What's in a Frame When it Comes to Fossil Fuels: Does Health Matter More Than Climate Change?

Sunday, February 17, 2013
Auditorium/Exhibit Hall C (Hynes Convention Center)
Nada Petrovic , Columbia University, New York, NY
Jaime Madrigano , Columbia University, New York, NY
Lisa Zaval , Columbia University, New York, NY
In the US, the public consistently ranks climate change as a low national priority even though over half of the population is convinced of the reality and seriousness of the problem.  These seemingly contradictory statements can be explained through a lack of personal engagement and a sense of spatial and temporal distance from the effects of climate change.  Yet, the chief method for climate change mitigation, the reduction of fossil fuel use, would also reduce air pollution, which is responsible each year for 0.8 million premature deaths and 6.4 million lost life years worldwide.  The health behavior literature demonstrates that personal perception of risk is one of the strongest motivators of behavioral change. The objective of this study was to understand whether emphasizing present-day public health impacts has a greater effect on beliefs/actions toward fossil fuel reduction than emphasizing climate change impacts.  A secondary aim was to understand what other characteristics (demographic, political, religious, etc.) predict beliefs and actions.  We will present preliminary data that begins to answer these questions and discuss next steps in this project.