Climate change concern and discourse among nature lovers

Climate change concern and discourse among nature lovers | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Article Climate change concern and discourse among nature lovers Lisa Seiler This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-4345629/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Published Journal Publication published 11 Oct, 2024 Read the published version in npj Climate Action → Version 1 posted 4 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract One barrier to action on climate change is not talking about it. The majority of Americans and Canadians are concerned about climate change 1,2 but are reluctant to discuss it with family and friends 1,3,4,5 . Finding comfortable opportunities to promote conversation about climate change would help increase the acceptability of climate actions 6 . In this study, 32 semi-structured interviews were held with representatives of nature-related organizations in Ontario, Canada, including hiking groups, naturalists, preservation and conservation groups, cross-country skiers, and hunters and anglers, to ascertain how they perceive and talk about climate change and whether those organizations would constitute welcoming spaces. This article adds to the literature on laypeople’s understanding of climate change 7,8 . Most interviewees noticed local effects of climate change and were either Alarmed or Concerned about climate change, referencing Global Warming’s Six Americas 3 . Some were quite concerned about the effects on their chosen activity. Others were worried for their offspring. This suggests that these groups might be safe spaces for talking about climate change. More generally, it suggests that nature lovers across North America who distance themselves from the environmental movement 9 might be amenable to discussing climate change as the issue becomes more salient. Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Climate change Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Sociology Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Psychology Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Culture Figures Figure 1 INTRODUCTION This article focuses on barriers and pathways to climate action in nature lovers in Canada. The overwhelming majority of Canadians participate in outdoor activities 10 , and potentially see the effects of climate change. This study asks how ordinary people who enjoy being out in nature perceive and talk about climate change. Despite general agreement in both Canada and the United States that climate change is happening and primarily human-caused 1,2 , the majority of people in both countries are reluctant to talk about it 1,3,4,5 . Discussing climate change with family and friends increases knowledge about climate change and also demonstrates that others in one’s circle care about the issue 6 . Certainty that climate change is happening and primarily human-caused are strong predictors of climate policy support 11 . It follows that climate policy could be more acceptable if more people talked about climate change. The Five Canadas of Climate Change 4 is a counterpart to Global Warming’s Six Americas 3 , in which respondents are categorised along a continuum from Alarmed to Dismissive about climate change. Those Concerned about climate change but not Alarmed are less confident in their climate change beliefs than the Alarmed, and relatively unlikely to talk much about climate change with family and friends 4 . Nature lovers are supported by countless clubs and organizations focused on recreational and volunteer activities, such as hiking, cross-country skiing, bird watching, hunting, fishing, trail maintenance, tree planting, and invasive species removal. All of these nature-related organizations offer social opportunities where their members could potentially talk about climate change. There is copious literature on the environmental movement but little on movement-adjacent groups and their members. One such study of the Audubon Society found that birders tended to distance themselves from the environmental movement 9 . In this study, I interviewed representatives of nature-related organizations across Ontario—Canada’s most populous province. Almost all interviewees were either Concerned or Alarmed about climate change. This article provides a qualitative expansion on those responses. Responses referred to climate science, concern for future generations, concern about the organization’s activities, and lack of knowledge. Some interviewees engaged in storytelling 12 , others in skepticism, gradualism, or catastrophism 13 . This article adds to the literature on laypeople’s understanding of climate change 7,8 . The general degree of concern about climate change suggests that many of these groups could be receptive to talking about climate change, increasing the possibility of climate change action. Interviewees shared that group members tended to avoid talking about climate change 14 . A few interviewees suggested that some members of their organization were vocal deniers of climate change. Others, though, welcomed the thought of talking about climate change with fellow members. LITERATURE REVIEW This literature review is presented in three subsections. First, I discuss climate change discourses. I next present literature mainly from psychology on the use of heuristics in reasoning, and possible confirmation bias as a result. Then I present statistics and literature specific to climate change mainly from environmental sociology. I establish that climate change is a concern for the majority of Americans and Canadians, but that there is a reluctance in both countries to talk about climate change. Climate Change Discourse Climate change originally came to light as a scientific phenomenon and has often been discussed through a science lens 15 . In very general terms, there have traditionally been three additional climate change discourses: skepticism, gradualism, and catastrophism 13 . Skepticism or denial of climate change has been part of the discourse almost as long as has climate change. Right-wing think tanks in the United States were sowing doubt about the reality of climate change as far back as the 1990s 16 . Five reasons cited by climate skeptics as to why they doubt that climate change exists are: 1) climate change is natural, 2) climate change is overhyped, 3) the science is faulty, 4) climate change is not happening, and 5) climate change is a conspiracy 17,18 . Haltinner and Sarathchandra found a political narrative around a global conspiracy as well as a religious narrative around “God’s plan” 19 . Gradualism had been a moderate discourse taken by the IPCC and others 13 , at least until recently. Gradualism, or ecological modernization 8,20 , expects that climate change solutions will be developed in time to limit the worst effects of climate change. The environmental movement has pointed to the potential for a catastrophic future if urgent action is not taken on climate change 21 . Al Gore’s 2006 film, An Inconvenient Truth , is an example. Unfortunately, history shows “that exaggerated claims of catastrophic risks from even real and serious environmental problems can backfire in terms of stimulating public concern and appropriate policy responses” 22 . In response to failure to make significant progress on climate change, factions within the movement are now looking at alternatives to a discourse of catastrophism 21 . Lay understandings of climate change are formed through media discourse and other social contexts 7 . One of those understandings is that climate change is a future phenomenon, which lessens current concern 7,23 . Potentially offsetting that is a concern for future generations, such as one’s children 24 . Storytelling can be a way of conveying one’s knowledge or concern about climate change 8,12 . A “ story is something with a beginning, a middle, and end. … [T]here is generally also a protagonist. … Then something happens” 12 . Analysis of storytelling considers why and how a story is told in a particular context 12 . Confirmation Bias In the psychological literature on reasoning processes, Evans 25 asserts that there are two types of reasoning: heuristic and analytic. The purpose of heuristic processes is to decide what information is relevant, before feeding that information into the analytic process. In a different interpretation of the term ‘heuristics,’ the heuristic of representativeness is used to judge whether a particular instance of something can be categorised in a certain way 26 . In either interpretation, representativeness or the heuristic process of selection may be prone to bias 27 . Confirmation bias is “a tendency to look for confirmatory evidence for our hypotheses,” or to hold onto existing ideas and reject new ones that contradict them 28 . As an example, Halford and Sheehan note that if people have faith that technological solutions to climate change can be found, they might ignore climate change messaging 28 . Nickerson adds that this preferential treatment of information is done unintentionally, even if it is motivated by an interest in defending one’s beliefs 27 . Further, it not only applies to false beliefs but also true beliefs, making one’s certainty in those beliefs stronger than the evidence suggests 27 . The current polarization over climate change demonstrates confirmation bias in both directions 29 . Nickerson describes five different types of confirmation biases: 1) hypothesis-determined information seeking, when people seek out information to support their hypothesis or beliefs and then interpret it in a way that supports their beliefs; 2) the preferential treatment of evidence supporting existing beliefs, or “my-side bias,” putting greater emphasis on information that supports their beliefs and downplaying, ignoring, forgetting, or inaccurately recalling contradictory information; 3) looking only or primarily for positive cases, resulting in “illusory” confirmation; 4) overweighting positive confirmatory instances, that is, requiring less confirmatory evidence to accept a hypothesis and more to reject it; and 5) seeing what one is looking for, that is, finding patterns where none necessarily exist 27 . Climate Change Attitudes and Engagement The Climate Change in the American Mind series 1 has been tracking opinions of US residents on global warming since 2008. The October 2023 survey indicated that 72 percent of Americans think that global warming is happening, and 58 percent acknowledge that it is primarily human-caused. In that survey, 65 percent of respondents indicated that they were somewhat or very worried about global warming. Worry has been found to be a motivator and predictor of climate policy support 30 . Results from a representative 2016–2017 pan-Canadian survey showed higher levels for each of these questions: 92 percent thought climate change was happening, 70 percent thought it was mainly human-caused, and 76 were somewhat or very worried 2 . Global Warming’s Six Americas , based on the above US survey series, categorises the US population according to their degree of concern about climate change 3 . Out of a continuum of Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive about global warming, Concerned has perennially been the most popular category. A 2017 survey from the Five Canadas of Climate Change showed that 25 percent of Canadians were Alarmed, 45 percent were Concerned, and the remainder were Disengaged, Doubtful, or Dismissive about climate change 4 . Despite the concern, 65 percent of US respondents said that they rarely or never talk about global warming with family or friends and only 20 percent heard people they know talking about global warming at least once a month 1 . While 63 percent of Americans felt some personal responsibility to help reduce global warming, only 40 percent felt normative expectations from others to do so (injunctive norm) and only 35 percent believed that their family and friends were doing so (descriptive norm). Not surprisingly, those who perceived these norms were more likely to talk about global warming 5 . Of the Alarmed, 83 percent in the United States 5 and 95 percent in Canada 4 talked about climate change with friends and family occasionally or often . In the United States, only 38 percent of the Concerned and less than 15 percent of the other categories did so 5 . In Canada, the Concerned were much less likely than the Alarmed to feel very informed about climate change or very confident in their beliefs, and they were also much less likely to talk about climate change with family and friends 4 . Discussing climate change with family and friends is a step towards climate action, however, as it creates “a positive feedback loop that encourages deeper engagement with the issue of climate change” and also demonstrates that others care about the issue 6 . The lack of norms to discuss or act on climate change can be compared with Norway, where Norgaard found that people had a tacit agreement not to talk about climate change despite obvious changes in their weather patterns which were affecting their economically- and culturally-significant sport of skiing 14 . Geiger and Swim also discussed a culture of silence related to climate change 31 . In surveys of university students, they found that a reluctance to talk about climate change was related to one’s perception that other people had a different view of climate change than oneself. Further, the reluctance was related to fear of appearing incompetent in the discussion, rather than fear of being disliked. Thus, this reluctance could be overcome by learning more 31 . Another obstacle to talking about or acting on climate change is the finite pool of worry, wherein individuals have “only so much capacity for worry” 32 . A smaller number of tweets about climate change during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previously has been explained as evidence of a finite pool of worry 33 . As further confirmation, those tweets contained more positive sentiments and fewer negative sentiments, such as worry, than before the pandemic. Thus, other issues could crowd out worry about climate change. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION The 32 interviews in this study were comprised of both closed-ended and open-ended questions. This analysis combines the responses of both types of questions. The first subsection describes the interviewees. The second subsection is a qualitative analysis of their responses to a question about whether they had seen changes due to climate change and a series of questions probing their individual level of concern. The responses provide insights into laypeople’s climate change discourse. The third subsection gleans information from the broader interviews on the social nature of these organizations and the potential for discussing climate change, as a pathway to climate action. Nature lovers In response to whether the interviewees considered their organization’s members to be nature lovers, 87 percent said yes. The others agreed that some of them were, but others may have been members for other reasons. On the yes side, I heard that “you wouldn't be a hiker unless you liked nature.” A representative of a preservation organization stated that their supporters “are either into actually walking the trails and engaging with the outdoors or they are concerned about the environment.” On the more nuanced side, one comment was that “I think anyone who likes to be outside, there's a piece of them that is, is concerned about the environment and is concerned about nature. But, but that's a pretty broad brush to say we're all like that.” Extrapolating that to the interviewees themselves is also a little tenuous. Only 61 percent of interviewees were board members and could, therefore, be considered members. The remainder were employees, who might or might not also be members. There was no marked difference, however, in responses. Many employees indicated an environmental focus to their post-secondary education. For these reasons, it would be fair to say that the term “nature lover” would apply to the vast majority of the people interviewed. Thirty interviewees were asked to self-identify in terms of Global Warming’s Six Americas 3 : 40 percent were Alarmed, 47 percent were Concerned, 10 percent were Cautious, and 3 percent were Disengaged regarding climate change. This is skewed towards alarm in comparison to both US 3 and Canadian 4 general population results but, in all cases, Concerned was the largest category. Asked whether they were worried about climate change, 81 percent said yes , 16 percent said maybe , and 3 percent said no . Climate change discourse This section analyzes the responses to the question: “Has climate change or biodiversity loss caused problems for your organization? Or have you seen changes?” in conjunction with responses to a series of questions about personal concern about climate change. Three discourses topped the list: science, concern for future generations, and concern about the organization’s activities. Some interviewees engaged in storytelling. Two admitted a lack of knowledge about climate change. Other discourses included skepticism, gradualism, and catastrophism. Science . Ten interviewees mentioned science. These could be subcategorised into science as a defence or science as an activity. Four, who were all employees of regional or provincial organizations, spoke in scientific terms. Much of the research on climate change is from a scientific viewpoint 15 . Skepticism is largely about a rejection of the climate science 16,18 . One particularly focused interviewee frequently repeated that “everything we do is science-based,” which sounded like a rehearsed defence, possibly against skeptical members concerned that the organization was acting as part of a political conspiracy 19 . Other mentions of science were non-controversial. Four interviewees talked about an organizational activity of “citizen science” or “monitoring,” wherein members would track changes in flora, fauna, and/or natural conditions. One of those mentioned the naturalist apps, eBird and iNaturalist, as ways of reporting sightings. Two other interviewees also mentioned themselves or others tracking local conditions less officially. Lack of knowledge . Two middle-aged interviewees admitted a lack of knowledge about climate change, their organizations being more focused on biodiversity loss. Nonetheless, both were Concerned and worried about climate change. Lack of knowledge points to a need for talking about climate change in some organizations as a pathway to action. Concern for future generations . Eight interviewees expressed concern for future generations. Six of those directly mentioned fear or worry for their children, grandchildren, future children, students, or simply “future generations.” This is a form of temporal distancing, in that climate change is seen to be more of a problem in the future 7,23 . On the other hand, affinity with those affected could increase interest in taking action 24 . One of the six accepted generational complicity in the problem: “It stresses me that it's my kids that are going to be really seeing the consequences of our mistakes.” Hanson-Easey et al. found the same sense of collective responsibility in their focus groups 7 . Two parents of teens expressed concern about the disengagement of young people. One lamented: I look at my children. I think everybody's just disconnected, because they think there's nothing they can do about it and the whole world's gone to hell in a hand basket. And, if you get your youth to disengage, you have a real problem. Hanson-Easey et al. found this to be a moral judgment 7 , whereas these two interviewees were genuinely worried and at a loss. A ninth interviewee related to this category was himself a Disengaged young person. As a parent of young children, he noted that “of the million things I thought of this week, none of them were climate change. Right? And even in the last, everything that's happened in the last few years, very rarely did I think about climate change.” The day-to-day worries associated with parenthood could lessen worry about the more nebulous issue of climate change, demonstrating a finite pool of worry 7,32,33 . Effects on the organization’s activities . Six interviewees focused on the effects of climate change on their organization’s activities. Half were cross-country skiers. Most of the cross-country skiers interviewed agreed that climate change posed a threat to their sport. Not only is the season is getting shorter but, there's definitely this more cyclical pattern of warming and so, you know, particularly recreational skiers, they're not gonna go do a sport where, every time they go out, the conditions are treacherous because it's icy and rainy or, you know, if you can't groom the conditions properly, it becomes really challenging to ski and unpleasant and dangerous. And, so, people will pick something else. Right? The other half were hiking and trail maintenance organizations. An Alarmed board member said, People are much more aware of weather and how that affects the different hikes. That's just growing in impact. You know, where before, people, I think, would say, ‘Oh, yeah, we know. It's just a little rain,’ it's, like, ‘Nope, gotta really take this seriously.’ Concern about the future of one’s chosen recreational pursuit could be a pathway to action on climate change. Skepticism . Skepticism discourse asserts that climate change is not problematic, thereby creating a barrier to discussion 18,19 . Skepticism was paired with a limited amount of worry about climate change. Two older interviewees demonstrated confirmation bias against action on climate change. One of them, a hiker, noted that “there are more ticks along the trails that can cause Lyme disease. There are more opossums that eat the ticks, so they're a welcoming site [chuckling].” This alludes to the skepticism discourse that climate change is natural and also demonstrates my-side bias, giving preferential treatment to the appearance of opossums and downplaying the risk of Lyme disease. Two young interviewees expressed skepticism but also the belief that “we still have a lot of time to, you know, to reverse [climate change] to a certain extent,” evidencing temporal distancing 7,23 . One of them outlined a wide range of climate change conspiracy theories circulating among young people 17,18,19 . None of these four were outright deniers but might create obstacles to effectively talking about climate change. Gradualism . The gradualist discourse expects that solutions will be found in time to limit the consequences of climate change 13 , which could be a barrier to climate action insofar as it limits concern. Two older men were not worried about climate change, expressing hope in our institutions. One explained that “I do feel that we will end up arriving at solutions because they are economically smart decisions.” This aligns with the ecological modernization discourse 8,20 and is the same confirmation bias identified by Halford and Sheehan 28 . Two additional interviewees embraced the gradualist discourse. A middle-aged employee was Concerned: “We have a lot of people that are working on this, and maybe there is some, you know, technology that could help or changes in our approach that we will finally adapt.” A young employee was Alarmed: “We need to find all these new technologies. So, I hope that we have enough smart people in the world.” It is possible to discern an inverse relationship between age and degree of concern among these four interviewees. Catastrophism . Although over a third of interviewees self-identified as Alarmed about climate change, only one interviewee could be considered as using a catastrophist discourse 13 . Regarding the Six Americas continuum, she asserted that there should be a category for “terrified.” She was the only one to mention a “climate emergency. … It just feels like, you know, the more you learn about it, the more you realise that time is very quickly running out.” This extreme concern could be a pathway to action, except that it might be alienating 22 . In this particular case, there was a conflict between her original activist intentions as founder of the organization and its current situation as a conservation group. Storytelling . The two interviewees not included in any of the other categories engaged in storytelling 8,12 . One was an exemplar of the tendency for some to attribute a variety of observations to climate change. One of her stories can be paraphrased and summarised as follows: “I have a friend who has a woodlot. He has noticed that his maple trees are dying for no reason. I looked it up and found reasons to believe that climate change is to blame. This could be a real problem.” This story was told to confirm that climate change is happening. It has a beginning, middle, and end, climate change is the protagonist, and it has an action, in looking up a solution. Looking up information is also an example of hypothesis-determined information seeking 27 . The other interviewee in this category told a story that can be summarised as follows: “We do not see changes here. We support other groups in their climate change efforts. Our members are very knowledgeable about climate change.” The story seemed to be told to justify their situation of not actually talking about climate change within their organization 8 . The social side of nature-oriented organizations Social opportunities and the degree of camaraderie offered by nature-oriented organizations constitute a pathway to talking about climate change. Hiking and cross-country ski groups primarily hold active outdoor events. One cross-country skiing group rents a bus to take them to skiing venues. “The bus is very social. Provides a really nice little venue for people to socialise.” A hiker from an older adults group said, “The hiking community is a small community. We're retired. … So, it's a social network.” Naturalist groups tend to have regular indoor meetings with invited speakers as well as organised nature walks. A naturalist noted that their indoor meetings are “a fairly social affair.” Another shared that, after a nature presentation, “all the people … mingle. So they might talk about certain issues in their little group.” Volunteer opportunities also tend to be social events. Trail-related groups organise trail maintenance days. Conservation and preservation groups organise tree plantings and invasive species removal. One interviewee suggested that their volunteers “just like the camaraderie. They like to come out and work with other people and accomplish stuff.” Talking about climate change. There were three streams of comments about the potential for talking about climate change among members. The most prevalent was avoidance 14 . Three different interviewees said simply that climate change “doesn’t come up.” A hiker said, “I think it's one of those things that, quite honestly, in many ways, it's almost like people just avoid it.” The extremely alarmed interviewee shared that “one of our board members said to us one time, not that long ago, that… a lot of people don’t want to hear about climate change.” The second stream was obstructionist, and was only heard in relation to hunting and fishing. One hunter said that, among their membership, “there are some extremists that think that climate change is a hoax.” Another said, “there are [members] who are very vocal in their opposition, or their denialism, if you will, of climate change.” It should not be construed from this, however, that all hunters and anglers are obstructionist as I also heard that most are ardent conservationists. The third stream was open-mindedness. A hiker allowed that, “Members are welcome to talk about it basically amongst themselves. … I think everybody also respects