It’s a common refrain: If people only knew more about the science, there wouldn’t be so much polarization on the issue of climate change. But Dan M. Kahan’s groundbreaking work has gone a long way to prove that idea wrong. In fact, he’s found, it’s not the lack of scientific understanding that has led to conflict over climate change, but rather the need to adhere to the philosophy and values of one’s “cultural” group. In an interview with Yale Environment 360, Kahan, a professor of law and psychology at Yale Law School, maintains that in order to break down the polarization, the issue needs to be reframed in a way that minimizes the likelihood that positions on climate change will be identified with a particular group. “Are there ways to combine the science with meanings that would be affirming rather than threatening to people?” he says. “I think if somebody believes that there just aren’t any, I think that person just doesn’t have much imagination.”
Interview: Finding a Better Message About the Risks of Climate Change
More From E360
-
Cities
‘Sponge City’: How Copenhagen Is Adapting to a Wetter Future
-
INTERVIEW
On Controlling Fire, New Lessons from a Deep Indigenous Past
-
Solutions
Paying the People: Liberia’s Novel Plan to Save Its Forests
-
OPINION
Forest Service Plan Threatens the Heart of an Alaskan Wilderness
-
INTERVIEW
Pakistan’s Solar Revolution Is Bringing Power to the People
-
Food & Agriculture
In Uganda, Deadly Landslides Force an Agricultural Reckoning
-
Energy
Why U.S. Geothermal May Advance, Despite Political Headwinds
-
Food & Agriculture
In War Zones, a Race to Save Key Seeds Needed to Feed the World
-
Climate
Lightning Strikes the Arctic: What Will It Mean for the Far North?
-
RIVERS
A Win for Farmers and Tribes Brings New Hope to the Klamath
-
Solutions
Deconstructing Buildings: The Quest for New Life for Old Wood
-
NATURAL DEFENSES
How Restored Wetlands Can Protect Europe from Russian Invasion