{Ch. 1} Limited Cognition (Artusnoia)

Often, as humans, we don’t think very well; we think we are rational, but often we rationalize. The environment often falls victim to us not thinking when we could, and should, take more action. Eleven manifestations of limited cognition are known:

• Ancient Brain (A. reptilis)

  • Our brains have not evolved much since the time when we were no threat to the environment as a whole. Therefore, we tend to think in terms of immediately providing for ourselves, our families, and our friends, rather than the more distant or future task of sustaining the complex environmental systems upon which we ultimately depend.

• Limited Information (A. indoctus)

  • Some people are still unaware that climate change is a problem. Others are quite aware, but have no knowledge of what to do about it. This may be caused by mixed media messages, lack of individual research, or perhaps simply a lack of technical knowledge about what is and is not effective.

• Uncertainty (A. anceps)

  • When we are not sure, we hesitate; hesitation is inaction. Uncertainty can also feed self-interest: not sure how much of a resource is available? We tend to assume there are lots of it.

• Environmental Numbness (A. torpens)

  • This manifests in two ways. First, it can mean screening out the distant aspects of climate change with which one cannot immediately identify or which have no immediate impact. Second, when we receive very frequent messages about climate change or the environment, we habituate to the message rather than actively listening to it.

• Spatial Discounting (A. tractus)

  • Occurs when individuals presume that climate change or environmental problems are worse in other places than their own, so that they need not take personal responsibility now.

• Temporal Discounting (A. aevum)

  • Occurs when individuals presume that climate change or environmental problems will occur so far in the future that they need not take personal responsibility now.

• Optimism Bias (A. confidens)

  • Usually, optimism is a good thing, but many individuals assume they are less at risk for health issues than they actually are, and in terms of environmental problems, they often assume that all will be well without they themselves needing to act.

• Perceived Behavioral Control (A. impotens)

  • When people believe they not able to do anything helpful about climate change or the environment.

• Self-Efficacy (A. parvoperitia)

  • When people believe what they are able to do about climate change or the environment will not matter.

• Confirmation Bias (A. segrego)

  • We want to be told that our views are correct, so we tend to choose media that reinforce our views.

• Time = Money (A. merces)

  • When people tend to think of the time they are spending on something is about money, they tend to act less sustainably.

{Ch. 2} Ideology (Decretum)

Ideologies are broad, umbrella-like sets of beliefs. Depending on what they are, they may shelter anti-climate beliefs and actions. Four types exist:

• Worldviews (D. perspectus)

  • For example, strong belief in free-enterprise capitalism tends to include the belief that the natural world is free to exploit as much as one desires or is able.

• Suprahuman Powers (D. deutactus)

  • Some people believe that an omnipotent deity will cause or solve environmental problems. Others believe that Mother Nature is in charge. In both cases, the believer does not feel responsible for the climate or the environment.

• Technosalvation (D. mechiania)

  • This is the belief that technology, such as geoengineering, can, by itself, reverse the effects of climate change. Although this field may have some promise, overconfidence in it can lead to inaction.

• System Justification (D. sejustus)

  • People whose lifestyle is comfortable but climate-negative often would not like to lose that comfort. One way they justify keeping their lifestyle intact is by believing that “this is the way it was meant to be.”

{Ch. 3} Social Comparison (Communis)

The tendency to be influenced by others that one admires or is beholden to is quite strong. It can determine a portion of one’s environmental actions. Four species fall under this genus:

• Social Comparison (C. invidia)

  • People often compare their actions with those of others to determine the “correct” behavior, even when that behavior is harmful for the environment

• Social Norms (C. vicinia)

  • Norms predict behaviour. For example, when homeowners are told the average electricity use on their block, they tend to alter their own usage to match it, whether that’s up or down!

• Perceived Inequity (C. illibra)

  • No one wants to be taken advantage of. When people believe that others will not take steps to reduce their use of carbon or help the environment, they are less likely to do so themselves.

