Rule-Governed Behavior and Climate Change: Why Climate Warnings Fail to Motivate Sufficient Action.

Abstract

Climate scientists warn of dire consequences for ecological systems and human well-being if significant steps to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions are not taken immediately. Despite these warnings, greenhouse gas concentrations continue to rise, indicating that current responses are inadequate. Climate warnings and reactions to them may be analyzed in terms of rules and rule-governed behavior. The literature on rule-governed behavior in behavior analysis has identified a variety of factors that can reduce rule following, including insufficient rule exposure, insufficient learning history and rule complexity, incomplete rules, instructed behavior not sufficiently learned, rules having weak function-altering effects, conflicting rules, lack of speaker credibility, rule plausibility and inconsistency with prior learning, and insufficient reinforcement for rule following. The present paper aims to analyze how these factors might impact responses to climate change, and possible solutions and strategies are discussed. Much of the theory and research on climate-change communication has come from outside of behavior analysis. Thus, the paper also aims to integrate findings from this literature with a behavior-analytic approach to rule control. Interpreting climate warnings and climate solutions in terms of rule-governed behavior may improve our understanding of why such rules are not more effective, and aid in the development of verbal and nonverbal strategies for changing behavior and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.