Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

To Mitigate or Adapt? : Explaining Why Citizens Responding to Climate Change Favour the Former

Blennow, Kristina LU and Persson, Johannes LU orcid (2021) In Land 10(3).
Abstract
Why do citizens’ decisions made because they favour the mitigation of climate change outnumber those made because they favour adaptation to its impacts? Using data collected in a survey of 338 citizens of Malmö, Sweden, we tested two hypotheses. H1: the motivation for personal decisions because they favour adaptation to the impacts of climate change correlates with the decision-making agent´s knowledge of specific local impacts of climate change, and H2: the motivation for personal decisions because they favour mitigation of climate change correlates with the risk perception of the decision-making agent. While decisions made because they favour mitigation correlated with negative net values of expected impacts of climate change (risk... (More)
Why do citizens’ decisions made because they favour the mitigation of climate change outnumber those made because they favour adaptation to its impacts? Using data collected in a survey of 338 citizens of Malmö, Sweden, we tested two hypotheses. H1: the motivation for personal decisions because they favour adaptation to the impacts of climate change correlates with the decision-making agent´s knowledge of specific local impacts of climate change, and H2: the motivation for personal decisions because they favour mitigation of climate change correlates with the risk perception of the decision-making agent. While decisions made because they favour mitigation correlated with negative net values of expected impacts of climate change (risk perception), decisions made because they favour adaptation correlated with its absolute value unless tipping point behaviour occurred. Tipping point behaviour occurs here when the decision-making agent abstains from decisions in response to climate change in spite of a strongly negative or positive net value of expected impacts. Hence, the decision-making agents´ lack of knowledge of specific climate change impacts inhibited decisions promoting adaptation. Moreover, positive experiences of climate change inhibited mitigation decisions. Discussing the results, we emphasised the importance of understanding the drivers of adaptation and mitigation decisions. In particular, we stress that attention needs to be paid to the balance between decisions solving problems ‘here and now’ and those focusing on the ‘there and then’. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
climate change adaptation, climate change mitigation, tipping point behaviour, risk perception, net value of expected impacts, decision maker´s tipping point behaviour; systemic tipping point behaviou, systemic tipping point behaviour, climate change adaptation, climate change mitigation, tipping point behaviour, risk perception, net value of expected impacts, decision maker’s tipping point behaviour, systemic tipping point behaviour
in
Land
volume
10
issue
3
article number
240
pages
13 pages
publisher
MDPI AG
external identifiers
  • scopus:85102561521
ISSN
2073-445X
DOI
10.3390/land10030240
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
7cf516a6-f12b-4ef5-b2af-82f26ca38e31
date added to LUP
2021-03-01 10:40:34
date last changed
2022-12-08 22:54:33
@article{7cf516a6-f12b-4ef5-b2af-82f26ca38e31,
  abstract     = {{Why do citizens’ decisions made because they favour the mitigation of climate change outnumber those made because they favour adaptation to its impacts? Using data collected in a survey of 338 citizens of Malmö, Sweden, we tested two hypotheses. H1: the motivation for personal decisions because they favour adaptation to the impacts of climate change correlates with the decision-making agent´s knowledge of specific local impacts of climate change, and H2: the motivation for personal decisions because they favour mitigation of climate change correlates with the risk perception of the decision-making agent. While decisions made because they favour mitigation correlated with negative net values of expected impacts of climate change (risk perception), decisions made because they favour adaptation correlated with its absolute value unless tipping point behaviour occurred. Tipping point behaviour occurs here when the decision-making agent abstains from decisions in response to climate change in spite of a strongly negative or positive net value of expected impacts. Hence, the decision-making agents´ lack of knowledge of specific climate change impacts inhibited decisions promoting adaptation. Moreover, positive experiences of climate change inhibited mitigation decisions. Discussing the results, we emphasised the importance of understanding the drivers of adaptation and mitigation decisions. In particular, we stress that attention needs to be paid to the balance between decisions solving problems ‘here and now’ and those focusing on the ‘there and then’.}},
  author       = {{Blennow, Kristina and Persson, Johannes}},
  issn         = {{2073-445X}},
  keywords     = {{climate change adaptation; climate change mitigation; tipping point behaviour; risk perception; net value of expected impacts; decision maker´s tipping point behaviour; systemic tipping point behaviou; systemic tipping point behaviour; climate change adaptation; climate change mitigation; tipping point behaviour; risk perception; net value of expected impacts; decision maker’s tipping point behaviour; systemic tipping point behaviour}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  month        = {{03}},
  number       = {{3}},
  publisher    = {{MDPI AG}},
  series       = {{Land}},
  title        = {{To Mitigate or Adapt? : Explaining Why Citizens Responding to Climate Change Favour the Former}},
  url          = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/94622596/land_10_00240.pdf}},
  doi          = {{10.3390/land10030240}},
  volume       = {{10}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}