Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The power of impact framing and experience for determining acceptable levels of climate change-induced flood risk: a lab experiment

  • Original article
  • Published:
Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study explores how individuals, when assuming the role of policymakers, determine acceptable levels of risk in response to (a) different framings of flood risk information and (b) after experiencing economic losses from a hypothetical flood event in Zarautz (Basque Country, Spain). An incentivised lab experiment is conducted on a representative sample in the neighbouring region of Bilbao. A 2 × 2 factorial between-subject design is used to measure risk acceptability in response to visual and economic impact framings, and the effect of experience is measured using a 2-period repeated game within-subject design. Results from the experiment teach us that photos of climate impacts can be an effective medium for provoking visceral feelings about climate change. When used in conjunction with simple numerical risk information, photos can help the public to engage more deeply with climate issues and in turn encourage them to take precautionary measures to limit losses in the future. Experiencing economic losses leads to reductions in levels of acceptable risks, but decision-making is characterised by little emotional or logical reasoning, signalling a use of heuristics such as ‘gut impulse’, which may be prone to cognitive bias.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

Data are available upon request.

Notes

  1. Flooding represents one of the major climate-related impacts in the North of Spain, especially impacting the Basque Country (Gobierno Vasco 2015).

  2. The post-experiment survey can be found in Online Resource 2.

  3. While the experiment focused on flood events in the neighbouring Basque town of Zarautz, the experiment itself was conducted in Bilbao where the closest economic laboratory was situated.

References

  • Abadie LM, Galarraga I, de Murieta ES (2017) Understanding risks in the light of uncertainty: low-probability, high-impact coastal events in cities. Environ Res Lett 12:014017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Akerlof K, Maibach EW, Fitzgerald D, Cedeno AY, Neuman A (2013) Do people “personally experience” global warming, and if so how, and does it matter? Glob Environ Change 23:81–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.07.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell H, Tobin G (2007) Efficient and effective? The 100-year flood in the communication and perception of flood risk. Environ Hazards 7:302–311. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envhaz.2007.08.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Braasch G (2013) Climate change: Is seeing believing? Bull at Sci 69:33–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brügger A, Pidgeon NF (2018) Spatial framing, existing associations and climate change beliefs. Environ Values 27:559–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bubeck P, Botzen WJW, Aerts JCJH (2012) A review of risk perceptions and other factors that influence flood mitigation behavior: review of flood risk perceptions. Risk Anal 32:1481–1495. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01783.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burningham K, Fielding J, Thrush D (2008) ‘It’ll never happen to me’: understanding public awareness of local flood risk. Disasters 32:216–238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camerer CF (2011) Behavioral game theory: experiments in strategic interaction. Princeton University Press, New York

  • Camerer CF, Kunreuther H (1989) Decision processes for low probability events: policy implications. J Policy Anal Manage 8:565–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaiken S, Trope Y (1999) Dual-process theories in social psychology. Guilford Press, New York

  • Cooper KE, Nisbet EC (2016) Green narratives: How affective responses to media messages influence risk perceptions and policy preferences about environmental hazards. Sci Commun 38:626–654

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demeritt D, Nobert S (2014) Models of best practice in flood risk communication and management. Environ Hazards 13:313–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman JN, McDermott R (2008) Emotion and the framing of risky choice. Polit Behav 30:297–321. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-008-9056-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein S (1994) Integration of the cognitive and the psychodynamic unconscious. Am Psychol 49:709

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk A, Becker A, Dohmen TJ, Huffman D, Sunde U (2016) The preference survey module: a validated instrument for measuring risk, time, and social preferences (No. 9674), IZA Discussion Papers. Institute of the Study of Labor (IZA), Bonn

  • Foudi S, Osés‐Eraso N, Galarraga I (2017) The effect of flooding on mental health: Lessons learned for building resilience. Water Resour Res 53(7):5831–5844

  • Galarraga I, Sainz de Murieta E, Markandya A, Abadie LM (2018) Addendum to ‘Understanding risks in the light of uncertainty: low-probability, high-impact coastal events in cities.’ Environ Res Lett 13:029401

  • Gigerenzer G, Hertwig R, Van Den Broek E, Fasolo B, Katsikopoulos KV (2005) “A 30% chance of rain tomorrow”: how does the public understand probabilistic weather forecasts? Risk Anal. Int J 25:623–629

    Google Scholar 

  • Gobierno Vasco (2015) Estrategia de Cambio Climático 2050 del País Vasco. Departamento de Medio Ambiente y Política Territorial, Vitoria-Gasteiz

  • Hart PS (2013) The role of numeracy in moderating the influence of statistics in climate change messages. Public Underst Sci 22:785–798

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvatt J, Petts J, Chilvers J (2011) Understanding householder responses to natural hazards: flooding and sea-level rise comparisons. J Risk Res 14:63–83

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Highfield WE, Norman SA, Brody SD (2013) Examining the 100-year floodplain as a metric of risk, loss, and household adjustment. Risk Anal Int J 33:186–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Frederick S (2002) Representativeness revisited: attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Heuristics Biases Psychol Intuitive Judgm 49:81

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

  • Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47:263–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellens W, Zaalberg R, Neutens T, Vanneuville W, De Maeyer P (2011) An analysis of the public perception of flood risk on the Belgian coast: an analysis of the public perception of flood risk. Risk Anal 31:1055–1068. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01571.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kousky C (2017) Disasters as learning experiences or disasters as policy opportunities? Examining flood insurance purchases after hurricanes. Risk Anal 37:517–530

