csiro second annual survey australian attitudes climate change

8/13/2019 CSIRO Second Annual Survey Australian Attitudes Climate Change

1/38

Second Annual Survey of Australian

Attitudes to Climate Change: INTERIM

REPORT

Leviston, Z. & Walker, I.

Social & Behavioural Sciences Research Group

September 2011


2/38

Enquiries should be addressed to:Dr. Iain WalkerResearch Group LeaderEcosystem SciencesPhone: 61 8 9333 6291Fax: 61 8 9333 6444Email: [email protected]

Copyright and Disclaimer

2011 CSIRO To the extent permitted by law, all rights are reserved and no part of

this publication covered by copyright may be reproduced or copied in any form or by

any means except with the written permission of CSIRO.

Important DisclaimerCSIRO advises that the information contained in this publication comprises general

statements based on scientific research. The reader is advised and needs to be aware

that such information may be incomplete or unable to be used in any specific situation.

No reliance or actions must therefore be made on that information without seeking prior

expert professional, scientific and technical advice. To the extent permitted by law,

CSIRO (including its employees and consultants) excludes all liability to any person for

any consequences, including but not limited to all losses, damages, costs, expenses

and any other compensation, arising directly or indirectly from using this publication (in

part or in whole) and any information or material contained in it.


3/38

i

Contents

Executive Summary.................................................................................................. iv1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 51.1 Demographic profile of respondents ......................................................................... 52. General attitudes towards climate change...................................................... 6

2.1 Climate change and its causes ................................................................................. 62.2 What people think other people think ....................................................................... 92.3 Harm, worry, experience and importance ............................................................... 112.4 Trust and responsibility ........................................................................................... 132.5 Federal Government action on climate change ...................................................... 15

3. Climate change and behaviour....................................................................... 173.1 Climate change causes, political orientation and pro-environmental behaviour .... 193.2 Behaviour and climate change attitudes ................................................................. 21

4. How people think and feel about climate change......................................... 224.1 Cognitions ............................................................................................................... 224.2 Emotions ................................................................................................................. 23

5. Natural disasters ............................................................................................. 256. Changes over time.......................................................................................... 26

6.1 General attitudes towards climate change ............................................................. 266.2 Harm, worry, experience and importance ............................................................... 286.3 Trust ........................................................................................................................ 296.4 Responsibility for causing and responding to climate change ................................ 296.5 Pro-environmental behaviour.................................................................................. 296.6 Emotions ................................................................................................................. 316.7 Cognitions ............................................................................................................... 32

7. Concluding remarks........................................................................................ 33References ................................................................................................................ 35Acknowledgements .................................................................................................. 35


4/38

ii

List of Figures

Figure 1:Percentage of agreement that climate change is happening (n=5030) ................. 6

Figure 2: Typological breakdown of thoughts about climate change (n=2522) ................... 8Figure 3: Typological breakdown of thoughts about climate change with amended

phrasing (n=2508)................................................................................................................ 8Figure 4. Comparison of respondents actual levels of agreement with each statement

with their estimates of the Australian communitys agreement (n=5030)...................... 9Figure 5. Respondents estimates of the Australian communitys levels of agreement with

each statement, broken down by respondents own opinion type (n=5030)............... 10Figure 6: Levels of worry about climate change as a percentage of respondents............ 11Figure 7: Levels of personal harm arising from climate change as a percentage of

respondents........................................................................................................................ 11Figure 8: Levels of experience with climate change as a percentage of respondents...... 12Figure 9: Levels of the importance of climate change as a percentage of respondents... 12Figure 10: Mean ratings of trust in climate change information sources........................... 13Figure 11: Mean ratings of responsibility for causing climate change............................... 14Figure 12: Mean ratings of responsibility for responding to climate change ..................... 14Figure 13: Satisfaction with Federal Government action on climate change (n=5030) ..... 15Figure 14: Satisfaction with Federal Government action by climate change typology ..... 15Figure 15: Support for carbon pricing scheme with different phrasing (n=5030) .............. 16Figure 16: Support for carbon pricing scheme by climate change typology...................... 16Figure 17: Percentage of respondents engaging in explicit environmental behaviours ... 17Figure 18: Percentage of respondents engaging in climate change relevant behaviours 18Figure 19: Opinions about the causes of climate change by voting behaviour................. 19Figure 20: Pro-environmental behaviour scores by voting behaviour (n=4130) ................ 20Figure 21: Pro-environmental behaviour scores by climate change typology (n=5030) ... 20Figure 22: Perceptions of frequency of natural disasters (n=5030) ..................................... 25Figure 23: Perceptions of severity of natural disasters (n=5030)........................................ 25Figure 24: Levels of engagement in pro-environmental behaviour for any reason (n=1355)

