[The paper is mainly focused on understanding what is happening in the rich (and high greenhouse gas emitting) countries of our world. It seems reasonable to assume that similar dynamics may be at play for the rich within less-developed nations, but that different dynamics are at work for the world's poor.]I'm intrigued that it "seems reasonable to assume" that all rich people have similar denial issues regardless of the wealth of the country they come from. But let's not linger on this.
The real shocker to me was the following summary:
Thinking about the problem of climate change is deeply disturbing for most people – it generates a cascade of negative emotions that motivate us to processes of denial.I'll jump to the chase: Option #5 is the only real issue for me, being the wealthy man that I am. The other 4 options are actually laughable. But this is the thinking that the World Bank is now operating with. I'm speechless. Let me set the record straight - I don't feel guilty. I have no shame. I am not embarrassed. I don't think I come from a bad nation. None of this applies AT ALL.
- Our sense of ontological security is threatened: Large scale environmental problems such as climate change seem threaten the very conditions of our life and society. This feeling may be amorphous, but it is certainly unpleasant. (p.30)
- We feel helpless: The problem often seems overwhelming, far too large to grapple with, and we don’t always have confidence that our governments and the world community can be relied upon to solve the problem. (p.30)
- We feel guilty: We are aware that our privileged lifestyles and actions contribute to the problem, and that makes us feel bad. (pp.30-31)
- We don’t want to feel like ‘a bad person” or a member of a ‘bad nation’: Individually and collectively, citizens of rich nations gain very real material benefits from their greenhouse gas polluting activities. We want to continue to believe in ourselves as good people. Engaging with climate change issues, and with climate change facts such as our failure to meet emission reduction targets, challenges that positive sense of self. (p.32) Clean-Green New Zealand, anyone?
- It is difficult to link to daily life:“rather than [being] a problem we can touch and see for ourselves, climate change is a threat which must be interpreted for us through scientific expertise, using complex instrumentation. As a result, the environmental problem of contaminated water feels invisible to those who can easily afford to buy their water bottled.” (p.33)
There is not one hint that the wealthy people ARE informed and just don't buy it. Is it not possible that our denial comes from our reasoning abilities? No, of course not. And this is made clear from the next portion of the summary as follows:
Furthermore, talking about it with others is difficult, as for most people it falls outside social norms – it is not a popular activity to talk about matters that make people feel uncertain and guilty. And yet conversation is vital for the sharing of information and ideas, and the creation of collective meaning and the building of community, so this absence of talk about climate change leaves us in a position where in a sense “we don’t know how to know about it”. (p.28)
Really? I don't know how to know about Global Warming? I hear about it in the news, at public rallies, every company in my world is "going green" and I have no idea what they are talking about. I even have the internet. I'm curious how "conversation is vital for...the creation of collective meaning and building of community..." has anything to do with global warming. I guess the conversation I have, and the resulting community and meaning I get from it, must not be significant enough if I don't include the ideas of global warming. Now that I think about it, I really do feel so alone in this polluted world. Will someone help?
But the paper doesn't stop there.
I have no problem talking with people about such issues. I actually quite enjoy such lively discussions. But of course, the fossil fuel industry is the evil satan and has us all deceived or enslaved so we cannot break free from our bondage and see the world as it really is. Either that, or my "general economic growth ideology" prevents me from acknowledging it. I'm not sure which one it is.Finally, there are a range political-economic factors that work as barriers to effective action, including:
1. The ability of the fossil fuel industry to influence government policy [and in countries less directly influenced by the industry, the influence major fossil fuel using industries and the general economic growth ideology]
2. The existence of climate change skepticism campaigns funded by fossil fuel interest groups
3. The lack of quality information about climate change in the mass media
4. The distortion of climate science as presented in the media due to the operation of “balance as bias” (pp.36-37)
Funny, I've never taken a dime of funding from any fossil fuel interest group (although I wouldn't refuse it if they offered it to me), and yet I still think the way I do. How is it possible? Truly a mystery.
I'm glad the World Bank has got this paper to explain it all. And now you know as well.