The shrinks have decided that it is high time they establish their position and role on climate change; the American Psychological Association put together a task force to figure out why, in a nation where 75 to 80% of the population believes climate change is an important issue, the vast majority of people have taken virtually no action.
The main reasons for inaction are reproduced here:
Uncertainty – Research has shown that uncertainty over climate change reduces the frequency of “green” behavior.
Mistrust – Evidence shows that most people don’t believe the risk messages of scientists or government officials.
Denial – A substantial minority of people believe climate change is not occurring or that human activity has little or nothing to do with it, according to various polls.
Undervaluing Risks – A study of more than 3,000 people in 18 countries showed that many people believe environmental conditions will worsen in 25 years. While this may be true, this thinking could lead people to believe that changes can be made later.
Lack of Control – People believe their actions would be too small to make a difference and choose to do nothing.
Habit – Ingrained behaviors are extremely resistant to permanent change while others change slowly. Habit is the most important obstacle to pro-environment behavior, according to the report.
The psychologists suggest that the way to tackle habits is through immediate feedback and quick returns. If people can see the results of their actions today, and save money today, then they are much more likely to take action today. Successful short-term action then motivates people to take action on changes with longer-term paybacks.
For example, in the context of energy-efficiency, a short-term payback period and immediate feedback on energy savings seems to be the ticket. Yet, we observe many energy efficiency opportunities which easily meet these criteria but are not being acted upon. In HAC’s experience, providing the information alone is insufficient. A well designed behaviour change program is necessary to have a substantial long-term impact on the energy use and emissions of an organisation.
As one would expect, the psychologists have a whole arsenal of weaponry that can be thrown at this issue.
“Many of the shortcomings of policies based on only a single intervention type, such as technology, economic incentives or regulation, may be overcome if policy implementers make better use of psychological knowledge,”
The APA media release is worth a read, and a quick Google search turned up a great resource for links and tools on the Australian Psychology Society’s website.