.............................................................................................................................................. 30Figure 25: Levels of engagement in pro-environmental behaviour for mainly

environmental reasons (n=1355)...................................................................................... 30


5/38

iii

List of Tables

Table 1. Simultaneous regression analysis of climate change attitudes and behaviour.. 21Table 2: Mean ratings of agreement with cognitive evaluations of climate change.......... 22Table 3: Mean ratings of agreement with emotions prompted by climate change (n=5036)

............................................................................................................................................. 23Table 4: Most highly rated emotion descriptor for each climate change type................... 24Table 5: Agreement with statements about the causes of climate change over time....... 26Table 6: Comparison of numbers of repeat respondents selecting that climate change

was occurring due to natural or human activity over time (n=1355)............................ 27Table 7: Mean ratings of attitudes to by climate change over time (n=1355)..................... 28Table 8: Mean ratings of agreement with emotions prompted by climate change over time

(n=1355)............................................................................................................................... 31Table 9: Mean ratings of agreement with cognitive evaluations of climate change over

time (n=1355)...................................................................................................................... 32


6/38

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

iv

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A survey of 5030 Australians was conducted in July and August of 2011 seeking

peoples understandings ofclimate change. Respondents included a cohort of 1355

people who undertook a similar survey in 2010.

The findings suggest that most people agree that climate change is happening, but are

evenly split about the role played by human activity.

Whether people think that climate change is caused mainly by humans or is a natural

phenomenon is strongly linked to:

o who people think is responsible for causing and acting on climate change

o peoples perceptions of the importance of climate change

o how worried people are about climate change, and

o whether people think climate change will harm them personally.

Whether people engage in behaviours that help mitigate climate change is related to:

o opinions about the causes of climate change, but more importantly, to:

o how important and personally relevant climate change is perceived to be,

and

o feeling a moral and ethical responsibility to act on climate change.

Political orientation and voting behaviour are linked to people's climate change

opinions and behaviours. Support for policy responses to climate change was strongly

influenced by wording.

There was strong evidence that people overestimate the prevalence of climate change

denial in Australia. This overestimation is strongest for those who themselves disagree

that climate change is happening. Conversely, people underestimate levels of

acceptance that climate change is happening.

Analyses of responses from people who participated in both the 2010 and 2011

surveys revealed small reductions in rated responsibility for causing climate change

and for responding to it. There were small decreases in trust ratings of scientists for

those who thought climate change was a natural phenomenon. For those who

accepted human-induced climate change, there were increases in trust for government

and scientists, suggesting some polarisation of peripheral climate change attitudes.

There have been no dramatic shifts in climate change beliefs and attitudes between

2010 and 2011, although there is some suggestive evidence of a slight decrease in the

percentage accepting that humans contribute to climate change. The survey is due to

be repeated in July 2012.


7/38

INTRODUCTION

5

1. INTRODUCTION

This report presents the findings of a survey undertaken in July and August of 2011

with 5030 Australians. The survey forms part of a longitudinal research program

seeking to understand what and how Australians think about climate change.

Respondents included a cohort of 1355 people who undertook a similar survey in July

and August of 2010 (Leviston & Walker, 2010). We present a snapshot of current

Australian attitudes and behaviours relevant to climate change, and an analysis of

changes in attitudes since 2010. The survey is due to be repeated in July 2012.

The survey was administered online using a representative group of respondents from

across metropolitan, regional and rural Australia. Respondents were drawn from a

research-only panel of 300,000 individuals.1

1.1 Demographic profile of respondents

The demographic profile of respondents corresponded closely with the population

characteristics of Australians (ABS, 2010). Small differences were found between the

entire survey sample, repeat respondents, and the national population data on gender,

age groups and individual income, but these differences had no impact on the

interpretation of the data.2

1 A research-only panel means that panel members complete only surveys intended for

legitimate research purposes. This strategy reduces the number of professional surveyrespondents and increases the representativeness of respondents across behavioural, attitudinaland lifestyle criteria. The panel used for this survey is administered by ORU, an online

fieldwork company with QSOAP 'Gold Standard' and Global ISO 26362 standard accreditation.

