* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise
Climatic Research Unit email controversy wikipedia , lookup
ExxonMobil climate change controversy wikipedia , lookup
Climate change denial wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Fred Singer wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on human health wikipedia , lookup
Climatic Research Unit documents wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
IPCC Fourth Assessment Report wikipedia , lookup
Years of Living Dangerously wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Environmental Science & Policy journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/envsci Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation Karen L. Akerlofa,* ,1, Katherine E. Rowanb , Todd La Portec, Brian K. Battend , Howard Ernste , Dann M. Sklarewa a Department of Environmental Science and Policy, George Mason University, USA Department of Communication, George Mason University, USA School of Policy, Government, and International Affairs, George Mason University, USA d Dewberry, USA e Political Science Department, U.S. Naval Academy, USA b c A R T I C L E I N F O Article history: Received 30 January 2016 Received in revised form 28 June 2016 Accepted 5 July 2016 Available online xxx Keywords: Sea level rise Risk perception Deliberation Communication Public opinion Climate adaptation A B S T R A C T To examine whether U.S. public opinion may become as sharply polarized on adaptation responses as it has been on mitigation policies, we surveyed a sample of urban coastal residents in Maryland (n = 378). We then tested the impact of a community deliberative event (n = 40) with small-group sea level rise discussions as a depolarization strategy. Cultural worldviews which contribute to politically polarized beliefs about climate were predictive of perceptions of sea level rise risk. Living close to flooding hazards also significantly predicted respondents’ perceptions of household or neighborhood risks, but not of risks to the entire county. The event significantly increased topic knowledge among all participants and, among those with a worldview predisposing them to lower risk perceptions, significantly increased problem identification and concern about impacts. These results suggest small-group deliberation focused on local problem-solving may be an effective tool for reducing the polarizing effects of cultural worldviews on decision-making. ã 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Discussions of adaptation responses to climate change have only recently begun appearing in Americans’ public discourse (Moser, 2012, 2009). Some have cautioned these efforts could be forestalled if cast within the same politically charged context as greenhouse gas emission reductions (Kates, 1997; Moser, 2012; Moser and Luers, 2008). Nevertheless, a wide range of adaptation approaches are underway (Hoss et al., 2014; Markolf et al., 2015; Woodruff and Stults, 2016). Emerging research examines how the public views these measures, particularly at the local scales of likely implementation (Canfield et al., 2015; Carrico et al., 2015; Howe, 2011; Javeline, 2014; Moser, 2014). Of these studies, a subset specifically address public engagement on sea level rise (SLR) (Covi and Kain, 2015; Kahan, 2015; MacInnis et al., 2015; Moser, 2013; Wong-Parodi and Fischhoff, 2015), one of the effects of climate change raising significant societal concerns (Hinkel et al., 2015). * Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (K.L. Akerlof). 1 Present address: Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University, USA. In adaptation planning, communication among decisionmakers, technical experts, stakeholders and the public about impacts and solutions can influence efforts at all levels; moreover, unsuccessful communication can become a barrier to policy adoption (Hurlimann et al., 2014; Moser and Ekstrom, 2010). Conflicting cultural worldviews about how society should function—e.g., prioritization of individual freedoms versus the collective good—generate miscommunication and disagreement about policy goals (Greene, 2013), contributing to dissension over climate change risks (Kahan, 2012a). This study aims to assess factors influencing public opinion on SLR risks at a local level and evaluate roles for public engagement to advance community decision-making for climate adaptation. We first tested whether cultural worldviews influence public perceptions of SLR risks at three geographic scales: home, neighborhood, and county. We subsequently investigated whether a community deliberative event providing scientific background, and localized impact and policy information would lessen the influence of cultural worldviews, and consequently decrease issue polarization. County-level SLR inundation and flooding projections were prepared for this project (Dewberry, 2012), then incorporated into the event and analyses. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 1462-9011/ã 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 2 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 1.1. Study location Anne Arundel County, Maryland, lies within the heavily urbanized Northeast “megalopolis” (Gottmann, 1961), just 10 miles east of Washington, D.C., and directly south of Baltimore. Its shoreline sits along the northwest border of the Chesapeake Bay. The rate of SLR in the region is about a quarter of a centimeter a year (Boon et al., 2010), among the highest on the Atlantic Coast, and appears to be accelerating (Sallenger et al., 2012). This contributes to the severity of storm surges, inland extension of the coastal floodplain, and future permanent inundation (Boon, 2006; Maryland Commission on Climate Change, 2008). Under moderate rates of relative SLR, more than 8 square kilometers of the county could be submerged by 2050 (Batten, 2012). By 2100, that number could double, and projected storm surges and tidal inundation places $1.5 billion in building values alone at risk. 1.2. Public perceptions of SLR risk Risk perceptions about climate change have been studied worldwide for three decades (Capstick et al., 2015; Klima, 2016; Nisbet and Myers, 2007; Taylor et al., 2014). Fewer surveys specifically focus on SLR perceptions (GfK Custom Research North America, 2013; Responsive Management, 2014, 2010). One national survey found that most in the U.S. believe global warming will cause SLR (73%) and that it will be a serious problem (76%) (GfK Custom Research North America, 2013). If climate change is an arguably intangible threat for people (Weber, 2006), SLR might be easier to grasp given its visible legacy of increasing waterlines upon shores, dunes, docks, and other coastal infrastructure. Thus our research question: RQ: Do county residents recognize SLR is occurring, and if so, how do they characterize its risk? 1.3. Cultural theory and Cultural Cognition Cultural theories of risk perception hold that individuals identify threats according to views of the group culture with which they identify (Tansey and Rayner, 2009). Cross-culturally, groups at varying scales—from tribes to nations—can be characterized by certain belief traits, e.g., whether some individuals should have more power than others according to status (hierarchy) or whether individual preferences should take precedence over those of the collective (individualism) (Douglas, 1970; Hofstede, 1983; Kahan, 2012b). Anthropologist Mary Douglas’ (1978, 1992) original conceptualization of cultural theory holds that risks are socially construed as perceived harm to the way of life of a group, including its moral values and functional integrity, and do not necessarily reflect objective characteristics of danger, such as probability and severity. This study uses a psychometric operationalization of cultural theory, Cultural Cognition (Kahan, 2012b). Its thesis—and a related earlier theorization (Dake, 1991)—has been controversial in its conversion of an anthropological theory about groups to a psychological measure of worldviews with highly