火灾试验:支持2020年俄勒冈州野火后的缓解和适应政策

IF 1.9 4区 地球科学 Q3 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Weather Climate and Society Pub Date : 2023-05-05 DOI:10.1175/wcas-d-22-0075.1
Leanne S. Giordono, Muhammad Usman Amin Siddiqi, Gregory Stelmach, Chad Zanocco, June Flora, Hilary S. Boudet
{"title":"火灾试验:支持2020年俄勒冈州野火后的缓解和适应政策","authors":"Leanne S. Giordono, Muhammad Usman Amin Siddiqi, Gregory Stelmach, Chad Zanocco, June Flora, Hilary S. Boudet","doi":"10.1175/wcas-d-22-0075.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe September 2020 Oregon wildfires were unprecedented in terms of their geographic scope and the number of communities affected by smoke and wildfire. Though it is difficult to directly attribute the event to climate change, scientists have noted the strong connection between warmer and drier conditions in the Western U.S. – conditions that are linked to climate change – and increasing wildfire risk. These wildfires thus had the potential to act as a “focusing event,” potentially strengthening public support for climate change policy. Political ideology is a well-known driver of public support for climate change mitigation policies in the U.S., but few studies have examined adaptation policy support. Moreover, other factors shaping post-event support for the two “pillars” of climate change policy—adaptation and mitigation—have rarely been compared. We conducted a survey of Oregonians within 6 months of the 2020 wildfires (n=1,308) to understand post-event support for climate mitigation and adaptation policies. We found that the magnitude of the association between political ideology and policy support was lower for adaptation policies than mitigation policy and there was no association with support for forest management changes. In contrast, selected socio-demographic characteristics played a more important role in support for selected adaptation policies than mitigation policy.","PeriodicalId":48971,"journal":{"name":"Weather Climate and Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Trial by Fire: Support for Mitigation and Adaptation Policy after the 2020 Oregon Wildfires\",\"authors\":\"Leanne S. Giordono, Muhammad Usman Amin Siddiqi, Gregory Stelmach, Chad Zanocco, June Flora, Hilary S. Boudet\",\"doi\":\"10.1175/wcas-d-22-0075.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe September 2020 Oregon wildfires were unprecedented in terms of their geographic scope and the number of communities affected by smoke and wildfire. Though it is difficult to directly attribute the event to climate change, scientists have noted the strong connection between warmer and drier conditions in the Western U.S. – conditions that are linked to climate change – and increasing wildfire risk. These wildfires thus had the potential to act as a “focusing event,” potentially strengthening public support for climate change policy. Political ideology is a well-known driver of public support for climate change mitigation policies in the U.S., but few studies have examined adaptation policy support. Moreover, other factors shaping post-event support for the two “pillars” of climate change policy—adaptation and mitigation—have rarely been compared. We conducted a survey of Oregonians within 6 months of the 2020 wildfires (n=1,308) to understand post-event support for climate mitigation and adaptation policies. We found that the magnitude of the association between political ideology and policy support was lower for adaptation policies than mitigation policy and there was no association with support for forest management changes. In contrast, selected socio-demographic characteristics played a more important role in support for selected adaptation policies than mitigation policy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48971,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Weather Climate and Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Weather Climate and Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1175/wcas-d-22-0075.1\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Weather Climate and Society","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1175/wcas-d-22-0075.1","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

2020年9月俄勒冈州的野火在地理范围和受烟雾和野火影响的社区数量方面都是前所未有的。尽管很难将这一事件直接归因于气候变化,但科学家们注意到,美国西部的温暖和干燥条件——与气候变化有关的条件——与野火风险的增加之间存在着密切联系。因此,这些野火有可能成为“焦点事件”,有可能加强公众对气候变化政策的支持。政治意识形态是美国公众支持气候变化缓解政策的一个众所周知的驱动因素,但很少有研究考察适应政策的支持。此外,影响事后支持气候变化政策的两个“支柱”——适应和缓解——的其他因素很少被比较。我们在2020年野火发生后的6个月内对俄勒冈人进行了一项调查(n=1308),以了解事件后对气候缓解和适应政策的支持。我们发现,政治意识形态与适应政策的政策支持之间的关联程度低于缓解政策,而且与支持森林管理改革没有关联。相比之下,选定的社会人口特征在支持选定的适应政策方面比缓解政策发挥了更重要的作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Trial by Fire: Support for Mitigation and Adaptation Policy after the 2020 Oregon Wildfires
The September 2020 Oregon wildfires were unprecedented in terms of their geographic scope and the number of communities affected by smoke and wildfire. Though it is difficult to directly attribute the event to climate change, scientists have noted the strong connection between warmer and drier conditions in the Western U.S. – conditions that are linked to climate change – and increasing wildfire risk. These wildfires thus had the potential to act as a “focusing event,” potentially strengthening public support for climate change policy. Political ideology is a well-known driver of public support for climate change mitigation policies in the U.S., but few studies have examined adaptation policy support. Moreover, other factors shaping post-event support for the two “pillars” of climate change policy—adaptation and mitigation—have rarely been compared. We conducted a survey of Oregonians within 6 months of the 2020 wildfires (n=1,308) to understand post-event support for climate mitigation and adaptation policies. We found that the magnitude of the association between political ideology and policy support was lower for adaptation policies than mitigation policy and there was no association with support for forest management changes. In contrast, selected socio-demographic characteristics played a more important role in support for selected adaptation policies than mitigation policy.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Weather Climate and Society
Weather Climate and Society METEOROLOGY & ATMOSPHERIC SCIENCES-
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
13.60%
发文量
95
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Weather, Climate, and Society (WCAS) publishes research that encompasses economics, policy analysis, political science, history, and institutional, social, and behavioral scholarship relating to weather and climate, including climate change. Contributions must include original social science research, evidence-based analysis, and relevance to the interactions of weather and climate with society.
期刊最新文献
On the risk efficiency of a weather index insurance product for the Brazilian semi-arid region Climate Change Driving Salinity an Overview of Vulnerabilities, Adaptations, and Challenges for Indonesian Agriculture Flash drought typologies and societal impacts: a worldwide review of occurrence, nomenclature, and experiences of local populations Transformative ecological and human impacts from climate change and diminished sea ice in the northern Bering Sea Future Heavy rainfall and flood risks for Native America under climate and demographic changes: A case study in Oklahoma
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1