Advertisement

Climatic Change

, Volume 142, Issue 1–2, pp 287–300 | Cite as

The earth is our home: systemic metaphors to redefine our relationship with nature

  • Paul H. ThibodeauEmail author
  • Cynthia McPherson Frantz
  • Matias Berretta
Article

Abstract

Climate change is one of the most compelling challenges for science communication today. Societal reforms are necessary to reduce the risks posed by a changing climate, yet many people fail to recognize climate change as a serious issue. Unfortunately, the accumulation of scientific data, in itself, has failed to compel the general public on the urgent need for pro-environmental policy action. We argue that certain metaphors for the human-environment relationship can lead people to adopt a more nuanced and responsible conception of their place in the natural world. In two studies, we tested properties of multiple metaphors with the general public (study 1) and experts on climate change (study 2). The metaphor “the earth is our home” resonated with climate experts as well as diverse subpopulations of the general public, including conservatives and climate-change deniers.

Keywords

Climate Change Positive Affect Metaphor Natural World System Thinking 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The research for this article was financially supported by the National Science Foundation (grant no. 1534479; assessing the effect of systems thinking on decision-making).

Compliance with ethical standards

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

Supplementary material

10584_2017_1926_MOESM1_ESM.docx (1.4 mb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 1398 kb)

References

  1. Bain PG et al (2012) Promoting pro-environmental action in climate change deniers. Nat Clim Chang 2:600–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bain PG et al (2016) Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world. Nat Clim Chang 6:154–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bernauer T (2013) Climate change politics. Annu Rev Polit Sci 16:421–448CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bernauer T, McGrath LF (2016) Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy. Nat Clim Chang. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2948 Google Scholar
  5. Burgess MM (2014) From ‘trust us’ to participatory governance: deliberative publics and science policy. Public Underst Sci 23:48–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cai, Y., Lenton, T. M., & Lontzek, T. S. (2016). Risk of multiple interacting tipping points should encourage rapid CO2 emission reduction. Nature Climate Change. doi: 10.1038/nclimate2964
  7. Checkland P (1981) Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. John Wiley & Sons, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Citron FMM, Goldberg AE (2014) Metaphorical sentences are more emotionally engaging than their literal counterparts. J Cogn Neurosci 26:2585–2595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clifford S, Jewell RM, Waggoner PD (2015) Are samples drawn from Mechanical Turk valid for research on political ideology? Res Polit 2(4):1–9Google Scholar
  10. Dweck C (2006) Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Elwood WN (1995) Declaring war on the home front: metaphor, presidents, and the war on drugs. Metaphor Symb 10:93–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Feinberg M, Willer R (2011) Apocalypse soon? Dire messages reduce belief in global warming by contradicting just-world beliefs. Psychol Sci 22:34–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Feldman L, Hart PS, Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C (2015) Do hostile media perceptions lead to action? The role of hostile media perceptions, political efficacy, and ideology in predicting climate change activism. Commun Res 0093650214565914Google Scholar
  14. Francis P (2015) Laudato si. Encyclical Letter of the Holy Father (On care for our common home). Retrieved April 25, 2016 from http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html
  15. Furnham A (2003) Belief in a just world: research progress over the past decade. Personal Individ Differ 34:795–817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gallup (2015) Most important problem. Retrieved October 20, 2015, from http://www.gallup.com/poll/1675/most-important-problem.aspx
  17. Gibbs R (1994) The poetics of mind. Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar
  18. Hung W (2008) Enhancing systems-thinking skills with modeling. Br J Educ Technol 39:1099–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaeble D, Glaze L, Tsoutis A, Minton T (2015) Correctional populations in the United States, 2014. Tech. Rep. NCJ 249513, Bureau of Justice StatisticsGoogle Scholar
  20. Kahan DM et al (2012) The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nat Clim Chang 2:732–735CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keysar B, Bly B (1995) Intuitions of the transparency of idioms: can one keep a secret by spilling the beans? J Mem Lang 34:89–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lakoff G (2010) Why it matters how we frame the environment. Environ Commun 4:70–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lakoff G, Johnson M (1980) Metaphors we live by. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  24. Larson B (2011) Metaphors for environmental sustainability: redefining our relationship with nature. Yale University Press, New HavenGoogle Scholar
  25. Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C, Feinberg G, Rosenthal S (2015) Climate change in the American mind: October, 2015. Yale Project on Climate Change Communication. Yale University and George Mason University, New Haven, Retrieved April 25, 2016 from http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/PolicySupportJune2010.pdf Google Scholar
  26. Lezak S, Thibodeau PH (2016) Systems thinking and environmental concern. J Environ Psychol 46:143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. McCright AM, Dunlap RE (2011) The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views on global warming. Sociol Q 52:155–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meadows DH, Wright D (2008) Thinking in systems: a primer. Chelsea Green Publishing, White River JunctionGoogle Scholar
  29. Miller G, Spoolman S (1988) Environmental science: problems, connections and solutions. Thomson, BelmontGoogle Scholar
  30. Myers TA, Nisbet MC, Maibach EW, Leiserowitz AA (2012) A public health frame arouses hopeful emotions about climate change. Clim Chang 113:1105–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Nerlich B, Koteyko N, Brown B (2010) Theory and language of climate change communication. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Chang 1:97–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. O’Neill S, Nicholson-Cole S (2009) “Fear Won’t Do It” promoting positive engagement with climate change through visual and iconic representations. Sci Commun 30:355–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Pachauri RK et al (2014) Climate change 2014: synthesis report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeGoogle Scholar
  34. Petrovic N, Madrigano J, Zaval L (2014) Motivating mitigation: when health matters more than climate change. Clim Chang 126:245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Primavesi A (2008) Gaia and climate change: a theology of gift events. Rutledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Princen T (2010) Speaking of sustainability: the potential of metaphor. Sustain: Sci, Pract Policy 6:60–65Google Scholar
  37. Schwartz B, Sharpe K (2010) Practical wisdom: the right way to do the right thing. Penguin, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  38. Shaw C, Nerlich B (2015) Metaphor as a mechanism of global climate change governance: a study of international policies, 1992–2012. Ecol Econ 109:34–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sopory P, Dillard JP (2002) The persuasive effects of metaphor: a meta-analysis. Hum Commun Res 28:382–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Spence A, Pidgeon N (2010) Framing and communicating climate change: the effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Glob Environ Chang 20:656–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Stehr N (2015) Climate policy: democracy is not an inconvenience. Nature 525:449–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sterman JD (2010) Does formal system dynamics training improve people’s understanding of accumulation? Syst Dyn Rev 26:316–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Thibodeau PH, Boroditsky L (2011) Metaphors we think with: the role of metaphor in reasoning. PLoS ONE 6:e16782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Thibodeau PH, Frantz CM, Stroink ML (2016a) Situating a measure of systems thinking in a landscape of psychological constructs. Syst Res Behav Sci 33:753–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Thibodeau PH, Winneg A, Frantz CM, Flusberg SJ (2016b) The mind is an ecosystem: systemic metaphors promote systems thinking. Metaphor Soc World 6:224–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. van der Linden SL, Leiserowitz AA, Feinberg GD, Maibach EW (2015) The scientific consensus on climate change as a gateway belief: experimental evidence. PLoS ONE 10:e0118489CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul H. Thibodeau
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cynthia McPherson Frantz
    • 1
  • Matias Berretta
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyOberlin CollegeOberlinUSA

Personalised recommendations