sociology of culture to sociology as a discipline. In D. Crane (Ed.), The Sociology of Culture (pp. 1–20). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  13. Cuny, F. (1983). Disasters and Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Dalton, D. (1993). Mahatma Gandhi: Nonviolent Power in Action. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  15. David, R. S. (1996). Re-democratization in the wake of the 1986 People Power Revolution: Errors and dilemmas. Kasarinlan, 11, 5–20.Google Scholar
  16. Delina, L. L. (2016). Strategies for Rapid Climate Mitigation: Wartime Mobilisation as a Model for Action? Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Demski, C., Capstick, S., Pidgeon, N., Sposato, R. G., & Spence, A. (2017). Experience of extreme weather affects climate change mitigation and adaptation responses. Climatic Change, 140, 149–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dunlap, R. E., & McCright, A. M. (2011). Organized climate change denial. In J. S. Dryzek, R. B. Norgaard, & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society (pp. 144–160). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Festinger, L. (1962). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Fisher, D., & McInerney, P.-B. (2012). The limits of networks in social movement retention: On canvassers and their careers. Mobilization: An International Quarterly, 17, 109–128.Google Scholar
  21. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fossil-Free. (2018). Divestment Commitments. https://gofossilfree.org/divestment/commitments/.
  23. German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU). (2011). World in Transition: A Social Contract for Sustainability. Berlin: WBGU.Google Scholar
  24. Gifford, R. (2011). The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. American Psychologist, 66, 290–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gifford, R., Lacroix, K., & Chen, A. (2018). Understanding responses to climate change: Psychological barriers to mitigation and new theory of behavioral choice. In S. Clayton & C. Manning (Eds.), Psychology and Climate Change: Human Perceptions, Impacts, and Responses (pp. 161–183). London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review, 108(4), 814–834.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Haidt, J. (2007). The new synthesis on moral psychology. Science, 316, 998–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Harrington, W. (2000). Rosa Parks and the Montgomery Bus Boycott. In P. Winters (Ed.), The Civil Rights Movement (pp. 45–57). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Howard, E. (2016, May 7). Philippines investigates Shell and Exxon over climate change. The Guardian.Google Scholar
  30. Irfan, U. (2018, October 30). The Supreme Court is about to decide if the children’s climate lawsuit can proceed. Vox.Google Scholar
  31. Judd, C. M., James-Hawkins, L., Yzerbyt, V., & Kashima, Y. (2005). Fundamental dimensions of social judgment: Understanding the relations between judgments of competence and warmth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 899–913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kahan, D. M., & Braman, D. (2008). The self-defensive cognition of self-defense. American Criminal Law Review, 45, 1–65.Google Scholar
  33. Kahan, D., Jenkins-Smith, H., & Braman, D. (2011). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Komisar, L. (1987). Corazon Aquino: The Story of a Revolution. New York: George Braziller.Google Scholar
  35. Kraft, P. W., Lodge, M., & Taber, C. S. (2015). Why people “don’t trust the evidence”: Motivated reasoning and scientific beliefs. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 658, 121–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Krugman, P. (2018, October 15). Donald and the deadly deniers. The New York Times.Google Scholar
  37. Kurzman, C. (2008). Meaning-making in social movements. Anthropological Quarterly, 81, 5–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N., & Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 234–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Leiserowitz, A., & Smith, N. (2017). Affective imagery, risk perceptions, and climate change communication. In E. von Storch (Ed.), Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Climate Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Lewandowsky, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2018). Climate communication for biologists: When a picture can tell a thousand words. PLoS Biology, 16, e20006004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lorenzoni, I., Nicholson-Cole, S., & Whitmarsh, L. (2007). Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Global Environmental Change, 17, 445–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mann, M. E., Hassol, S. J., & Toles, T. (2017, July 12). Doomsday scenarios are as harmful as climate change denial. The Washington Post.Google Scholar
  43. Markowitz, E. M., & Shariff, A. F. (2012). Climate change and moral judgement. Nature Climate Change, 2, 243–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. McKibben, B. (2012, July 19). Global warming’s terrifying new math. RollingStone.Google Scholar
  45. McKibben, B. (2013, April 11). The fossil fuel resistance. Rollingstone.Google Scholar
  46. Mooney, C. (2011, May/June). The Science of Why We Don’t Believe Science. Mother Jones. https://bit.ly/2Ez9egt.
  47. Moser, S. C. (2007). More bad news: The risk of neglecting emotional responses to climate change information. In S. Moser & L. Dilling (Eds.), Creating a Climate for Change: Communicating Climate Change and Facilitating Social Change (pp. 64–80). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Moser, S. C. (2010). Communicating climate change: History, challenges, process and future directions. WIREs Climate Change, 1, 31–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Moyer, B., McAllister, J., Finley, M. L., & Soifer, S. (2001). Doing Democracy: The MAP Model for Organizing Social Movements. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.Google Scholar
  50. Nepstad, S. E. (2011). Nonviolent Revolutions: Civil Resistance in the Late 20th Century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Neslen, A. (2015, June 24). Dutch government ordered to cut carbon emissions in landmark ruling. The Guardian.Google Scholar
  52. O’Neill, S. J., & Hulme, M. (2009). An iconic approach for representing climate change. Global Environmental Change, 19, 402–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. O’Neill, S. J., & Nicholson-Cole, S. (2009). “Fear won’t do it”: Promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Science Communications, 30, 355–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Oreskes, N., Conway, E., Karoly, D. J., Gergis, J., Neu, U., & Pfister, C. (2008). The denial of global warming. In S. White, C. Pfister, & F. Mauelshagen (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Climate History. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  55. Parks, R. (1992). Rosa Parks: My Story. New York: Dial Books.Google Scholar
  56. Pelling, M., & Dill, K. (2009). Disaster politics: Tipping points for change in the adaptation of socio-political regimes. Progress in Human Geography, 34, 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Roberts, D. (2017, July 11). Did that New York magazine climate story freak you out? Good. Vox.Google Scholar
  58. Rosewarne, S., Goodman, J., & Pearse, R. (2014). Climate Action Upsurge: The Ethnography of Climate Movement Politics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Schock, K. (2005). Unarmed Insurrections: People Power Movement in Nondemocracies. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  60. Segnit, N., & Ereaut, G. (2007). Warm Words II: How the Climate Story Is Evolving and the Lessons We Can Learn for Encouraging Public Action. London, UK: Institute for Public Policy Research.Google Scholar
  61. Sisco, M. R., Bosetti, V., & Weber, E. U. (2017). When do extreme weather events generate attention to climate change? Climatic Change, 143, 227–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Snow, D. A. (2007). Framing and social movements. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology. Malden, MA: Wiley.Google Scholar
  63. Snow, D. A. (2013). Framing and social movements. In D. A. Snow, D. della Porta, B. Klandermans, & D. McAdam (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of Social and Political Movements. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  64. Snow, D. A., & Benford, R. D. (1988). Ideology, frame resonance, and participant mobilization. International Social Movement Research, 1, 197–217.Google Scholar
  65. Spence, A., Poortinga, W., Butler, C., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2011). Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature Climate Change, 1, 46–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Srnicek, N., & Williams, A. (2016). Inventing the Future: Postcapitalism and a World Without Work. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  67. Stern, P. C. (2012). Psychology: Fear and hope in climate messages. Nature Climate Change, 2, 572–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Stevenson, K., & Peterson, N. (2015). Motivating action through fostering climate change hope and concern and avoiding despair among adolescents. Sustainability, 8, 6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Stirling, A. (2014). Transforming power: Social science and the politics of energy choices. Energy Research & Social Science, 1, 83–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Stoknes, P. E. (2014). Rethinking climate communications and the “psychological climate paradox”. Energy Research & Social Science, 1, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Stoll-Kleeman, S., O’Riordan, T., & Jaeger, C. C. (2001). The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: Evidence from Swiss focus groups. Global Environmental Change, 11, 107–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Swim, J. K., Stern, P. C., Doherty, T. J., Clayton, S., Reser, J. P., Weber, E. U., et al. (2011). Psychology’s contributions to understanding and addressing global climate change. American Psychology, 66, 241–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. The Next Systems Project. (2018). https://thenextsystem.org.
  74. Thomas, E. F., McGarty, C., & Mavor, K. I. (2009). Transforming “apathy into movement”: The role of prosocial emotions in motivating action for social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13, 310–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Thompson, M. R. (1995). The Anti-Marcos Struggle: Personalistic Rule and Democratic Transition in the Philippines. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Wallace-Wells, D. (2017, July 9). The uninhabitable earth. New York Magazine.Google Scholar
  77. Weber, E. U. (2006). Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: Why global warming does not scare us (yet). Climatic Change, 77, 103–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Weber, E. U. (2010). What shapes perceptions of climate change? WIREs Climate Change, 1, 332–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Zilk, E. (2016). The Climate Mobilization Victory Plan. The Climate Mobilization.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Laurence L. Delina
    • 1
  1. 1.Boston UniversityBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations