Laypeople’s Risky Decisions in the Climate Change Context: Climate Engineering as a Risk-Defusing Strategy?

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2015, Pages 533-559

  Amelung, Dorothee ^a   Funke, Joachim ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HEIDELBERG   (Germany)

Author keywords

climate engineering; climate politics; metacognition; moral judgment; public acceptance; risk perception; values

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919873577     PISSN: 10807039     EISSN: 15497860     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10807039.2014.932203     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Amelung D and Funke J. 2013. Dealing with the uncertainties of climate engineering: Warnings from a psychological complex problem solving perspective. Technol Soc 35(1):32–40
2. Bär AS and Huber O. 2008. Successful or unsuccessful search for risk defusing operators: Effects on decision behaviour. Eur J Cogn Psychol 20(4):807–27
3. Bellamy R, Chilvers J, Vaughan N, 2012. A review of climate geoengineering appraisals. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change 3(6):597–615. doi:10.1002/wcc.197
4. Bellamy R and Hulme M. 2011. Beyond the tipping point: understanding perceptions of abrupt climate change and their implications. Wea Climate Soc 3(1):48–60. doi:10.1175/2011WCAS1081.1
5. Bostrom A, O’Connor RE, Böhm G, 2012. Causal thinking and support for climate change policies: International survey findings. Global Environ Chang 22(1):210–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.09.012
6. Botetzagias I and Schuur W. 2012. Active greens: An analysis of the determinants of green party members’ activism in environmental movements. Environ Behav 44(4):509–44. doi:10.1177/0013916510393278
7. Corner A and Pidgeon N. 2010. Geoengineering the climate: the social and ethical implications. Environment 52(1):24–37
8. Crutzen PJ. 2006. Albedo enha ncement by stratospheric sulfur injections: a contribution to resolve a policy dilemma? Clim Change 77(3–4):211–20. doi:10.1007/s10584–006–9101-y
9. Davies GT. 2010. Geoengineering: A critique. Climate Law 1:429–41
10. Dutt V and Gonzalez C. 2012. Decisions from experience reduce misconceptions about climate change. J Environ Psychol 32:19–29. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2011.10.003
11. Galaz V. 2012. Geo-engineering, governance, and social-ecological systems: critical issues and joint research needs. Ecol Soc 17(1):24. doi:10.5751/ES-04677–170124
12. German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU). 2000. World in Transition. Strategies for Managing Global Environmental Risks. Annual Report 1998. Springer, Berlin, Germany
13. Gifford R. 2011. The dragons of inaction. Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation. Am Psychol 66(4):290–302. doi:10.1037/a0023566
14. Huber O. 2007. Behavior in risky decisions: Focus on risk defusing. In: Abdellaoui M, Luce RD, Machina M, et al. (eds), Uncertainty and risk: Mental, formal, experimental representations, pp 291–306. Springer, Berlin, Germany
15. Huber O. 2012. Risky decisions: Active risk management. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 21(1):26–30
16. Huber O and Huber OW. 2008. Gambles vs. quasi-realistic scenarios: Expectations to find probability and risk-defusing information. Acta Psychol 127:222–36. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.05.002
17. Huber O and Kunz U. 2007. Time pressure in risky decision-making: Effect on risk defusing. Psychol Sci 49(4):415–26
18. Huber O, Wider R, and Huber OW. 1997. Active information search and complete information presentation in naturalistic risky decision tasks. Acta Psychol 95:15–29. doi:10.1016/S0001–6918(96)00028–5
19. Huber O, Beutter C, Montoya J, 2001. Risk-defusing behaviour: Towards an understanding of risky decision-making. Eur J Cogn Psychol 13:409–26. doi:10.1080/09541440125915
20. Huber O, Huber OW, and Bär AS. 2011. Information search and mental representation in risky decision making: The advantages first principle. J Behav Decis Making 24(3):223–48. doi:10.1002/bdm.674
21. Kahan D. 2010. Fixing the communications failure. Nature 463:296–7. doi:10.1038/463296a
22. Kahan DM, Jenkins-Smith HC, Tarantola T, 2012. Geoengineering and the Science Communication Environment: A Cross-Cultural Experiment. The Cultural Cognition Project Working Paper No. 92. Available at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1981907 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1981907 (accessed July 29, 2013)
23. Kahnemann D and Tversky A. 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–91
24. Keith DW. 2010. Photophoretic levitation of engineered aerosols for geoengineering. PNAS 107(38):16428–31