2For the entire survey sample, those in lower income brackets were marginally under-

represented, while those in higher age brackets were marginally over-represented. Males weremarginally over-represented among the repeat respondents. We tested the effects of thesedifferences on dependent variables. Scores on the behaviour variable were significantlydifferent between males and females (p


8/38

GENERAL ATTITUDES TOWARDS CLIMATE CHANGE

6 Second annual survey of Australian attitudes to climate change: Interim ReportSeptember 2011

2. GENERAL ATTITUDES TOWARDS CLIMATE CHANGE

2.1 Climate change and its causes

An initial question asking about the existence of climate change revealed that roughly

three-quarters (77%) of respondents thought that climate change was happening

(Figure 1).

Figure 1:Percentage of agreement that climate change is happening (n=5030)

Women were more likely than men to agree that climate change was happening, but

the association was small.3Those who lived in regional towns were lesslikely to agree

that climate change was happening than those in capital cities or rural areas, but the

association was very small.4Younger people were marginally more likely to agree

climate change was happening, but again the association was very small.5Personal

3Women = 78.5% agreement; men = 75.8% agreement.X

2[1,N=5030] = 16.48,p= .01,

Cramers V= .06

4Eta squared = .005. This contrasts with findings from the 2010 where it was found that thosein rural areas were slightly less likely to think climate change was happening than those incapital cities or regional towns.

5Yes mean date of birth =1960, SD=15.68; No mean date of birth =1956.5, SD=14.64,

t(5028)=6.82,p


9/38


7

income levels were unrelated to agreement.6Those from higher household income

brackets were slightly more likely to agree that climate change was happening.7

Half of the respondents were asked to rate which of a series of statements best

described their thoughts about the causes of climate change (Figure 2). The wordingwas the same as that used in the 2010 survey.The large majority thought climate

change was happening, with slightly more considering it a result of natural temperature

variability than as something caused by humans.

The remaining half of respondents received the same question with the last statement

slightly altered to test for the effect of question wording (Figure 3). There was

significantly more agreement with the thought of human-induced climate change using

this phrasing, although the overall pattern of responses was similar.8For the remaining

2011 analyses, the four groups displayed in Figures 2 and 3were aggregated.9

6p = .08

7X

2[1,N=5030] = 5.22,p= .02, Cramers V= .02

8Chi-square goodness-of-fit test,X

2(3, 2508) = 13.78,p= .003.

9Regression analyses with these two groupings and other key attitudinal variables revealed no

significant differences attributable to question framing, hence the aggregation of the two items

into one variable was deemed appropriate.


10/38



Figure 2: Typological breakdown of thoughts about climate change (n=2522) Figure 3: Typological breakdown of thoughts about climate change with

amended phrasing (n=2508).


11/38


9

2.2 What people think other people think

Respondents were asked to estimate the percentage of Australians they thought would

agree with each of the four statements shown in Figures 2 and/or 3. Figure 4presents

a comparison of actual levels of agreement10with these estimates. On average,

respondents overestimatedthe proportion of people denying that climate change was

happening, and underestimatedthe proportion who thought climate change was

happening due to either natural or human processes.

Figure 4: Comparison of respondents actual levels of agreement with each statement with their

estimates of the Australian communitys agreement (n=5030)

10Here, actuallevels refer to responses by our own survey sample (n=5030).


12/38



Figure 5 shows these estimates broken into groups based on responses to the

questions shown in Figures 2 and 3. Every group estimated that their own belief type

was the most common. Those who denied or didnt know whether climate change washappening grossly overestimated levels of general agreement with their own

statement. Those who thought that climate change was happening, either due to

natural fluctuations or human activity, moderately underestimated levels of general

agreement with their own statement. Everygroup overestimated the percentage of

people who denied that climate change was happening.

