type all threads links
  rss feed

CRAGs and persuasion?

Thread started on 27/2/2008 00:11

Peckham Anna

I’m aware that there’s been some debate amongst CRAGgers about media representation of us, and “green self-selection”, both of which are problematic given our need to mainstream the acceptance of carbon rationing.

I’ve been mulling over how CRAGs could widen their audience for a while, and several books have been really helpful.

Firstly, I know I’ve mentioned this book before on this forum, but George Marshall’s “Carbon Detox” really is superb in the way it grapples with the issue of audiences of climate change messages. In addition to being an easy, entertaining read with lots of very useful concepts – the carbon bottom line – and practical detox things to do – he clearly describes how people with different types of core values will respond to, or be turned off by, different types of message about climate change i.e. how you “frame” a message. For instance, “self-selecting greens” will probably be motivated to “save the planet” and contemptuous of attempts to make them “the first with new gadgetry”, whereas go-getting materialist heavily competitive types will probably respond in opposite ways. He describes four broad different clusters of core values – Survivors, Traditionalists, Winners and Strivers. I don’t want to describe the book in any more detail – I want people to actually read it – it really is excellent…

So, take home point one: be aware of the likely core values of your audience beforehand, and frame your message accordingly. If poss, frame it so there’s something for everyone!

Secondly, on the recommendation of Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty in The Sunday Times a few weeks ago, I’ve also been reading “The Tipping Point” by Malcolm Gladwell which has some very interesting ideas on social change – see the wikipedia crib:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Tipping_Point_(book)

So, take home point two: we need some trendsetters, some mavens and some connectors… and then, having got our message out there effectively, we need to make our message “sticky”.

Thirdly, how to make our message “sticky”? I’m now reading “Yes! 50 secrets from the science of persuasion” by Noah Goldstein, Steve Martin and Robert Cialdini that is very easy to read and includes lots of counter-intuitive research based examples of what works when persuading people.

There’s an RSA podcast that gives you an introduction if you’re interested [right at the bottom of the page]:

http://www.rsa.org.uk/audio/

So, take home point three: don’t use what you think will work for you, use what does actually work, which may be surprising. For instance, as part of an ad, why is “Operators are waiting, please call now” far less effective than “If operators are busy, please call again”? Because the latter suggests that lots of people are already interested in calling, which means that other people are more likely to be persuaded. We really aren’t rugged individualists – by and large, we do what we see other people doing. This is social proof theorem at work – I’d like to see CRAGs making creative use of this.

OK, I’m a psychologist so it’s not surprising these are issues I’m interested in, but I really do think these ideas are * crucial *, and I think they should be included in any pack we give to start-up CRAGs, because I see no reason why CRAGs can’t be part of the mainstream cultural change we so urgently require * so long as * we * express * ourselves * effectively * [i.e. don’t * describe * ourselves as hair shirt, even if our lives are carbon-minimalist, it just says “oh look, eco-fundamentalists, they’re so not like me – and hence what they say is of no relevance to me].

There’s also a huge difference between persuading people to join us [which we need to do] and teaching [even though we also need to be able to teach informally and effectively at meetings, especially as we get more mainstream people involved]. Persuasion is done by equals, teaching is done expert to novice – so different conversational tones and techniques are needed.

In addition, as George Marshall points out, we really MUST move away from using the “Medusa effect” – ohmigod it’s so ****ing scary – which can be greens’ default mode under stress – it just paralyses people in terror, despair and denial. Even if we only describe ourselves as feeling that way, people don’t wanna know!

I’d be happy to produce a mini-guide condensing the key points of relevance for CRAGs from these last two books for the start-up pack if people felt that was a good idea. I’ll also try to put up the “Climate Change and Core Values” exercise we did at Peckham CRAG in December on Peckham CRAG’s pages at some point.

It’d also be really interesting to hear from CRAGgers who may have been trained in how to deal with the media – I know Zaria from Peckham CRAG has, maybe others have too.

I’d be interested to know what other CRAGgers think about these ideas. One implication might be that we have a standard, agreed agenda and way of answering questions when we deal with the media.

