Citizen Action Monitor

There is a “trust deficit” that blocks communication about the danger of climate change

“It is not enough to tell people how things stand: we need to generate trust.” – Ugo Bardi tells a story to make his point.

No 1842 Posted by fw, December 7, 2016

Ugo Bardi

Ugo Bardi

“Why are we failing at communicating the danger of climate change? Maybe people don’t have enough information? (This is the ‘information deficit’ model). Or maybe they have too much information? (This is called the ‘cultural cognition’ model). Or maybe they are not getting the right information? Or there is something else that’s wrong? …. let me tell you of an event that was an eye-opening experience for me. It made me understand that there is such a thing as an ‘information deficit’ problem, but also that things are not as simple as that. I think that more than an information deficit, there is a ‘trust deficit’ that blocks communication. It is not enough to tell people how things stand: we need to generate trust. And trust begets trust. But let me tell you the story.”Ugo Bardi, Casandra’s Legacy

Ugo Bardi, professor in Physical Chemistry at the University of Florence, Italy, is the author of the blog, Casandra’s Legacy. His blog is dedicated to exploring the future of humankind, affected by the decline of the availability of natural resources, the climate problem, and the human tendency of mismanaging both. The future doesn’t look bright, but it is still possible to do something good if we don’t discount the alerts of the modern Cassandras.

Cassandra

Cassandra

For those unfamiliar with the Greek mythological prophet, Cassandra, a common version of her story relates how, in an effort to seduce her, Apollo gave her the power of prophecy — but when she refused him, he spat into her mouth to inflict a curse that nobody would ever believe her prophecies.

Modern Cassandras are the climate scientists whose prophetic warnings are discounted at our peril.

Therein lies the problem, says Bardi: “…we have squandered so much of the trust that the public had in its sources of information that we live squarely in an ‘Empire of Lies’. Will we ever be able to restore trust? Perhaps not impossible, but very, very difficult.

Who will you trust to tell you the truth about the climate change threat? Surely not political leaders who tell you we can both build pipelines to grow the economy and rapidly cut carbon emissions: or as one headline put it: The Canadian government’s double standards: acting on climate by seeking to export more fossil fuels.

Anyway, let Ugo Bardi tell his story.

**********

Climate science communication: trust begets trust by Ugo Bardi, Casandra’s Legacy, December 4, 2016

With more than 50.000 students, the University of Florence, in Italy, is a huge organization with plenty of problems. But it is also an ancient and prestigious university that, sometimes, manages to do something right. Recently, it organized an information day on climate change for its employees that was remarkably successful, showing that trust begets trust. 

Why are we failing at communicating the danger of climate change? Maybe people don’t have enough information? (This is the “information deficit” model). Or maybe they have too much information? (This is called the “cultural cognition” model). Or maybe they are not getting the right information? Or there is something else that’s wrong?

Without going into the details of the debate, let me tell you of an event that was an eye-opening experience for me. It made me understand that there is such a thing as an “information deficit” problem, but also that things are not as simple as that. I think that more than an information deficit, there is a “trust deficit” that blocks communication. It is not enough to tell people how things stand: we need to generate trust. And trust begets trust. But let me tell you the story.

This year, the University of Florence decided to offer to its personnel – the employees working in the administration or in services –  three “information days” on matters related to sustainability. One of these information days was dedicated to climate change and was held on Nov 9th, 2016. I was one of the organizers, so I followed the event from the beginning.

The first point is that this was supposed to be a class; not a vacation day: there would be several talks for a total of about eight hours and we planned them as real, university-level lessons. We had climate modeling, paleoclimatology, climate negotiations, communication, mitigation, adaptation, and more. It was communication directed to non-scientists, but the speakers were all specialists in their fields and they made no attempt of sweetening the pill or of trivializing the subject.

To be honest, I wasn’t sure that it would have worked. I was afraid that people would take the initiative as an excuse for a day of vacation; that they wouldn’t show up, or show up and disappear shortly afterward. Or, if they were to stay, they would be bored to death and sleep throughout the day. I was even expecting that some idiot in the audience would stand up and say something like “don’t you see how cold it is today? Climate change is a hoax!”

But nothing like that happened. With a certain surprise on my part, the aula magna of the University of Florence was crammed full with some two hundred people, mostly university employees, but also students and faculty members. Most of them bravely sat through the 8 hours of talks, a remarkable feat (at some moments, some of them had to stand because there were not enough seats available). And not only they sat in the room; they listened to the talks. After much experience with public talks and lessons, I can sense whether the audience is attentive or not, and they were. They were not sleeping. Actually, I detected some closed eyes, occasionally, – it is normal. But, on the whole, I would say that they were more attentive than many of my students.

We made no attempt of a formal evaluation of the results of this initiative, but I think I have sufficient informal feedback to be able to tell you that the message got through. Many people were not just interested, they were amazed. They had no idea that climate science was such a deep, wide, and fascinating field. They had never realized the extent of the threat we are facing.

For me, as I said, it was an eye-opening experience that made me re-evaluate everything I knew about scientific communication. It made me understand how remote climate science is for the people who, really, suffer from an information deficit problem. Most people who are not scientists get their information from the mainstream media (MSM) and there are two problems with that: one is that they only get snippets and glimpses, drowned in the general noise of the news. The other, perhaps more important, is that they correctly mistrust the MSM. Yet, where else can they get information from? It is truly a deadly combination: bad information from a mistrusted source: any wonder that nobody is doing anything about climate change?

And here comes the university; an institution full of problems but that’s supposed to exist in order to create science and culture, not to make money. Because of this, it enjoys a certain prestige and, this time, it used it to do something right. It told to its employees, “we value you, so we offer to you our knowledge about climate science for free. We trust that you will appreciate it.” And the employees responded by reciprocating the trust and appreciating this gift. Trust begets trust.

I think this experience has a general value. It agrees with a fact that is described, for instance, by Ara Norenzayan in his book “Big Gods“. Simply stated, people will believe a message if (and only if) they believe the messenger. So, no wonder that people are not much moved by the messages on climate change that they receive by the MSM – not only they are receiving a garbled message, they don’t believe the messenger. But when they receive the message from a trusted institution and from people who, clearly, are doing their best to inform them, then they understand. It is not a question of volume, not a question of sweetening the pill, not a question of public relation strategies. It is a question of trust.

And here lies the problem: we have squandered so much of the trust that the public had in its sources of information that we live squarely in an “Empire of Lies“. Will we ever be able to restore trust? Perhaps not impossible, but very, very difficult. Still, what the University of Florence did was a step in the right direction. Maybe it can be replicated and then, who knows?

FAIR USE NOTICE – For details click here

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: