Über Nachhaltigkeit, Psychologie und Ausreden beim Klimaschutz
Downloads
Wir stellen hier Illustrationen zur Verfügung, die gemäß Creative Commons Lizenz frei verwendet werden dürfen (unverändert, mit Nennung der Quelle). Über Feedback freuen wir uns.
Here we will share illustrations related to climate psychology in German and English language (scroll for English versions). These may be used under the creative commons license CC-BY-ND.
Wirksamkeit and Schwierigkeitsgrad ausgewählter klimafreundlicher Entscheidungen in einer vereinfachten Darstellung – Erweiterung der ursprünglichen Graphik aus dem Buch „Die Kunst der Ausrede“ (Oekom Verlag, 2022). Daten zu Wirksamkeit siehe Wynes & Nicholas (2017, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541) und weitere Quellen aus der Fachliteratur; Schwierigkeitsgrad ist subjektiv und kontextabhängig.
Wirksamkeit and Schwierigkeitsgrad ausgewählter klimafreundlicher Entscheidungen in einer vereinfachten Darstellung. Daten zu Wirksamkeit siehe Wynes & Nicholas (2017, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541) und weitere Quellen aus der Fachliteratur; Schwierigkeitsgrad ist subjektiv und kontextabhängig. Illustration aus unserem Buch „Die Kunst der Ausrede“ (oekomverlag, 2022)
Moralisches Lizensieren und Realität: Subjektiv kann es sich so anfühlen, dass kleine Massnahmen die großen umweltschädlichen Entscheidungen kompensieren. Objektiv gesehen trifft das nicht zu.
Drei Zonen für Klimaschutz – mit unterschiedlicher technologischer Lösbarkeit und Notwendigkeit für Verhaltensänderung. Details im Blogpost.
Wenn es um #Klimaschutz geht, wird oft auf die nicht #nachhaltigen Entwicklungen in China verwiesen. Aus historischer Sicht (1751-2017) haben Europa und USA weit mehr Emissionen zu verantworten. Illustration aus unserem Buch „Die Kunst der Ausrede“ (oekomverlag, 2022) Daten von OurWorldInData.
Climate knowledge overconfidence. Climate change knowledge in the general public is limited and error-prone, and many misconceptions are held with strong confidence: 60% of people in one of our studies believed that the ozone hole is the main cause for the greenhouse effect, and people were on average 80% confident that their belief is correct. Other studies found misconceptions regarding the effectiveness of individual decisions: People believe that avoiding plastic is more effective for climate protection than avoiding flights (which is wrong). People also believe that the environment can be better protected by turning off the water while brushing teeth than by reducing meat consumption (also wrong). While knowledge does not necessarily lead to more climate-friendly actions, such knowledge gaps and confidently held misbeliefs are a challenge for climate policy: People who understand the causes of and solutions to the climate crisis, might be more likely to support the necessary measures.Impact and difficulty of selected climate-friendly decisions in a simplified illustration. Impact data from Wynes & Nicholas (2017, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541) and other sources; perceived difficulty is subjective and context-dependent. Impact and difficulty of selected climate-friendly decisions in a simplified illustration – extension of the original illustration. Impact data from Wynes & Nicholas (2017, https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541) and other sources; perceived difficulty is subjective and context-dependent.
When it comes to CO2 emissions, we often point out the #unsustainable developments in China. It is true that per-capita emissions in China are growing and overtaking many western countries. It is also true that a significant share of these emissions can be ascribed to the production of goods consumed in western countries. From a historical perspective (1751-2017), United States and Europe accounted for almost 50% of global emissions. In the apparent stand-off, who should move first in reducing greenhouse gas emissions? Data from OurWorldInData, Illustration: Annechien Dirkje Hoeben, from our German book “Die Kunst der Ausrede“ (Oekom Verlag, 2022).
Moral licensing vs. reality. Subjectively, small actions compensate for climate-unfriendly decisions. Objectively they do not. Difficulty and climate impact: An attempt to illustrate decisions with long-term relevance. The quantification of single decisions was more difficult compared to day-to-day decisions and synthesized from various sources. There is considerable variance, and the devil definitely is in the details. The positioning of elements is therefore a rough indication. Examples: The performance of EVs is highly dependent on the electricity mix; the emission reductions coming from a heat pump depend on which heating system is replaced. Difficulty is subjective and context-dependent. Examples: Living car-free is easy for a student in a European city, and very difficult for a single-mom on the countryside; wooden buildings or green roofs are also a question of money and not everybody can afford that.The „vicious roundabout“ – as explained in our blogpost.The probably most important question that still needed to be answered. See details in my LinkedIn-Posting.
When it comes to CO2 emissions, we often point out the #unsustainable developments in China. It is true that per-capita emissions in China are growing and overtaking many western countries. It is also true that a significant share of these emissions can be ascribed to the production of goods consumed in western countries. From a historical perspective (1751-2017), United States and Europe accounted for almost 50% of global emissions. In the apparent stand-off, who should move first in reducing greenhouse gas emissions? Data from OurWorldInData, Illustration: Annechien Dirkje Hoeben, from our German book “Die Kunst der Ausrede“ (Oekom Verlag, 2022). 
Moral licensing vs. reality. Subjectively, small actions compensate for climate-unfriendly decisions. Objectively they do not.