Figure 5: Respondents estimates of the Australian communitys levels of agreement with each

statement, broken down by respondents own opinion type(n=5030)


13/38


11

2.3 Harm, worry, experience and importance

Respondents were asked a series of general questions about their attitudes towards

climate change and its impacts.Figure 6 suggests that the majority of people are either

not veryor somewhatworried about climate change, whileFigure 7 suggests themajority consider it will harm them at least moderately.Levels of worry and perceived

personal harm depended on whether climate change was considered a natural

phenomenon or human-induced.11

Figure 6: Levels of worry about climate change as a percentage of respondents

Figure 7: Levels of personal harm arising from climate change as a percentage of respondents

11

For ease of interpretation, group comparisons in these figures are here limited to the two maingroup types, who represent 88.4% of the whole sample.


14/38



Respondents rated their level of personal experience with climate change and how

important they thought climate change was.Figure 8 suggests that the majority of

people consider they have had little or no personal experience with the effects of

climate change, although a large proportion (34.5%) of those who consider climate

change to be human-induced thought they had experienced moderate levels or a greatdeal of the effects of climate change. The perceived importance of climate change also

varied according to whether people thought it was human-induced or natural, with

larger levels of importance cited by those who considered it human-induced (Figure 9).

Figure 8: Levels of experience with climate change as a percentage of respondents

Figure 9: Levels of the importance of climate change as a percentage of respondents


15/38


13

2.4 Trust and responsibility

Respondents were asked to rate their levels of trust in different sources to provide

them with truthful information about climate change (Figure 10). Those who considered

climate change a natural process reported lower levels of trust than those whoconsidered it human-induced in all sources but car and oil companies.

While University scientists topped the rankings in trust, government and local

authorities fared relatively poorlyoutranking only car and oil companies for those who

considered climate change human-induced. Friends and family were rated the most

trusted source of information for those who considered climate change a natural

phenomenon.

Figure 10: Mean ratings of trust in climate change information sources


16/38



The survey also sought views on which entities people considered most responsible for

causing climate change. Figure 11 reveals that those who considered climate change

a natural phenomenon, on average also considered big-polluting countries and multi-

national corporations as partly responsible for causing it.

Figure 11: Mean ratings of responsibility for causing climate change

Respondents were also asked about which entities they thought had the greatest

responsibility for respondingto climate change.Figure 12 shows the greatest rating of

responsibility was given to big-polluting countries; the responsibility of individuals to

respond to climate change was rated significantly lower than all other entities.

Figure 12: Mean ratings of responsibility for responding to climate change


17/38


15

2.5 Federal Government action on climate change

Respondents were asked a series of questions about Federal Government responses

to climate change.12In relation to general attitudes on Federal Government action, the

most common response was that the Government was doing the wrong thing aboutclimate change (Figure 13).

Figure 13: Satisfaction with Federal Government action on climate change (n=5030)

Figure14 shows these attitudes broken down by each climate change type.

Figure 14: Satisfaction with Federal Government action by climate change typology

12At the time of the survey, the federal Australian Labor Party held office and had just launched

their proposed policy for a price on carbon.


18/38



To test attitudes about a proposed price on carbon, respondents were randomly

assigned one of two questions: one framed with direct relevance to the Federal

Governments proposed carbon pricing scheme (announced just prior to the survey),

and the other framed in general terms. Figure 15 shows higher levels of support for a

price on carbon framed in general terms.

Figure 15: Support for carbon pricing scheme with different phrasing (n=5030)

Figure16 shows average support for carbon pricing broken down for each climatechange type.

Figure 16: Support for carbon pricing scheme by climate change typology


19/38

CLIMATE CHANGE AND BEHAVIOUR

17

3. CLIMATE CHANGE AND BEHAVIOUR

Respondents were asked 11 questions relating to behaviour relevant to greenhousegas emissions. Behaviours ranged from personal transport choices to purchasing

decisions and political activism. Motivations for performing carbon-friendly behaviourswere also accounted for. Responses are shown on the next page (Figure 18).

As well as these individual pro-environmental behaviours, respondents were asked to

indicate whether they engaged in any of the community-based environmental

behaviours inFigure 17.

Figure 17: Percentage of respondents engaging in explicit environmental behaviours

An aggregated score was calculated for each respondent to capture the total number

of individual and community-based environmental behaviours in which they

participated.13

13For each of the individual behaviours, a score of 1 was given for each behaviour engaged in

for non-environmental reasons, and a score of 2 was given for each behaviour engaged in formainly environmental reasons. For community-based behaviours, a score or 2 was given foreach behaviour engaged in, as each of these behaviours were deemed explicitly environmental

in motivation.


20/38



Figure 18: Percentage of respondents engaging in climate change relevant behaviours


21/38


19

3.1 Climate change causes, political orientation and pro-environmental behaviour

Respondents were asked to nominate who they voted for in the 2010 Federalelection.14 Figure 19 provides a breakdown of voting behaviour by opinions about the

causes of climate change. Those who voted Labor or Greens were more likely to agree

with human-induced climate change, while those voting Liberal and National were

more likely to consider climate change a product of natural variation.

Figure 19: Opinions about the causes of climate change by voting behaviour

Figure 20 provides a breakdown of voting behaviours and average pro-environmental

behaviour scores. Those who voted for the Greens had significantly higher behaviourscores than those who voted for Labor or for an independent. Those who voted Liberal

or National had the lowest behaviour scores on average.

14

A total of 900 respondents recorded a response of Other, Nobody, or Prefer not toanswer.


22/38



Figure 20: Pro-environmental behaviour scores by voting behaviour (n=4130)

Figure 21 displays the average aggregated behaviour score for respondents from eachclimate change type. All four groups differed significantly. People who thought human-

induced climate change was happening scored highest on average and those whothought it was not happening scored lowest.

Figure 21: Pro-environmental behaviour scores by climate change typology (n=5030)


23/38


21

3.2 Behaviour and climate change attitudes

To investigate what sort of attitudes could best account for (or predict) the amount of

pro-environmental behaviours people engaged in, peoples responses to a set of

attitudinal questions about climate change were compared with their overall behaviourscore. A simultaneous regression quantified the uniquecontribution of each attitudinal

statement in predicting a persons overall behaviour score. These contributions are

denoted by the beta score in the second column ofTable 1;higher beta scores indicate

that an item is a better indicator of a persons behaviour score.

Table 1 shows that attitudes about the importance of climate change, perceived ethical

responsibility and moral duty, and perceived personal relevance of climate were the

best predictors of the extent to which someone was engaged in pro-environmental

behaviours. Certainty about human-induced climate change was relatively unimportant.

Table 1. Simultaneous regression analysis of climate change attitudes and behaviour

Item

Over past year, have you become more or less certain that climate

change is happening?.01

How worried are you about climate change? .05*

How much do you think climate change will harm you? .06**

How important is climate change to you? .19**

How much have you experienced climate change? .05**

How personally relevant is climate change to you? .13**

I feel it is my ethical responsibility to change my individual

behaviour to combat climate change.19**

I feel a moral duty to do something about climate change .13**

How sure are you that climate change is happening? .06**

How certain are you that climate change is caused by humans? .03

Total amount of variance in behaviour score explained (R squared): 41%

* Significant predictive contribution at p < .05 ** Significant contribution at p < .001


24/38

HOW PEOPLE THINK AND FEEL ABOUT CLIMATE CHANGE


4. HOW PEOPLE THINK AND FEEL ABOUT CLIMATECHANGE

4.1 Cognitions

Respondents were asked to rate their agreement with several statements on a scale of

1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) about climate change and what some of its

potential impacts might be. Average ratings for each statement are provided inTable 2,

in order of most agreed with to least agreed with.

Table 2: Mean ratings of agreement with cognitive evaluations of climate change

Statement (n=5030) Mean SD

Responding to climate change will cost Australia a lot of money 3.81 1.00

Climate change will result in financial hardship for many people 3.46 1.03

Doing something about climate change is an opportunity to be

part of something bigger than ourselves3.33 1.12

Trying to do something about climate change will mean a lot of

people lose their jobs3.11 1.13

The challenge of climate change will provide people with a sense

of purpose3.08 1.01

There's nothing Australia can do about climate change that will

make a meaningful difference2.95 1.35

Climate change will foster greater community spirit and

connectedness

2.72 0.97

Climate change may mean that wealth and resources end up

being distributed more fairly2.42 0.98


25/38


23

4.2 Emotions

Respondents were asked to rate a list of emotions, on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree)to 5 (strongly agree), according to how climate change made them feel. Average

ratings are provided inTable 3.The most strongly related emotions were negative(irritated, angry, confused), but overall, respondents did not indicate strong emotions atall.