the personal advocacy that everybody does.” Another hiker thought that “people are pretty open-minded about other people's views on it. I mean, it was the same with COVID. … I guess you just have to be tolerant of people that you don't agree with.” One cross-country skier agreed to be interviewed precisely because she was interested in getting her club talking about climate change: It could be another way for members to interact with each other. Because a lot of times, we need excuses to talk with each other. … If we kind of brought up the question or the interest, it could be another level at which members would talk with each other. And since it does support or help with climate change, or mitigate the negative effects of climate change with respect to the impact on our environment and therefore our sport, then there could be more motivation to do certain things. And if we get more people in the world doing things like this, then it could make a difference. This response illustrates the potential for nature-related groups to increase talk about climate change and thereby increase climate action. CONCLUSION In this study, I interviewed members of nature-related organizations—people who are regularly out in nature by choice—to see whether they experienced climate change and how they made sense of it. If such people would start to talk more about climate change through their regular activities, understanding of climate change would increase 6 , thereby increasing the possibly of climate action 11 . Pathways to climate action included concern about climate change in general and about the organizations’ activities as well as opportunities for social interaction provided by the organizations. Referring to Global Warming’s Six Americas 3 , the vast majority of these nature lovers were either Concerned or Alarmed about climate change. They noticed changes in the weather, plants, animals, and insects. Some engaged in citizen science. A number of interviewees acknowledged effects of climate change on their organization’s activities. Two admitted a lack of knowledge but were worried about climate change. Some were worried about their children and future generations. The degree of awareness and concern about climate change suggests that these organizations could be receptive to climate change discussion. On the other hand, a number of potential barriers to talking about climate change were identified. The four interviewees in the youngest age category ( 25 – 34 ) all exhibited some form of barrier. These four spanned the range from Disengaged to Alarmed. One experienced a finite pool of worry 7,32,33 , another discussed conspiracy theories 17,18,19 , two expressed temporal distancing 7,23 , and one used a gradualist discourse, putting their faith in future solutions 8,13 . Temporal distancing and gradualism were also used by other interviewees. Of the four interviewees espousing gradualism, the discourse was more urgent the younger the interviewee. Some of these barriers could be overcome with increased discussion of climate change. More challenging would be organizations with skeptics among their members. Some interviewees seemed to use a science discourse automatically as a defence against such obstructionists. The organizations themselves provide a pathway to talking about climate change through opportunities for social interaction. The degree of camaraderie mentioned by interviewees suggests that members may develop close bonds. With these pathways far outweighing the barriers, many nature-related organizations could potentially be safe spaces to discuss climate change. Although these organizations tend to avoid conflict by choosing a centrist path 9 and their members tended to avoid talking about climate change, my findings suggest that members were fairly unified in their concern about climate change. Some were even open-minded about talking about climate change. The regular events held by nature-related organizations have a social component in which members could potentially talk about climate change. Alarmed members, who are more likely to want to talk with friends about climate change 4 , could help increase the confidence of less concerned members in their climate change beliefs 6,31 . Encouraging these organizations to create opportunities for discussing climate change with this receptive audience could help to increase the acceptability of climate change action. This article provides an update on laypeople’s understanding of climate change 7,8 . Learning how climate change is understood and discussed provides starting points to build on. The use of storytelling by a number of interviewees suggests that that might be an engaging way to start the conversation. Limitations The interview questions analyzed in this study were part of a larger study on the behaviour of nature-related organizations themselves. This article draws individual-level findings from the broader interviews. Future analysis will explore possibilities at the organizational level. As a qualitative study using a pseudo-random sample on a population defined for the purpose of this study, there is no guarantee that the people or organizations interviewed were representative of any population. I intended to study how ordinary people who enjoy being out in nature perceive and talk about climate change. The demographically skewed nature of the interviewees puts the expectation of “ordinary people” into question. A future direction would be to explore the involvement of younger people and BIPOC residents in nature-related activities. It is also questionable whether board members and non-profit employees would be entirely representative of their organizations’ members, and whether both board members and employees could be considered nature lovers. There was no reason to believe in advance that the employees were as nature-oriented as members would be. As it turned out, all employees but one were worried about climate change. Most of the quotations used, however, were from board members rather than staff. It would be fair to assume that there was some self-selection bias involved in who chose to participate in the interviews. Those who were Disengaged to Dismissive about climate change might have chosen not to respond. Hanson-Easey et al. noted this challenge regarding their focus groups 7 . My recruitment strategy was to invite people to an interview about “biodiversity loss and/or climate change,” thereby lessening the focus on climate change alone. Nonetheless, only one of the interviewees considered themselves Disengaged, and none were Doubtful or Dismissive about climate change, leaving a skewed population relative to the general public. However, it could be expected that nature lovers would constitute a somewhat biased sample in any case. Declarations Inclusion and Ethics This research has received ethics review and approval by the Delegated Ethics Review Committee, which is delegated authority to review research ethics protocols by the Human Participants Review Committee at York University (Certificate # STU 2023-009). It conforms to the standards of the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement. All interviewees provided informed consent in advance of their interview. Data Availability The data will be made available upon request. Code Availability No code was used in this study. Acknowledgements Funding for a portion of the work was received through an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. The author thanks Dr. Joanna Robinson and Dr. Glenn Stalker for comments on an earlier version of this paper. Competing interests The author declares no competing interests. REFERENCES Leiserowitz, A. et al. Climate change in the American mind: beliefs & attitudes, fall 2023. Yale University and George Mason University . New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (2023). https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/climate-change-in-the-american-mind-beliefs-attitudes-fall-2023/ Seiler, L. Y. & Stalker. G. J. Canadian climate change attitudes and energy policy. Can Rev Sociol 60 (1), 4–28 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.12424 Leiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., Marlon, J. & Maibach, E. Global Warming’s Six Americas: a review and recommendations for climate change communication. Curr Opin Behav Sci 42 , 97–103 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.04.007 Martel-Morin, M. & Lachapelle, E. The Five Canadas of Climate Change: using audience segmentation to inform communication on climate policy. PLOS ONE 17 (11), e0273977 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273977 Ballew, M. et al. Who is most likely to talk about climate change? Yale University and George Mason University . New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (2023). https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/who-is-most-likely-to-talk-about-climate-change/ Goldberg, M. H., van der Linden, S., Maibach, E. & Leiserowitz, A. Discussing global warming leads to greater acceptance of climate science. PNAS 116 (30), 14804–14805 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906589116 Hanson-Easey, S., Williams, S., Hansen, A., Fogarty, K. & Bi, P. Speaking of climate change: a discursive analysis of lay understandings. Sci Commun 37 (2), 217–239 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547014568418 Kurz, T. & Prosser, A. M. B. Understanding the social dynamics of climate change through analyses of discourse. Curr Opin Psychol 42 , 71–75 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.03.010 Cherry, E. “Not an environmentalist”: strategic centrism, cultural stereotypes, and disidentification. Sociological Perspectives 62 (5), 755–772 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121419859297 Environment Canada. 2012 Canadian nature survey: Awareness, participation, and expenditures in nature-based recreation, conservation, and subsistence activities. Canadian Councils of Resource Ministers . Ottawa, ON (2014). http://deslibris.ca/ID/243567 Goldberg, M. H., Gustafson, A., Ballew, M. T., Rosenthal, S. A. & Leiserowitz, A. Identifying the most important predictors of support for climate policy in the United States. Behav Public Policy 5 (4), 480–502 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.39 Moezzi, M., Janda, K. B. & Rotmann, S. Using stories, narratives, and storytelling in energy and climate change research. Energy Res Social Sci 31 , 1–10 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.034 Urry, J. Climate Change and Society . (Polity Press, Cambridge, UK, 2011). Norgaard, K. M. Living in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2011). Brulle, R. J. & Dunlap, R. E. Sociology and global climate change. Climate Change and Society Ch. 1 , Dunlap R. E. & Brulle, R. J., eds. (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2015). Dunlap, R. E. & McCright, A. M. Challenging climate change. Climate Change and Society Ch. 10 , Dunlap R. E. & Brulle, R. J., eds. (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2015). Leiserowitz, A. Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: the role of affect, imagery, and values. Clim Chang 77 (1), 45–72 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9 Jacques, P. J. & Knox, C. C. Hurricanes and hegemony: a qualitative analysis of micro-level climate change denial discourses. Env Polit 25 (5), 831–852 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2016.1189233 Haltinner, K. & Sarathchandra, D. The nature and nuance of climate change skepticism in the United States. Rural Sociol 86 (4), 673–702 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12371 Mol, A. P. J., Spaargaren, G. & Sonnenfeld, D. A. Ecological modernisation: three decades of policy, practice and theoretical reflection. The Ecological Modernisation Reader: Environmental Reform in Theory and Practice Ch. 1 , Mol, A. P. J., Sonnenfeld, D. A. & Spaargaren, G., eds. (Routledge, London, 2009). Cassegård, C. & Thörn, H. Toward a postapocalyptic environmentalism? Responses to loss and visions of the future in climate activism. Environ Plann E 1 (4), 561–578 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848618793331 Marchant, G. E. & Bradshaw, K. The short-term temptations and long-term risks of environmental catastrophism. Jurimetrics 56 (4), 357 (2016). Jasanoff, S. A new climate for society. Theory Cult Soc 27 (2–3), 233–253 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409361497 Wade-Benzoni, K. & Tost, L. P. The egoism and altruism of intergenerational behavior. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 13 (3), 165–193 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309339317 Evans, J. St. B. T. Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning. Br J Psychol 75 (4), 451–468 (1984). Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185 , 1125-1131. Nickerson, R. S. Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Rev Gen Psychol 2 (2), 175–220 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175 Halford, G. S. & Sheehan, P. W. Human response to environmental changes. Int J Psychol 26 (5), 599–611 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1080/00207599108247147 Zhou, Y. & Shen, L. Confirmation bias and the persistence of misinformation on climate change. Commun Res 49 (4), 500–523 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211028049 Smith, N. & Leiserowitz, A. The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Anal 34 (5), 937–948 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12140 Geiger, N. & Swim, J. K. Climate of silence: pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. J Environ Psychol 47 , 79–90 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.002 Weber, E. U. Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: why global warming does not scare us (yet). Clim Chang 77 (1–2), 103–120 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9060-3 Smirnov, O. & Hsieh, P.-H. COVID-19, climate change, and the finite pool of worry in 2019 to 2021 Twitter discussions. PNAS 119 (43), e2210988119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2210988119 METHODOLOGY AND DATA The data for this study comprised 32 semi-structured interviews with 33 representatives of nature-related organizations located in Ontario, Canada. The interviews were conducted via Zoom between May of 2023 and January of 2024. Interviews were between 45 minutes and two hours in duration, with the exception of one 20-minute phone conversation. Interviews consisted of a mix of open-ended and closed-ended questions. Embedding closed-ended questions within a qualitative interview enabled the classification of qualitative responses. There is no comprehensive list of nature-related organizations in Ontario. The sampling frame was initially generated from the membership lists of Ontario Nature and Cross Country Ski Ontario—umbrella organizations providing support to smaller organizations throughout the province. I categorised those members by focus: conservation and preservation, naturalists, hiking and trails, cross-country skiing, and hunting and fishing. I used the seven regional classifications from Ontario Nature in a quasi-random sampling exercise resulting in approximately one organization of each focus within each region. Purposive sampling was used to fill gaps, which included additional internet searches. The sample of 32 was chosen from a sampling frame of 284 organizations. There would be many similar organizations that did not make the frame through not paying membership to a provincial body or through enjoying an activity not included in this study, such as canoeing. Attention was paid to the size of the organization and its catchment area. Exactly half of the organizations had no paid staff and were represented by a board member. Board members also spoke for three of the ten organizations in the 1 to 10 paid staff category. Staff members spoke for the rest. In terms of catchment area, the sample broke into thirds between less than 100,000 people (31 percent), 100,00 to 500,000 people (31 percent), and more than 500,000 people including province-wide organizations (38 percent). The intent was not to be representative but to gather a wide range of perspectives. Excluding four provincial organizations, 28 groups interviewed had a combined membership of over 22,000 people or about 0.14 percent of the population of Ontario. With the provincial organizations, the reach would be an order of magnitude greater. The 20 board members interviewed were exclusively white, almost entirely over age 50, with slightly more males than females. Staff members, in contrast, were almost entirely under age 55, mostly female, and included two BIPOC employees. Together, these two groups comprised a skewed cross-section of the population of Ontario. The Zoom transcripts were edited for accuracy then loaded into NVivo for data management and visualization. I manually coded the interviews within NVivo using a grounded theory approach 34 . Codes were initially gleaned from the literature then added to as themes arose from the data. Closed-ended questions included organizational data, personal demographics, and attitudes and emotions regarding climate change. Attitudes included a self-assessment according to the categories in Global Warming’s Six Americas 3 . A check on the validity of this self-assessment was conducted in March 2024 via email using the SASSY tool (https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/sassy/). The response rate was 48 percent. For those who responded to both the interview question and SASSY, the results were identical for 69 percent. SASSY produced a slightly more alarmed response for the remainder. Bivariate statistics (Figure 1) show that those who expressed worry about climate change registered more alarm than those who were less worried. Interestingly, of the six who said maybe or no about worry, two were in the youngest age category (25-34) and three were in the oldest category (65+). Future research could explore the age association further. Methods References 34. Corbin, J. M. & Strauss, A. Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qual Sociol 13 (1), 3–21 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593 Additional Declarations (Not answered) Cite Share Download PDF Status: Published Journal Publication published 11 Oct, 2024 Read the published version in npj Climate Action → Version 1 posted Reviewers invited by journal 03 May, 2024 Editor assigned by journal 30 Apr, 2024 Submission checks completed at journal 30 Apr, 2024 First submitted to journal 29 Apr, 2024 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-4345629","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":298325003,"identity":"6d6b8228-2b93-42d8-a793-9857aea60a62","order_by":0,"name":"Lisa Seiler","email":"","orcid":"https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9425-572X","institution":"York University","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lisa","middleName":"","lastName":"Seiler","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-04-30 02:10:06","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4345629/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4345629/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[{"content":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-024-00169-3","type":"published","date":"2024-10-11T04:00:00+00:00"}],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":56173712,"identity":"782f1120-d9cc-4c21-8864-0fe06de35ab1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-05-09 12:31:03","extension":"png","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":33876,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eResponse to “Do you feel worry about climate change?” by attitude towards climate change (n=29).\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"Picture1.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4345629/v1/929a8d98bade50ac3097171c.png"},{"id":66450549,"identity":"64a1e05b-41d1-4d11-9c39-4710677dcbee","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2024-10-12 07:09:35","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":480741,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-4345629/v1/7b521bf8-bea7-47a0-8713-0d5232b0c976.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"(Not answered)","formattedTitle":"Climate change concern and discourse among nature lovers","fulltext":[{"header":"INTRODUCTION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis article focuses on barriers and pathways to climate action in nature lovers in Canada. The overwhelming majority of Canadians participate in outdoor activities\u003csup\u003e10\u003c/sup\u003e, and potentially see the effects of climate change. This study asks how ordinary people who enjoy being out in nature perceive and talk about climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eDespite general agreement in both Canada and the United States that climate change is happening and primarily human-caused\u003csup\u003e1,2\u003c/sup\u003e, the majority of people in both countries are reluctant to talk about it\u003csup\u003e1,3,4,5\u003c/sup\u003e. Discussing climate change with family and friends increases knowledge about climate change and also demonstrates that others in one\u0026rsquo;s circle care about the issue\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e. Certainty that climate change is happening and primarily human-caused are strong predictors of climate policy support\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e. It follows that climate policy could be more acceptable if more people talked about climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe \u003cem\u003eFive Canadas of Climate Change\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e is a counterpart to \u003cem\u003eGlobal Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e, in which respondents are categorised along a continuum from Alarmed to Dismissive about climate change. Those Concerned about climate change but not Alarmed are less confident in their climate change beliefs than the Alarmed, and relatively unlikely to talk much about climate change with family and friends\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNature lovers are supported by countless clubs and organizations focused on recreational and volunteer activities, such as hiking, cross-country skiing, bird watching, hunting, fishing, trail maintenance, tree planting, and invasive species removal. All of these nature-related organizations offer social opportunities where their members could potentially talk about climate change. There is copious literature on the environmental movement but little on movement-adjacent groups and their members. One such study of the Audubon Society found that birders tended to distance themselves from the environmental movement\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn this study, I interviewed representatives of nature-related organizations across Ontario\u0026mdash;Canada\u0026rsquo;s most populous province. Almost all interviewees were either Concerned or Alarmed about climate change. This article provides a qualitative expansion on those responses. Responses referred to climate science, concern for future generations, concern about the organization\u0026rsquo;s activities, and lack of knowledge. Some interviewees engaged in storytelling\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e, others in skepticism, gradualism, or catastrophism\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e. This article adds to the literature on laypeople\u0026rsquo;s understanding of climate change\u003csup\u003e7,8\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe general degree of concern about climate change suggests that many of these groups could be receptive to talking about climate change, increasing the possibility of climate change action. Interviewees shared that group members tended to avoid talking about climate change\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e. A few interviewees suggested that some members of their organization were vocal deniers of climate change. Others, though, welcomed the thought of talking about climate change with fellow members.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"LITERATURE REVIEW","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis literature review is presented in three subsections. First, I discuss climate change discourses. I next present literature mainly from psychology on the use of heuristics in reasoning, and possible confirmation bias as a result. Then I present statistics and literature specific to climate change mainly from environmental sociology. I establish that climate change is a concern for the majority of Americans and Canadians, but that there is a reluctance in both countries to talk about climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eClimate Change Discourse\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClimate change originally came to light as a scientific phenomenon and has often been discussed through a science lens\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e. In very general terms, there have traditionally been three additional climate change discourses: skepticism, gradualism, and catastrophism\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e. Skepticism or denial of climate change has been part of the discourse almost as long as has climate change. Right-wing think tanks in the United States were sowing doubt about the reality of climate change as far back as the 1990s\u003csup\u003e16\u003c/sup\u003e. Five reasons cited by climate skeptics as to why they doubt that climate change exists are: 1) climate change is natural, 2) climate change is overhyped, 3) the science is faulty, 4) climate change is not happening, and 5) climate change is a conspiracy\u003csup\u003e17,18\u003c/sup\u003e. Haltinner and Sarathchandra found a political narrative around a global conspiracy as well as a religious narrative around \u0026ldquo;God\u0026rsquo;s plan\u0026rdquo;\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eGradualism had been a moderate discourse taken by the IPCC and others\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e, at least until recently. Gradualism, or ecological modernization\u003csup\u003e8,20\u003c/sup\u003e, expects that climate change solutions will be developed in time to limit the worst effects of climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe environmental movement has pointed to the potential for a catastrophic future if urgent action is not taken on climate change\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e. Al Gore\u0026rsquo;s 2006 film, \u003cem\u003eAn Inconvenient Truth\u003c/em\u003e, is an example. Unfortunately, history shows \u0026ldquo;that exaggerated claims of catastrophic risks from even real and serious environmental problems can backfire in terms of stimulating public concern and appropriate policy responses\u0026rdquo;\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e. In response to failure to make significant progress on climate change, factions within the movement are now looking at alternatives to a discourse of catastrophism\u003csup\u003e21\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLay understandings of climate change are formed through media discourse and other social contexts\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e. One of those understandings is that climate change is a future phenomenon, which lessens current concern\u003csup\u003e7,23\u003c/sup\u003e. Potentially offsetting that is a concern for future generations, such as one\u0026rsquo;s children\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eStorytelling can be a way of conveying one\u0026rsquo;s knowledge or concern about climate change\u003csup\u003e8,12\u003c/sup\u003e. A \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003estory\u003c/em\u003e is something with a beginning, a middle, and end. \u0026hellip; [T]here is generally also a protagonist. \u0026hellip; Then something happens\u0026rdquo;\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e. Analysis of storytelling considers why and how a story is told in a particular context\u003csup\u003e12\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ch3\u003eConfirmation Bias\u003c/h3\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn the psychological literature on reasoning processes, Evans\u003csup\u003e25\u003c/sup\u003e asserts that there are two types of reasoning: heuristic and analytic. The purpose of heuristic processes is to decide what information is relevant, before feeding that information into the analytic process. In a different interpretation of the term \u0026lsquo;heuristics,\u0026rsquo; the heuristic of representativeness is used to judge whether a particular instance of something can be categorised in a certain way\u003csup\u003e26\u003c/sup\u003e. In either interpretation, representativeness or the heuristic process of selection may be prone to bias\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConfirmation bias is \u0026ldquo;a tendency to look for confirmatory evidence for our hypotheses,\u0026rdquo; or to hold onto existing ideas and reject new ones that contradict them\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e. As an example, Halford and Sheehan note that if people have faith that technological solutions to climate change can be found, they might ignore climate change messaging\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e. Nickerson adds that this preferential treatment of information is done unintentionally, even if it is motivated by an interest in defending one\u0026rsquo;s beliefs\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e. Further, it not only applies to false beliefs but also true beliefs, making one\u0026rsquo;s certainty in those beliefs stronger than the evidence suggests\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e. The current polarization over climate change demonstrates confirmation bias in both directions\u003csup\u003e29\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNickerson describes five different types of confirmation biases: 1) hypothesis-determined information seeking, when people seek out information to support their hypothesis or beliefs and then interpret it in a way that supports their beliefs; 2) the preferential treatment of evidence supporting existing beliefs, or \u0026ldquo;my-side bias,\u0026rdquo; putting greater emphasis on information that supports their beliefs and downplaying, ignoring, forgetting, or inaccurately recalling contradictory information; 3) looking only or primarily for positive cases, resulting in \u0026ldquo;illusory\u0026rdquo; confirmation; 4) overweighting positive confirmatory instances, that is, requiring less confirmatory evidence to accept a hypothesis and more to reject it; and 5) seeing what one is looking for, that is, finding patterns where none necessarily exist\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n \u003ch3\u003eClimate Change Attitudes and Engagement\u003c/h3\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe \u003cem\u003eClimate Change in the American Mind\u003c/em\u003e series\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e has been tracking opinions of US residents on global warming since 2008. The October 2023 survey indicated that 72 percent of Americans think that global warming is happening, and 58 percent acknowledge that it is primarily human-caused. In that survey, 65 percent of respondents indicated that they were \u003cem\u003esomewhat\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003every worried\u003c/em\u003e about global warming. Worry has been found to be a motivator and predictor of climate policy support\u003csup\u003e30\u003c/sup\u003e. Results from a representative 2016\u0026ndash;2017 pan-Canadian survey showed higher levels for each of these questions: 92 percent thought climate change was happening, 70 percent thought it was mainly human-caused, and 76 were \u003cem\u003esomewhat\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003every worried\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGlobal Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas\u003c/em\u003e, based on the above US survey series, categorises the US population according to their degree of concern about climate change\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e. Out of a continuum of Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive about global warming, Concerned has perennially been the most popular category. A 2017 survey from the \u003cem\u003eFive Canadas of Climate Change\u003c/em\u003e showed that 25 percent of Canadians were Alarmed, 45 percent were Concerned, and the remainder were Disengaged, Doubtful, or Dismissive about climate change\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDespite the concern, 65 percent of US respondents said that they \u003cem\u003erarely\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003enever\u003c/em\u003e talk about global warming with family or friends and only 20 percent heard people they know talking about global warming at least once a month\u003csup\u003e1\u003c/sup\u003e. While 63 percent of Americans felt some personal responsibility to help reduce global warming, only 40 percent felt normative expectations from others to do so (injunctive norm) and only 35 percent believed that their family and friends were doing so (descriptive norm). Not surprisingly, those who perceived these norms were more likely to talk about global warming\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e. Of the Alarmed, 83 percent in the United States\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e and 95 percent in Canada\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e talked about climate change with friends and family \u003cem\u003eoccasionally\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eoften\u003c/em\u003e. In the United States, only 38 percent of the Concerned and less than 15 percent of the other categories did so\u003csup\u003e5\u003c/sup\u003e. In Canada, the Concerned were much less likely than the Alarmed to feel very informed about climate change or very confident in their beliefs, and they were also much less likely to talk about climate change with family and friends\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e. Discussing climate change with family and friends is a step towards climate action, however, as it creates \u0026ldquo;a positive feedback loop that encourages deeper engagement with the issue of climate change\u0026rdquo; and also demonstrates that others care about the issue\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eThe lack of norms to discuss or act on climate change can be compared with Norway, where Norgaard found that people had a tacit agreement not to talk about climate change despite obvious changes in their weather patterns which were affecting their economically- and culturally-significant sport of skiing\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e. Geiger and Swim also discussed a culture of silence related to climate change\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e. In surveys of university students, they found that a reluctance to talk about climate change was related to one\u0026rsquo;s perception that other people had a different view of climate change than oneself. Further, the reluctance was related to fear of appearing incompetent in the discussion, rather than fear of being disliked. Thus, this reluctance could be overcome by learning more\u003csup\u003e31\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAnother obstacle to talking about or acting on climate change is the finite pool of worry, wherein individuals have \u0026ldquo;only so much capacity for worry\u0026rdquo;\u003csup\u003e32\u003c/sup\u003e. A smaller number of tweets about climate change during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to previously has been explained as evidence of a finite pool of worry\u003csup\u003e33\u003c/sup\u003e. As further confirmation, those tweets contained more positive sentiments and fewer negative sentiments, such as worry, than before the pandemic. Thus, other issues could crowd out worry about climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe 32 interviews in this study were comprised of both closed-ended and open-ended questions. This analysis combines the responses of both types of questions. The first subsection describes the interviewees. The second subsection is a qualitative analysis of their responses to a question about whether they had seen changes due to climate change and a series of questions probing their individual level of concern. The responses provide insights into laypeople\u0026rsquo;s climate change discourse. The third subsection gleans information from the broader interviews on the social nature of these organizations and the potential for discussing climate change, as a pathway to climate action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eNature lovers\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIn response to whether the interviewees considered their organization\u0026rsquo;s members to be nature lovers, 87 percent said yes. The others agreed that some of them were, but others may have been members for other reasons. On the yes side, I heard that \u0026ldquo;you wouldn't be a hiker unless you liked nature.\u0026rdquo; A representative of a preservation organization stated that their supporters \u0026ldquo;are either into actually walking the trails and engaging with the outdoors or they are concerned about the environment.\u0026rdquo; On the more nuanced side, one comment was that \u0026ldquo;I think anyone who likes to be outside, there's a piece of them that is, is concerned about the environment and is concerned about nature. But, but that's a pretty broad brush to say we're all like that.\u0026rdquo; Extrapolating that to the interviewees themselves is also a little tenuous. Only 61 percent of interviewees were board members and could, therefore, be considered members. The remainder were employees, who might or might not also be members. There was no marked difference, however, in responses. Many employees indicated an environmental focus to their post-secondary education. For these reasons, it would be fair to say that the term \u0026ldquo;nature lover\u0026rdquo; would apply to the vast majority of the people interviewed.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThirty interviewees were asked to self-identify in terms of \u003cem\u003eGlobal Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e: 40 percent were Alarmed, 47 percent were Concerned, 10 percent were Cautious, and 3 percent were Disengaged regarding climate change. This is skewed towards alarm in comparison to both US\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e and Canadian\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e general population results but, in all cases, Concerned was the largest category. Asked whether they were worried about climate change, 81 percent said \u003cem\u003eyes\u003c/em\u003e, 16 percent said \u003cem\u003emaybe\u003c/em\u003e, and 3 percent said \u003cem\u003eno\u003c/em\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eClimate change discourse\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis section analyzes the responses to the question: \u0026ldquo;Has climate change or biodiversity loss caused problems for your organization? Or have you seen changes?\u0026rdquo; in conjunction with responses to a series of questions about personal concern about climate change. Three discourses topped the list: science, concern for future generations, and concern about the organization\u0026rsquo;s activities. Some interviewees engaged in storytelling. Two admitted a lack of knowledge about climate change. Other discourses included skepticism, gradualism, and catastrophism.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eScience\u003c/em\u003e. Ten interviewees mentioned science. These could be subcategorised into science as a defence or science as an activity. Four, who were all employees of regional or provincial organizations, spoke in scientific terms. Much of the research on climate change is from a scientific viewpoint\u003csup\u003e15\u003c/sup\u003e. Skepticism is largely about a rejection of the climate science\u003csup\u003e16,18\u003c/sup\u003e. One particularly focused interviewee frequently repeated that \u0026ldquo;everything we do is science-based,\u0026rdquo; which sounded like a rehearsed defence, possibly against skeptical members concerned that the organization was acting as part of a political conspiracy\u003csup\u003e19\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOther mentions of science were non-controversial. Four interviewees talked about an organizational activity of \u0026ldquo;citizen science\u0026rdquo; or \u0026ldquo;monitoring,\u0026rdquo; wherein members would track changes in flora, fauna, and/or natural conditions. One of those mentioned the naturalist apps, eBird and iNaturalist, as ways of reporting sightings. Two other interviewees also mentioned themselves or others tracking local conditions less officially.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eLack of knowledge\u003c/em\u003e. Two middle-aged interviewees admitted a lack of knowledge about climate change, their organizations being more focused on biodiversity loss. Nonetheless, both were Concerned and worried about climate change. Lack of knowledge points to a \u003cem\u003eneed\u003c/em\u003e for talking about climate change in some organizations as a pathway to action.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eConcern for future generations\u003c/em\u003e. Eight interviewees expressed concern for future generations. Six of those directly mentioned fear or worry for their children, grandchildren, future children, students, or simply \u0026ldquo;future generations.\u0026rdquo; This is a form of temporal distancing, in that climate change is seen to be more of a problem in the future\u003csup\u003e7,23\u003c/sup\u003e. On the other hand, affinity with those affected could increase interest in taking action\u003csup\u003e24\u003c/sup\u003e. One of the six accepted generational complicity in the problem: \u0026ldquo;It stresses me that it's my kids that are going to be really seeing the consequences of our mistakes.\u0026rdquo; Hanson-Easey et al. found the same sense of collective responsibility in their focus groups\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo parents of teens expressed concern about the disengagement of young people. One lamented:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eI look at my children. I think everybody's just disconnected, because they think there's nothing they can do about it and the whole world's gone to hell in a hand basket. And, if you get your youth to disengage, you have a real problem.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHanson-Easey et al. found this to be a moral judgment\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e, whereas these two interviewees were genuinely worried and at a loss.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eA ninth interviewee related to this category was himself a Disengaged young person. As a parent of young children, he noted that \u0026ldquo;of the million things I thought of this week, none of them were climate change. Right? And even in the last, everything that's happened in the last few years, very rarely did I think about climate change.\u0026rdquo; The day-to-day worries associated with parenthood could lessen worry about the more nebulous issue of climate change, demonstrating a finite pool of worry\u003csup\u003e7,32,33\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eEffects on the organization\u0026rsquo;s activities\u003c/em\u003e. Six interviewees focused on the effects of climate change on their organization\u0026rsquo;s activities. Half were cross-country skiers. Most of the cross-country skiers interviewed agreed that climate change posed a threat to their sport. Not only is the season is getting shorter but,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ethere's definitely this more cyclical pattern of warming and so, you know, particularly recreational skiers, they're not gonna go do a sport where, every time they go out, the conditions are treacherous because it's icy and rainy or, you know, if you can't groom the conditions properly, it becomes really challenging to ski and unpleasant and dangerous. And, so, people will pick something else. Right?\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe other half were hiking and trail maintenance organizations. An Alarmed board member said,\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003ePeople are much more aware of weather and how that affects the different hikes. That's just growing in impact. You know, where before, people, I think, would say, \u0026lsquo;Oh, yeah, we know. It's just a little rain,\u0026rsquo; it's, like, \u0026lsquo;Nope, gotta really take this seriously.\u0026rsquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eConcern about the future of one\u0026rsquo;s chosen recreational pursuit could be a pathway to action on climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eSkepticism\u003c/em\u003e. Skepticism discourse asserts that climate change is not problematic, thereby creating a barrier to discussion\u003csup\u003e18,19\u003c/sup\u003e. Skepticism was paired with a limited amount of worry about climate change. Two older interviewees demonstrated confirmation bias against action on climate change. One of them, a hiker, noted that \u0026ldquo;there are more ticks along the trails that can cause Lyme disease. There are more opossums that eat the ticks, so they're a welcoming site [chuckling].\u0026rdquo; This alludes to the skepticism discourse that climate change is natural and also demonstrates my-side bias, giving preferential treatment to the appearance of opossums and downplaying the risk of Lyme disease.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo young interviewees expressed skepticism but also the belief that \u0026ldquo;we still have a lot of time to, you know, to reverse [climate change] to a certain extent,\u0026rdquo; evidencing temporal distancing\u003csup\u003e7,23\u003c/sup\u003e. One of them outlined a wide range of climate change conspiracy theories circulating among young people\u003csup\u003e17,18,19\u003c/sup\u003e. None of these four were outright deniers but might create obstacles to effectively talking about climate change.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eGradualism\u003c/em\u003e. The gradualist discourse expects that solutions will be found in time to limit the consequences of climate change\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e, which could be a barrier to climate action insofar as it limits concern. Two older men were not worried about climate change, expressing hope in our institutions. One explained that \u0026ldquo;I do feel that we will end up arriving at solutions because they are economically smart decisions.\u0026rdquo; This aligns with the ecological modernization discourse\u003csup\u003e8,20\u003c/sup\u003e and is the same confirmation bias identified by Halford and Sheehan\u003csup\u003e28\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eTwo additional interviewees embraced the gradualist discourse. A middle-aged employee was Concerned: \u0026ldquo;We have a lot of people that are working on this, and maybe there is some, you know, technology that could help or changes in our approach that we will finally adapt.\u0026rdquo; A young employee was Alarmed: \u0026ldquo;We need to find all these new technologies. So, I hope that we have enough smart people in the world.\u0026rdquo; It is possible to discern an inverse relationship between age and degree of concern among these four interviewees.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eCatastrophism\u003c/em\u003e. Although over a third of interviewees self-identified as Alarmed about climate change, only one interviewee could be considered as using a catastrophist discourse\u003csup\u003e13\u003c/sup\u003e. Regarding the Six Americas continuum, she asserted that there should be a category for \u0026ldquo;terrified.\u0026rdquo; She was the only one to mention a \u0026ldquo;climate emergency. \u0026hellip; It just feels like, you know, the more you learn about it, the more you realise that time is very quickly running out.\u0026rdquo; This extreme concern could be a pathway to action, except that it might be alienating\u003csup\u003e22\u003c/sup\u003e. In this particular case, there was a conflict between her original activist intentions as founder of the organization and its current situation as a conservation group.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eStorytelling\u003c/em\u003e. The two interviewees not included in any of the other categories engaged in storytelling\u003csup\u003e8,12\u003c/sup\u003e. One was an exemplar of the tendency for some to attribute a variety of observations to climate change. One of her stories can be paraphrased and summarised as follows: \u0026ldquo;I have a friend who has a woodlot. He has noticed that his maple trees are dying for no reason. I looked it up and found reasons to believe that climate change is to blame. This could be a real problem.\u0026rdquo; This story was told to confirm that climate change is happening. It has a beginning, middle, and end, climate change is the protagonist, and it has an action, in looking up a solution. Looking up information is also an example of hypothesis-determined information seeking\u003csup\u003e27\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe other interviewee in this category told a story that can be summarised as follows: \u0026ldquo;We do not see changes here. We support other groups in their climate change efforts. Our members are very knowledgeable about climate change.\u0026rdquo; The story seemed to be told to justify their situation of not actually talking about climate change within their organization\u003csup\u003e8\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003c/div\u003e\n\u003ch2\u003eThe social side of nature-oriented organizations\u003c/h2\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSocial opportunities and the degree of camaraderie offered by nature-oriented organizations constitute a pathway to talking about climate change. Hiking and cross-country ski groups primarily hold active outdoor events. One cross-country skiing group rents a bus to take them to skiing venues. \u0026ldquo;The bus is very social. Provides a really nice little venue for people to socialise.\u0026rdquo; A hiker from an older adults group said, \u0026ldquo;The hiking community is a small community. We're retired. \u0026hellip; So, it's a social network.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNaturalist groups tend to have regular indoor meetings with invited speakers as well as organised nature walks. A naturalist noted that their indoor meetings are \u0026ldquo;a fairly social affair.\u0026rdquo; Another shared that, after a nature presentation, \u0026ldquo;all the people \u0026hellip; mingle. So they might talk about certain issues in their little group.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eVolunteer opportunities also tend to be social events. Trail-related groups organise trail maintenance days. Conservation and preservation groups organise tree plantings and invasive species removal. One interviewee suggested that their volunteers \u0026ldquo;just like the camaraderie. They like to come out and work with other people and accomplish stuff.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003eTalking about climate change.\u003c/em\u003e There were three streams of comments about the potential for talking about climate change among members. The most prevalent was avoidance\u003csup\u003e14\u003c/sup\u003e. Three different interviewees said simply that climate change \u0026ldquo;doesn\u0026rsquo;t come up.\u0026rdquo; A hiker said, \u0026ldquo;I think it's one of those things that, quite honestly, in many ways, it's almost like people just avoid it.\u0026rdquo; The extremely alarmed interviewee shared that \u0026ldquo;one of our board members said to us one time, not that long ago, that\u0026hellip; a lot of people don\u0026rsquo;t want to hear about climate change.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe second stream was obstructionist, and was only heard in relation to hunting and fishing. One hunter said that, among their membership, \u0026ldquo;there are some extremists that think that climate change is a hoax.\u0026rdquo; Another said, \u0026ldquo;there are [members] who are very vocal in their opposition, or their denialism, if you will, of climate change.\u0026rdquo; It should not be construed from this, however, that all hunters and anglers are obstructionist as I also heard that most are ardent conservationists.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe third stream was open-mindedness. A hiker allowed that, \u0026ldquo;Members are welcome to talk about it basically amongst themselves. \u0026hellip; I think everybody also respects the personal advocacy that everybody does.\u0026rdquo; Another hiker thought that \u0026ldquo;people are pretty open-minded about other people's views on it. I mean, it was the same with COVID. \u0026hellip; I guess you just have to be tolerant of people that you don't agree with.\u0026rdquo; One cross-country skier agreed to be interviewed precisely \u003cem\u003ebecause\u003c/em\u003e she was interested in getting her club talking about climate change:\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt could be another way for members to interact with each other. Because a lot of times, we need excuses to talk with each other. \u0026hellip; If we kind of brought up the question or the interest, it could be another level at which members would talk with each other. And since it does support or help with climate change, or mitigate the negative effects of climate change with respect to the impact on our environment and therefore our sport, then there could be more motivation to do certain things. And if we get more people in the world doing things like this, then it could make a difference.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis response illustrates the potential for nature-related groups to increase talk about climate change and thereby increase climate action.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"CONCLUSION","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn this study, I interviewed members of nature-related organizations\u0026mdash;people who are regularly out in nature by choice\u0026mdash;to see whether they experienced climate change and how they made sense of it. If such people would start to talk more about climate change through their regular activities, understanding of climate change would increase\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e, thereby increasing the possibly of climate action\u003csup\u003e11\u003c/sup\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003ePathways to climate action included concern about climate change in general and about the organizations\u0026rsquo; activities as well as opportunities for social interaction provided by the organizations. Referring to \u003cem\u003eGlobal Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e, the vast majority of these nature lovers were either Concerned or Alarmed about climate change. They noticed changes in the weather, plants, animals, and insects. Some engaged in citizen science. A number of interviewees acknowledged effects of climate change on their organization\u0026rsquo;s activities. Two admitted a lack of knowledge but were worried about climate change. Some were worried about their children and future generations. The degree of awareness and concern about climate change suggests that these organizations could be receptive to climate change discussion.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn the other hand, a number of potential barriers to talking about climate change were identified. The four interviewees in the youngest age category (\u003cspan additionalcitationids=\"CR26 CR27 CR28 CR29 CR30 CR31 CR32 CR33\" citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e25\u003c/span\u003e\u0026ndash;\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e34\u003c/span\u003e) all exhibited some form of barrier. These four spanned the range from Disengaged to Alarmed. One experienced a finite pool of worry\u003csup\u003e7,32,33\u003c/sup\u003e, another discussed conspiracy theories\u003csup\u003e17,18,19\u003c/sup\u003e, two expressed temporal distancing\u003csup\u003e7,23\u003c/sup\u003e, and one used a gradualist discourse, putting their faith in future solutions\u003csup\u003e8,13\u003c/sup\u003e. Temporal distancing and gradualism were also used by other interviewees. Of the four interviewees espousing gradualism, the discourse was more urgent the younger the interviewee. Some of these barriers could be overcome with increased discussion of climate change. More challenging would be organizations with skeptics among their members. Some interviewees seemed to use a science discourse automatically as a defence against such obstructionists.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe organizations themselves provide a pathway to talking about climate change through opportunities for social interaction. The degree of camaraderie mentioned by interviewees suggests that members may develop close bonds. With these pathways far outweighing the barriers, many nature-related organizations could potentially be safe spaces to discuss climate change. Although these organizations tend to avoid conflict by choosing a centrist path\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e and their members tended to avoid talking about climate change, my findings suggest that members were fairly unified in their concern about climate change. Some were even open-minded about talking about climate change. The regular events held by nature-related organizations have a social component in which members could potentially talk about climate change. Alarmed members, who are more likely to want to talk with friends about climate change\u003csup\u003e4\u003c/sup\u003e, could help increase the confidence of less concerned members in their climate change beliefs\u003csup\u003e6,31\u003c/sup\u003e. Encouraging these organizations to create opportunities for discussing climate change with this receptive audience could help to increase the acceptability of climate change action.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis article provides an update on laypeople\u0026rsquo;s understanding of climate change\u003csup\u003e7,8\u003c/sup\u003e. Learning how climate change is understood and discussed provides starting points to build on. The use of storytelling by a number of interviewees suggests that that might be an engaging way to start the conversation.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Limitations","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe interview questions analyzed in this study were part of a larger study on the behaviour of nature-related organizations themselves. This article draws individual-level findings from the broader interviews. Future analysis will explore possibilities at the organizational level.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAs a qualitative study using a pseudo-random sample on a population defined for the purpose of this study, there is no guarantee that the people or organizations interviewed were representative of any population. I intended to study how ordinary people who enjoy being out in nature perceive and talk about climate change. The demographically skewed nature of the interviewees puts the expectation of \u0026ldquo;ordinary people\u0026rdquo; into question. A future direction would be to explore the involvement of younger people and BIPOC residents in nature-related activities.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is also questionable whether board members and non-profit employees would be entirely representative of their organizations\u0026rsquo; members, and whether both board members and employees could be considered nature lovers. There was no reason to believe in advance that the employees were as nature-oriented as members would be. As it turned out, all employees but one were worried about climate change. Most of the quotations used, however, were from board members rather than staff.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt would be fair to assume that there was some self-selection bias involved in who chose to participate in the interviews. Those who were Disengaged to Dismissive about climate change might have chosen not to respond. Hanson-Easey et al. noted this challenge regarding their focus groups\u003csup\u003e7\u003c/sup\u003e. My recruitment strategy was to invite people to an interview about \u0026ldquo;biodiversity loss and/or climate change,\u0026rdquo; thereby lessening the focus on climate change alone. Nonetheless, only one of the interviewees considered themselves Disengaged, and none were Doubtful or Dismissive about climate change, leaving a skewed population relative to the general public. However, it could be expected that nature lovers would constitute a somewhat biased sample in any case.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003eInclusion and Ethics\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis research has received ethics review and approval by the Delegated Ethics Review Committee, which is delegated authority to review research ethics protocols by the Human Participants Review Committee at York University (Certificate # STU 2023-009). It conforms to the standards of the Canadian Tri-Council Policy Statement. All interviewees provided informed consent in advance of their interview.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData Availability\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe data will be made available upon request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCode Availability\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eNo code was used in this study.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAcknowledgements\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eFunding for a portion of the work was received through an Ontario Graduate Scholarship. The author thanks Dr. Joanna Robinson and Dr. Glenn Stalker for comments on an earlier version of this paper.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe author declares no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"REFERENCES","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeiserowitz, A. et al. Climate change in the American mind: beliefs \u0026amp; attitudes, fall 2023. \u003cem\u003eYale University and George Mason University\u003c/em\u003e. New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (2023). https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/climate-change-in-the-american-mind-beliefs-attitudes-fall-2023/ \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSeiler, L. Y. \u0026amp; Stalker. G. J. Canadian climate change attitudes and energy policy. \u003cem\u003eCan Rev Sociol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e60\u003c/strong\u003e(1), 4\u0026ndash;28 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/cars.12424\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., Marlon, J. \u0026amp; Maibach, E. Global Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas: a review and recommendations for climate change communication. \u003cem\u003eCurr Opin Behav Sci\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e42\u003c/strong\u003e, 97\u0026ndash;103 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.04.007\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMartel-Morin, M. \u0026amp; Lachapelle, E. The Five Canadas of Climate Change: using audience segmentation to inform communication on climate policy. \u003cem\u003ePLOS ONE\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e17\u003c/strong\u003e(11), e0273977 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0273977\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBallew, M. et al. Who is most likely to talk about climate change? \u003cem\u003eYale University and George Mason University\u003c/em\u003e. New Haven, CT: Yale Program on Climate Change Communication (2023). https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/who-is-most-likely-to-talk-about-climate-change/ \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoldberg, M. H., van der Linden, S., Maibach, E. \u0026amp; Leiserowitz, A. Discussing global warming leads to greater acceptance of climate science. \u003cem\u003ePNAS\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e116\u003c/strong\u003e(30), 14804\u0026ndash;14805 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1906589116\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHanson-Easey, S., Williams, S., Hansen, A., Fogarty, K. \u0026amp; Bi, P. Speaking of climate change: a discursive analysis of lay understandings. \u003cem\u003eSci Commun\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e37\u003c/strong\u003e(2), 217\u0026ndash;239 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1177/1075547014568418\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eKurz, T. \u0026amp; Prosser, A. M. B. Understanding the social dynamics of climate change through analyses of discourse. \u003cem\u003eCurr Opin Psychol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e42\u003c/strong\u003e, 71\u0026ndash;75 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.03.010\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCherry, E. \u0026ldquo;Not an environmentalist\u0026rdquo;: strategic centrism, cultural stereotypes, and disidentification. \u003cem\u003eSociological Perspectives\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e62\u003c/strong\u003e(5), 755\u0026ndash;772 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1177/0731121419859297\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEnvironment Canada. 2012 Canadian nature survey: Awareness, participation, and expenditures in nature-based recreation, conservation, and subsistence activities. \u003cem\u003eCanadian Councils of Resource Ministers\u003c/em\u003e. Ottawa, ON (2014). http://deslibris.ca/ID/243567 \u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGoldberg, M. H., Gustafson, A., Ballew, M. T., Rosenthal, S. A. \u0026amp; Leiserowitz, A. Identifying the most important predictors of support for climate policy in the United States. \u003cem\u003eBehav Public Policy\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e5\u003c/strong\u003e(4), 480\u0026ndash;502 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1017/bpp.2020.39\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMoezzi, M., Janda, K. B. \u0026amp; Rotmann, S. Using stories, narratives, and storytelling in energy and climate change research. \u003cem\u003eEnergy Res Social Sci\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e31\u003c/strong\u003e, 1\u0026ndash;10 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2017.06.034\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eUrry, J. \u003cem\u003eClimate Change and Society\u003c/em\u003e. (Polity Press, Cambridge, UK, 2011).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNorgaard, K. M. \u003cem\u003eLiving in Denial: Climate Change, Emotions, and Everyday Life. \u003c/em\u003e(MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2011).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrulle, R. J. \u0026amp; Dunlap, R. E. Sociology and global climate change. \u003cem\u003eClimate Change and Society Ch. 1\u003c/em\u003e, Dunlap R. E. \u0026amp; Brulle, R. J., eds. (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2015).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDunlap, R. E. \u0026amp; McCright, A. M. Challenging climate change. \u003cem\u003eClimate Change and Society Ch. 10\u003c/em\u003e, Dunlap R. E. \u0026amp; Brulle, R. J., eds. (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2015).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeiserowitz, A. Climate change risk perception and policy preferences: the role of affect, imagery, and values. \u003cem\u003eClim Chang\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e77\u003c/strong\u003e(1), 45\u0026ndash;72 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJacques, P. J. \u0026amp; Knox, C. C. Hurricanes and hegemony: a qualitative analysis of micro-level climate change denial discourses. \u003cem\u003eEnv Polit\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e25\u003c/strong\u003e(5), 831\u0026ndash;852 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2016.1189233\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHaltinner, K. \u0026amp; Sarathchandra, D. The nature and nuance of climate change skepticism in the United States. \u003cem\u003eRural Sociol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e86\u003c/strong\u003e(4), 673\u0026ndash;702 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1111/ruso.12371\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMol, A. P. J., Spaargaren, G. \u0026amp; Sonnenfeld, D. A. Ecological modernisation: three decades of policy, practice and theoretical reflection. \u003cem\u003eThe Ecological Modernisation Reader: Environmental Reform in Theory and Practice Ch. 1\u003c/em\u003e, Mol, A. P. J., Sonnenfeld, D. A. \u0026amp; Spaargaren, G., eds. (Routledge, London, 2009).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCasseg\u0026aring;rd, C. \u0026amp; Th\u0026ouml;rn, H. Toward a postapocalyptic environmentalism? Responses to loss and visions of the future in climate activism. \u003cem\u003eEnviron Plann E\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e1\u003c/strong\u003e(4), 561\u0026ndash;578 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848618793331\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMarchant, G. E. \u0026amp; Bradshaw, K. The short-term temptations and long-term risks of environmental catastrophism. \u003cem\u003eJurimetrics\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e56\u003c/strong\u003e(4), 357 (2016).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eJasanoff, S. A new climate for society. \u003cem\u003eTheory Cult Soc\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e27\u003c/strong\u003e(2\u0026ndash;3), 233\u0026ndash;253 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409361497\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWade-Benzoni, K. \u0026amp; Tost, L. P. The egoism and altruism of intergenerational behavior. \u003cem\u003ePers Soc Psychol Rev\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e(3), 165\u0026ndash;193 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309339317\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEvans, J. St. B. T. Heuristic and analytic processes in reasoning. \u003cem\u003eBr J Psychol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e75\u003c/strong\u003e(4), 451\u0026ndash;468 (1984).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTversky, A. \u0026amp; Kahneman, D. 1974. Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. \u003cem\u003eScience\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e185\u003c/strong\u003e, 1125-1131.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNickerson, R. S. Confirmation bias: a ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. \u003cem\u003eRev Gen Psychol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e2\u003c/strong\u003e(2), 175\u0026ndash;220 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHalford, G. S. \u0026amp; Sheehan, P. W. Human response to environmental changes. \u003cem\u003eInt J Psychol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e26\u003c/strong\u003e(5), 599\u0026ndash;611 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1080/00207599108247147\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhou, Y. \u0026amp; Shen, L. Confirmation bias and the persistence of misinformation on climate change. \u003cem\u003eCommun Res\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e49\u003c/strong\u003e(4), 500\u0026ndash;523 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211028049\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSmith, N. \u0026amp; Leiserowitz, A. The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. \u003cem\u003eRisk Anal\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e34\u003c/strong\u003e(5), 937\u0026ndash;948 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12140\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGeiger, N. \u0026amp; Swim, J. K. Climate of silence: pluralistic ignorance as a barrier to climate change discussion. \u003cem\u003eJ Environ Psychol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e47\u003c/strong\u003e, 79\u0026ndash;90 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.002\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWeber, E. U. Experience-based and description-based perceptions of long-term risk: why global warming does not scare us (yet). \u003cem\u003eClim Chang\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e77\u003c/strong\u003e(1\u0026ndash;2), 103\u0026ndash;120 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9060-3\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSmirnov, O. \u0026amp; Hsieh, P.-H. COVID-19, climate change, and the finite pool of worry in 2019 to 2021 Twitter discussions. \u003cem\u003ePNAS\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e119\u003c/strong\u003e(43), e2210988119 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2210988119\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"},{"header":"METHODOLOGY AND DATA ","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe data for this study comprised 32 semi-structured interviews with 33 representatives of nature-related organizations located in Ontario, Canada. The interviews were conducted via Zoom between May of 2023 and January of 2024. Interviews were between 45 minutes and two hours in duration, with the exception of one 20-minute phone conversation. Interviews consisted of a mix of open-ended and closed-ended questions. Embedding closed-ended questions within a qualitative interview enabled the classification of qualitative responses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere is no comprehensive list of nature-related organizations in Ontario. The sampling frame was initially generated from the membership lists of Ontario Nature and Cross Country Ski Ontario\u0026mdash;umbrella organizations providing support to smaller organizations throughout the province. I categorised those members by focus: conservation and preservation, naturalists, hiking and trails, cross-country skiing, and hunting and fishing. I used the seven regional classifications from Ontario Nature in a quasi-random sampling exercise resulting in approximately one organization of each focus within each region. Purposive sampling was used to fill gaps, which included additional internet searches. The sample of 32 was chosen from a sampling frame of 284 organizations. There would be many similar organizations that did not make the frame through not paying membership to a provincial body or through enjoying an activity not included in this study, such as canoeing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAttention was paid to the size of the organization and its catchment area. Exactly half of the organizations had no paid staff and were represented by a board member. Board members also spoke for three of the ten organizations in the \u003cem\u003e1 to 10 paid staff\u003c/em\u003e category. Staff members spoke for the rest. In terms of catchment area, the sample broke into thirds between less than 100,000 people (31 percent), 100,00 to 500,000 people (31 percent), and more than 500,000 people including province-wide organizations (38 percent). The intent was not to be representative but to gather a wide range of perspectives. Excluding four provincial organizations, 28 groups interviewed had a combined membership of over 22,000 people or about 0.14 percent of the population of Ontario. With the provincial organizations, the reach would be an order of magnitude greater.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe 20 board members interviewed were exclusively white, almost entirely over age 50, with slightly more males than females. Staff members, in contrast, were almost entirely under age 55, mostly female, and included two BIPOC employees. Together, these two groups comprised a skewed cross-section of the population of Ontario.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe Zoom transcripts were edited for accuracy then loaded into NVivo for data management and visualization. I manually coded the interviews within NVivo using a grounded theory approach\u003csup\u003e34\u003c/sup\u003e. Codes were initially gleaned from the literature then added to as themes arose from the data.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eClosed-ended questions included organizational data, personal demographics, and attitudes and emotions regarding climate change. Attitudes included a self-assessment according to the categories in \u003cem\u003eGlobal Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e. A check on the validity of this self-assessment was conducted in March 2024 via email using the SASSY tool (https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/visualizations-data/sassy/). The response rate was 48 percent. For those who responded to both the interview question and SASSY, the results were identical for 69 percent. SASSY produced a slightly more alarmed response for the remainder.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBivariate statistics (Figure 1) show that those who expressed worry about climate change registered more alarm than those who were less worried. Interestingly, of the six who said \u003cem\u003emaybe\u003c/em\u003e or \u003cem\u003eno\u003c/em\u003e about worry, two were in the youngest age category (25-34) and three were in the oldest category (65+). Future research could explore the age association further.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMethods References\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e34. Corbin, J. M. \u0026amp; Strauss, A. Grounded theory research: procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. \u003cem\u003eQual Sociol\u003c/em\u003e \u003cstrong\u003e13\u003c/strong\u003e(1), 3\u0026ndash;21 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593\u003c/p\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":true,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"npj-climate-action","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"npjclimataction","sideBox":"Learn more about [npj Climate Action](https://www.nature.com/npjclimataction)","snPcode":"44168","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/44168/3","title":"npj Climate Action","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"NPJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4345629/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4345629/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eOne barrier to action on climate change is not talking about it. The majority of Americans and Canadians are concerned about climate change\u003csup\u003e1,2\u003c/sup\u003e but are reluctant to discuss it with family and friends\u003csup\u003e1,3,4,5\u003c/sup\u003e. Finding comfortable opportunities to promote conversation about climate change would help increase the acceptability of climate actions\u003csup\u003e6\u003c/sup\u003e. In this study, 32 semi-structured interviews were held with representatives of nature-related organizations in Ontario, Canada, including hiking groups, naturalists, preservation and conservation groups, cross-country skiers, and hunters and anglers, to ascertain how they perceive and talk about climate change and whether those organizations would constitute welcoming spaces. This article adds to the literature on laypeople\u0026rsquo;s understanding of climate change\u003csup\u003e7,8\u003c/sup\u003e. Most interviewees noticed local effects of climate change and were either Alarmed or Concerned about climate change, referencing \u003cem\u003eGlobal Warming\u0026rsquo;s Six Americas\u003c/em\u003e\u003csup\u003e3\u003c/sup\u003e. Some were quite concerned about the effects on their chosen activity. Others were worried for their offspring. This suggests that these groups might be safe spaces for talking about climate change. More generally, it suggests that nature lovers across North America who distance themselves from the environmental movement\u003csup\u003e9\u003c/sup\u003e might be amenable to discussing climate change as the issue becomes more salient.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Climate change concern and discourse among nature lovers","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-05-09 12:30:54","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-4345629/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2024-05-03T10:00:59+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2024-04-30T09:37:41+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2024-04-30T09:32:16+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"npj Climate Action","date":"2024-04-30T02:05:02+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"npj-climate-action","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"npjclimataction","sideBox":"Learn more about [npj Climate Action](https://www.nature.com/npjclimataction)","snPcode":"44168","submissionUrl":"https://submission.springernature.com/new-submission/44168/3","title":"npj Climate Action","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"stoa","reportingPortfolio":"NPJ","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"a4d7bc14-878c-4703-a55a-fe25d4742203","owner":[],"postedDate":"May 9th, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"published-in-journal","subjectAreas":[{"id":31471762,"name":"Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Climate change"},{"id":31471764,"name":"Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Sociology"},{"id":31471765,"name":"Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Psychology"},{"id":31471766,"name":"Scientific community and society/Social sciences/Culture"}],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2024-10-12T07:09:31+00:00","versionOfRecord":{"articleIdentity":"rs-4345629","link":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-024-00169-3","journal":{"identity":"npj-climate-action","isVorOnly":false,"title":"npj Climate Action"},"publishedOn":"2024-10-11 04:00:00","publishedOnDateReadable":"October 11th, 2024"},"versionCreatedAt":"2024-05-09 12:30:54","video":"","vorDoi":"10.1038/s44168-024-00169-3","vorDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s44168-024-00169-3","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-4345629","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-4345629","identity":"rs-4345629","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"8U1c8b4HqxoKbykW_rLl7","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}