As the effects of climate change become clearer and more ominous, fossil fuel companies face a choice: Defy warnings of catastrophic climate change, or envision their roles in a post-carbon world.
It’s easy to spot outright rejection of the facts on climate change. But it’s far harder to see our own biases and excuses that lead us to delay or deny the need for real action.
People are more likely to deny climate change if they’re inclined toward hierarchy, have lower levels of education or are more religious. But the strongest predictor of denial is a person’s politics.
Africa has already felt the effects of Donald Trump’s climate change denialism. Recent events are also raising political issues of keen interest among the continent’s democrats.
Scott Morrison told reporters he discussed climate change with his daughters, aged 10 and 12, but didn’t share, unfortunately, the girls’ views on the subject.
Climate deniers recently gathered to talk shop at Donald Trump’s hotel in Washington DC. There’s more to their links with the president than a reservation, though.
Ten years ago, politicians such as Tony Abbott would routinely voice disdain for climate science. Now, while the policy debate remains fierce, the battleground has shifted to economics and jobs.
In the end, climate policy didn’t swing the federal election, and for those on the losing side it can be tempting to play the blame game. But listening and respect are much better ways to move forward.
Media reports are starting to directly connect climate change to its weather effects in local communities. But how you respond to those linkages depends on what you already think about climate change.
Professor of Management & Organizations; Professor of Environment & Sustainability; Professor of Sustainable Enterprise at the Ross School of Business and School of Environment and Sustainability, University of Michigan