Table 3: Mean ratings of agreement with emotions prompted by climate change (n=5036)

Emotion

DescriptorMean SD

Irritated 3.09 1.12

Angry 3.07 1.06

Confused 3.00 1.09

Powerless 2.93 1.03

Hopeful 2.83 0.97

Fearful 2.80 1.09

Bored 2.78 1.16

Ashamed 2.63 1.06

Despairing 2.61 .99

Guilty 2.55 1.03

Excited 2.22 1.16

Joyful 2.17 .86


26/38



Table 4 displays the most highly rated emotions for each climate change type.

Table 4: Most highly rated emotion descriptor for each climate change type

Climate change type Most highly agreed with

emotion descriptor

Mean rating

I dont think that climate change is

happening (n=364)Irritated 3.66

I have no idea whether climate change is

happening or not (n=220)Confused 3.42

I think that climate change is happening,

but its just a natural variation in Earths

temperatures (n=2201)

Irritated 3.27

I think that climate change is happening,

and I think that it has largely been caused

by humans (n=2245)

Fear 3.29


27/38

NATURAL DISASTERS

25

5. NATURAL DISASTERS

Respondents wereasked to nominate which statement best represented their point of

view regarding the frequency and intensity of natural disasters such as floods,

bushfires and cyclones (Figure 22 andFigure 23). Roughly two-thirds of respondents

thought these natural disasters were occurring more frequently and were more severe,

but were divided on whether this was attributable to human activity or was the result of

natural fluctuations. Less than a quarter of respondents disagreed that natural

disasters were more frequent and severe.

Figure 22: Perceptions of frequency of natural disasters (n=5030)

Figure 23: Perceptions of severity of natural disasters (n=5030)


28/38

CHANGES OVER TIME


6. CHANGES OVER TIME

A total of 1355 respondents from the 2010 survey completed the current 2011 survey,

allowing tests for significant changes over time to be conducted. This section

investigates such changes on key questions.

6.1 General attitudes towards climate change

Significantly fewer respondents stated that they thought climate change was occurring

in the 2011 survey (75.5%) than the 2010 survey (80.4%),15but changes in agreement

with the series of statements about the causes of climate change were not statistically

significant (Table 5).

Table 5: Agreement with statements about the causes of climate change over time

Statement% 2010

(n=1355)

% 2011

(n=674)

I dont think that climate change is happening 6.2 8.5

I have no idea whether climate change is

happening or not3.7 3.3

I think that climate change is happening, but its

just a natural fluctuation in Earths temperatures46.9 47.9

I think that climate change is happening, and I think

that humans are largely causing it43.2 40.4

15

McNemar test:p< .001, n=1355.


29/38

CHANGES OVER TIME

27

Table 6 illustrates the number of people who agreed with each statement in 2010 and

2011. Boxes shaded in grey represent the number of respondents who selected the

same statement in both surveys. Boxes shaded in pink represent respondents whoagreed in 2010 that climate change was human-induced, but moved away from that

view in 2011. By contrast, boxes shaded in green represent respondents who did not

agree in 2010 that climate change was human-induced, but moved towards this view in

2011.

Table 6: Comparison of numbers of repeat respondents selecting that climate change was

occurring due to natural or human activity over time (n=1355)

2010 Survey

2011

Survey

Causation

type

Dont think

climate

change is

happening

Dont know if

climate

change is

happening

Climate

change

happening,

but natural

Climate

change

happening,

and human-

induced

Dont think

climate change

is happening

39 4 53 13

Dont know if

climate change

is happening

5 20 16 6

Climate change

happening, but

natural

41 17 441 115

Climate change

happening, and

human- induced

3 8 81 493

Together, these results suggest an overall slight reduction in acceptance of human-

induced climate change.Table 6 also suggests, however, that an appreciable number

of people (those denoted by the boxes shaded in green) are now more willing to

attribute climate change to human activity than they were in 2010.