American political overtones (Sjoberg, 1998; van der Linden, 2016). Nonetheless, its scales of hierarchy and individualism have proven better than political ideology for predicting Americans’ risk perceptions across an array of controversial policies, from gun control to climate change (Kahan et al., 2007). The Cultural Cognition scales of hierarchy-egalitarianism and individualism-communitarianism function as predictive factors in risk perception models placing individuals within four “group and grid” quadrants, per Fig. 1 (Kahan, 2012b). The individualism scale captures views about government’s role in balancing the rights of the individual versus the good of society. The hierarchy scale Fig. 1. Placing individuals within cultural worldviews based on Cultural Cognition’s hierarchy and individualism scales. measures views about whether greater equality should be promoted across income levels, racial groups, gender, and sexual preference groups. Douglas and Wildavsky (1983) argued polarized societal perspectives on risks arise from the opposing worldviews of egalitarian solidarists and hierarchical individualists over the degree of regulation of commerce and industry required to maintain balance between individual freedoms and the collective good. However, identifying risks as a collective threat does not occur in all, or even most, public policy matters (Kahan, 2010). Public responses to low salience issues—e.g., nanotechnology and cell phone radio waves—are not explained by differing worldviews (Kahan, 2015). Because of the association of SLR with climate change, we hypothesized: H1. (a) Respondents’ worldviews will explain a significant amount of variance in risk perceptions of SLR and inundation; (b) hierarchy and individualism will inversely correlate with SLR risk perceptions. 1.4. Detection of physical risks in the environment We also geospatially assessed flood exposure to compare objective measures’ to cultural worldviews’ influence on perceptions of SLR threats. Notably, Brody et al. (2008) measured the influence of sea-level physical risk variables on perceived climate change risk to the respondents’ health, finances, and physical environment. Vulnerability to SLR and coastal proximity were statistically significant in predicting these risk perceptions at the individual scale. Still, cultural filters play a complex role in which threats are signified, and by whom. Recent work suggests the effects of proximity on risk perceptions can be mediated by other factors (e.g., nature of the hazard, cultural cognition, spatial scale). Goebbert et al. (2012) found political ideology and cultural worldviews predicted weather perceptions, but measures of actual weather change were only partially predictive (i.e., of flooding and drought, not of temperatures). The authors concluded that perceptions of local weather changes incorporate direct observation, ideology and cultural cognition. Moreover, Ruddell et al. (2012) found that scale was a factor in perceptions of neighborhood versus regional temperatures in Phoenix, Arizona. At the neighborhood level, perceptions of temperature changes were more strongly related to modeled temperature data, while at the Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 3 regional level, they were more strongly associated with social frames of reference, including gender, ethnicity and political conservatism. Based on the findings of Ruddell et al. we hypothesized: experienced mixed success (Canfield et al., 2015; Hobson and Niemeyer, 2011). We hypothesized that deliberation may moderate cultural factors influencing individuals’ evaluation of risks, specifically: H2. (a) Respondents’ exposure to coastal flooding and inundation threats will explain a significant amount of variance in risk perceptions of SLR and inundation; (b) risk exposure will be a stronger factor in perceptions at smaller spatial scales. H3. (a) SLR knowledge and risk perceptions will increase among deliberation participants; (b) differences in risk perceptions between subjects with competing worldviews (egalitarian solidarist and hierarchical individualist) will diminish due to the deliberative session. 1.5. Deliberation 2. Methods Recently, practitioners have focused on social components of climate change vulnerability assessment and broad stakeholder involvement in decision-making (Burton and Mustelin, 2011; Moser and Ekstrom, 2010; NRC, 2010). Yet, little evaluation of public engagement efforts for climate adaptation exists (Burton and Mustelin, 2011). As the National Academies (NRC, 2008) and others have commented (Carpini et al., 2004; Cobb, 2011), there has been very little experimental or quasi-experimental research on the conditions for success. Most pertinent research has used deliberative polls (Fishkin and Luskin, 2005). Probability samples are first used to assess the opinions of the population. Next, those polled are invited to a deliberative session where experts speak and attendees discuss issue-related material in small groups. Finally, deliberative session attendees are re-surveyed. Thus, deliberative sessions can be structured into quasi-experimental tests of psychometric and small-group variables (Farrar et al., 2010; List et al., 2013). Though critics of deliberative forums say they are disconnected from actual decision-making, unrepresentative, and too infrequent to be relevant, the benefits accorded to collective deliberation is long, similar to those attributed to public participation generally (Carpini et al., 2004). These include: increases in citizen engagement in public affairs; increases in tolerance of other viewpoints; gains in understanding of their own preferences and abilities for argumentation; realization of social interdependence; faith in democratic processes; more considered and informed political decisions; and growth of social capital. Deliberative events feature small-group discussions. Typically, participants are placed randomly into these groups to ensure representation of diverse views (Fishkin and Luskin, 2005). Hearing and arguing for various policy options are believed to stimulate knowledge acquisition and preference changes (Barabas, 2004). Cultural cognition scholars have begun to assess how deliberation interacts with participants’ worldviews to influence citizens’ choices (Gastil et al., 2010). One recent study demonstrated that participation can dramatically change peoples’ views, transcending cultural worldview biases (Gastil et al., 2016). Within small group discussions, the dynamics of identity are believed to determine whether individuals become more alike or more polarized in values and preferences (Sunstein, 2002, 2000). Sunstein (2007) states deliberation could reduce polarization on climate change if equal numbers of group members hold opposing viewpoints, and there are no salient differences in identity among members. When individuals perceive themselves as similar to other group members along some relevant dimension (political ideology, race, gender), they give more credence to those individuals’ arguments and are less likely to challenge their positions. This leads to increased polarization and extremism (Sunstein, 2007). So far, deliberation on climate change has We pre-surveyed and invited a random sample of Anne Arundel County residents to a community deliberative event. Participants in the event then completed their post-survey at the event’s culmination. The analyses here examine the survey and physical data developed on SLR risk exposure for the project. George Mason University and U. S. Naval Academy human subjects review boards oversaw this research. 