Political values and socialization in environmental movements

Code red for humanity or time for broad collective action? Exploring the role of positive and negative messaging in (de)motivating climate action

“…Our analysis identified four unique audiences within our sample of active environmental group supporters in Canada, with varying levels of engagement and radicalism: the active radicals (26% in 2019; 34% in 2021), the active reformers (43% in 2019; 44% in 2021), the moderate reformers (25% in 2019; 17% in 2021) and the passive pragmatists (6% in 2019; 5% in 2021). Overall, these results are broadly consistent with previous research exploring the heterogeneity of views within the environmental movement Szuster, 2018, 2019;Brulle and Norgaard, 2019;Tindall et al, 2022). Our findings differ from past research suggesting that the environmental movement might be understood as divided between only two groups (i.e., "reformists" and "radicals"; e.g., Brulle and Norgaard, 2019), though they are in line with previous studies suggesting that pro-environmental worldviews vary along a more complex range of views (e.g., Szuster, 2018, 2019).…”

“…While use of audience segmentation in the context of climate change is growing (e.g., Maibach et al, 2011;Hine et al, 2016;Metag and Schäfer, 2018), we know relatively less about the diversity within environmentally engaged citizens. Yet, research suggests that the environmental movement is far from homogeneous, and that environmentalists diverge not only in their levels of engagement with climate change, but also-and perhaps most importantly-in terms of views about nature, technology, economic growth and social change Szuster, 2018, 2019;Brulle and Norgaard, 2019;Tindall et al, 2022). While some authors argue that the environmental movement can be best understood as divided into two groups-those engaged in conventional advocacy, considered as "reformists, " and those supporting a more contentious climate-justice perspective, considered "radicals" (e.g., Hadden, 2015;Brulle and Norgaard, 2019)-several others have suggested that the classical division between "reformists" and "radicals" might be further subdivided and refined (e.g., Perron et al, 2001;Szuster, 2018, 2019).…”

“…While some authors argue that the environmental movement can be best understood as divided into two groups-those engaged in conventional advocacy, considered as "reformists, " and those supporting a more contentious climate-justice perspective, considered "radicals" (e.g., Hadden, 2015;Brulle and Norgaard, 2019)-several others have suggested that the classical division between "reformists" and "radicals" might be further subdivided and refined (e.g., Perron et al, 2001;Szuster, 2018, 2019). Overall, the literature suggests that the effectiveness of emotional appeals for climate action may depend not only on the level of engagement with climate change (Cho and Salmon, 2006), but also on pre-existing values, ideologies and worldviews (Kuhn and Lao, 1996;Lord et al, 1979;Kahan, 2012), and that these predispositions are likely to vary, even among environmentally engaged citizens (Brulle and Norgaard, 2019;Szuster, 2018, 2019;Tindall et al, 2022).…”