30/38

CHANGES OVER TIME


6.2 Harm, worry, experience and importance

Changes in mean ratings of harm, worry, experience and importance attached to

climate change are shown inTable 7.There were moderate decreases in worry,

perceived personal harm and perceived experience with climate change since 2010.There were also small decreases in certainty that climate change was happening and

in the importance of climate change.

Table 7: Mean ratings of attitudes to by climate change over time (n=1355)

StatementMean

2010

Mean

2011

Direction

of change

Effect

size

Over the past year, have you

become more or less sure that

climate change is happening?

3.37 3.24** Lower Small

How worried are you about

climate change?2.63 2.42** Lower Moderate

How much do you think climate

change will harm you

personally?

2.33 2.12** Lower Moderate

How important is the issue of

climate change to you

personally?


How much have you personally

experienced the effects of

climate change?

1.96 1.77** Lower Moderate

** Significant change from the 2010 mean at thep< .01


31/38

CHANGES OVER TIME

29

6.3 Trust

Changes to levels of trust in different sources to provide information on climate change

were also examined. While there were statistically significant changes in levels of trust

for some sources, they were either small or very small.16

For those respondents who thought climate change was happening and human-

induced (n=585), there was a significant moderate increasein trust in government.

There were also significant but small increasesin trust in government scientists,

industrial scientists, local authorities, oil companies and car companies; and significant

but small decreases in trust in people from their community and friends and family.

For those respondents who thought climate change was happening, but due to natural

variation (n=614), there were significant but small decreasesin trust for environmental

organisations, university scientists, government scientists, environmental scientists and

government; and significant but small increasesin trust for oil and car companies.

6.4 Responsibility for causing and responding to climatechange

An examination of changes to ratings of responsibility for causingclimate change

showed a significant moderate reduction in responsibility ratings of multi-national

corporations. There were significant but small reductions in responsibility ratings for all

other bodies: Big-polluting countries, wealthy countries, the Federal Government, state

governments, local governments, normal individuals, and global organisations.

Responsibility ratings for respondingto climate change yielded significant but small

reductions in responsibility for the following bodies: Local governments, state

governments, the Federal Government, global organisations and multi-national

corporations.

6.5 Pro-environmental behaviour

Changes in individual pro-environmental behaviour were examined.Figure 24 shows

levels of engagement in behaviour regardless of whether it was environmentally

motivated, while Figure 25 shows levels of engagement for mainly environmental

reasons.

While engagement in pro-environmental behaviours in general remained relatively

constant, in most cases there was a slight drop in attributing these behaviours to

environmental reasons.

16That is, the eta squareda measure of effect sizewas below .06 for each informationsource


32/38

CHANGES OVER TIME


Figure 24: Levels of engagement in pro-environmental behaviour for any reason (n=1355)

Figure 25: Levels of engagement in pro-environmental behaviour for mainly environmental reasons

(n=1355)


33/38

CHANGES OVER TIME

31

6.6 Emotions

Table 8 presents changes in emotion ratings over time, scored on a scale of 1 (strongly

disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) according to how climate change made them feel. For

the most part, emotions about climate change remained relatively stable from 2010 to2011. There were small reductions in feelings of shame, guilt and fear, and small

increases in feelings of boredom and irritation. There was a moderate reduction in

feelings of hope, with the mean rating dropping below the scale midpoint.

Table 8: Mean ratings of agreement with emotions prompted by climate change over time (n=1355)

Emotion

Descriptor

Mean

2010

Mean

2011

Direction of

changeEffect size

Angry 3.02 3.05 No change None

Ashamed 2.77 2.54 ** Lower Small

Guilty 2.60 2.44** Lower Small

Fearful 2.90 2.67** Lower Small

Hopeful 3.08 2.82** Lower Moderate

Powerless 2.95 2.89 No change Negligible

Joyful 2.11 2.12 No change Negligible

Confused 2.79 2.90** Higher Very small

Despairing 2.61 2.54* Lower Very small

Excited 2.26 2.20* Lower Very small

Bored 2.54 2.79** Higher Small

Irritated 2.89 3.09** Higher Small

* Significant change from 2010 mean at thep < .05 level

** Significant change from 2010 mean at thep< .01


34/38

CHANGES OVER TIME


6.7 Cognitions

Table 9 presents change over time for statements about how respondents thought

about climate change and what some of its potential impacts might be. There were

small increases in agreement with the negative outcomes of responding to climatechange, and small decreases in agreement with positive outcomes. There were

moderate increases in the sentiment that responding to climate change would cost

jobs, and that nothing Australia could do would make a meaningful difference.