Best wishes,

Anna

Key messages

david

david

Sorry, I realised this comment wasn’t really relevant to this thread, so I’ve started a new thread at Key media messages

 

Climate Challenge website

Rick M

Hi Anna, I agree this is a crucial area and one that has concerned me for a long time. I have listened Malcolm Gladwell reading Tipping Point. And I went out straight after reading your post, bought Carbon Detox and am reading it avidly.

I had already found this Government website and in particular Creating Climate Change Communications

In relation to the first 2 points made on that site:
In proposing how we run the new Sheffield area CRAG, I have suggested we donate any carbon debts to a local flood relief charity so that (a) we can build the association between what we are doing in the CRAG and the local impact of climate change (b)as a charitable donor we are more likely to win support and endorsement from people that are admired or repected.

So, Yes please to your offer of a condensed guide for a start-up pack. And to any advice on dealing with the media.

 

Climate Challenge website

Peckham Anna

Hi Rick,

Hey, thanks for the fab link to the Climate Challenge website – that’s really good.

The idea of donating carbon debts from Sheffield CRAG to a local flood relief charity looks really superb to me – [recommended on the site you mention, but Mark Lynas has also made the point that we need to get on with implementing the practical changes that climate change requires, such as mass issuing of sandbags in some areas etc, rather than getting bogged down in arguments with CC deniers, which will in itself be a powerful persuasive tool.] Win-win for everyone I hope! [Makes me wonder how Peckham CRAG can do something similar – this looks like a potentially very useful approach…]

Am working on the condensed version of “Yes! 50 Secrets…”.

Best wishes

Anna

 

Alternatives to Flood Relief Funds

Rick M

Thanks Anna.

Its true that not everywhere has had a recent flood on the scale of South Yorkshire or the Severn Valley (Gloucester, Tewkesbury) or another highly visible natural disaster that can reasonably be linked to climate change.

Many people (including myself) appreciate green spaces, nature and beautiful countryside. Climate change is having an impact here even if it is less obvious than natural disasters. For example, I recall that blue tit chicks are starving because the caterpillars on which they are fed are peaking earlier in the year because of milder springs. There isn’t enough food left when the parents nest. Many people might relate to fluffy chicks. (Can’t recall the source of this info but the RSPB should know.)

If people care about these green spaces &/or the wildlife in them, that might be a more generally applicable good cause. So, if the memory of the 1987 hurricane that hit SE England is too long ago for most people, how about supporting a local green space group. ( Is Friends of Nunhead Cemetry still going ? Is there a group that looks after Sydenham Hill woods ? )

 

Linking "planet" with "people"

david

david

I like this proposal too, because it’s about helping people – the first to be affected by climate change. Many media stories use the angle of “disaster for the planet”, or “damage to the environment” – but these are such abstract concepts for most. If we can make the link between mitigation and adaptation, it will be a point well made. After all, we know we are already to committed to significant damage – ask the Tuvaluan islanders!

 

Treesponsibility a worthy cause to support

Rick M

I really enjoyed this weekends CRAG get together in the beautiful countryside of the South Pennines near Hebden Bridge and would like to do it again next planting season. I’ve e-mailed Despina to thank her.

We were planting on the edge of the moors to reduce flash flooding in the populated valley below. We were laying old newspapers down as mulch around the saplings we planted. One edition from January had flash flooding in nearby Hedben Bridge as its lead story. More winter flooding is a predicted consequence of climate change. So, CRAGS could consider adopting Treesponsibility as a charity if you wish to donate some or all of your carbon fund to a good cause (and cannot find something more local/relevant to you) AND/OR support it by taking part in a planting weekend. It was super value for money at £25 – food was vegan and delicious.

I think the work that Treesponsibility are doing fits the bill for a good cause that builds a clear association in the public & media mind between CRAGS aims and climate change. I think it would be particularly appropriate for Leeds CRAG to consider as it will be subject to flooding from the river catchment area we were working in.