2.1. County survey Between March 28 and June 19, 2012, we sent 9582 surveys to local residents of 18 years or older (Appendix A in Supplementary information). They returned 378 completed surveys. While response rates below 10% are increasingly commonplace in social science research (Keeter et al., 2006; Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 2012; Roser-Renouf et al., 2014), our 4% response rate could raise questions about the potential for nonresponse bias. Bias can be assessed by comparing sample characteristics to those of the population, testing for differences between early and late waves of responders and extrapolating linear trends over time, and contrasting the characteristics of respondents to nonrespondents on variables of relevance (Armstrong and Overton, 1977). We employed two of these tests for sample bias—a proxy test for non-response bias and comparison of sample characteristics compared to population estimates—and an additional test to evaluate for self-selection of respondents based on topic salience. 2.1.1. Proxy test for non-response bias No data were available on non-respondents; however, late survey responders can be assumed to resemble non-respondents and function as a proxy (Lewis et al., 2013). Testing for mean differences between the first 10% of responders and last 10% for each of the three dependent variables, we find no statistically significant difference; Appendix B (in Supplementary information) elaborates. 2.1.2. Non-response error resulting from topic salience Survey topic interest is assumed to influence non-response rates and error (Groves et al., 2004). To test whether bias arose from highlighting SLR and coastal flooding in the survey cover letter, we contrasted risk perception data with a study that did not mention the topics in the introductory materials. In spring 2014, a statewide mail survey titled, “Healthy People, Healthy Places” included similar SLR risk perception questions (Akerlof and Maibach, 2014). In selecting the cases of only those 2014 Maryland survey respondents who resided in Anne Arundel (n = 164), we were able to compare the response frequencies by county between the two studies. Although slight differences in question wording could influence findings, the response distributions are remarkably similar. For both surveys, 32% of respondents estimated SLR effects will be significant in the county/Maryland by 2024-2025; shoreline erosion is listed as the impact of most concern for both the county Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 4 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx (63%) and state (65%) (Appendix C in Supplementary information). Thus, non-response error due to topic salience is unlikely. 2.1.3. Demographic estimates compared to sample characteristics Our countywide sample was older, more educated, and less racially diverse than the adult county population responding to 2010 U.S. Census data and 2006–2010 American Community Survey (Appendix D in Supplementary information). The largest disparity was in educational attainment, then age and race. Researchers have long obtained greater response rates from those who are more educated, older and female (Gannon et al., 1971). The sampled distribution for political party affiliation was 26.8% Republican, 35.7% Democrat, 30.0% Independent and 7.6% other/no party (Appendix E in Supplementary information). Weighting the data to Census distributions for over-represented variables resulted in little change in response distributions (Appendix F in Supplementary information). 2.2. Citizens’ discussion post-survey The Citizens’ Discussion participants were recruited during the county survey. To obtain as representative a sample as possible, all mailings included an invitation to the event. A subset of 41 participants from the survey attended. Post-event survey data from one participant was dropped due to missing pre-survey data leaving a final sample size of 40, within the range of expected participation for such events (Luskin et al., 2002; Timotijevic and Raats, 2007). The Citizens’ Discussion participants closely resembled non-attendees in their sea-level rise risk perceptions prior to the event (Appendix G in Supplementary information). There were no significant differences on five of eight SLR knowledge and risk perception variables. The remaining three variables tested close to 95% confidence significance levels (risk to home and property, p = 0.05; concern about impacts, p = 0.05; timing of significant impacts to the county from SLR, p = 0.03). The demographics of the deliberation attendees were more diverse in terms of income and race than the county’s, and skewed female (Appendix H in Supplementary information). The largest differences between participants and county residents were by education and gender. Participant’s political affiliation was Democratic (37.5%), Independents (32.5%), Republicans (20.0%), and other/no party (10.0%). 2.3. Components of the deliberative event The methodology of the sampling and event was modelled on the Fishkin and Luskin (2005) trademarked approach to deliberative polling. In the weeks prior to the April 28, 2012, Citizens’ Discussion, participants of the pre-survey who agreed to attend received event information and background materials. During event registration, participants were randomly assigned to small groups for discussion and use of the online coastal flooding and SLR viewer (Appendix I in Supplementary information). Trained facilitators led the discussion at each of eight tables. Facilitators ensured all participants in group discussions expressed their views, that the briefing materials were reviewed, and that groups generated pertinent questions for the expert panelists during two plenaries: one focused on science and impacts, and another on potential policy strategies for local governments (Appendix J in Supplementary information). 2.4. Questionnaire measures and risk exposure variables The 41 questions in the pre-survey and 56 in the post-survey addressed risk perceptions of coastal flooding and SLR, topic knowledge and beliefs, policy preferences for coastal areas within the county, and political efficacy (Akerlof, 2012). This paper focuses on risk perception results. Project geospatial data consisting of county-level SLR inundation and flooding mapping along with building exposure formed the risk exposure variables (Dewberry, 2012). 2.4.1. Demographic, political affiliation and ideology measures Demographic questions—age, gender, race, ethnicity, income, education—were used in the pre-survey to compare with U.S. Census Bureau data, and as control variables in regression analyses. Respondents were asked both their political affiliation (categorical variable) and political ideology (seven-point scale from very liberal to very conservative). 2.4.2. Measures of coastal flooding and SLR risk perceptions and beliefs Both instruments included measures of risk perceptions across geographic and temporal scales and assessed impacts most concerning residents. The first survey question asked residents whether coastal flooding was an increasing problem for the county. Questions followed about whether the respondent believed that SLR is occurring, and if so, when its effects would significantly impact the county and which effects were of most concern. The final risk perception queries had the respondent rate the risk of severe flooding from SLR at scales including their own home or property, their neighborhood, and their county. 2.4.3. Knowledge measures To assess Anne Arundel County resident knowledge about SLR— its causes, historical levels, and rate of change—respondents were asked on both instruments to agree or disagree with five statements using a five-point scale (Appendix K in Supplementary information). The five items were summed into a scale. 2.4.4. Worldview measures Worldviews were assessed with six items each for the Cultural Cognition hierarchy and individualism scales (Appendices L–N in Supplementary information) (Kahan, 2012b). A principal component analysis of the 12 measures derives two components; the resulting factor scores form the scale measures representing latent constructs used in multivariate analyses and to identify members of the four cultural worldviews as they fall across the group and grid, relative to median values (Fig. 1). 