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence J, Quade D, Becker J (2014) Integrating the effects of flood experience on risk perception with responses to changing climate risk. Nat Hazards 74:1773–1794. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-014-1288-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leiserowitz A (2006) Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: the role of affect, imagery, and values. Clim Change 77:45–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leviston Z, Price J, Bishop B (2014) Imagining climate change: the role of implicit associations and affective psychological distancing in climate change responses. Eur J Soc Psychol 44:441–454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindman HR (1974) Analysis of variance in complex experimental designs. WH Freeman & Co., San Francisco

  • Lorenzoni I, Nicholson-Cole S, Whitmarsh L (2007) Barriers perceived to engaging with climate change among the UK public and their policy implications. Glob Environ Change 17:445–459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2007.01.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenzoni I, Pidgeon NF (2006) Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Clim Change 77:73–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lujala P, Lein H, Rød JK (2015) Climate change, natural hazards, and risk perception: the role of proximity and personal experience. Local Environ 20:489–509. https://doi.org/10.1080/13549839.2014.887666

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott T, Surminski S (2018) How normative interpretations of climate risk assessment affect local decision-making: an exploratory study at the city scale in Cork, Ireland. Philos Trans R Soc Math Phys Eng Sci 376:20170300

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton TA, Rabinovich A, Marshall D, Bretschneider P (2011) The future that may (or may not) come: how framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Glob Environ Change 21:103–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill SJ, Boykoff M, Niemeyer S, Day SA (2013) On the use of imagery for climate change engagement. Glob Environ Change 23:413–421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • O’Neill SJ, Smith N (2014) Climate change and visual imagery. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Clim Change 5:73–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Otieno C, Spada H, Liebler K, Ludemann T, Deil U, Renkl A (2014) Informing about climate change and invasive species: how the presentation of information affects perception of risk, emotions, and learning. Environ Educ Res 20:612–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Refsgaard JC, van der Sluijs JP, Højberg AL, Vanrolleghem PA (2007) Uncertainty in the environmental modelling process–a framework and guidance. Environ Model Softw 22:1543–1556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roeser S (2012) Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: a role for emotions: risk communication, public engagement, and climate change. Risk Anal 32:1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01812.x

  • Roeser S (2012) Risk communication, public engagement, and climate change: a role for emotions: risk communication, public engagement, and climate change. Risk Anal 32:1033–1040. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01812.x

  • Rogers RW (1975) A protection motivation theory of fear appeals and attitude change1. J Psychol 91(1):93–114

  • Shih T-J, Lin C-Y (2017) Developing communication strategies for mitigating actions against global warming: linking framing and a dual processing model. Environ Commun 11:840–858

  • Shih T-J, Lin C-Y (2017) Developing communication strategies for mitigating actions against global warming: linking framing and a dual processing model. Environ Commun 11:840–858

  • Simon HA (1956) Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychol Rev 63:129

  • Simon HA (1956) Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychol Rev 63:129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloman SA (1996) The empirical case for two systems of reasoning. Psychol Bull 119:3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slovic P (2010) If I look at the mass I will never act: psychic numbing and genocide. In: Emotions and risky technologies. Springer, Dordrecht, p 37–59

  • Slovic P, Numbed by Numbers (2007) Foreign Policy, March 2007, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1565665

  • Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG (2004) Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk Anal 24:311–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith N, Leiserowitz A (2014) The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Anal 34:937–948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith N, Leiserowitz A (2012) The rise of global warming skepticism: exploring affective image associations in the United States over time. Risk Anal 32:1021–1032. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01801.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spence A, Pidgeon N (2010) Framing and communicating climate change: the effects of distance and outcome frame manipulations. Glob Environ Change 20:656–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sunstein CR (2007) On the divergent American reactions to terrorism and climate change. Colum Rev 107:503

    Google Scholar 

  • Swim JK, Bloodhart B (2015) Portraying the perils to polar bears: The role of empathic and objective perspective-taking toward animals in climate change communication. Environ Commun 9:446–468

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terpstra T (2011) Emotions, trust, and perceived risk: affective and cognitive routes to flood preparedness behavior: affective and cognitive routes to flood preparedness behavior. Risk Anal 31:1658–1675. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01616.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van der Linden S (2014) On the relationship between personal experience, affect and risk perception: the case of climate change: personal experience, affect and risk perception. Eur J Soc Psychol 44:430–440. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Neumann J, Morgenstern O (1947) Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton University Press, Princeton

  • Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. J Pers Soc Psychol 54:1063

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weber EU, Stern PC (2011) Public understanding of climate change in the United States. Am Psychol 66:315–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weitzman ML (2009) On modeling and interpreting the economics of catastrophic climate change. Rev Econ Stat 91:1–19

Download references

Funding

This research was supported by the Horizon 2020 COACCH Project (grant agreement no. 776479). Additionally, it was also supported by the Basque Government through the BERC 2018–2021 programme and by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness MINECO through BC3 María de Maeztu excellence accreditation MDM-2017–0714.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Basque Center for Climate Change (BC3), Bilbao, Basque Country, Spain

    Ambika Markanday & Ibon Galarraga

  2. Centre for International Climate and Environmental Research (CICERO), Oslo, Norway

    Steffen Kallbekken

Authors
  1. Ambika Markanday
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steffen Kallbekken
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ibon Galarraga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ambika Markanday.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (DOCX 14 KB)

Supplementary file2 (DOCX 17 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Markanday, A., Kallbekken, S. & Galarraga, I. The power of impact framing and experience for determining acceptable levels of climate change-induced flood risk: a lab experiment. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 27, 12 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-021-09989-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-021-09989-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation