| 1. |
- Gifford, Robert, et al.
(författare)
-
Temporal pessimism and spatial optimism in environmental assessments: An 18-nation study
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Psychology. - : Elsevier BV. - 0272-4944. ; 29, s. 1-12
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The personal assessments of the current and expected future state of the environment by 3232 community respondents in 18 nations were investigated at the local, national, and global spatial levels. These assessments were compared to a ranking of each country's environmental quality by an expert panel. Temporal pessimism (“things will get worse”) was found in the assessments at all three spatial levels. Spatial optimism bias (“things are better here than there”) was found in the assessments of current environmental conditions in 15 of 18 countries, but not in the assessments of the future. All countries except one exhibited temporal pessimism, but significant differences between them were common. Evaluations of current environmental conditions also differed by country. Citizens' assessments of current conditions, and the degree of comparative optimism, were strongly correlated with the expert panel's assessments of national environmental quality. Aside from the value of understanding global trends in environmental assessments, the results have important implications for environmental policy and risk management strategies.
|
|
| 2. |
- Sundblad, Eva-Lotta, 1956, et al.
(författare)
-
Knowledge and Confidence in Knowledge about Climate Change among Experts, Journalists, Politicians, and Laypersons.
- 2009
-
Ingår i: Environment and Behavior. ; 41, s. 281-302
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Knowledge and confidence in one´s own knowledge of climate change was investigated among experts, journalists, politicians and laypersons. Subsamples of 65 experts, 72 environmental journalists, 145 politicians being chairs of environmental committees, and 621 laypersons in Sweden responded to survey questions concerning current climate state, causes and consequences of climate change. Experts presented the highest level of knowledge, followed by journalists, politicians and laypersons. In all the groups, knowledge of causes was greater than that of climate state and of future consequences, and among the latter knowledge was less of health consequences than that of weather and sea/glacier consequences. Also, experts expressed the highest level of confidence in their own knowledge, followed by journalists, politicians and laypersons. Nevertheless, the adjustment of confidence in one’s own knowledge to actual knowledge was somewhat higher among journalists than among experts.
|
|
