Climatic Change

, Volume 80, Issue 3–4, pp 213–238 | Cite as

Understanding public complacency about climate change: adults’ mental models of climate change violate conservation of matter

  • John D. StermanEmail author
  • Linda Booth Sweeney
Original Article


Public attitudes about climate change reveal a contradiction. Surveys show most Americans believe climate change poses serious risks but also that reductions in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions sufficient to stabilize atmospheric GHG concentrations can be deferred until there is greater evidence that climate change is harmful. US policymakers likewise argue it is prudent to wait and see whether climate change will cause substantial economic harm before undertaking policies to reduce emissions. Such wait-and-see policies erroneously presume climate change can be reversed quickly should harm become evident, underestimating substantial delays in the climate’s response to anthropogenic forcing. We report experiments with highly educated adults – graduate students at MIT – showing widespread misunderstanding of the fundamental stock and flow relationships, including mass balance principles, that lead to long response delays. GHG emissions are now about twice the rate of GHG removal from the atmosphere. GHG concentrations will therefore continue to rise even if emissions fall, stabilizing only when emissions equal removal. In contrast, most subjects believe atmospheric GHG concentrations can be stabilized while emissions into the atmosphere continuously exceed the removal of GHGs from it. These beliefs – analogous to arguing a bathtub filled faster than it drains will never overflow – support wait-and-see policies but violate conservation of matter. Low public support for mitigation policies may arise from misconceptions of climate dynamics rather than high discount rates or uncertainty about the impact of climate change. Implications for education and communication between scientists and nonscientists (the public and policymakers) are discussed.


Pattern Match Emission Path Write Explanation Springer Climatic Change Mass Balance Principle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Alley R, Marotzke J, Nordhaus W, Overpeck J, Peteet D, Pielke R, Pierrehumbert R, Rhines P, Stocker T, Talley L, Wallace J (2003) Abrupt climate change. Science 299:2005–2010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Axelrod R (1976) The Structure of Decision: The Cognitive Maps of Political Elites. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  3. Betts R (2000) Offset of the potential carbon sink from boreal forestation by decreases in surface albedo. Nature 408:187–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Booth Sweeney L, Sterman JD (2000) Bathtub dynamics: initial results of a systems thinking inventory. Syst Dyn Rev 16(4):249–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bord R, O’Connor R, Fisher A (2000) In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change? Public Understanding Sci 9:205–218CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bostrom A, Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Read D (1994) What do people know about global climate change? Part 1: Mental models. Risk Anal 14(6):959–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brechin S (2003) Comparative public opinion and knowledge on global climatic change and the kyoto protocol: The U.S. versus the World? Int J Sociol Soc Policy 23:106–134Google Scholar
  8. Buesseler K, Andrews J, Pike S, Charette M (2004) The effects of iron fertilization on carbon sequestration in the southern ocean. Science 304:414–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Buesseler K, Boyd P (2003) Will ocean fertilization work? Science 300:67–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Camerer C, Hogarth R (1999) The effects of financial incentives in experiments: a review and capital-labor-production framework. J. Risk Uncertainty 19(1–3):7–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Caspersen J, Pacala S, Jenkins J, Hurtt G, Moorcroft P, Birdsey R (2000) Contributions of land-use history to carbon accumulation in U.S. forests. Science 290:1148–1151Google Scholar
  12. Chisholm S, Falkowski P, Cullen J (2001) Dis-crediting ocean fertilization. Science 294:309–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Cox P, Betts R, Jones C, Spall S, Totterdell I (2000) Acceleration of global warming due to carbon-cycle feedbacks in a coupled climate model. Nature 408:184–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Einhorn H, Hogarth R (1986) Judging probable cause. Psychol Bull 99(1):3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Feudtner C, Marcuse E (2001) Ethics and immunization policy: promoting dialogue to sustain consensus. Pediatrics 107(5):1158–1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fiddaman T (2002) Exploring policy options with a behavioral climate-economy model. Syst Dyn Rev 18(2):243–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gentner D, Stevens A (1983) Mental Models. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  18. Gigerenzer G, Todd P, et al. (1999) Simple Heuristics that Make us Smart. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Gill R, Polley H, Johnson H, Anderson L, Maherali H, Jackson R (2002) Nonlinear grassland responses to past and future atmospheric CO2. Nature 417:279–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Goulden M, Wofsy S, Harden J, Trumbore S, Crill P, Gower S, Fries T, Daube B, Fan S-M, Sutton D, et al. (1998) Sensitivity of boreal forest carbon balance to soil thaw. Science 279:214–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Herzog H, Caldeira K, Reilly J (2003) An issue of permanence: assessing the effectiveness of temporary carbon storage. Climatic Change 59:293–310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hogarth R (1981) Beyond discrete biases – functional and dysfunctional aspects of judgmental heuristics. Psychol Bull 90(2):197–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Houghton J, Ding Y, Griggs D, Noguer M, van der Linden P, Dai X, Maskell K, Johnson C (eds) (2001) Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKGoogle Scholar
  24. House J, Prentice IC, LeQuéré C (2002) Maximum impacts of future reforestation or deforestation on atmospheric CO2. Global Change Biol 8:1047–1052CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jansen V, Stollenwerk N, Jensen H, Ramsay M, Edmunds W, Rhodes C (2003) Measles outbreaks in a population with declining vaccine uptake. Science 301:804CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jean-Baptiste P, Ducroux R (2003) Potentiel des méthodes de séparation et stockage du CO2 dans la lutte contre l’effect de serre. Comptes Rendus Geoscience 335:611–625CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Johnson-Laird P (1983) Mental Models: Toward a Cognitive Science of Language, Inference, and Consciousness. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  28. Kasemir B, Dahinden U, Swartling A, Schüle R, Tabara D, Jaeger C (2000) Citizens’ perspectives on climate change and energy use. Global Environ Change 10:169–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Kempton W (1997) How the public views climate change. Environment 39(9):12–21Google Scholar
  30. Kempton W (1993) Will public environmental concern lead to action on global warming? Annu Rev Energy Environ 18:117–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kempton W, Boster J, Hartley J (1995) Environmental Values in American Culture. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  32. Kleinmuntz D, Schkade D (1993) Information displays and decision-processes. Psychol Sci 4:221–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krosnick J, Holbrook A, Visser P (2000) The impact of the fall 1997 debate about global warming on American public opinion. Public Understanding Sci 9:239–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kull S (2001) Americans on the Global Warming Treaty. Program on International Policy Attitudes,
  35. Leiserowitz A (2003) American Opinions of Global Warming. University of Oregon Survey Research Laboratory,
  36. Malhi Y, Meir P, Brown S (2002) Forests, carbon and global climate. Philos T Roy Soc A 360:1567–1591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Meehl GA, Washington WM, Collins WD, et al. (2005) How much more global warming and sea level rise? Science 307:1769–1772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Meijnders A, Midden C, Wilke H (2001) Role of negative emotion in communication about CO2 risks. Risk Anal 21(5):955–966CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Milyukova I, Kolle O, Varlagin A, Vygodskaya N, Schulze E, Lloyd J (2002) Carbon balance of a southern taiga spruce stand in European Russia. Tellus B 54:429–442CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Bostrom A, Atman C (2002) Risk Communication: A mental models approach. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  41. Moser S, Dilling L (2004) Making climate hot. Environment 46(10):32–46Google Scholar
  42. Oeschger H, Siegenthaler U, Schotterer U, Gugelmann A (1975) Box diffusion-model to study carbon-dioxide exchange in nature. Tellus 27:168–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. O’Connor R, Bord R, Fisher A (1999) Risk perceptions, general environmental beliefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Anal 19(3):461–471Google Scholar
  44. O’Connor R, Bord R, Yarnal B, Wiefek N (2002) Who wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions? Soc Sci Q 83(1):1–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. O’Neill B, Oppenheimer M (2002) Dangerous climate impacts and the Kyoto protocol. Science 296:1971–1972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Page S, Siegert F, Rieley J, Boehm H, Jaya A, Limin S (2002) The amount of carbon released from peat and forest fires in Indonesia during 1997. Nature 420:61–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Palmgren C, Morgan MG, de Bruin W, Keith D (2004) Initial public perceptions of deep geological and oceanic disposal of carbon dioxide. Environ Sci Technol 38(24):6441–6450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Payne J, Bettman J, Johnson E (1993) The Adaptive Decision Maker. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  49. Plous S (1993) The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making. McGraw Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  50. Read D, Bostrom A, Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Smuts D (1994) What do people know about global climate change? Part 2: Survey studies of educated laypeople. Risk Anal 14(6):971–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rodo X, Pascual M, Fuchs G, Faruque A (2002) ENSO and cholera: a nonstationary link related to climate change? Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:12901–12906CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rogers E (2003) Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  53. Sarmiento J, Hughes T, Stouffer R, Manabe S (1998) Simulated response of the ocean carbon cycle to anthropogenic climate warming. Nature 393:245–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Sarmiento JL, Le Quéré C, Pacala SW (1995) Limiting future atmospheric carbon dioxide. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 9(1):121–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Scheffer M, Carpenter S, Foley J, Folkes C, Walker B (2001) Catastrophic shifts in ecosystems. Nature 413:591–596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Scott MJ, Edmonds JA, Mahasenan N, Roop JM, Brunello AL, Haites EF (2004) International emissions trading and the cost of greenhouse gas emissions mitigation and sequestration. Climatic Change 64:257–287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Slovic P (ed) (2000) The Perception of Risk. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  58. Stachowicz J, Terwin J, Whitlatch R, Osman R (2002) Linking climate change and biological invasions: Ocean warming facilitates nonindigenous species invasions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:15497–15500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Sterman J (2000) Business Dynamics: Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World. Irwin/McGraw-Hill, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  60. Sterman J, Booth Sweeney L (2002) Cloudy skies: assessing public understanding of global warming. Syst Dyn Rev 18:207–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T, Jaeger C (2001) The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups. Global Environ Change 11:107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sturgis P, Allum N (2004) Science in society: re-evaluating the deficit model of public attitudes. Public Understanding Sci 13:55–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Taylor H (2001) Large Majority of Public Now Believes in Global Warming and Supports International Agreements to Limit Greenhouse Gases. Harris Poll 45, Harris Interactive,
  64. Thomas C, Cameron A, Green R, Bakkenes M, Beaumont L, Collingham Y, Erasmus B, Ferreira de Siqueira M, Grainger A, Hannah L, et al. (2004) Extinction risk from climate change. Nature 427:145–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. United States Freedom Foundation. Helmet laws of the 50 states and how to beat them! Available at
  66. White A, Cannell M, Friend A (2000) CO2 stabilization, climate change, and the terrestrial carbon sink. Global Change Biol 6:817–833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Wigley T (2005) The climate change commitment. Science 307:1766–1769CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.MIT Sloan School of ManagementCambridgeU.S.A.
  2. 2.Harvard Graduate School of EducationMassachusettsU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations