Public opinion on global warming is the aggregate of attitudes or beliefs held by the adult population concerning the science, economics, and politics of global warming. It is affected by media coverage of climate change.
Influences on individual opinion
Geographic region
Proportion
reporting knowing "something" or "a great deal" about global warming in
2007–08. Darker areas indicate a greater proportion of individuals
aware, yellow indicates no data.
Proportion
responding yes when asked, "Temperature rise is part of global warming
or climate change. Do you think rising temperatures are [...] a result
of human activities?"
Proportion responding that global warming is a serious personal threat
A 2007–2008 Gallup Poll
surveyed individuals in 128 countries. This poll queried whether the
respondent knew of global warming. Those who had a basic concept of
global warming didn’t necessarily connect it to human activities,
revealing that a knowledge of global warming and the knowledge that it’s
human-induced are two separate things. Over a third of the world's
population were unaware of global warming. Developing countries have less awareness than developed, and Africa the least aware. Of those aware, residents of Latin America
and developed countries in Asia led the belief that climate change is a
result of human activities while Africa, parts of Asia and the Middle
East, and a few countries from the former Soviet Union led in the opposite. Opinion within the United Kingdom was divided.
The first major worldwide poll, conducted by Gallup in 2008–2009
in 127 countries, found that some 62% of people worldwide said they knew
about global warming. In the industrialized countries of North America, Europe and Japan, 90% or more knew about it (97% in the U.S., 99% in Japan); in developing countries,
especially in Africa, fewer than a quarter knew about it, although many
had noticed local weather changes. Among those who knew about global
warming, there was a wide variation between nations in belief that the
warming was a result of human activities.
Adults in Asia, with the exception of those in developed
countries, are the least likely to perceive global warming as a threat.
In the western world, individuals are the most likely to be aware and
perceive it as a very or somewhat serious threat to themselves and their
families; although Europeans are more concerned about climate change than those in the United States.
However, the public in Africa, where individuals are the most
vulnerable to global warming while producing the least carbon dioxide,
is the least aware – which translates into a low perception that it is a
threat.
These variations pose a challenge to policymakers,
as different countries travel down different paths, making an agreement
over an appropriate response difficult. While Africa may be the most
vulnerable and produce the least amount of greenhouse gases, they are
the most ambivalent. The top five emitters (China,
the United States, India, Russia, and Japan), who together emit half
the world's greenhouse gases, vary in both awareness and concern. The
United States, Russia, and Japan are the most aware at over 85% of the
population. Conversely, only two-thirds of people in China and one-third
in India are aware. Japan expresses the greatest concern, which
translates into support for environmental policies. People in China,
Russia, and the United States, while varying in awareness, have
expressed a similar proportion of aware individuals concerned.
Similarly, those aware in India are likely to be concerned, but India
faces challenges spreading this concern to the remaining population as
its energy needs increase over the next decade.
An online survey on environmental questions conducted in 20
countries by Ipsos MORI, "Global Trends 2014", shows broad agreement,
especially on climate change and if it is caused by humans, though the
U.S. ranked lowest with 54% agreement. It has been suggested that the low U.S. ranking is tied to denial campaigns.
A 2010 survey of 14 industrialized countries found that skepticism
about the danger of global warming was highest in Australia, Norway,
New Zealand and the United States, in that order, correlating positively
with per capita emissions of carbon dioxide.
United States
In 2009 Yale University
conducted a study identifying global warming's 'Six Americas'. The
report identifies six audiences with different opinions about global
warning: The alarmed (18%), the concerned (33%), the cautious (19%), the
disengaged (12%), the doubtful (11%) and the dismissive (7%). The
alarmed and concerned make out the largest percentage and think
something should be done about global warming. The cautious, disengaged
and doubtful are less likely to take action. The dismissive are
convinced global warming is not happening. These audiences can be used
to define the best approaches for environmental action. The theory of
the 'Six Americas' is also used for marketing purposes.
Opinions in the United States vary intensely enough to be considered a culture war.
In a January 2013 survey, Pew found that 69% of Americans say
there is solid evidence that the Earth's average temperature has gotten
warmer over the past few decades, up six points since November 2011 and
12 points since 2009.
A Gallup poll in 2014 concluded that 51 percent of Americans were
a little or not at all worried about climate change, 24 percent a great
deal and 25 percent a fair amount.
In 2015, 32 percent or Americans were worried about global
warming as a great deal, 37 percent in 2016, and 45 percent in 2017. A
poll taken in 2016 shows that 52% of Americans believe climate change to
be caused by human activity, while 34% state it is caused by natural changes. Data is increasingly showing that 62 percent of Americans believe that the effects of global warming are happening now in 2017.
In 2016 GALLUP
found that 64% of Americans are worried about global warming, 59%
believed that global warming is already happening and 65% is convinced
that global warming is caused by human activities. These numbers show
that awareness of global warming is increasing in the United States
Education
In countries varying in awareness, an educational gap translates into a gap in awareness.
However an increase in awareness does not always result in an increase
in perceived threat. In China, 98% of those who have completed four
years or more of college education reported knowing something or a great
deal of climate change while only 63% of those who have completed nine
years of education reported the same. Despite the differences in
awareness in China, all groups perceive a low level of threat from
global warming. In India those who are educated are more likely to be
aware, and those who are educated there are far more likely to report
perceiving global warming as a threat than those who are not educated.
In Europe, individuals who have attained a higher level of education
perceive climate change as a serious threat. There is also a strong
association between education and Internet use. Europeans who use the
Internet more are more likely to perceive climate change as a serious
threat. However, a survey of American adults found that "...there is in fact little disagreement among culturally diverse citizens
on what science knows about climate change. The source of the
climate-change controversy and like disputes over societal risks is the
contamination of the science-communication environment with forms of
cultural status competition that make it impossible for diverse citizens
to express their reason as both collective-knowledge acquirers and
cultural-identity protectors at the same time.
Demographics
Residential demographics
affect perceptions of global warming. In China, 77% of those who live
in urban areas are aware of global warming compared to 52% in rural
areas. This trend is mirrored in India with 49% to 29% awareness,
respectively.
Of the countries where at least half the population is aware of
global warming, those with the majority who believe that global warming
is due to human activities have a greater national GDP per unit
energy—or, a greater energy efficiency.
In Europe, individuals under fifty-five are more likely to
perceive both "poverty, lack of food and drinking water" and climate
change as a serious threat than individuals over fifty-five. Male
individuals are more likely to perceive climate change as a threat than
female individuals. Managers, white collar workers, and students are
more likely to perceive climate change as a greater threat than house
persons and retired individuals.
In the United States, conservative white men are more likely than other Americans to deny climate change.
Political identification
In the United States, support for environmental protection was relatively non-partisan in the twentieth century. Republican Theodore Roosevelt established national parks whereas Democrat Franklin Delano Roosevelt established the Soil Conservation Service. Republican Richard Nixon was instrumental in founding the United States Environmental Protection Agency, and tried to install a third pillar of NATO dealing with environmental challenges such as acid rain and greenhouse effect. Daniel Patrick Moynihan was Nixon's NATO delegate for the topic.
This non-partisanship began to erode during the 1980s, when the Reagan administration
described environmental protection as an economic burden. Views over
global warming began to seriously diverge between Democrats and
Republicans during the negotiations that led up to the creation of the Kyoto Protocol
in 1998. In a 2008 Gallup poll of the American public, 76% of Democrats
and only 41% of Republicans said that they believed global warming was
already happening. The opinions of the political elites, such as members of Congress, tends to be even more polarized.
In Europe, opinion is not strongly divided among left and right parties. Although European political parties on the left, including Green parties,
strongly support measures to address climate change, conservative
European political parties maintain similar sentiments, most notably in
Western and Northern Europe. For example, Margaret Thatcher,
never a friend of the coal mining industry, was a strong supporter of
an active climate protection policy and was instrumental in founding the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the British Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research. Some speeches, as to the Royal Society on 27 September 1988
and to the UN general assembly in November 1989 helped to put climate
change, acid rain, and general pollution in the British mainstream.
After her career, however, Thatcher was less of a climate activist, as
she called climate action a "marvelous excuse for supranational
socialism," and called Al Gore an "apocalyptic hyperbole". France's center-right President Chirac pushed key environmental and climate change policies in France in 2005–2007. Conservative German administrations (under the Christian Democratic Union and Christian Social Union) in the past two decades have supported European Union climate change initiatives; concern about forest dieback and acid rain regulation were initiated under Kohl's archconservative minister of the interior Friedrich Zimmermann. In the period after former President George W. Bush announced that the United States was leaving the Kyoto Treaty, European media and newspapers on both the left and right criticized the move. The conservative Spanish La Razón, the Irish Times, the Irish Independent, the Danish Berlingske Tidende, and the Greek Kathimerini all condemned the Bush administration's decision, as did left-leaning newspapers.