Table 9: Mean ratings of agreement with cognitive evaluations of climate change over time (n=1355)

StatementMean

2010

Mean

2011

Direction of

changeEffect size

Responding to climate change will costAustralia a lot of money

3.17 3.84** Higher Small

Doing something about climate change

is an opportunity to be part of something

bigger than ourselves


Climate change will result in financial

hardship for many people3.49 3.42* Lower Very small

The challenge of climate change will

provide people with a sense of purpose3.22 3.04** Lower Small

Climate change will foster greater

community spirit and connectedness2.88 2.66** Lower Small

Trying to do something about climate

change will mean a lot of people lose

their jobs

2.87 3.19** Higher Moderate

Climate change may mean that wealth

and resources end up being distributed

more fairly


There's nothing Australia can do about

climate change that will make a

meaningful difference

2.61 3.07** Higher Moderate

* Significant change from 2010 mean at thep < .05 level

** Significant change from 2010 mean at thep< .01


35/38

CONCLUDING REMARKS

33

7. CONCLUDING REMARKS

Most people agree that climate change is happening; but the Australian community is

evenly split about the impact human activity has on climate change.

Whether people think climate change is caused mainly by humans or is a natural

phenomenon is strongly linked to other beliefs, values and attitudes they hold about

who is responsible for causing climate change and who is responsible for acting on

climate change. It is also strongly linked to perceptions of the importance of climate

change, how worried people are about it, and whether they think it will harm

them personally. Whether people think that climate change is caused mainly by

humans or is a natural phenomenon is only very weakly related to age, income,

gender, and the region in which people live.

Opinions about the causes of climate change are related to a range of individual and

community behaviours. But the more important predictors of behaviour are how

important climate change is perceived to be, how personally relevant it is, and feeling a

moral and ethical responsibility to act. Less important is how certain people are about

whether human activity is driving climate change. This suggests that efforts to change

behaviours would be better invested in stressing the relevance of climate change

impacts and our role in mitigating and adapting to these impacts, rather than beliefs

about whether human activity causes climate change.

Political orientation and voting behaviour are linked to people's climate change

opinions and behaviours. There were strong effects on support for policy responses toclimate change based on question phrasing, highlighting the importance of

communication and other social processes in energising support.

There was strong evidence that people who deny that climate change is happening

overestimate how prevalent their own views are in the wider community, perhaps

reflecting the importance of friends and family in shaping beliefs. There was also strong

evidence that people largely overestimate the prevalence of outright deniers in the

community regardlessof their own view: the estimated prevalence is about 23%,

compared to the actual prevalence of about 7%. These disparities may reflect the role

of the media in portraying and shaping public opinion.

Analyses of responses from people who participated in both the 2010 and 2011

surveys revealed small reductions in rated responsibility for causing climate change

and for responding to it. A small decrease in trust ratings of scientific groups was

evident for those who thought climate change was a natural phenomenon. We also

saw increases in trust for government and scientists, suggesting some polarisation of

peripheral climate change attitudes.

Climate change beliefs have remained fairly stable between 2010 and 2011, although

there is some suggestive evidence of a slight decrease in the percentage accepting

that humans contribute to climate change. Trends are difficult to detect with just two


36/38

CONCLUDING REMARKS


data points: a third survey to be conducted in July 2012 will enable firmer conclusions

to be drawn about trends in Australians' views about climate change.


37/38

REFERENCES

35

REFERENCES

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2010). Australian demographic statistics. Cat. No.

3101.0. Canberra, ACT, Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Leviston, Z., & Walker, I. (2010). Baseline survey of Australian attitudes to climate

change: Preliminary report. CSIRO: Perth.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The research contained in this report was funded by the CSIRO Climate AdaptationFlagship as part of the Adaptive Behaviours project. The authors wish to thank Dave

Tucker, Natasha Porter, and Sarah Morwinski for their assistance in compiling this

report, and Anne Leitch and Roger Lawes for their timely and insightful reviews.


38/38

csiro second annual survey australian attitudes climate change

Documents