Efficacy-based and normative interventions for facilitating the diffusion of conservation behavior through social networks

Research suggests that encouraging motivated residents to reach out to others in their social network is an effective strategy for increasing the scale and speed of conservation action adoption. However, little is known about how to effectively encourage large numbers of residents to reach out to others about conservation causes. We examined the influence of normative and efficacy-based messaging at motivating residents to engage in and to encourage others to participate in native plant gardening in their community. To do so, we conducted a field experiment with messages on mailings and tracked native plant vouchers used. Efficacy messages tended to be more effective than normative messages at increasing residents’ willingness to reach out to others to encourage conservation action, as indicated by a several percentage point increase in native plant voucher use by residents’ friends and neighbors. Messages sometimes had different impacts on residents based on past behaviors and perceptions related to native plant gardening. Among these subgroups, efficacy and combined efficacy and norm messages most effectively encouraged individual and collective actions, as indicated by increased voucher usage. Our findings suggest that interventions that build residents’ efficacy for engaging in a conservation behavior and for reaching out to others may be a promising path forward for outreach. However, given our results were significant at a false discovery rate cutoff of 0.25 but not 0.05, more experimental trials are needed to determine the robustness of these trends.     

Framing Dynamics and Political Gridlock: The Curious Case of Hydraulic Fracturing in New York

‘Fracking’ was on New York's agenda since 2008, yet no decision was made about it until late 2014. The gridlock is an intriguing puzzle given that the Marcellus shale is considered a ‘world class’ energy supply, and development has been aggressive in other US states. While policy scholars typically conceptualize gridlock as policy stability, this paper examines it as a dynamic process by which competing discourse coalitions engage in interactive framing processes that (re)structure the discussion. This suggests that the interaction between contending coalitions influences gridlock. Yet, we lack knowledge about interactive framing between competing coalitions during policy controversies. Our main finding is that a central mechanism of gridlock is the production of conflict through interactive framing dynamics that deny a shared discursive space capable of ushering in a consensus, or reasoned agreement. In New York, this contest evolved from a policy consensus about the economic benefits of fracking to policy negotiation that incorporated environmental threats, and to prolonged policy controversy in which competing discourse coalitions contested notions of fracking in relation to energy production, environmental protection, public health, economic development, and governance. While a ban has been instituted, the failure to bridge discourse coalitions suggests that controversy will persist unless meaning disputes are resolved.     

Normative Framing and Public Attitudes toward Biofuels Policies

Although the power of elite issue frames to shape public attitudes toward different policies is well established, the relative influence of different types of frames in competitive framing environments remains uncertain. For example, we do not fully understand the relative influence of economic versus normative frames on the public's policy attitudes, despite the common use of both types of frames to promote the same policy in many settings. Using data from a 2010 national Internet survey, this paper investigates the relative influence of economic versus normative frames on public attitudes toward the contentious policy issue of biofuels. The results indicate the importance of normative frames in shaping public attitudes on this issue, suggesting the relevance of normative frames more generally in shaping public opinion beyond the narrow confines of typical “morality” policies such as abortion or gambling.     

Locating Co-presence in Media Messages about Global Warming

This paper responds to recent calls for alternative approaches to the analysis of environmental communication that uncover overlooked voices in the discussion of environmental issues. Borrowing core principles from critical rhetoric, it suggests a way to categorize media messages according to how human–nature relationships are constructed in media discourse. The paper illustrates how, in presenting contrasting and often oppositional constructions of human–nature relationships, the media messages examined articulate three recurrent (but not equal) discourses on global warming. These discourses include (1) nature-as-out-of-reach discourse, (2) nature-as-antagonist discourse, and (3) nature-as-co-present discourse. By juxtaposing these discourses, the paper shows how environmental communication scholars can engage in critical realism and political advocacy to illuminate latent public discourse that holds the potential to champion marginalized voices of nature and accentuate the interconnectedness of humans and the environment.     

Sources and Framing of Fracking: A Content Analysis of Newspaper Coverage in North Carolina,New York,and Pennsylvania

Research across several decades has mapped the way complex environmental issues with complicated policy implications are often differentially framed within the media, public, and policy agendas with major implications for how they are understood, discussed, and decided. Building on this work, this this study compared news coverage of the debate over natural gas “fracking” in New York, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina between the period 2008 and 2013. Examining state newspapers, the analysis evaluated the types of sources used, the assertions of these sources, and how the issue of fracking was framed. From a general perspective, this study reveals how differences in framing of an environmental and scientific controversy can be attributed to the locally relevant sources used in reporting, as well as the political, economic, and social factors that might be unique to a state. Specific to the debate over natural gas “fracking,” this study adds to our understanding of how such state-based factors influence the portrayal of the issue in the news media.     

Optimizing Messaging to Reduce Red Meat Consumption

Red meat production has a range of negative environmental impacts. We sought to characterize the motivations, environmental attitudes and demographics of red meat-eaters, and examine the effect of message framing in reducing future meat consumption. Canadian adult meat-eaters (593) completed a survey and were randomly assigned to one of six message treatments that presented information on the environmental impacts of meat production using frames representing social norms and/or place identity constructs. Taste and quality were the most important motivators for eating meat, while moral/ethical factors were the least. Forty-nine percent of respondents indicated they would reduce red meat intake after exposure to an information only message, while the social norms frame was more effective than others (χ2). Awareness of the environmental effects increased significantly after messaging for all 13 impacts. These findings should assist communicators with designing more effective messaging aimed at encouraging pro-environmental behaviours associated with meat consumption.     

Hannah Arendt’s turn to the self and environmental responses to climate change paralysis

Environmentalists have struggled with how to mobilize people to act in the face of widespread and now inevitable consequences of climate change. Significant responses to this challenge, such as incentivizing individual Green choices in the market and avoiding the rhetoric of catastrophe, continue the philosophical and political trends, identified by Hannah Arendt, that contribute to world alienation and the decline of politics. Environmental thinkers are invited to use Arendt’s theories of the turn to the self and political action to think critically about contemporary strategies to address climate change.     

Blowing policy bubbles: rethinking emissions targets and low-carbon energy policies in the U.K.

The issue of proportionality is central to climate policy debates about setting targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and the development of low-carbon energy. In effect, these debates centre on whether the perceived social costs outweigh the benefits of policies and, if not, whether this may lead to over-investment or ‘policy bubbles’. Political attention, agenda setting and policy image are all crucial drivers of ambitious policy formation, as seen in the case of the United Kingdom's (U.K.) Climate Change Act (2008). However, as political salience waned and economic depression dragged on, the cost of long-term climate targets has been reconsidered. Based on documentary analysis and 33 interviews with central political actors, this article presents a detailed account of how economic arguments have been used to reinterpret and challenge policies, using the heuristics of ‘over-investment’ and ‘policy bubbles’. Ultimately, arguments about proportionality hinge on which costs and benefits are considered. In the U.K., economic and technical framings are typically prioritised, but they do not explain contradictory and politically motivated policy decisions. We discuss these dynamics within the context of maturing renewable energy technologies, high energy prices and the U.K.’s cross-party consensus approach to climate politics.     

Sustainability and social inclusion? Examining the frames of Canadian English-speaking environmental movement organisations

Some scholars and activists have suggested that discourses of environmental sustainability do not include sufficient attention to social issues or environmental justice. Since social inclusion is a prevalent masterframe among activists and in social policy circles in Canada and elsewhere, our research explored the extent that English-speaking Canadian environmental non-governmental organisations (ENGOs) incorporate discursive aspects of social inclusion into their website communication. Social inclusion includes such issues as multiculturalism, gender inequality, low income and racialisation. We analysed mission statements, programmes and policy analysis presented by a sample of ENGOs drawn from the membership of the Canadian Environmental Network for evidence of a variety of indicators of attention to social inclusion. We conclude that environmental groups remain locked into an “environmentalist” frame that often ignores such issues. This has major implications for partnerships with other Canadian social movements.     

Strategic Framing of Climate Change by Industry Actors: A Meta-analysis

This study uses framing theory to analyze 38 studies on industry actors' climate change communication between 1990 and 2010. It identifies three consecutive phases, each characterized by one dominant master frame: in the early and mid-1990s the US fossil fuel and coal industry pushed the frame of scientific uncertainty. With the rundown to the Kyoto negotiations in 1997, the strategy shifted toward the socioeconomic consequences of mandatory emission reductions, particularly in the USA and Australia. At the same time, European industry actors started to promote industrial leadership in a climate protection, which today dominates across all the world regions. The study discusses potential triggers for the regional differences as well as the implications for further research.