The Understanding and Perception of Climate Change - Essay Example

Environmental Risk Perception Introduction The study of psychology has proven that people may have different perceptions regarding something depending on their level of interaction, thus understanding, of the subject. This means that one person may have a different opinion about a similar occurrence from another person. Such occurrences may emerge from one party having had a negative relationship with the subject, or one may have more information about the same. In this study, the issue of climate change will be used to reveal how different perceptions may emerge from different authors through analyzing two articles defining the issue of global climate change. Anthony Leiserowitz, American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous? In this article, Leiserowitz discusses the issue of climate change and seeks to justify the term “dangerous” as applied by climate change experts. According to the author, some objectives such as those set by the 1992 UN Framework Conventions on Climate Change define climate change as a danger. In his introduction, he questions the criteria used in describing the occurrence as dangerous. Concisely, his idea is to conduct a general research on scientists and the public to understand what they feel about climate change and what they understand by “dangerous”. In the ensuing research conducted, Leiserowitz reviewed public polls conducted with the understanding and perception of climate change by the American public. The research was conducted based on two facts; that global climate change has been rising with the advance in time, and two, there has been an increase in the sensitivity of the matter. Apart from the public, the author conducts an analysis on experts (climate change scientists). From the collected information, the author found out that depending on factors such as exposure to the hazards of climate change, scientific understanding, cultural stance, and geographical factors amongst others, people perceive of the matter differently. On average, he concludes, Americans generally perceive of the matter as being moderate, thus unqualified to be termed as “dangerous”. Robert Wilby, Adapting to Flood Risk under Climate Change In his article, Wilby insists that climate change is an international concern and has continued to impact negatively on human lives through occurrences such as earthquakes, tsunamis, blizzards, and storms. He attributes the increase in natural catastrophes observed today from anthropogenic factors. In his article, however, he focuses on flood risks as a form of climate change and seeks to justify that the issue is dangerous, and has led to the concern of the international community to devise means of curbing its occurrence. In supporting his statement that flood risk is an international issue which qualifies to be termed as dangerous, he introduces several forms of evidence. One, he highlights the multiple forms of flood risk which nations seek to mitigate such as fluvial, groundwater, tidal, and surface water sources. These suggest that no one region is safe from flood risks. Second, he introduces the many methods of monitoring flood occurrence and vulnerability such as data exchange, weather forecasting, disaster management, and international conventions. In a summary, he creates the perception that owing to all these observations, climate change is a risk too high to be ignored, and must be contained. Evaluations Leiserowitz introduces the opposing perception by first of all terming the use of the word “dangerous” in climate change as ambiguous (Leiserowitz, 2005). In support of this, he states that the matter can be segmented into two for better understanding; the lay public and scientists. In the context of scientists, it is revealed that not 100 percent of them would say that climate change risks are high. This is evident in that only 58 percent of them believe that the risk levels are high. Additionally, Leiserowitz supports that Americans do not mind climate change by supplying the results of studies conducted for centuries. The results suggest that in 1989, 63 percent of Americans termed the issue as a high risk. In 1997, the percentage stood at 50 percent, but went up to 72 percent in 2000. In 2002, the percentage dropped to 58. From this trend, it is sufficient to state that the only appropriate term for the level of climate change risk is moderately and not high. The “high” attribution would only apply if the rates stood above 75 percent (Leiserowitz, 2005). Wibly’s perception on the same matter contradicts Leiserowitz’s. In his article, he analyzes the issue at an international level, unlike Leiserowitz who focuses on the US. He uses flooding claiming it is the “third most damaging natural hazard after earthquakes and storms” (Wibly, 2012). This description first creates the perception that the occurrence is widely known, and feared. That automatically qualifies the issue as a high risk factor which is activated by anthropogenic environmental stressors such as mining and burning of fossil fuels which causes global warming, thus climate change. To add to the “high” ranking of the matter, Leiserowitz reveals that nations worldwide are implementing preventive measures such as flood prediction, upgrading infrastructure to resistance levels, pre-flooding evacuations, modification of climate change policies, and periodic reviews. This means that the issue is a sufficient cause of alarm, thus qualifies as a high risk factor caused by climate change. Opinion and conclusions In my opinion, climate change should attract a higher risk perception which should activate global concerns. Any literate individual should come to terms with the overly evident impacts of climate change in the world today; decreasing snow on the mountains, rising ocean levels, unpredictable weather patterns, flash floods, famine, earthquakes, and tsunamis to mention but a few. All these occurrences are caused by man-made stressors on the environment such as greenhouse gas emissions, mining, mineral exploitation, and deforestation amongst others. As such, it should be defined as a cause of alarm with high risk levels. The reason why this is so lies in that nobody knows the intensity of catastrophes which might occur in the future as a result of human ignorance (Smil, 2008). These do not mean that those perceiving of the matter lightly are wrong; rather, it should be acknowledged that if one has never experienced the wrath of nature or lacks knowledge on the matter would not understand the seriousness of the risks. References Leiserowitz, A. (2005). “American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?” Risk Analysis. 25(6), 1433-1442. Smil, V. (2008). Global catastrophes and trends: The next 50 years. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Wilby, R. (2012, June). “Adapting to Flood Risk under Climate Change”. Progress in Physical Geography. 36(3), 348-378. Read More