Hi there, interesting reading. Thanks. However, I would like to propose another angle to reflection. When reading this type of approach (those who've got it right do the right thing, those doing it wrongly have a smaller/wrong understanding - I know you did not write it, but that's what the graph suggests) I get the feeling that it tends to create division more than unity, among those who are aware and a 'legion of those who ignore, or aren't capable of understanding'.
I know this has been extracted from a known paper, but a lot has happened in the almost 30 (!!) years since this paper has been published, and climate debate is far different from what it was. So I'd be a bit careful when stating, in 2023, the reasons appointed by one paper, in 1996, as the factors/causes of something.
Ultimately, a perception I think is left outside of it (it wasn't that big topic 30y ago), that is reinforced by the confrontation sought by the "8 mechanisms (...)" is the social/economic gap. These mechanisms suggest that people start from similar base points but choose to disengage, and it ignores how inequalities affect people's perceptions of realities and their priorities. An again, this approach of pointing out the misbehaviors as the only source of knowledge sounds a bit like a confrontational arrogance. The reflection I propose for us all to make is on how to engage people that are still struggling to make ends meet and to have a decent life. Putting it simply, those excluded from the benefits of globalization (and they are still majority of the world) will choose their basic (and maybe their secondary) necessities before engaging in climate acts.
Oh I'm sorry if it wasn't clear in my post-- the origin of moral disengagement comes from a 1996 paper, including identifying the 8 mechanisms. The recent Leviston and Walker study tested most of these mechanisms for their impact on climate action, guilt, and other outcomes with a large representative sample of Australians.
I hear you about division vs. unity, it's a tricky balance to navigate amidst the stark reality of climate inequalities. In my work, I'm focused on activating the global top 10% (anyone making $38,000+) to take climate action- both reducing their own luxury emissions (the other 90% doesn't need to reduce their carbon footprint) and activating their climate superpowers as citizens, role models, investors, and professionals. Those struggling to make ends meet do not need to reduce their consumption; indeed the poorest have room (and the right!) to increase their consumption. If you want to dive in more, I've written about this for example in "The Rich Need to Get To Work" https://wecanfixit.substack.com/i/38231014/facts-the-rich-need-to-get-to-work and "Your Top 5 Climate Superpowers" https://wecanfixit.substack.com/p/your-top-5-climate-superpowers.
That justification+ list is fascinating. And I appreciated your preferred structure for emailing people, I'll definitely be using that lol - thank you!
Thanks Shim, glad you found it useful! It really jumped out at me when I first read those 8 justifications. Would love to see some creative visualizations to help get them out there. And happy to help slightly reduce email overload for everyone haha :)
Just coming across this newsletter - I absolutely love digging into the psychology and motivations behind climate change and what we can do to change them for the better, fantastic read. You’ve got a new subscriber in me!
Enjoyed your talk with the Palo Alto CC book club. I'm so glad you're looking into moral disengagement! Not all psychological research is spot on (retired therapist here), but much of it is really valuable, and too often flies under the radar. Even my professional friends can't keep up with all the literature. And also thanks for the bit about how to get people to read emails/say yes. Another great newsletter! Tak, David Page
Thanks so much, David! I agree, it's hard to keep up with everything-- I learned about moral disengagement from examining a MSc thesis recently! Really glad you found this one valuable, thanks for being here!
Thanks Kim, I've only recently discovered your substack and love your approach and style. As a pracademic myself I particularly appreciate your research informed approach. Thanks for the work you're doing! warm regards, Jen de Vries
Thanks Jen, great to connect, we pracademics need to stick together! :) I've found Substack a supportive place, and they're really amping up their tools to make it easy to write here (check out the resources like On Substack and the podcast The Active Voice). Good luck with the tricky balance between academia and impact, I hope to see more from you! :)
Hi Kim, thanks for your kind response. Yes, being a pracademic is often uncomfortable and not the best career move. I have a connection to Lund, as a consultant to the Learning for Change programmer for staff in the Faculty of Science. I visited recently, and despite having come across your work and wanting to meet you I managed to lose your name prior to the visit. A case of unconscious and conscious flying guilt (I am Australian) I think. So nice to connect in this way! I will explore substack some more as you suggest.
haha looks like you were morally engaged if you felt guilt, congrats! ;) Sorry we missed a chance to connect in person, but glad we've found each other here!
In response to this great post I have: 1) A quick ask for help (no cost but time) and 2) to wholeheartedly agree that we need to get people moving beyond inaction and break through their moral disengagement. My own effort to do that is to get them emotionally involved, not just intellectually through facts, but by capturing their imagination with climate stories that models action in the fictional plot.
The ask: I have a free newsletter that aims to promote this type of climate fiction and a new book which you can get a free review copy to read. This book doesn’t fit the typical dystopian genre, so it needs word of mouth to get it going. Please sign up and read the book and then tell everyone about it. The book is: The EarthStar Solution-A Climate Fiction Mystery. Go to www.climatestorygarden.com to learn more. And I thank you with all my heart.
Hi there, interesting reading. Thanks. However, I would like to propose another angle to reflection. When reading this type of approach (those who've got it right do the right thing, those doing it wrongly have a smaller/wrong understanding - I know you did not write it, but that's what the graph suggests) I get the feeling that it tends to create division more than unity, among those who are aware and a 'legion of those who ignore, or aren't capable of understanding'.
I know this has been extracted from a known paper, but a lot has happened in the almost 30 (!!) years since this paper has been published, and climate debate is far different from what it was. So I'd be a bit careful when stating, in 2023, the reasons appointed by one paper, in 1996, as the factors/causes of something.
Ultimately, a perception I think is left outside of it (it wasn't that big topic 30y ago), that is reinforced by the confrontation sought by the "8 mechanisms (...)" is the social/economic gap. These mechanisms suggest that people start from similar base points but choose to disengage, and it ignores how inequalities affect people's perceptions of realities and their priorities. An again, this approach of pointing out the misbehaviors as the only source of knowledge sounds a bit like a confrontational arrogance. The reflection I propose for us all to make is on how to engage people that are still struggling to make ends meet and to have a decent life. Putting it simply, those excluded from the benefits of globalization (and they are still majority of the world) will choose their basic (and maybe their secondary) necessities before engaging in climate acts.
Hi Bruno, thanks so much for this reflection!
Oh I'm sorry if it wasn't clear in my post-- the origin of moral disengagement comes from a 1996 paper, including identifying the 8 mechanisms. The recent Leviston and Walker study tested most of these mechanisms for their impact on climate action, guilt, and other outcomes with a large representative sample of Australians.
I hear you about division vs. unity, it's a tricky balance to navigate amidst the stark reality of climate inequalities. In my work, I'm focused on activating the global top 10% (anyone making $38,000+) to take climate action- both reducing their own luxury emissions (the other 90% doesn't need to reduce their carbon footprint) and activating their climate superpowers as citizens, role models, investors, and professionals. Those struggling to make ends meet do not need to reduce their consumption; indeed the poorest have room (and the right!) to increase their consumption. If you want to dive in more, I've written about this for example in "The Rich Need to Get To Work" https://wecanfixit.substack.com/i/38231014/facts-the-rich-need-to-get-to-work and "Your Top 5 Climate Superpowers" https://wecanfixit.substack.com/p/your-top-5-climate-superpowers.
Thanks for reading!
That justification+ list is fascinating. And I appreciated your preferred structure for emailing people, I'll definitely be using that lol - thank you!
Thanks Shim, glad you found it useful! It really jumped out at me when I first read those 8 justifications. Would love to see some creative visualizations to help get them out there. And happy to help slightly reduce email overload for everyone haha :)
Just coming across this newsletter - I absolutely love digging into the psychology and motivations behind climate change and what we can do to change them for the better, fantastic read. You’ve got a new subscriber in me!
So nice to hear, welcome Sean! :)
Kimberly! Very important issues for us in any Climate movement.
This reminds me a little of the work of George Lakoff on framing. See especially "The All New Don't Think of an Elephant" Excerpted at
https://lnkd.in/gcZaKEce
https://framelab.substack.com/
Thank you Mike, I loved that book in grad school and will check out the Substack and the updated version!
Enjoyed your talk with the Palo Alto CC book club. I'm so glad you're looking into moral disengagement! Not all psychological research is spot on (retired therapist here), but much of it is really valuable, and too often flies under the radar. Even my professional friends can't keep up with all the literature. And also thanks for the bit about how to get people to read emails/say yes. Another great newsletter! Tak, David Page
Thanks so much, David! I agree, it's hard to keep up with everything-- I learned about moral disengagement from examining a MSc thesis recently! Really glad you found this one valuable, thanks for being here!
Thanks Kim, I've only recently discovered your substack and love your approach and style. As a pracademic myself I particularly appreciate your research informed approach. Thanks for the work you're doing! warm regards, Jen de Vries
Thanks Jen, great to connect, we pracademics need to stick together! :) I've found Substack a supportive place, and they're really amping up their tools to make it easy to write here (check out the resources like On Substack and the podcast The Active Voice). Good luck with the tricky balance between academia and impact, I hope to see more from you! :)
Hi Kim, thanks for your kind response. Yes, being a pracademic is often uncomfortable and not the best career move. I have a connection to Lund, as a consultant to the Learning for Change programmer for staff in the Faculty of Science. I visited recently, and despite having come across your work and wanting to meet you I managed to lose your name prior to the visit. A case of unconscious and conscious flying guilt (I am Australian) I think. So nice to connect in this way! I will explore substack some more as you suggest.
haha looks like you were morally engaged if you felt guilt, congrats! ;) Sorry we missed a chance to connect in person, but glad we've found each other here!
In response to this great post I have: 1) A quick ask for help (no cost but time) and 2) to wholeheartedly agree that we need to get people moving beyond inaction and break through their moral disengagement. My own effort to do that is to get them emotionally involved, not just intellectually through facts, but by capturing their imagination with climate stories that models action in the fictional plot.
The ask: I have a free newsletter that aims to promote this type of climate fiction and a new book which you can get a free review copy to read. This book doesn’t fit the typical dystopian genre, so it needs word of mouth to get it going. Please sign up and read the book and then tell everyone about it. The book is: The EarthStar Solution-A Climate Fiction Mystery. Go to www.climatestorygarden.com to learn more. And I thank you with all my heart.