In Norway, a 2013 poll conducted by TNS Gallup found that 92% of those who vote for the Socialist Left Party and 89% of those who vote for the Liberal Party believe that global warming is caused by humans, while the percentage who held this belief is 60% among voters for the Conservative Party and 41% among voters for the Progress Party.
The shared sentiments between the political left and right on
climate change further illustrate the divide in perception between the
United States and Europe on climate change. As an example, conservative
German Prime Ministers Helmut Kohl and Angela Merkel
have differed with other parties in Germany only on how to meet
emissions reduction targets, not whether or not to establish or fulfill
them.
A 2017 study found that those who changed their opinion on
climate change between 2010 and 2014 did so "primarily to align better
with those who shared their party identification and political ideology.
This conforms with the theory of motivated reasoning: Evidence
consistent with prior beliefs is viewed as strong and, on politically
salient issues, people strive to bring their opinions into conformance
with those who share their political identity".
Individual risk assessment and assignment
The IPCC attempts to orchestrate global (climate) change research to shape a worldwide consensus. However, the consensus approach has been dubbed more a liability than an asset in comparison to other environmental challenges. The linear model of policy-making, based on a more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is said to have not been working and is in the meantime rejected by sociology.
Sheldon Ungar, a Canadian sociologist, compares the different public reactions towards ozone depletion and global warming.
The public opinion failed to tie climate change to concrete events
which could be used as a threshold or beacon to signify immediate
danger.
Scientific predictions of a temperature rise of two to three degrees
Celsius over several decades do not respond with people, e.g. in North
America, that experience similar swings during a single day. As scientists define global warming a problem of the future, a liability in "attention economy",
pessimistic outlooks in general and assigning extreme weather to
climate change have often been discredited or ridiculed (compare Gore effect) in the public arena. While the greenhouse effect per se is essential for life on earth, the case was quite different with the ozone shield
and other metaphors about the ozone depletion. The scientific
assessment of the ozone problem also had large uncertainties. But the
metaphors used in the discussion (ozone shield, ozone hole) reflected
better with lay people and their concerns.
The idea of rays penetrating a damaged “shield” meshes nicely with abiding and resonant cultural motifs, including “Hollywood affinities.” These range from the shields on the Starship Enterprise to Star Wars, ... It is these pre-scientific bridging metaphors built around the penetration of a deteriorating shield that render the ozone problem relatively simple. That the ozone threat can be linked with Darth Vader means that it is encompassed in common sense understandings that are deeply ingrained and widely shared. (Sheldon Ungar 2000)
The chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) regulation attempts of the end of the
1980s profited from those easy-to-grasp metaphors and the personal risk
assumptions taken from them. As well the fate of celebrities like
President Ronald Reagan,
which had skin cancer removal in 1985 and 1987, was of high importance.
In case of the public opinion on climate change, no imminent danger is
perceived.
Ideology
In the United States, ideology is an effective predictor of party identification, where conservatives are more prevalent among Republicans, and moderates and liberals among independents and Democrats. A shift in ideology is often associated with in a shift in political views.
For example, when the number of conservatives rose from 2008 to 2009,
the number of individuals who felt that global warming was being
exaggerated in the media also rose.
The 2006 BBC World Service poll found that when asked about various
policy options to reduce greenhouse gas emissions - tax incentives for
alternative energy research and development, installment of taxes to
encourage energy conservation, and reliance on nuclear energy to reduce
fossil fuels. The majority of those asked felt that tax incentives were
the path of action that they preferred.
As of May 2016, polls have repeatedly found that a majority of
Republican voters, particularly young ones, believe the government
should take action to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.
The pursuit of green energy is an ideology that defines hydroelectric dams, natural gas power plants and nuclear power as unacceptable alternative energies for the eight billion tons of coal
burnt each year. While there is popular support for wind, solar,
biomass, and geothermal energy, all these sources combined only supplied
1.3% of global energy in 2013.
Charts
A 2018
study found that individuals were more likely to accept that global
temperatures were increasing if they were shown the information in a
chart rather than in text.
Issues
Science
A scientific consensus on climate change exists, as recognized by national academies of science and other authoritative bodies.
The opinion gap between scientists and the public in 2009 stands at
84% to 49% that global temperatures are increasing because of
human-activity.
However, more recent research has identified substantial geographical
variation in the public's understanding of the scientific consensus.
