Knowledge and attitudes about deforestation: testing strategies to change attitudes
Ross Taplin
A
Abstract
With increasing concerns about global climate change and deforestation, attitudes towards environmental protection are important, especially in democracies where citizens can influence policy direction.
This paper investigates people’s knowledge of a local environmental issue, deforestation of an ecologically diverse forest. Strategies to change environmental attitudes are also tested.
An online survey measured people’s generic knowledge and technical knowledge regarding deforestation due to bauxite mining. It also contains a randomised experiment (24 factorial design) to test whether four pieces of information cause changes in attitudes towards deforestation due to mining. The method incorporates the practical reality that environmental protection is often in conflict with other objectives such as economic prosperity, so investigates the issue more objectively than only investigating changes in one direction on a spectrum of protection or development.
Respondents have high generic knowledge but low technical knowledge, suggesting the need for further education. Information can change attitudes for or against environmental protection, and narratives are more successful than images. However, results vary depending on how attitudes are measured.
The paper demonstrates how identifying misconceptions or knowledge gaps is an important step towards changing attitudes about the need for environmental protection.
Implications include evidence of which strategies can influence public attitudes towards, and away from, environmental protection.
Keywords: attitudes, bauxite, climate change, deforestation, ecology, environment, jarrah, knowledge, randomised experiment, restoration.
References
Ainsworth GB, Aslin HJ, Weston MA, Garnett S. (2016) Social values and species conservation: the case of Baudin’s and Carnaby’s black-cockatoos. Environmental Conservation 43, 294-305.
| Google Scholar |
Bain PG, Hornsey MJ, Bongiorno R, Jeffries C (2012) Promoting pro-environmental action in climate change deniers. Nature Climate Change 2, 603.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bain PG, Milfont TL, Kashima Y, Bilewicz M, Doron G, Garðarsdóttir RB, et al. (2016) Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world. Nature Climate Change 6, 154-157.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bakaki Z, Bernauer T (2016) Measuring and explaining the willingness to pay for forest conservation: evidence from a survey experiment in Brazil. Environmental Research Letters 11, 114001.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bernauer T, McGrath LF (2016) Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy. Nature Climate Change 6, 680-683.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Boakes Z, Mahyuni LP, Hall AE, Cvitanovic M, Stafford R (2023) Can coral reef restoration programmes facilitate changes in environmental attitudes? A case study on a rural fisher community in North Bali, Indonesia. Human Ecology 51, 891-905.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Bolsen T, Palm R, Kingsland JT (2019) Counteracting climate science politicization with effective frames and imagery. Science Communication 41, 147-171.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Campbell T, Dixon KW, Bradshaw SD, Gann GD, Hartley W, Lambers H, Wardell-Johnson G (2024) Standards-based evaluation inform ecological restoration outcomes for a major mining activity in a global biodiversity hotspot. Restoration Ecology 32, e14236.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Curnock MI, Marshall NA, Thiault L, Heron SF, Hoey J, Williams G, Taylor B, Pert PL, Goldberg J (2019) Shifts in tourists’ sentiments and climate risk perceptions following mass coral bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef. Nature Climate Change 9, 535-541.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Erikson L, Klapwijk MJ (2019) Attitudes towards biodiversity conservation and carbon substitution in forestry: a study of stakeholders in Sweden. Forestry 92, 219-229.
| Google Scholar |
Fesenfeld L, Beiser-McGrath L, Sun Y, Wicki M, Bernauer T (2024) Systematic mapping of climate and environmental framing experiments and re-analysis with computational methods points to omitted interaction bias. PLoS Climate 3, e0000297.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Fielding K, Lunney D, Rhodes J, Goldingay R, Hetherington S, Brace A, Vass L, Hopkins M, Swankie L, Garofano N, Goulding W, McAlpine C (2022) What predicts community members’ intentions to take action to protect koalas? Pacific Conservation Biology 29, 26-37.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Griscom BW, Adams J, Ellis PW, Houghton RA, Lomax G, Miteva DA, et al. (2017) Natural climate solutions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 114, 11645-11650.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hart PS (2011) One or many? The influence of episodic and thematic climate change frames on policy preferences and individual behavior change. Science Communication 33, 28-51.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Holum ML, Jakobsen TG (2024) Economic growth versus the environment: government spending, trust, and citizen support for environmental protection. Environmental Sociology 10, 420-431.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Hung LS, Bayrak MM (2020) Comparing the effects of climate change labelling on reactions of the Taiwanese public. Nature Communications 11, 6052.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
La V-P, Nguyen M-H, Vong Q-H (2024) Climate change denial theories, skeptical arguments, and the role of science communication. SN Social Sciences 4, 175.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Lawrence D, Coe M, Walker W, Verchot L, Vandecar K (2022) The unseen effects of deforestation: biophysical effects on climate. Frontiers in Forests and Global Change 5, 756115.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Lockie S, Bartelet HA, Ritchie BW, Demeter C, Taylor B, Sie L (2024) Australians support multi-pronged action to build ecosystem resilience in the Great Barrier Reef. Biological Conservation 299, 110789.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Maynard LT, Torchalski JR, Gezon ZJ, Callwood KA, Stamper MA, Schook MW, Martin C (2024) Does active or informative messaging result in greater conservation engagement? Conservation 4, 236-252.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Mendy L, Karlson M, Lindvall D (2024) Counteracting climate denial: a systematic review. Public Understanding of Science 33, 504-520.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Oreskes N (2024) Environmental protection does not kill jobs. Scientific American Magazine 330, 80.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Roe S, Streck C, Obersteiner M, Frank S, Griscom B, Drouet L, et al. (2019) Contribution of the land sector to a 1.5°C world. Nature Climate Change 9, 817-828.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Steg L, Vlek C (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. Journal of Environmental Psychology 29, 309-317.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Trisos CH, Merow C, Pigot AL (2020) The projected timing of abrupt ecological disruption from climate change. Nature 580, 496-501.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Vella K, Baresi U, Lockie S, Taylor B (2021) Challenges and opportunities for assisted regional ecosystem adaptation: international experience and implications for adaptation research. PLoS ONE 16, e0257868.
| Crossref | Google Scholar | PubMed |
Wardell-Johnson G, Wardell-Johnson A, Schultz B, Dortch J, Robinson T, Collard L, Calver M. (2019) The contest for the tall forests of south-western Australia and the discourses of advocates. Pacific Conservation Biology 25(1), 50-71.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |
Zeng D, Chen B, Wang J, Innes JL, Lu J, Guo F, Yan Y, Wang G (2023) Evolving environmental awareness and shifts in management priorities: a socioeconomic lens on the min river basin, China. Frontiers in Environmental Science 11, 1257089.
| Crossref | Google Scholar |