Public Trust in Nature's Climate Solutions: A Social Media Perspective
A recent survey of over a million social media posts has shed light on the public's perception of climate change solutions. The study, published in the journal Global Environmental Change, indicates that people are more optimistic about nature's capacity to combat climate change than radical technological interventions.
Researchers, armed with the latest artificial intelligence-driven language models, analyzed 1.5 million posts on X (formerly Twitter). They discovered expressions of "disgust" and "fear" in connection with the term "geoengineering," a concept often associated with unconventional technologies like aerosol spraying into the atmosphere or solar space sails.
In contrast, posts discussing nature-based initiatives to protect carbon-storing ecosystems, such as rainforests, kelp forests, and peat bogs, evoked more positive expressions like "joy." This revelation has come from a collaborative effort involving experts from the University of Cambridge, the Mercator Research Institute, the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), and Boston University.
Assistant Professor Ramit Debnath, a Cambridge Zero Fellow at the University of Cambridge and a co-author of the study, emphasized the significance of these findings. "Social media provides an opportunity to tap into the ocean of thoughts and feelings people are sharing in public conversations about emerging technologies," Debnath stated. "Governments and global organizations need to consider how the voting public will engage with proposed solutions for climate action."
According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), gradual reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, including carbon dioxide and methane, are insufficient to limit global warming to under 2 degrees Celsius, a crucial threshold for avoiding catastrophic weather events. The IPCC has proposed "geoengineering" as a potential solution, involving strategies to remove greenhouse gases or reflect excessive sunlight.
To gauge public opinion about these emerging climate technologies, researchers examined X-user posts from 2006 to 2021, covering various strategies, from ecosystem restoration and afforestation to more intrusive techniques like cloud modification and solar radiation management. Traditional survey methods often struggle to capture unfiltered public opinions, making the study of social media posts an insightful alternative.
Finn Müller-Hansen, a researcher at the Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) and the lead author, explained the approach: "That's why we chose a different approach: we were interested in how people engage with these topics without being asked."
The study found that, in general discussions about "geoengineering," negative sentiments (present in 30% of tweets) outweighed positive sentiments (6%). However, opinions about specific solutions revealed greater positivity toward greenhouse gas removal strategies (24% positive, 14% negative) than technologies related to solar manipulation (9% positive, 24% negative).
Interestingly, the more a solution was perceived as "natural," the more positive the reception. Tree-planting solutions, also known as "afforestation," garnered the highest approval.
The study concludes with a recommendation to avoid the term "geoengineering," which encompasses both technological and natural climate change mitigation efforts. It suggests that public concerns about "geoengineering" solutions should be addressed by scientists and policymakers or that greater attention should be given to nature-based solutions, which currently enjoy more public support.
#ClimateSolutions, #Geoengineering, #SocialMediaResearch, #PublicOpinion, #NatureBasedSolutions
