repubblica.it
Climate Action Spurs Rise of Denial Groups: Stanford Study
A Stanford University study found that climate change denial groups are more prevalent in countries with stronger environmental policies, with 548 organizations identified globally, 60% in the U.S., actively opposing climate action between 1990 and 2018.
- How did the researchers quantify a country's commitment to environmental protection and identify climate change denial organizations?
- The research, published in PLOS ONE, reveals a positive correlation between a country's commitment to environmental protection (measured by international agreements, national environmental organizations, and climate mitigation policies) and the presence of climate change denial groups. This suggests these groups often emerge in response to, or in opposition of, significant climate action.
- What is the relationship between governmental climate action and the rise of climate change denial groups, according to the Stanford University study?
- A Stanford University study analyzed climate change denial groups from 1990-2018 across 160+ countries. The study found 548 organizations, predominantly in Western industrialized nations, actively opposing climate policies. Approximately 60% (350 groups) were located in the U.S.
- What are the implications of this study's findings for future climate action strategies, particularly regarding the management of counter-movements and public engagement?
- The study's findings indicate that robust climate action may inadvertently stimulate counter-movements. This highlights the need for strategies to address misinformation and build broader public consensus around climate change, exceeding the reactive approach of simply countering denial groups.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The article frames the narrative around the surprising finding that climate change denial groups tend to emerge in countries with stronger environmental policies. This framing emphasizes the counterintuitive nature of the relationship, potentially downplaying other important aspects of the phenomenon. The headline itself might contribute to this framing effect.
Language Bias
The language used is largely neutral and objective, presenting the research findings in a descriptive manner. However, phrases like "negazionisti del cambiamento climatico" (climate change deniers) might be considered slightly loaded, though this is partially a translation issue from the original Italian.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses on the correlation between environmental policies and the emergence of climate change denial groups, but omits discussion of other potential contributing factors, such as economic interests or ideological beliefs. This omission might lead readers to oversimplify the origins of climate change denial.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between those who accept climate change and those who deny it, overlooking the nuances of public opinion and the range of perspectives on climate action. While acknowledging some groups advocate for less stringent measures, it doesn't explore the diversity of views within the "climate action" camp itself.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article discusses the emergence of climate change denial groups, which actively work against climate action policies. This directly hinders progress towards climate change mitigation and adaptation efforts outlined in the SDGs. The fact that these groups tend to form in countries with stronger environmental policies indicates a deliberate attempt to undermine climate action.