Public responses to climate change

The role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action

Kersty Hobson, Simon Niemeyer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

76 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Public deliberative platforms have been argued as potentially beneficial in fostering adaptive capacity to respond to climate change. However, little is known about the veracity of such claims, and indeed how deliberation and adaptive capacity can and do intersect. In response, this paper reports on findings from a project into public responses to climate change in the Australian Capital Region. It utilises quantitative analysis-in the form of Q methodology-and qualitative analysis, to compare discourses that emerged from individual scenario-based interviews with those that emerged at the end of a 4-day public deliberative process. It shows that while the scenario interviews had an impact on participants, this impact is not sustained. By contrast, the deliberative process gave rise to new discourses, one of which (labelled 'Collective Action Imperative') is argued as indicative of a potentially constructive personal and collective adaptive capacity. However, advocating deliberative processes still requires caution, as less adaptive discourses prevailed, suggesting strong governance signals and leadership are still essential for fostering a positive public response to the challenges of climate change.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)957-971
Number of pages15
JournalGlobal Environmental Change
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Aug 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

capacity building
deliberation
climate change
discourse
scenario
interview
collective behavior
collective action
qualitative analysis
leadership
governance
quantitative analysis
methodology
public

Cite this

@article{554b7854890d4f2b85279c6405549ff7,
title = "Public responses to climate change: The role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action",
abstract = "Public deliberative platforms have been argued as potentially beneficial in fostering adaptive capacity to respond to climate change. However, little is known about the veracity of such claims, and indeed how deliberation and adaptive capacity can and do intersect. In response, this paper reports on findings from a project into public responses to climate change in the Australian Capital Region. It utilises quantitative analysis-in the form of Q methodology-and qualitative analysis, to compare discourses that emerged from individual scenario-based interviews with those that emerged at the end of a 4-day public deliberative process. It shows that while the scenario interviews had an impact on participants, this impact is not sustained. By contrast, the deliberative process gave rise to new discourses, one of which (labelled 'Collective Action Imperative') is argued as indicative of a potentially constructive personal and collective adaptive capacity. However, advocating deliberative processes still requires caution, as less adaptive discourses prevailed, suggesting strong governance signals and leadership are still essential for fostering a positive public response to the challenges of climate change.",
keywords = "Adaptive capacity, Deliberation, Q methodology",
author = "Kersty Hobson and Simon Niemeyer",
year = "2011",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.05.001",
language = "English",
volume = "21",
pages = "957--971",
journal = "Global Environmental Change",
issn = "0959-3780",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "3",

}

Public responses to climate change : The role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action. / Hobson, Kersty; Niemeyer, Simon.

In: Global Environmental Change, Vol. 21, No. 3, 01.08.2011, p. 957-971.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public responses to climate change

T2 - The role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action

AU - Hobson, Kersty

AU - Niemeyer, Simon

PY - 2011/8/1

Y1 - 2011/8/1

N2 - Public deliberative platforms have been argued as potentially beneficial in fostering adaptive capacity to respond to climate change. However, little is known about the veracity of such claims, and indeed how deliberation and adaptive capacity can and do intersect. In response, this paper reports on findings from a project into public responses to climate change in the Australian Capital Region. It utilises quantitative analysis-in the form of Q methodology-and qualitative analysis, to compare discourses that emerged from individual scenario-based interviews with those that emerged at the end of a 4-day public deliberative process. It shows that while the scenario interviews had an impact on participants, this impact is not sustained. By contrast, the deliberative process gave rise to new discourses, one of which (labelled 'Collective Action Imperative') is argued as indicative of a potentially constructive personal and collective adaptive capacity. However, advocating deliberative processes still requires caution, as less adaptive discourses prevailed, suggesting strong governance signals and leadership are still essential for fostering a positive public response to the challenges of climate change.

AB - Public deliberative platforms have been argued as potentially beneficial in fostering adaptive capacity to respond to climate change. However, little is known about the veracity of such claims, and indeed how deliberation and adaptive capacity can and do intersect. In response, this paper reports on findings from a project into public responses to climate change in the Australian Capital Region. It utilises quantitative analysis-in the form of Q methodology-and qualitative analysis, to compare discourses that emerged from individual scenario-based interviews with those that emerged at the end of a 4-day public deliberative process. It shows that while the scenario interviews had an impact on participants, this impact is not sustained. By contrast, the deliberative process gave rise to new discourses, one of which (labelled 'Collective Action Imperative') is argued as indicative of a potentially constructive personal and collective adaptive capacity. However, advocating deliberative processes still requires caution, as less adaptive discourses prevailed, suggesting strong governance signals and leadership are still essential for fostering a positive public response to the challenges of climate change.

KW - Adaptive capacity

KW - Deliberation

KW - Q methodology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79960068434&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.05.001

DO - 10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.05.001

M3 - Article

VL - 21

SP - 957

EP - 971

JO - Global Environmental Change

JF - Global Environmental Change

SN - 0959-3780

IS - 3

ER -