Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 147
Appendix A
December 2009 Workshop Agenda
and List of Participants
Workshop on Issues in Public Understanding and
Mitigation of Climate Change
Agenda and List of Participants
December 3-4, 2009
This workshop, the first of two sponsored at the National Academies
by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, will include four half-day
sessions devoted to the following topics of pressing interest:
• Public Understanding of Climate Change
• pportunities for Limiting Climate Change Through Household
O
Action
• Public Acceptance of Energy Technologies
• Organizational Change and the Greening of Business
Each session will begin with presentations of current knowledge by
leading social and behavioral researchers and will proceed to discussions of
the practical implications of the knowledge for action by governmental and
nongovernmental organizations tasked with responding to climate change.
It is hoped that the discussions will stimulate participants to undertake
future activities, such as new policies, programs, or research activities, to
develop and implement insights arising from the workshop.
14
OCR for page 148
14 FACILITATING CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSES
Session #1—December 3, 2009
Public Understanding of Climate Change
Climate change as a phenomenon has attributes that make it is ex-
tremely difficult for nonspecialists to understand. For example, although
people typically rely on their senses and personal experience to assess condi-
tions in the external environment, these sources are a poor guide to whether
the global climate is changing or to the effects of such change. People often
apply cognitive short-cuts to make sense of complex topics, but doing this
with climate change easily promotes misunderstanding. The short-cut of
relying on trusted sources of information is problematic because conflicting
information sources claim expertise on climate change. The polarization
of U.S. public opinion on climate change can be traced to such social and
psychological processes.
This session will present the current state of knowledge about how non-
specialists attempt to comprehend climate change and why public opinion
has become increasingly polarized, even as scientific opinion has become
less so. It will conclude with discussion of what might be done about this
situation—in education, in the mass media, and through the communica-
tion efforts of the nation’s scientific community.
Welcoming comments, Roger Kasperson, Clark University,
Panel Chair
Anthony Leiserowitz, Yale University, Session Moderator
Presentations:
Why is climate change hard to understand?—Susanne Moser,
Susanne Moser Research and Consulting
Mental models of climate change—Daniel Read, Yale University
Insights from research on risk perception—Elke Weber, Columbia
University
The polarization of public opinion—Riley Dunlap, Oklahoma State
University
Comment and discussion topics:
—Implications for climate change education
—Implications for the mass media
—Implications for scientific communication
Discussants:
Frank Niepold, Climate Program Office, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration
Bud Ward, Yale Forum on Climate Change and the Media
OCR for page 149
14
APPENDIX A
Session #2—December 3, 2009
Opportunities for Limiting Climate Change Through Household Action
The most commonly proposed strategies for limiting climate change—
developing low-carbon energy technologies and creating systems that put
a price on greenhouse gas emissions—are likely to take a decade or more
to yield appreciable reductions. Changing the adoption and use of existing
technology can yield savings much faster if the requisite behavioral changes
can be brought about.
This session will focus on the potential in the household sector—direct
energy use in homes and nonbusiness travel—which accounts for about 38
percent of U.S. energy use. It will present new estimates of the technical and
reasonably achievable potential in this sector and knowledge about the ef-
fectiveness of various strategies for achieving this potential. It will conclude
with discussions of attractive policy options for achieving significant emis-
sions reductions from the household sector in a 5-10-year time scale.
Loren Lutzenhiser, Portland State University, Session Moderator
Presentations:
The national potential for emissions reduction from household
action—Thomas Dietz, Michigan State University
Achieving the potential for residential energy efficiency—Karen
Ehrhardt-Martinez, American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy
Inducing action through social norms—Wesley Schultz, California
State University, San Marcos
Interventions in the supply chain for consumer products and services
—Charles Wilson, London School of Economics
Comment and discussion topics
—Economic perspectives on household actions
—Policy opportunities and barriers
Discussion
Adjourn
Session #3—December 4, 2009
Public Acceptance of Energy Technologies
Many current proposals for limiting climate change depend on the de-
velopment and expeditious deployment of new low-carbon energy supply
technologies and new technologies for energy efficiency. Past and recent
OCR for page 150
10 FACILITATING CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSES
experiences make clear that public acceptance often slows these processes,
sometimes significantly.
This session will present summaries of knowledge about the conditions
under which public acceptance issues have and have not significantly slowed
implementation of new technologies, particularly energy technologies, and
about the effects of different ways of addressing public concerns. Discussion
will focus on the implications for the development and deployment of such
technologies as wind power, bioenergy technologies, and carbon capture
and sequestration. It will surface ideas about how to reconcile pressures for
rapid deployment and for well-informed democratic decision making.
