Climate change communication: a provocative inquiry into motives, meanings, and means.

摘要: The deliberately provocative theme of this article is that perceived difficulties in climate change communication (CCC)--e.g., indifference about or denial change's reality, negative consequences, anthropogenic causes, need to mitigate adapt it-are partly the fault communicators. Fischhoff's model risk development used demonstrate CCC date has tended stress persuasion, rather than social movement mobilization deliberation, and with a focus on model's early stages. Later stages are not necessarily better, but more diverse strategy seems superior perhaps narrowed by empathic, ideological, psychological, resource constraints. Furthermore, even within emphasizing wider set values, audiences could be fruitful. Social its own weaknesses, usefully complements persuasion developing power, subverting mainstream assumptions, engaging people collective action. Deliberation similarly drawbacks, unlike other two approaches does define solution-or even, necessarily, problem-in advance, thus offers chance for contending viewpoints jointly develop concepts action agendas hitherto unimagined. Simultaneous pursuit all three strategies can some degree offset their respective flaws, at potential cost diffusion energies contradictory messages. Success no means guaranteed self-reflection communicators, should better reveal CCC's limits.