According to a new study of the public in 26 countries, that suspicion runs particularly deep toward climate scientists. This gap depends, in great part, on people’s political ideology. A new research study recently published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology finds a staggering gap in trust. People who had more right-leaning political orientations were less likely to trust climate scientists than left-leaning people. This gap in trust makes it harder for communicators and policymakers to connect with the public and encourage meaningful climate action.
The research compared survey information from 10,641 respondents from varied countries. The bottom line is that political ideology largely determines how Americans view climate science. This effect has been particularly pronounced in wealthier democracies and Commonwealth anglophone countries. Indeed, in 22 of the 26 countries studied, people on the right experienced a significant increase in distrust toward climate scientists. Conversely, the findings from China and Indonesia indicate that left-leaning respondents in these countries expressed greater skepticism towards climate scientists.
Trust Disparities Across Nations
The research paints an incomplete picture of more public distrust in climate scientists. The study’s results show alarming disparities, especially in countries with ample resources and democratic systems. Even in these areas, right-leaning people exhibit a reliable trend of less trust in climate scientists. By comparison, those on the political left are significantly more trusting.
In Egypt and Georgia, surprisingly, the study discovered that political ideology did not play a major role in trust in climate scientists. This variance highlights the importance of understanding the cultural and political contexts that shape public perception of climate science.
“While climate scientists currently maintain fairly high levels of public trust—ranging from 58% in North America to 84% in South Asia—that trust is not held evenly across all groups.” – Kai Ruggeri, Ph.D.
The implications of these findings are considerable. They suggest that efforts to communicate climate science must account for the political affiliations of audiences to foster greater understanding and acceptance.
The Importance of Ideological Engagement
Kai Ruggeri, the Department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, serves as the study’s senior author. He highlights that the trust gap is something we can close with concerted work. It’s not an impossible hurdle. He proposes that to effectively engage all political perspectives, it is crucial to implement strategies that resonate with individuals across ideological lines.
“The political divide in trust isn’t inevitable. In fact, the popularity of most climate policies is dramatically underrated, even across that divide. To have a better balance, we must engage all political perspectives and foster trust that transcends ideology.” – Kai Ruggeri, Ph.D.
Ruggeri’s remarks further exemplify the possibility of a productive, cross-aisle conversation and partnership between divergent political philosophies on climate science. By creating a truly inclusive process for communication, all stakeholders can begin to address obstacles that prevent policy from being broadly accepted and implemented.
Navigating the Climate Communication Landscape
The study sheds light on a pressing issue: the difficulties in comprehending the intricate links between fossil fuel emissions, rising temperatures, and climate change. These connections frequently go beyond individual lived experience, muddying public perception.
In this brief piece, Ruggeri touches upon a major pain point. Failing to address the needs of marginalized communities puts up major barriers in crafting successful, evidence-based climate policy. So, he promotes tactics that engage people at their level, calling out the need for targeted messaging.
“Closing this gap requires meeting people where they are, through messengers and messages that resonate across ideological lines.” – Kai Ruggeri, Ph.D.
This new approach would go a long way toward building trust in climate science and helping foster support for climate action across the political spectrum.