2.4.5. Inundation and flood risk exposure [geospatial analyses] SLR risk assessments conducted for the project included the current and projected inundation and floodplain extent, change in relative flood probability, potential structural damage and a relative risk classification for individual properties at three rates of SLR and four time slices (2012, 2050, 2075, 2100) (Dewberry, 2012). Two scenarios are utilized for the purposes of the analyses here: 2012 and 2075 with a projected relative sea-level rise gain of approximately 0.6 m from 2012. The risk assessments were geocoded to survey participant addresses using ArcGIS 10.2. Permanent inundation was defined as areas at or below the elevation of the mean higher high water datum (MHHW) tidal datum. Elevations below this datum are expected to be “wetted” by the highest daily tide. Coastal flooding was defined as the FEMA Special Flood Hazard Area, or elevations equal to or less than the 100-yr coastal floodplain. Buildings subject to inundation were assumed to become uninhabitable and were attributed as “lost,” whereas buildings subject to coastal flooding were evaluated for percent damage through depth-damage analysis. Building value exposure was evaluated against the Maryland State Department of Planning “MD Property View” dataset for Anne Arundel County. The measures of flooding and inundation risk by Census Block Group (CBG) are highly correlated (Fig. 2; Appendices O–Q in Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 5 Fig. 2. Projections for SLR impacts by 2075 by CBGs in Anne Arundel County, Maryland: (a) percent of floodplain; (b) percent of land within mean higher high water; (c) building value at risk within mean higher high water. Supplementary information). A principal components analysis reduced the initial six variables—both current (2012) and future (2075) percent exposure of CBG to (1) 100-year floodplain, (2) inundation at or below MHHW, and (3) total building value at risk— to scores for two components. The resulting scores used within the analyses respectively represent flooding and inundation risk, and building value loss due to projected inundation (Appendix Q in Supplementary information). Individual household risk assessment values are not utilized because of the low frequency of survey participant properties in the 100-year floodplain or within MHHW. 2.5. Analysis of comparative influence of worldview and risk exposure on threat perception To address the first two hypotheses regarding the influence of cultural cognition on risk perceptions for SLR at three spatial scales, compared to risk assessment data, we performed blockwise hierarchical regression using risk perceptions at the home or property, neighborhood, and county level as the dependent variables (Table 1). Demographics, SLR risk, political affiliation, political ideology, and cultural worldviews served as the predictor variables (Table 2). All analyses were conducted using SPSS v. 20. solidarists—narrowed following the deliberative event. This was tested using a single-tailed analysis of the absolute value of the difference between the values of the pre-survey item means for hierarchical individualists and egalitarian solidarists, compared to the same statistics in the post-survey: D|pre,post-surveys| = | Mpre1 Mpre2| |Mpos1 Mpos2|. Taking the absolute values of the differences between the means makes it difficult to render standard errors for the statistic, and thus generate estimates of statistical significance. To overcome this problem, using R (Appendix R in Supplementary information) we employed two methods to create one-tailed significance estimates. The first method assumed that the statistic has approximately a normal distribution and bases an approximate p-value on a z-score. In the second method, bootstrap replicates of the statistic were centered to create an approximately null distribution, and the proportion of replications in which the centered bootstrapped statistic is greater than the observed value of the statistic was calculated. Both methods returned almost identical p-values. A final set of analyses using t-tests explored which groups significantly changed across risk perception measures following the deliberative event. 3. Results 2.6. Analysis of effects of deliberative event on risk perceptions 3.1. SLR risk perceptions Designating Citizens’ Discussion participants as hierarchical individualists, egalitarian solidarists, egalitarian individualists, and hierarchical communitarians (Appendix N in Supplementary information), we analyzed whether the absolute mean values between worldview groups with the most diametrical opinions on environmental risk—hierarchical individualists and egalitarian The countywide survey revealed that Anne Arundel residents are aware of local SLR and increased coastal flooding, but uncertain when impacts will become significant (Appendix S in Supplementary information). A majority of county residents (60.4%) said that SLR is occurring and (54.3%) that coastal flooding has become a Table 1 Characteristics of dependent variables (regression analyses). How would you describe the risk of more severe flooding from sea-level rise over the next 40 years to... Don't know (Coded missing) SLR risk perceptions a. the county generally b. your neighborhood c. your home or property 7.6% 6.0% 6.8% No risk (1) Very little risk (2) Some risk (3) High risk (4) M 3.0% 18.75 28.26 10.1% 36.4% 39.7% 46.7% 29.6% 19.3% 32.6% 9.2% 6.0% 3.18 2.31 2.03 SD 0.75 0.90 0.88 n = 368. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 6 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx Table 2 Characteristics of independent variables (regression analyses). Variable coding M SD Demographics Female [yes (1); no (0)] Non-white [yes (1); no (0)] Age [continuous] Education [less than high school (1) to completed a graduate or professional degree (6)] Income [less than $25,000 (1) to $150,000+ (6)] 0.54 0.14 52.61 4.68 3.96 0.50 0.35 15.04 1.33 1.44 SLR risk Flood and MHHW property risk scores MHHW property value risk scores 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Political affiliation Democrat [yes (1); no (0)] Republican [yes (1); no (0)] 0.36 0.27 0.48 0.44 Political ideology Political ideology [very liberal (1) to very conservative (7)] 4.07 1.53 Cultural worldviews Hierarchy scale Individualism scale 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 n = 368. greater problem in recent years. County residents are most concerned about shoreline erosion (64.6%), followed by private property damage or loss (59.3%), habitat loss (54.8%), and public infrastructure damage or loss (52.6%). However, most residents are uncertain when SLR will significantly impact the county. Almost a third (29.4%) said they don’t know. One in eight (12.5%) said that effects already have had significant impact. 3.2. Predictors of SLR risk perceptions As hypothesized, both risk exposure and cultural worldviews are predictors of SLR risk perceptions (H1(a) and H2(a)), hierarchy and individualism inversely correlate with perceived SLR risk (H1 (b)), and the effect of risk exposure diminishes at larger spatial scales of risk perception (H2(b)). Regressing risk perceptions specified at three spatial scales onto the same set of independent Table 3 Predictors of SLR risk perception at three spatial scales. Dependent variables: SLR risks to ... Demographics Female Non-white Age Education Income SLR risk Flood and MHHW property risk scores MHHW property value risk scores Political affiliation Democrat Republican County (n = 340) Neighborhood (n = 346) Own home or property (n = 343) b b b [95% CI] [95% CI] [95% CI] 0.11* [0.02, 0.20] 0.07 [ 0.17, 0.02] 0.05 [ 0.03, 0.15] 0.03 [ 0.14, 0.07] 0.06 [ 0.05, 0.15] 0.06 [ 0.05, 0.16] 0.04 [ 0.15, 0.06] 0.05 [ 0.14, 0.05] 0.02 [ 0.13, 0.08] 0.04 [ 0.15, 0.07] 0.10^ [0,0.20] 0.00 [ 0.12, 0.1] 0.05 [ 0.15, 0.05] 0.04 [ 0.16, 0.07] 0.03 [ 0.14, 0.09] 0.07 [ 0.01, 0.15] 0.05 [ 0.22, 0.1] 0.39*** [0.28, 0.51] 0.09* [0.04, 0.29] 0.32*** [0.21, 0.44] 0.09^ [ 0.17, 0.25] 0.08 [ 0.2, 0.04] 0.02 [ 0.15, 0.1] 0.1 [ 0.02, 0.22] 0.06 [ 0.18, 0.04] 0.08 [ 0.06, 0.2] 0.08 [ 0.2, 0.04] Political ideology Political ideology 0.07 [ 0.22, 0.09] 0.12 [ 0.03, 0.28] 0.13^ [ 0.03, 0.3] Cultural worldview Hierarchy 0.37*** [ 0.53, 0.21] 0.29*** [ 0.41, 0.18] 0.07 [ 0.05, 0.2] 0.260 10.181*** (3, 326) 0.18*** [ 0.33, 0.05] 0.24*** [ 0.35, 0.12] 0.05 [ 0.06, 0.16] 0.254 10.034*** (3, 332) 0.17* [ 0.32, 0.02] 0.20*** [ 0.32, 0.09] 0.07 [ 0.02, 0.17] 0.177 6.642*** (3, 329) Individualism Hierarchy individualism Adjusted R2 F (df1, df2) p < 0.10, ^; p < 0.05, *; p < 0.01, **; p < 0.001, ***. Regression coefficients are standardized and bolded if they reach the previously listed statistical thresholds.. aIncludes all respondents who self-identify as non-white and/or Hispanic. bPrincipal components scores, see Supplementary Materials Appendix Q for variable weighting. cDummy scores; the third category is independent, other or no party. dUnder political ideology, conservatism is scored high. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx variables revealed that cultural worldviews are predictive of individuals’ beliefs about sea-level risk at the county level (b Hierarchy = 0.37, p < 0.001; b Individualism = 0.29, p < 0.001), while exposure to SLR physical risk is not (Table 3, Appendix T in Supplementary information). At the scale of home and neighborhood, flooding and inundation hazard exposure was the largest predictor of SLR risk perceptions (Neighborhood: bFlood/MHHWrisk = 0.39, p < 0.001; bHierarchy = 0.18, p < 0.001; bIndividualism = 0.24, p < 0.001; own home: bFlood/MHHWrisk = 0.32, p < 0.001; bHierarchy = 0.17, p < 0.05; bIndividualism = 0.20, p < 0.001), though the confidence intervals for the size of the worldview and risk exposure coefficients overlap. Higher property value risk also predicted risk perceptions at the scale of neighborhood and home, though only marginally significantly so in the latter case (Neighborhood: bPropertyvaluerisk = 0.09, p < 0.05; own home: bPropertyvaluerisk = 0.09 p < 0.10). Being female was of—or near—significance at the spatial scales of county and home. All three final models explained between 18% and 26% of the variance in SLR risk perceptions. 3.3. Effects of deliberation on SLR risk perception The last of the research hypotheses (H3(a) and (b)) addressed changes resulting from the Citizens’ Discussion, (n = 40). The small sample size limited generalization from the results. However, even with the small sample size, there were statistically significant increases in participant knowledge and risk perceptions, as hypothesized. Across all participants, there were statistically significant increases in topic knowledge, the number of cited local impacts of most concern, the belief that coastal flooding has become more of a problem in recent years, and that SLR is occurring (H3(a)) (Table 4). In the Citizen’s Discussion, there were there were 8 hierarchical individualists, 14 egalitarian solidarists, 12 egalitarian individualists and 6 hierarchical communitarians among the 40 valid respondents. Considering the impact of deliberation between the two typically most polarized cultural worldview groups, hierarchical individualists and egalitarian solidarists (H3(b)), none of the knowledge and five risk indicators demonstrated means that statistically significantly converged (H3(b)) (Appendix U in Supplementary information). Instead of converging, both of these groups moved in the same direction on knowledge and risk. Only 7 one of the variables was even close to statistical significance (p = 0.09). For this item, respondents were asked whether they agree that SLR is occurring. We also assessed whether there had been any statistically significant shifts within the groups of hierarchical individualists and egalitarian solidarists between the pre- and post- surveys. In conducting a series of paired t-tests, both groups displayed significant increases in knowledge post-deliberation (Table 4). Only hierarchical individualists demonstrated a significant postdeliberation increase in expected impacts, concern about coastal flooding in the county, and agreement that SLR is occurring. 4. Discussion 4.1. Influence of cultural worldviews and physical risk on SLR risk perceptions This study reveals that coastal flooding and other impacts from the rising waters of the Chesapeake Bay are of concern to Anne Arundel County residents, but that citizens are uncertain when significant impacts will manifest. Moreover, perceptions at the county level of SLR risks are more heavily influenced by worldviews—preferences about the balance between individual freedoms and the collective good—than by physical exposure to coastal flooding and inundation risk. In contrast, both worldviews and physical exposure to at-risk coastal areas were associated with perceptions of risk to one’s own home or property. This finding aligns both with Cultural Cognition research demonstrating the effects of worldview on risk perceptions (Kahan et al., 2009, 2010, 2007) and with studies suggesting the strength of cultural influences in perceptions of physical risks varies depending on the geographic scale under consideration (Ruddell et al., 2012). It has long been known that risk perceptions of whom is at threat are highly scale-dependent, based on whether the risk target is the respondent, their family, or people in general (Sjöberg, 2000). Our results extend findings by Brody et al. (2008) about the correlation between coastal proximity and climate change risk perceptions by showing the relationship also exists for SLR risk perceptions, but only at the smaller scales of neighborhood and household, not at the larger community scales significant to policy formation. Many policy approaches to SLR adaptation (Sovacool, Table 4 Changes in knowledge and risk perceptions after deliberative discussion. Pre-Survey PostSurvey M M SD t df p* SD Knowledge scale: sum of 5 knowledge measures (1–25) Hierarchical individualists Egalitarian solidarists 13.67 4.63 16.67 5.31 11.13 4.36 14.38 3.85 15.23 4.21 18.08 5.72 3.07 2.15 2.15 20 0.003 7 0.034 12 0.026 Impacts concern scale: total number of impacts of most concern (0–9) Hierarchical individualists Egalitarian solidarists 4.68 3.88 5.14 3.03 5.73 3.09 6.25 3.01 5.43 3.15 3.33 3.13 1.75 2.75 0.38 21 0.047 7 0.014 13 0.354 Coastal flooding: In your opinion, has coastal flooding become more or less of a problem in the county in recent years? 2.40 (1–5, less coded high) 2.75 Hierarchical individualists Egalitarian solidarists 2.17 0.88 1.95 0.51 1.04 2.13 0.72 1.83 0.64 2.38 0.39 1.77 SLR: Sea level rise is an issue some coastal communities have been discussing recently. Sea level rise refers to increases in 3.64 the average height of water relative to the land over the course of the year. What do you think? Do you agree or disagree that sea level rise is occurring? (1–5, agree coded high) Hierarchical individualists 3.00 Egalitarian solidarists 4.00 1.26 4.23 1.15 1.739 21 0.048 1.31 1.11 4.38 4.14 1.06 1.23 2.99 0.33 * 2.93 19 0.004 7 11 0.025 0.052 7 0.010 13 0.373 p value is one-tailed. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 8 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx 2011) will require strategies beyond the scope of individual homeowners or neighborhood associations (Higgins, 2008). 