25. Kostov P and Lingard J. 2003. Risk management: A general framework for rural development. J Rural Stud 19(4):463–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0743–0167(03)00026–3
26. Lion R, Meertens RM, and Bot I. 2002. Priorities in information desire about unknown risks. Risk Anal 22(4):765–76. doi:10.1111/0272–4332.00067
27. Mercer AM, Keith DW, and Sharp JD. 2011. Public understanding of solar radiation management. Environ Res Lett 6:1–9. doi:10.1088/1748–9326/6/4/044006
28. NERC (Natural Environmental Research Council). 2010. Experiment Earth? Report on a Public Dialogue on Geoengineering. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, USA
29. Ott K. 2011. Argumente für und wider “Climate Engineering” [Arguments for and against “climate engineering”]. In: Maring M (ed), Fallstudien zur Ethik in Wissenschaft, Wirtschaft, Technik und Gesellschaft [Case studies concerning the ethics of science, business, technology and society. Series of the centre for business and technology ethics], vol 4, pp 198–210. KIT Scientific Publishing, Karlsruhe, Germany
30. Poumadere M, Bertoldo R, and Samadi J. 2011. Public perceptions and governance of controversial technologies to tackle climate change: Nuclear power, carbon capture and storage, wind, and geoengineering. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change 2(5):712–27. doi:10.1002/wcc.134
31. Ranyard R and McHugh S. 2012. Defusing the risk of borrowing: The psychology of payment protection insurance decisions. J Econ Psychol 33(4): 738–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2012.02.002
32. Renn O. 2005. Technikakzeptanz: Lehren und Rückschlüsse der Akzeptanzforschung für die Bewältigung des technischen Wandels [Technology acceptance: lessons and conclusions from public acceptance research for addressing the challenge of technological change]. Technikfolgenabschätzung, Theorie und Praxiss 14(3):29–38
33. Renn O. 2008. White paper on risk governance: Toward an integrative framework. In: Renn O and Walker KD (eds), Global risk governance. Concept and practice using the IRGC framework, vol. 1, pp. 3–73. Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht. doi:10.1007/978–1–4020–6799–0_1s
34. Renn O and Rohrmann B. 2010. Cross-Cultural Risk Perception: A Survey of Empirical Studies. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands
35. Rickels W, Klepper G, Dovern J, 2011. Large-Scale Interventions into the Climate System? Assessing the Climate Enginnering Debate. Scoping Report Conducted on Behalf of the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF). Kiel Earth Institute, Kiel, Germany
36. Robock A. 2008. 20 reasons why geoengineering may be a bad idea. Bull At Sci 64(2):14–8,59.doi:10.2968/064002006
37. Royal Society. 2009. Geoengineering the Climate. Science, Governance and Uncertainty. The Royal Society, London, UK
38. Schulz S. 2011a. Geoengineering kann ein Plan B in der Klimapolitik sein [Geoengineering can be a plan B for climate politics]. Zeit Online. Retrieved 29.11., 2011, from http://www.zeit.de/wissen/umwelt/2011–11/gastbeitrag-geoengineering-weltklimakonferenz (accessed November 29, 2011)
39. Schulz S. 2011b. Schwefelt den Himmel, düngt die Meere [Sulfur the sky, fertilize the oceans], Financial Times Germany, November 29:Sect. 24 (col. 1)
40. Shiloh S, Gerad L, and Goldman B. 2006. Patients’ information needs and decision-making processes: What can be learned from genetic counselees? Health Psychol 25(2):211–19. doi:10.1037/0278–6133.25.2.211
41. Slovic P. 1987. Perception of risk. Science 236(4799):280–5. doi:10.1126/science.3563507
42. Svenson O. 1996. Decision making and the search for fundamental psychological regularities: What can be learned from a process perspective? Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 65(3):252–67. doi:10.1006/obhd.1996.0026
43. Tobler C, Visschers VHM, and Siegrist M. 2012. Addressing climate change: Determinants of consumers’ willingness to act and to support policy measures. J Environ Psychol 32:197–207
44. Tversky A and Kahnemann D. 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211(4481):453–8. doi:10.1126/science.7455683
45. Wilke M, Haug H, and Funke J. 2008. Risk-specific search for risk-defusing operators. Swiss J Psychol 67(1):29–40. doi:10.1024/1421–0185.67.1.29
46. Williamson J, Ranyard R, and Cuthbert L. 2000a. Risk management in everyday insurance decisions: Evidence from a process tracing study. Risk Dec Pol 5(1):19–38
47. Williamson J, Ranyard R, and Cuthbert L. 2000b. A conservation-based process tracing method for use with naturalistic decisions: An evaluation study. Brit J Psychol 91:203–21. doi:10.1348/000712600161790