Economics
Economic debates weigh the benefits of limiting industrial emissions
of mitigating global warming against the costs that such changes would
entail. While there is a greater amount of agreement over whether global
warming exists, there is less agreement over the appropriate response.
Electric or petroleum distribution may be government owned or utilities
may be regulated by government. The government owned or regulated
utilities may, or may not choose to make lower emissions a priority over
economics, in unregulated counties industry follows economic
priorities. An example of the economic priority is Royal Dutch Shell PLC reporting CO2 emissions of 81 million metric tonnes in 2013.
Media
The popular media in the U.S. gives greater attention to skeptics
relative to the scientific community as a whole, and the level of
agreement within the scientific community has not been accurately
communicated.
US popular media coverage differs from that presented in other
countries, where reporting is more consistent with the scientific
literature. Some journalists attribute the difference to climate change denial being propagated, mainly in the US, by business-centered organizations employing tactics worked out previously by the US tobacco lobby.
The efforts of Al Gore
and other environmental campaigns have focused on the effects of global
warming and have managed to increase awareness and concern, but despite
these efforts as of 2007, the number of Americans believing humans are
the cause of global warming was holding steady at 61%, and those
believing the popular media was understating the issue remained about
35%.
Between 2010 and 2013, the number of Americans who believe the media
under-reports the seriousness of global warming has been increasing, and
the number who think media over-states it has been falling. According
to a 2013 Gallup US opinion poll, 57% believe global warming is at
least as bad as portrayed in the media (with 33% thinking media has
downplayed global warming and 24% saying coverage is accurate). Less
than half of Americans (41%) think the problem is not as bad as media
portrays it.
September 2011 Angus Reid Public Opinion
poll found that Britons (43%) are less likely than Americans (49%) or
Canadians (52%) to say that "global warming is a fact and is mostly
caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities." The same
poll found that 20% of Americans, 20% of Britons and 14% of Canadians
think "global warming is a theory that has not yet been proven."
A March 2013 Public Policy Polling poll about widespread and infamous conspiracy theories found that 37% of American voters believe that global warming is a hoax, while 51% do not.
A 2013 poll in Norway conducted by TNS Gallup found that 66% of
the population believe that climate change is caused by humans, while
17% do not believe this.
Politics
Public opinion impacts on the issue of climate change because
governments need willing electorates and citizens in order to implement
policies that address climate change. Further, when climate change
perceptions differ between the populace and governments, the
communication of risk to the public becomes problematic. Finally, a
public that is not aware of the issues surrounding climate change may
resist or oppose climate change policies, which is of considerable
importance to politicians and state leaders.
Public support for action to forestall global warming is as
strong as public support has been historically for many other government
actions; however, it is not "intense" in the sense that it overrides
other priorities.
A 2009 Eurobarometer survey found that, on the average, Europeans
rate climate change as the second most serious problem facing the world
today, between "poverty, the lack of food and drinking water" and "a
major global economic downturn." 87% of Europeans consider climate
change to be a "serious" or "very serious" problem, while 10% "do not
consider it a serious problem." However, the proportion who believe it
to be a problem has dropped in the period 2008/9 when the surveys were
conducted.
While the small majority believe climate change is a serious threat,
55% percent believe the EU is doing too little and 30% believe the EU is
going the right amount.
As a result of European Union climate change perceptions, "climate
change is an issue that has reached such a level of social and political
acceptability across the EU that it enables (indeed, forces) the EU
Commission and national leaders to produce all sorts of measures,
including taxes." Despite the persistent high level of personal involvement of European citizens, found in another Eurobarometer survey in 2011, EU leaders have begun to downscale climate policy issues on the political agenda since the beginning of the Eurozone crisis.
The proportion of Americans who believe that the effects of
global warming have begun or will begin in a few years rose to a peak in
2008 where it then declined, and a similar trend was found regarding
the belief that global warming is a threat to their lifestyle within
their lifetime.
Concern over global warming often corresponds with economic downturns
and national crisis such as 9/11 as Americans prioritize the economy and
national security over environmental concerns. However the drop in
concern in 2008 is unique compared to other environmental issues.
Considered in the context of environmental issues, Americans consider
global warming as a less critical concern than the pollution of rivers,
lakes, and drinking water; toxic waste; fresh water needs; air
pollution; damage to the ozone layer; and the loss of tropical rain
forests. However, Americans prioritize global warming over species
extinction and acid rain issues. Since 2000 the partisan gap has grown as Republican and Democratic views diverge.
