Hai Zuhad, Perlman Rebecca L
Department of Political Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
School of Public and International Affairs and Department of Politics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08540, USA.
Sci Adv. 2022 Sep 9;8(36):eabo2190. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abo2190.
The consequences of climate change are becoming increasingly visible in the form of more severe wildfires, hurricanes, and flooding. As the science linking these disasters to climate change has grown more robust, it has led to pressure on politicians to acknowledge the connection. While an analysis of U.S. Congressional press releases reveals a slight increase in politicians' willingness to do so, many remain hesitant. Why? We hypothesize that climate change attribution can backfire, harming politicians' popularity and undermining their ability to adapt to the visible manifestations of climate change. We conduct an original survey experiment on a representative sample of American adults and show that when a politician links wildfires to climate change, Republicans perceive the official as less capable of addressing weather-related disasters. In addition, Republicans become less supportive of efforts to protect against similar disasters in the future. Our findings shed light on the potential trade-offs of conveying the link between climate change and its impacts.
气候变化的后果正以更严重的野火、飓风和洪水的形式日益显现。随着将这些灾害与气候变化联系起来的科学依据变得更加确凿,这给政治家们带来了承认这种联系的压力。虽然对美国国会新闻稿的分析显示,政治家们这样做的意愿略有增加,但许多人仍然犹豫不决。为什么呢?我们推测,气候变化归因可能会适得其反,损害政治家的声望,并削弱他们应对气候变化明显表现的能力。我们对美国成年人的代表性样本进行了一项原创性调查实验,结果表明,当一名政治家将野火与气候变化联系起来时,共和党人会认为该官员应对与天气相关灾害的能力较弱。此外,共和党人对未来防范类似灾害的努力的支持度也会降低。我们的研究结果揭示了传达气候变化及其影响之间联系的潜在权衡。