Introduction
Climate change is one of the most severe and disturbing problems facing humanity. This circumstance is because this issue negatively affects the environment, which is a valuable source and place of residence for people, animals, and biological species. One of the leading causes of climate change is human activity, which affects the pollution of water and natural resources, an increase in the overall temperature on Earth, and many other negative consequences.
Despite the increased coverage and long-term evidence-based research in this area, there is a problem with the existence of climate change deniers and those who accept the reality of human-caused climate change but do not have faith in it. Studying the distinction between knowledge and belief in climate communication is valuable for finding ways to promote environmental protection and limit this problem.
Problem Statement
At the moment, there is a problem in society. Despite research and measures to limit the impact of human activity on the climate, there is a difficulty in increasing motivation and engagement. This is an issue because it is necessary to distinguish between what people know about this aspect and the belief that they have been communicated through various forms and approaches to environmental communication. It is noted that “a belief would surely awaken us to the urgent ethical imperative attached to it, shake our collective conscience, and render us willing to make small sacrifices” (Foer, 2019, p. 21). Thus, researchers and supporters of the importance of environmental protection face focusing on increasing the latter to achieve productive results.
Understanding how knowledge and belief in negative human contribution to the environment differ from each other contributes to awareness of the impacts, limits, and opportunities of the different forms and approaches to environmental communication. Among them stand out, such as corporate public relations, risk communication, journalism, and storytelling. First of all, this work will focus on the latter approach. Storytelling is valuable because it promotes awareness of the problem of the environment to an audience of different ages.
Literature Review
A relatively large number of literary works affect the topic under discussion. Maniates (2001) cites a children’s book called “The Lorax,” which touches on environmental changes. The author of the article notes that there are several reasons for its popularity among an influential audience: “the comfortable way the book permits us to look squarely at a set of profoundly uncomfortable dynamics we know to be operating but find difficult to confront” (Maniates, 2001, p. 45). Among these problems are “consumerism, the concentration of economic power, the mindless degradation of the environment, the seeming inability of science and objective fact to slow the damage” (Maniates, 2001, p. 45). Furthermore, the author emphasizes that it is valuable to provide the reader with a sense of concern about the issue raised in the work and a sense of self-importance in resolving it.
The aspects mentioned by Maniates provide a more detailed understanding of how storytelling can increase the degree of faith in climate change. This is because in addition to the most common mediums, such as social networks or journalism, it rises in less expected sources of information. Thus, readers can gain awareness of the problem’s criticality and importance, thereby understanding their contribution to mitigating it.
Particular importance should be given to considering the topic under discussion by corporate public relations. This aspect has a valuable role when considering climate communication and how one can distinguish between knowledge and belief in a problem. The issue is that corporate entities communicate information quite effectively regarding the importance of limiting harm to the environment but struggle with representing their faith in this aspect of the activity. Foer (2019) stated, “We know climate change has something to do with pollution, carbon, ocean temperatures, rainforests, ice caps… but most of us would find it difficult to explain how our individual and collective behavior is boosting hurricane winds by almost thirty miles per hour” (p. 13).
In other words, people are aware of what measures are being taken to limit the negative impact while having a low degree of awareness of how genuine the company is in their belief. One of the reasons for this circumstance may be the growing popularity of companies and corporate entities that adhere to sustainability as the central concept of their activities. Consequently, these parties are faced with increasing the forces to change the situation and providing knowledge about the truthfulness of their intentions.
The following approach to communication of the problem of climate change and human influence is the use of risk communication. In this aspect, the use of the emotional component, which performs the function of persuasion and motivation, occupies a particularly important place. Research indicated that “people often feel powerless in the face of climate change, when, in fact, there is no other issue over which they have more personal control or involvement” (Marshall, 2015, p. 192). Therefore, the main task of various sources of communication regarding the environmental problem is to use emotions to create a sense of the need for action on the part of society. This is also supported by the fact that “they motivate individuals, are generated in crowds, are expressed rhetorically, and shape stated and unstated goals of social movements” (Jasper, 2011, p. 286). That is, the motivation emanating from them contributes to the transition from the usual knowledge about the problem to the belief in the importance of an individual role in its mitigation.