4.2. Deliberation as a counter-strategy to polarization in risk decisionmaking The role of worldviews in affecting risk perceptions suggests the need for communicative strategies that counter this dynamic (Kahan, 2010). Strengthening individuals’ identification with other community members in deliberative events as they assess and consider solutions to local issues, such as SLR, could help. Analysis of the county survey data by groups holding differing worldviews showed that those predisposed to lower environmental risk perceptions displayed the most change in knowledge, impact concern, problem identification, and SLR beliefs, and in the direction of increased issue involvement. That is, those who were less likely to think SLR risk was a concern in their county, were the ones whose knowledge and beliefs most changed, and changed toward views consistent with the science of SLR. This may suggest that community deliberative events could ameliorate the influence of worldviews on SLR risk. Arguably, these hierarchical individualists were more likely to make statistically significant changes on these measures because there was more room for them to shift. Egalitarian solidarists— because of their worldviews—are generally more concerned about environmental issues (Douglas and Wildavsky, 1983). Deliberative events may affect individuals’ sense of group identity by placing citizens into small-group discussions about risk and policy of importance to their community, in this case the county. Smallgroup discussions have been said to be the defining experience of deliberative events (Barabas, 2004). Citizens’ Discussion participants were asked at the end about which component of the day they enjoyed the most: the small-group discussions, use of the online SLR viewer maps, or question periods with experts. Almost three-quarters (72.5%) of participants selected the small-group interactions. Not only can interpersonal communication be an effective means of attitudinal and behavioral change, perhaps more than mass communication alone (Abroms and Maibach, 2008), but group collaboration on tasks has been associated with better decision-making (Burleson et al., 1984; Woolley et al., 2010). Moreover, governance at smaller spatial scales—such as by municipalities and counties—has been linked to effective management of socioecological systems for resilience (Garmestani and Benson, 2013). 4.3. Study limitations Study limitations include its one field location, and low response rates to the initial countywide survey (4%) and the invitation to the Citizens’ Discussion (0.4%). For this article, we also did not explore the independent effects of the use of the SLR viewer on participant decision-making, a growing area of social science research (Richards, 2015; Stephens et al., 2015, 2014; Wong-Parodi et al., 2014) 5. Conclusion To counteract the effects of cultural polarization, Kahan (2010) recommends providing individuals with both scientific information and salutary cultural cues, such as congenial policy solutions or a diversity of culturally identifiable messengers—strategies for scrambling cultural identity cues. In contrast, we call attention to characteristics of deliberative events, similar to “team reasoning” (Hindriks, 2012), that may establish, or reinforce, the salience of membership in a particular group through sustained interpersonal communication and emphasis on decision-making for the community. By deepening individuals’ sense of belonging to a group and their sense of shared place through evaluating policy choices for their long-term well-being, deliberative community events may generate the Durkheimian collective conscious to support community resilience to SLR. As coastal communities globally address the growing threat of sea level rise, multidisciplinary teams will increasingly be needed to provide this complex combination of science and policy information in a context informed by social science (Wong-Parodi and Strauss, 2014). Acknowledgements This work was supported by Mid-Atlantic Sea Grant, and Virginia Sea Grant (VASG). Funding did not influence the study’s design, implementation, analysis, writing, or interpretation. We wish to thank: Dan Nataf, Center for the Study of Local Issues, Anne Arundel Community College, for assistance in executing the survey; Cecily Cutshall and Courtney Burkey for facilitation of the community discussion; Mohan Rajasekar of Dewberry for developing the SLR viewer; and Cliff Sutton, Director of the George Mason University Statistical Consulting Center. Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data associated with this article can be found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. envsci.2016.07.002. References Abroms, L.C., Maibach, E.W., 2008. The effectiveness of mass communication to change public behavior. Annu. Rev. Public Health 29, 219–234. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.29.020907.090824. Akerlof, K., Maibach, E.W., 2014. Adapting to Climate Change & Sea Level Rise: A Maryland Statewide Survey, Fall 2014. Center for Climate Change Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. Akerlof, K.L., 2012. Risky Business: Engaging the Public in Policy Discourse on SeaLevel Rise and Inundation (Ph.D.). George Mason University, Fairfax, VA. Armstrong, J.S., Overton, T.S., 1977. Estimating nonresponse bias in mail surveys. J. Mark. Res. 14, 396–402. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3150783. Barabas, J. (2004). How deliberation affects policy opinions. American Political Science Review, 98(4), 687–701. Batten, B., 2012. Future Coast Sea-Level Rise Visualization: Anne Arundel County Level Summary. Dewberry, Fairfax, VA. Boon, J.D., Brubaker, J., Forrest, D.R., 2010. Chesapeake Bay Land Subsidence and Sea Level Change: An Evaluation of Past and Present Trends and Future Outlook. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA. Boon, J., 2006. The Three Faces of Isabel. Virginia Institute of Marine Science, Gloucester Point, VA. Brody, S.D., Zahran, S., Vedlitz, A., Grover, H., 2008. Examining the relationship between physical vulnerability and public perceptions of global climate change in the United States. Environ. Behav. 40, 72–95. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0013916506298800. Burleson, B.R., Levine, B.J., Samter, W., 1984. Decision-making procedure and decision quality. Hum. Commun. Res. 10, 557–574. doi:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/j.1468-2958.1984.tb00032.x. Burton, P., Mustelin, J., 2011. Planning for Climate Adaptation: Is Public Participation the Key to Success? Urban Research Program, Griffith University, Queensland, Australia. Canfield, C., Klima, K., Dawson, T., 2015. Using deliberative democracy to identify energy policy priorities in the United States. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 8, 184–189. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2015.05.008. Capstick, S., Whitmarsh, L., Poortinga, W., Pidgeon, N., Upham, P., 2015. International trends in public perceptions of climate change over the past quarter century. WIREs Clim. Change 6, 35–61. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.321. Carpini, M.X.D., Cook, F.L., Jacobs, L.R., 2004. Public deliberation, discursive participation, and citizen engagement: a review of the empirical literature. Ann. Rev. Political Sci. 7, 315–344. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev. polisci.7.121003.091630. Carrico, A.R., Truelove, H.B., Vandenbergh, M.P., Dana, D., 2015. Does learning about climate change adaptation change support for mitigation? J. Environ. Psychol. 41, 19–29. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.10.009. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx Cobb, M.D., 2011. Creating informed public opinion: citizen deliberation about nanotechnologies for human enhancements. J. Nanopart. Res. 13, 1533–1548. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11051-011-0227-0. Covi, M.P., Kain, D.J., 2015. Sea-Level rise risk communication: public understanding, risk perception, and attitudes about information. Environ. Commun. 0, 1–22. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2015.1056541. Dake, K., 1991. Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 22, 61–82. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022191221006. Dewberry, 2012. Community Adaptation to Sea-Level Rise and Inundation (CASI): Permanent Inundation and Coastal Flood Hazard and Risk Analysis. Dewberry, Fairfax, VA. Douglas, M., Wildavsky, A.B., 1983. Risk and Culture: an Essay on the Selection of Technical and Environmental Dangers, 1st paperback printing ed. University of California Press, Berkeley. Douglas, M., 1970. Natural Symbols; Explorations in Cosmology, 1st American ed. Pantheon Books, New York. Farrar, C., Fishkin, J.S., Green, D.P., List, C., Luskin, R.C., Levy Paluck, E., 2010. Disaggregating deliberation’s effects: an experiment within a deliberative poll. Br. J. Political Sci. 40, 333–347. Fishkin, J.S., Luskin, R.C., 2005. Experimenting with a democratic ideal: deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica 40, 284–298. http://dx.doi.org.mutex. gmu.edu/10.1057/palgrave.ap.5500121. Gannon, M.J., Nothern, J.C., Carroll, S.J., 1971. Characteristics of nonrespondents among workers. J. Appl. Psychol. 55, 586–588. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/ h0031907. Garmestani, A.S., Benson, M.H., 2013. A framework for resilience-based governance of social-ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 18, 9. Gastil, J., Bacci, C., Dollinger, M., 2010. Is deliberation neutral?: Patterns of attitude change during The Deliberative PollsTM. J. Public Deliberation 6, 3. Gastil, J., Knobloch, K.R., Kahan, D., Braman, D., 2016. Participatory policymaking across cultural cognitive divides: two tests of cultural biasing in public forum design and deliberation. Public Admin. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ padm.12255. GfK Custom Research North America, 2013. Stanford University Climate Adaptation National Poll [Conducted for Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment and Center for Ocean Solutions]. GfK Custom Research North America. Goebbert, K., Jenkins-Smith, H.C., Klockow, K., Nowlin, M.C., Silva, C.L., 2012. Weather, climate, and worldviews: the sources and consequences of public perceptions of changes in local weather patterns. Weather Clim. Soc. 4, 132–144. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/WCAS-D-11-00044.1. Gottmann, J., 1961. Megalopolis; the Urbanized Northeastern Seaboard of the United States. Twentieth Century Fund, New York. Greene, J., 2013. Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them, 1st edition Penguin press, New York. Groves, R.M., Presser, S., Dipko, S., 2004. The role of topic interest in survey participation decisions. Public Opin. Q. 68, 2–31. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ poq/nfh002. Higgins, M., 2008. Sea level rise impacts on beaches and coastal property. Sea Grant Law Policy J. 1, 43–64. Hindriks, F., 2012. Team reasoning and group identification. Rationality Soc. 24, 198– 220. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1043463111429274. Hinkel, J., Jaeger, C., Nicholls, R.J., Lowe, J., Renn, O., Peijun, S., 2015. Sea-level rise scenarios and coastal risk management. Nature Clim. Change 5, 188–190. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2505. Hobson, K., Niemeyer, S., 2011. Public responses to climate change: the role of deliberation in building capacity for adaptive action. Global Environmental Change, Symposium on Social Theory and the Environment in the New World (Dis)Order 21, 957–971. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.05.001. Hofstede, G., 1983. National cultures in four dimensions: a research-based theory of cultural differences among nations. Int. Stud. Manage. Organ. 13, 46–74. Hoss, F., Klima, K., Fischbeck, P., 2014. Ten strategies to systematically exploit all options to cope with anthropogenic climate change. Environ. Syst. Decis. 34, 578–590. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-014-9517-2. Howe, P.D., 2011. Hurricane preparedness as anticipatory adaptation: a case study of community businesses. Global Environmental Change, Special Issue on The Politics and Policy of Carbon Capture and Storage 21, 711–720. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2011.02.001. Hurlimann, A., Barnett, J., Fincher, R., Osbaldiston, N., Mortreux, C., Graham, S., 2014. Urban planning and sustainable adaptation to sea-level rise. Landscape Urban Plann. 126, 84–93. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.12.013. Javeline, D., 2014. The most important topic political scientists are not studying: adapting to climate change. Perspect. Politics 12, 420–434. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1017/S1537592714000784. Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., Cohen, G.L., 2007. The Second National Risk and Culture Study: Making Sense of – and Making Progress in – the American Culture War of Fact. SSRN eLibrary (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. ID 1017189). Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network. Retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=1017189.. Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Cohen, G.L., Gastil, J., Slovic, P., 2010. Who fears the HPV vaccine, who doesn’t, and why? An experimental study of the mechanisms of Cultural Cognition. Law Hum. Behav. 34 (6), 501–516. Kahan, D.M., Braman, D., Slovic, P., Gastil, J., Cohen, G., 2009. Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology. Nat. Nanotechnol. 4 (2), 87–90. Kahan, D.M., 2010. Fixing the communications failure. Nature 463, 296–297. 9 Kahan, D., 2012a. Why we are poles apart on climate change. Nature 488 (7411), 255. http://doi.org/10.1038/488255a. Kahan, D.M., 2012b. Cultural Cognition as a conception of the cultural theory of risk. In: Hillerbrand, R., Sandin, P., Roeser, S., Peterson, M. (Eds.), Handbook of Risk Theory: Epistemology, Decision Theory, Ethics and Social Implications of Risk. Springer, London, pp. 725–760. Kahan, D.M., 2015. Climate-science communication and the measurement problem. Political Psychol. 36, 1–43. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12244. Kates, R.W., 1997. Climate change 1995: impacts, adaptations, and mitigation. Environ. Sci. Policy Sustain. Dev. 39, 29–33. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 00139159709604767. Keeter, S., Kennedy, C., Dimock, M., Best, J., Craighill, P., 2006. Gauging the impact of growing nonresponse on estimates from a national RDD telephone survey. Public Opin. Q. 70, 759–779. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfl035. Klima, K., 2016. Public perceptions of global warming: understanding survey differences. In: Drake, J.L., Kontar, Y.Y., Eichelberger, J.C., Rupp, T.S., Taylor, K.M. (Eds.), Communicating Climate-Change and Natural Hazard Risk and Cultivating Resilience, Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp. 55–63. Lewis, E.F., Hardy, M., Snaith, B., 2013. Estimating the effect of nonresponse bias in a survey of hospital organizations. Eval. Health Prof. 36, 330–351. doi:http://dx. doi.org/10.1177/0163278713496565. List, C., Luskin, R.C., Fishkin, J.S., McLean, I., 2013. Deliberation, single-peakedness, and the possibility of meaningful democracy: evidence from deliberative polls. J. Politics 75, 80–95. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0022381612000886. Luskin, R.C., Fishkin, J.S., Jowell, R., 2002. Considered opinions: deliberative polling in Britain. Br. J. Political Sci. 32, 455–487. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/ S0007123402000194. MacInnis, B., Krosnick, J.A., Abeles, A., Caldwell, M.R., Prahler, E., Dunne, D.D., 2015. The American public’s preference for preparation for the possible effects of global warming: impact of communication strategies. Clim. Change 128, 17–33. Markolf, S.A., Klima, K., Wong, T.L., 2015. Adaptation frameworks used by US decision-makers: a literature review. Environ. Syst. Decis. 35, 427–436. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10669-015-9572-3. Maryland Commission on Climate Change, 2008. Comprehensive Strategy for Reducing Maryland’s Vulnerability to Climate Change, Phase I: Sea Level Rise and Coastal Storms. Report of the Maryland Commission on Climate Change Adaptation and Response Working Group. Maryland Department of Natural Resources, Maryland, Department of the Environment, Maryland Department of Planning, Annapolis and Baltimore, MD. Moser, S.C., Ekstrom, J.A., 2010. A framework to diagnose barriers to climate change adaptation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 22026–22031. doi:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1007887107. Moser, S., Luers, A., 2008. Managing climate risks in California: the need to engage resource managers for successful adaptation to change. Clim. Change 87, 309– 322. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-007-9384-7. Moser, S.C., 2009. Good Morning, America! The Explosive US Awakening to the Need for Adaptation. California Energy Commission, Sacramento, CA. Moser, S.C., 2012. Adaptation, mitigation, and their disharmonious discontents: an essay. Clim. Change 111, 165–175. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-0120398-4. Moser, S.C., 2013. Navigating the political and emotional terrain of adaptation: community engagement when climate change comes home. In: Moser, S.C., Boykoff, M.T. (Eds.), Successful Adaptation to Climate Change: Linking Science to Policy in a Rapidly Changing World. Routledge, London. Moser, S.C., 2014. Communicating adaptation to climate change: the art and science of public engagement when climate change comes home. WIREs Clim. Change 5, 337–358. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wcc.276. NRC, 2010. America’s Climate Choices: Adapting to the Impacts of Climate Change. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. Nisbet, M.C., Myers, T., 2007. The polls-trends: twenty years of public opinion about global warming. Public Opin. Q. 71, 444–470. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, 2012. Assessing the Representativeness of Public Opinion Surveys. Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, Washington, DC. Responsive Management, 2010. Delaware Residents’ Opinions on Climate Change and Sea Level Rise [Survey for Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control]. Responsive Management, Harrisonburg, VA. Responsive Management, 2014. Delaware Residents’ Opinions on Climate Change and Sea Level Rise [State of Delaware and the Delaware Sea Grant College Program]. Responsive Management, Harrisonburg, VA. Richards, D., 2015. Testing the waters: local users, sea level rise, and the productive usability of interactive geovisualizations. Commun. Des. Q. Rev 3, 20–24. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2792989.2792992. Roser-Renouf, C., Maibach, E.W., Leiserowitz, A., Zhao, X., 2014. The genesis of climate change activism: from key beliefs to political action. Clim. Change 125, 163–178. Ruddell, D., Harlan, S., Grossman-Clarke, S., Chowell, G., 2012. Scales of perception: public awareness of regional and neighborhood climates. Clim. Change 111, 581–607. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0165-y. Sallenger, A.H., Doran, K.S., Howd, P.A., 2012. Hotspot of accelerated sea-level rise on the Atlantic coast of North America. Nature Clim. Change doi:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/nclimate1597 advance online publication. Sjöberg, L., 2000. Factors in risk perception. Risk Anal. 20, 1–12. doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/0272-4332.00001. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002 G Model ENVSCI 1829 No. of Pages 10 10 K.L. Akerlof et al. / Environmental Science & Policy xxx (2016) xxx–xxx Sjoberg, L., 1998. World views, political attitudes, and risk perception. Risk: Health Saf. Environ. 9, 137–152. Sovacool, B.K., 2011. Hard and soft paths for climate change adaptation. Clim. Policy 11, 1177–1183. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2011.579315. Stephens, S.H., DeLorme, D.E., Hagen, S.C., 2014. An analysis of the narrativebuilding features of interactive sea level rise viewers. Sci. Commun. 36, 675– 705. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1075547014550371. Stephens, S.H., DeLorme, D.E., Hagen, S.C., 2015. Evaluating the utility and communicative effectiveness of an interactive sea-level rise viewer through stakeholder engagement. J. Bus. Tech. Commun. 3. doi:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1177/1050651915573963 1050651915573963. Sunstein, C.R., 2000. Deliberative trouble? Why groups go to extremes. Yale Law J. 110, 71–119. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/797587. Sunstein, C.R., 2002. The law of group polarization. J. Political Philos. 10, 175–195. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00148. Sunstein, C.R., 2007. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton University Press, Princeton. Tansey, J., Rayner, S., 2009. Cultural theory and risk: a review. In: Heath, R.L., O’Hair, H.D. (Eds.), Handbook of Crisis and Risk Communication. Routledge, New York, NY, pp. 53–80. Taylor, A., de Bruin, W.B., Dessai, S., 2014. Climate change beliefs and perceptions of weather-related changes in the United Kingdom. Risk Anal. 34, 1995–2004. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/risa.12234. Timotijevic, L., Raats, M.M., 2007. Evaluation of two methods of deliberative participation of older people in food-policy development. Health Policy 82, 302–319. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2006.09.010. Weber, E.U., 2006. Experience-based and description-based perceptions of longterm risk: why global warming does not scare us (yet). Clim. Change 77, 103– 120. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9060-3. Wong-Parodi, G., Fischhoff, B., 2015. The impacts of political cues and practical information on climate change decisions. Environ. Res. Lett. 10 doi:http://dx.doi. org/10.1088/1748-9326/10/3/034004 034004. Wong-Parodi, G., Strauss, B.H., 2014. Team science for science communication. PNAS 111, 13658–13663. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1320021111. Wong-Parodi, G., Fischhoff, B., Strauss, B., 2014. A method to evaluate the usability of interactive climate change impact decision aids. Clim. Change 126, 485–493. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10584-014-1226-9. Woodruff, S.C., Stults, M., 2016. Numerous strategies but limited implementation guidance in US local adaptation plans. Nat. Clim. Change doi:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/nclimate3012 advance online publication. Woolley, A.W., Chabris, C.F., Pentland, A., Hashmi, N., Malone, T.W., 2010. Evidence for a collective intelligence factor in the performance of human groups. Science 330, 686–688. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.1193147. van der Linden, S., 2016. A conceptual critique of the cultural cognition thesis. Sci. Commun. 38, 128–138. Karen L. Akerlof is research assistant professor at the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University. She studies ways in which communities interpret scientific information and bring experience, values, and local knowledge to bear in decision-making. Katherine E. Rowan is professor of communication and director of the graduate program in science communication at George Mason University. A Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, her research concerns earning trust and explaining complexities through risk and crisis communications. Todd La Porte is associate professor at the School of Policy, Government, and International Affairs at George Mason University. His research interests include organizational and social resiliency, and public organizations, governance and the use and impacts of networked information technologies. Brian K. Batten is senior coastal scientist at Dewberry. His is a technical lead on sea level rise and coastal hazard risk assessments for federal, state and municipal clients such as FEMA, the Transportation Research Board, the New York State Energy and Research and Development Authority, and City of Virginia Beach. Howard Ernst is professor of political science at the U.S. Naval Academy. His teaching and research interests include environmental politics, energy policy, and environmental behavior. Dann M. Sklarew is Environmental Science and Policy associate professor and Coordinator of Sustainability Initiatives at George Mason University. His research focuses on advancing ecological stewardship and sustainability. Please cite this article in press as: K.L. Akerlof, et al., Risky business: Engaging the public on sea level rise and inundation, Environ. Sci. Policy (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2016.07.002