01422 843222 – The Treesponsibility Office, treesponsibility@yahoo.co.uk
www.treesponsibility.com [ under construction ]

 

The Vision Problem

david

david

Over the past weeks I’ve discovered many excellent presentations on YouTube and TED, and I’ve talked to Andy, Anna, Guy and Jessica briefly, about this – so I’ve all these ideas buzzing I’d like to get down in some form. Sorry if I misrepresent anyone’s thoughts – everything’s merging!

  • Rob Hopkins is excellent on the motivational vision of a better life in a low-carbon world – the core idea behind Transition. He talks about addiction psychology and how people generally act on the basis of utility (the petrol you put into your car) rather than waste (the pollution that comes out). His review of “The Rocky Road to a new Transition” brings up interesting contrasts between the CRAG/Transition approach of individual and community action (be the change) with oppositional approaches used by leftist activists.
  • Al Gore has a new slideshow! He has moved away from the disappointing call to change lightbulbs at the end of the last one, calling for a remaking of society – and us the lucky generation with the opportunity to rise to the challenge and do so (symphonies will be composed about us, apparently!).
  • Yochai Benkler outlines the trends away from centralised control of information, showing how open decentralised models are flourishing. Meanwhile, Will Ashley-Cantello advocates the power of “Web 2.0” to drive social change.

So what’s the relevance to CRAGs? Well we want the right message to engage people, but at the same time, folk soon realise the scale of the challenge once they’ve calculated their footprint. So, however you spin it, there’s no hiding the hard decisions and ethical dilemmas involved in solving the climate problem. As Anna says, we addressing the problem head on, and that’s a strength.

On the other hand, people are unlikely to engage with you at all if you slap a ration on them immediately, before they’ve had a chance to really get to grips with their own footprint. You have to remember here that CRAGs really are ahead of the curve (too far for many people) (again, Anna’s point), so we need to offer people a way in or they will simply ignore you. I think the answer here is a softer approach, introducing footprinting and the ways to address it, before even talking about allowances. Andy often makes the point that it’s better to lead people in and let them make their own conclusions, and I agree.

This still leaves CRAGs with motivational problems. Our approach can come across as “squeezing” people into a ration – and most don’t like to be squeezed! Where is the CRAG vision? One approach could be to emphasise households saving money and building resilience against increasing energy prices (shamelessly borrowed from Transition, here) – Shannon did this well in the CBS story. Helping households with energy bills and cutting carbon can only be positive (perhaps we should measure energy cost footprints alongside the carbon ones?). Rick’s ideas about volunteering on local adaptation projects are really great too.

At the same time, I feel we can put too much pressure on the individual for his/her footprint, when many are constrained and meshed into the system. Making people feel guilty for aspects out of their control is alienating (I have lost at least one member this way, especially where other family members are unsympathetic). Here, I feel CRAGs should be looking upwards towards community initiatives (whether Transition, Council or self-started) that can help people committed to high carbon use (after all, these folk are financial vulnerable to high energy costs, too), rather than focusing responsibility down on the individual to sort it out. I don’t know how to achieve this practically, though.

For all this debate, though, (and I would like to get it right) the success of Web 2.0 and decentralised systems can remind us that it’s often enough just to give people the tools and let them get on with it! That points to the importance of getting this site as highly interlinked as possible with carbon calculators and social networking sites (nb. that Transition has 600+ members on facebook; whilst we have ~20).

So on that note, I’ll end this monster post, feeling rather relieved to have put all of these thoughts onto the Web and out of my Head!

 

Reinvention not self-denial

david

david

There are some good quotes here: Time to leave the comfort zone.

Some people think that cutting carbon means denying ourselves the things that make life enjoyable – no shopping, no fun – but I see it differently. Tackling climate change isn’t about self-denial, it’s about reinvention; reinventing towns and cities, redesigning the way they work, and changing the way we all manage our lives.

This is what we need to communicate in CRAGs imo, as well as providing a broad spectrum of reasons why living a low carbon life is a positive move to make: the financial, health, happiness benefits as well as the environmental ones.