One of the problems in the framework of the topic under discussion is the difficulty of implementing widespread initiatives and actions to limit the problem of climate change. Research showed that “few people are willing to significantly adapt their lifestyle in order to reduce their ecological footprint” (Roeser, 2012, p. 1033). This information becomes an additional confirmation that in order to equalize the influence of knowledge and faith, it is necessary to pay attention to the emotional aspect. They help to increase motivation and awareness, which is critically essential for changing the current situation in the world. However, the issue is that “emotions are generally excluded from communication and political decision-making about climate change, or they are used instrumentally to create support for a position” (Roeser, 2012, p. 1033). Thus, within the framework of risk communication, it is critically necessary to transform this aspect, pay attention to the emotional component, and increase their motivating function.
Environmental journalism also has an integral role in considering the concepts of knowledge and belief in a problem when communicating it to the public. This is due to the fact that it is one of the primary sources of information for the population. Additionally, it is of central importance to shape people’s perceptions and attitudes toward the problem of climate change and the contributions that they make through their activities. At the same time, studies have shown that “TV news rarely discussed both the impacts likely to result from climate change alongside frames highlighting actions to address the problem” (Bolsen & Shapiro, 2018, p. 153).
One of the problems is that “it is not obvious how one can get the public to attend to scientific information about climate change given the number of other priorities competing for an individual’s limited and selective attention” (Bolsen & Shapiro, 2018, p. 154). This circumstance was formed due to a large number of sources, each of which is trying to grab the attention and engagement of the audience. As in the case of corporate public relations, there is a need to develop the concept that it is necessary to spread knowledge but also to strengthen faith in the issue.
An example would be an attempt by individuals who deny any climate change to refute research on this problem. Research in 1998 showed that “after a long period of relatively minor temperature variations (the “shaft”), it showed a sharp mercury upswing during the last century or so (“the blade”)” (Mooney, 2013, para. 1). The generated graph showed the frightening consequences that human the detail and related changes in the environment have an effect on the temperature level. However, this study was not convincing to some people. Despite the extensive number of studies, individuals literally attacked the researchers who compiled this graph.
Based on the information received from various sources, there is a need to change the perspective regarding the impact of human activity on the climate. Therefore, it is important not only to maintain and understand scientific data on human-caused environmental changes but also genuinely believe and accept its implications. This will help to increase motivation and involvement in various initiatives to combat the problem raised in this paper. Additionally, it will enhance the decision-making process regarding the personal contribution that members of society make in their daily lives.
Conclusion
In conclusion, there is a relevance between knowledge and belief in climate communication. The literature under study has shown that in many cases, despite extensive research and knowledge that is provided to individuals, they have a low degree of faith in issues. This aspect affects both the belief in the negative contribution of human activity and the belief that they can do something to limit it.
Approaches such as corporate media relations, crisis communication, news reporting, and narrative techniques become valuable in the communication of environmental issues. Each of them contributes to understanding the effects, constraints, and possibilities associated with various methods and strategies in environmental communication. The transformation of the current state of these aspects provides an opportunity to increase the public’s faith in the possibilities of mitigation of the problem under discussion.
References
Bolsen, T., & Shapiro, M. A. (2018). The US news media, polarization on climate change, and pathways to effective communication. Environmental Communication, 12(2), 149-163. Web.
Foer, J. S. (2019). We are the weather: Saving the planet begins at breakfast. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Jasper, J. M. (2011). Emotions and social movements: Twenty years of theory and research. Annual Review of Sociology, 37, 285-303. Web.
Maniates, M. F. (2001). Individualization: Plant a tree, buy a bike, save the world?Global Environmental Politics, 1(3), 31-52. Web.
Marshall, G. (2015). Don’t even think about it: Why our brains are wired to ignore climate change. Bloomsbury USA.
Mooney, C. (2013). The hockey stick: The most controversial chart in science, explained. The Atlantic. Web.
Roeser, S. (2012). Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: A role for emotions. Risk Analysis: An International Journal, 32(6), 1033-1040. Web.
Loading...
