The BBC World Service just released the results of a poll they did of 22,000 people in 21 countries on attitudes toward global warming. Short story: large majorities believe that human beings are causing global warming, that urgent action needs to be taken to avert it, and that part of that action should be rich countries helping fund the efforts of poor countries.
Says GlobeScan President Doug Miller, "The strength of these findings makes it difficult to imagine a more supportive public opinion environment for national leaders to commit to climate action."
And yet, national leaders continue to dither and whinge. What up, national leaders?
Also: What's up with India? Clearly word has not gotten around over there. Any Indian activists in the audience? You people need to step it up.
Two more nifty charts below the fold.
Australia’s real climate on climate change
What is Obama’s international climate strategy?
U.S.-Russia climate and energy efficiency cooperation: A neglected challenge
Comments
View as Flat
Tom Philpott Posted 8:56 am
25 Sep 2007
But we are doing something!
What, you never heard of biofuels?
Victual Reality
Permalink
WWAGD?! Posted 9:29 am
25 Sep 2007
Madame Velocibovary
This is why people should change their lifestyles:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/articl ...
John Bailo
Sutext:
Permalink
GreenEngineer Posted 10:12 am
25 Sep 2007
graphs
Those results look compelling, but I wonder what would have happened if they had asked: Would you be willing to pay <2x the going rate per gallon> for gas to combat climate change? Or pay 10% more taxes? Or drive half as much? (Obviously, these are developed-world-centric questions.) But I suspect that the proportions would have been reversed. Humans have an amazing ability to hold multiple contradictory positions simultaneously.
The American Environmental Values Survey (PDF) speaks to some of these contradictions. Worth a read.
Permalink
plum Posted 10:20 am
25 Sep 2007
Re: India
India has an awful lot of libertarian Ayn Rand types. Could this explain their low scores? More to the point, what's with Germany & S Korea? And where's Japan?
Permalink
zacaroni Posted 12:44 am
27 Sep 2007
Libertarian Ayn Rand Types
Excuse me, plum, but I am an ardent environmental activist and happen to also be a libertarian, and a [sceptical but open minded] reader of Ayn Rand. I don't like that India's results are written off simply because you think that most of them are the "type" to ignore the issue. And maybe they are. But I am not.
Environmentalism and libertarianism are not in opposition to each other, as I see it (though unfortunately, many libertarians disagree, as you seem to). I see environmental justice as a personal health issue as much as I see it as a global issue. Therefore, it is in the best interest of an individual to care about the air that they breath and the water that they drink. As my water could come from as far away as China or India, I should also care about water quality in that place. Perhaps I simply have a broader view of "home" than most libertarians: my home is the Earth, and the Earth is a mess.
(All you non-libertarians out there should use this as an example when trying to convince your libertarian friends to be environmentalists!)
Permalink
zacaroni Posted 1:34 am
27 Sep 2007
on the survey
I would be curious to explore this survey in depth. I'm concerned about both technicalities and the psychology of the survey.
Firstly: I wonder about translations. I have noticed that the three Spanish-speaking countries (not including Spain) have generally the same score. Is this cultural? Or, does it have to do with the Spanish translation of the survey? I think the latter. Note that the industrialized English-speaking countries all have similar numbers.
This could possibly explain why Germany (which I believe isn't that unconcerned with global climate change and environmental issues) seemed to be split down the middle: perhaps the word "necessary" or the word "soon" was poorly translated into the German!
Furthermore, when it comes to the psychology of a survey, consider how you would answer the following questions:
"How necessary do you think it is to address climate change?"
"How necessary do you think it is to address human rights?"
"How necessary do you think it is to address world hunger?"
Get the idea? Not many people are going to say they are unconcerned with an issue like this. Few people would honestly answer "not very necessary" to the question that was posed, which makes this survey's results predictable.
Permalink
trock Posted 3:07 am
27 Sep 2007
used to call myself a libertarian
I would have called myself a libertarian at one time and still look to is as some kind of ideal to strive for.
We have 4 trillion dollars in taxes in a 13 trillion dollar economy. If we are going to have taxes, at least have it on something that can do some good for having taxes on it as well as bring in money for government services. Why have taxes on things that just make things cost more without at least doing something good.
I also think these numbers of people who think that global warming is a problem and we need to do something is a mile wide, but an inch thick. Not like protecting our country, like people in Iraq feel they are doing, risking their lives and sometimes losing it. I suppose some of the stunts of Greenpeace or Earth Firsters would qualify on that. But how many are willing to work for it, whether letters to the editors, politians or influence public opinion in any way. That's harder.
Permalink
plum Posted 9:12 am
27 Sep 2007
On libertarians
Sorry, zacaroni, if my comment got your goat up. I admit, my attitude to libertarians is influenced in large part by those libertarians I know who are strongly in the climate change denial camp. Nice to see one who not only isn't, but is an ardent environmentalist! (Now, if you could just have a word or two with some of your fellows...)
On the India results in the survey, I took a gander at the pdf and noticed that only 48% of Indian respondents said they had heard or read about global warming (no time period asked), so I'm assuming this goes a long way to explaining why only 47% of Indians viewed human activity as a major cause of global warming.
Seems like the Indian media still may have a long way to go on this topic.
Permalink
socialscientist Posted 10:54 am
27 Sep 2007
misdirection
Agrofuels and more efficient autos will prolong the life of autosprawl, probably just long enough to doom us.
http://www.freepublictransit.org
Permalink