Roger Kasperson, Clark University, Session Moderator
Presentations:
Lessons from the past: Governance of emerging energy technologies
—Nicholas Pidgeon, Cardiff University
Lessons from the past: Addressing facility siting controversies—
Seth Tuler, Social and Environmental Research Institute
Public acceptance issues with renewable energy: offshore wind power
—Jeremy Firestone, University of Delaware
Public acceptance issues with carbon capture and storage—Wändi
Bruine de Bruin, Carnegie Mellon University
Comment and discussion topics:
—Implications for managing technology development and
introduction
—Implications for reaching carbon reduction goals
—Acceptance issues with other new technologies: bioenergy,
geoengineering, etc.
—Can government learn the lessons of past energy technologies?
Discussants:
Robert Marlay, U.S. Climate Change Technology Program
Baruch Fischhoff, Carnegie Mellon University
Session #4—December 4, 2009
Organizational Change and the Greening of Business
Businesses are major contributors to climate change through their di-
rect use of energy and land and through their effects on the life cycles of
goods and services they use, process, and sell. Behavioral evidence shows
that significant resistances exist in business organizations to making transi-
tions to “greener” operations that would be economically rational.
OCR for page 151
11
APPENDIX A
This session will begin with presentations on barriers to change in busi-
ness that have been identified in organizational theory and research and will
then move to a discussion of practical knowledge about the greening of
business and about barriers to change. It will end with discussions of what
businesses, business organizations, and governments can do to facilitate
transitions to greener business practices.
Andrew Hoffman, University of Michigan, Session Moderator
Presentations:
Psychological barriers to organizational change—Max Bazerman,
Harvard University
Organizational and institutional barriers to change—Royston
Greenwood, University of Alberta
Survey results on barriers to change in businesses—Clay Nesler,
Johnson Controls, Inc.
Roundtable discussion among practitioners:
Andre de Fontaine, Markets and Business Strategy Fellow,
Pew Center on Global Climate Change
Melissa Lavinson, Pacific Gas and Electric
Clay Nesler, Vice President, Global Energy and Sustainability,
Johnson Controls, Inc.
Comment:
Policy possibilities for facilitating organizational change—John
Dernbach, Widener University College of Law
List of Participants
David Allen, U.S. Global Change Research Program
Rep. Brian Baird, U.S. Congress, Washington State
Max Bazerman, Harvard University
Bill Blakemore, ABC News
Jay Braitsch, U.S. Department of Education
Wändi Bruine de Bruin, Carnegie Mellon University
Bruine
Robert Corell, Global Environmental and Technology Foundation
Corell,
Andre de Fontaine, Pew Center on Global Climate Change
de
Linda DePugh, The National Academies
John Dernbach, Widener University College of Law
Dernbach,
Riley Dunlap, Oklahoma State University
Karen Ehrhardt-Martinez, American Council for an Energy-Efficient
Economy
Jeremy Firestone, University of Delaware
Firestone,
OCR for page 152
12 FACILITATING CLIMATE CHANGE RESPONSES
Baruch Fischhoff, Carnegie Mellon University
Ilya Fischhoff, U.S. Agency for International Development
Fischhoff,
Sherrie Forrest, The National Academies
Robert Fri, Resources for the Future, Washington, DC
Jason Gallo, Science and Technology Policy Institute
Elisabeth Graffy, U.S. Department of Interior
Royston Greenwood, University of Alberta
Rachelle Hollander, National Academy of Engineering
Douglas Kaempf, U.S. Department of Energy
Prajwal Kulkarni, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Kulkarni,
Katrina Lassiter, Office of Rep. Brian Baird, U.S. Congress, Washington
State
Melissa Lavinson, Pacific Gas and Electric
Linda Lawson, U.S. Department of Transportation
Lawson,
Meredith Blaydes Lilley, University of Delaware
Ed Maibach, George Mason University
Robert Marlay, U.S. Climate Change Technology Program
Tanya Maslak, U.S. Global Research Program
Meg McDonald, Global Issues, Alcoa
Michael Meirovitz, Lewis-Burke Associates, LLC
Claudia Mengelt, The National Academies
Clay Nesler, Johnson Controls, Inc.
Frank Niepold, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
Niepold,
Robert O’Connor, National Science Foundation
O’Connor,
Eleonore Pauwels, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Nicholas Pidgeon, Cardiff University
Pidgeon,
Daniel Read, Yale University
David Rejeski, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars
Marcy Rockman, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Rockman,
Joseph Ryan, William and Flora Hewlett Foundation
Ryan,
Sarah J. Ryker, Science and Technology Policy Institute
Ryker,
Wesley Schultz, California State University
Stephanie Shipp, Science & Technology Policy Institute
Rachael Shwom, Rutgers University
Paul Stern, The National Academies
Rita Teutonico, National Science Foundation
Seth Tuler, Social and Environmental Research Institute
Louie Tupas, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Kenneth Verosub, U.S. Agency for International Development
Bud Ward, Yale Forum on Climate Change and the Media
Elke Weber, Columbia University
Thomas Webler, Social and Environmental Research Institute
Charles Wilson, London School of Economics
