Framing climate change solutions: get the numbers right

The purpose of this paper is to use goal setting theory to examine the efficacy of two current messages advocating carbon cuts to address climate change. There is anecdotal evidence that the common message, “We must cut carbon 80 percent by 2050” does not inspire people to take personal action or endorse policy change. Other groups offer an alternative and potentially more motivating message: cutting carbon 2 percent per year until the year 2050.

A survey study with 300 adults attending a regional expo and two urban street festivals compared the two messages by embedding them within two versions of a text that differed only in the phrasing of the goal (“80 percent by the year 2050” vs “2 percent per year until the year 2050”).

Participants reading about “carbon emissions cuts of 2 percent per year until the year 2050” are significantly more likely to agree with the statement “I feel like I can be a part of the solution” than participants reading “carbon emissions cuts of 80 percent by the year 2050.”

The generalizability of these findings should be tested among different samples of people and will be extended by a number of studies that further examine the parameters of framing and goal setting in the context of climate change messages.

These results indicate that people are drawn to climate change solution messages that have both an overall, effective roadmap and manageable, concrete steps.

Groups advocating for steep cuts in carbon emissions can apply the results of this research to craft more effective messages.