• Authority Rules (C. obsequium)

  • Sometimes one’s boss or organization requires one to travel or engage in other carbon-negative behavior.

{Ch. 4} Discredence (Negatio)

Unfortunately, disbelief about climate change and other environmental issues still exists. Those who do not accept that these problems exist tend to be hobbled by five dragons:

• Mistrust (N. suspicio)

  • Some people distrust government officials or scientists, from whom much climate change information originates. This distrust leads to inaction.

• Perceived Program Inadequacy (N. structura)

  • Even if individuals do trust authorities, they may not trust the programs that policymakers have proposed or implemented. Because most such programs are voluntary, some people blame the program’s shortcomings, rather than their own non-compliance, for their unwillingness to take part.

• Denial (N. negatio)

  • Although this is becoming less common, the outright denial of climate and environmental problems can still be found. Deniers seem to be over-represented in the comments sections of the media.

• Reactance (N. rebellis)

  • Some people not only distrust authorities, but actively take steps to engage in even more actions that harm the environment.

• Contrarianism (N. dissidens)

  • Some people have a generalized tendency to disbelieve conventional wisdom. Such a person might believe that the moon landings were faked, that there was a US government conspiracy to topple the 911 towers, and that climate change is another hoax.

{Ch. 5} Perceived Risk (Timor)

Change is terrifying for many people. Six different types of risk have been identified as dragons that hinder changing behavior:

• Functional Risk (T. efficax)

  • What if the change I am considering will not work as well as my current choice does? For example, one may not consider an electric vehicle out of fear that battery problems might limit its range.

• Physical Risk (T. injuria)

  • For example, someone might consider cycling more, but worry about accidents.

• Financial Risk (T. impersolvo)

  • Some environmental changes, such as solar panels, require significant initial costs. Will the investment pay off before one moves to a another residence?

• Social Risk (T. ignominia)

  • What if a person’s friends tease her for choosing a pro-environmental action, or at least she fears that they will? This slows change.

• Psychological Risk (T. mensagonia)

  • When teasing becomes more serious, such as from a significant other, or from a larger number of others, it can cause more serious psychological damage.

• Temporal Risk (T. senex)

  • Time is valuable. One might decide not to change merely because the time needed to research the change means that the time spent is not spent on something else. What if the time spent leads to a change that is subject to one of the above risks? Hesitation hinders change.

{Ch. 6} Sunk Cost (Pretium)

Sunk costs are investment choices (not necessarily monetary) that limit alternative choices, in this case climate-friendly choices. Four species of this have been identified:

• Financial Investments (P. pecunia)

  • If someone invests in a car, for instance, she or he is then less likely to bicycle for environmental reasons. This monetary choice scales all the way to up to making important investments in fossil fuel stocks.

• Behavioral Momentum (P. impetus)

  • Habits are difficult to change, and many of our habits are not climate-positive. For example, eating habits and transportation habits can have strong negative effects on the climate and environment.

• Conflicting Goals and Aspirations (P. alterplex)

  • This is an especially difficult dragon. We all have multiple goals, often quite worthy in themselves, and those other goals and aspirations often conflict with the goal of not harming the environment.

• Lack of Place Attachment (P. dissocioterra)

  • Those who love the place in which they live are more likely to take care of it. Conversely, those with less attachment to the place where they live are also less likely to act in pro-environmental ways.

{Ch. 7} Limited Behaviour (Immobilis)

Most people try to do something to limit greenhouse gasses or help the environment. But sometimes their efforts fall short or even boomerang? Here are two dragons that cause this problem:

• Tokenism (I. signum)

  • The climate change behaviors that are easiest to implement tend to have the least effect on the reduction of greenhouse gasses, so some people choose less effective solutions than they could.

• The Rebound Effect (I. jevonsii)

  • Possibly the most ironic of the dragons of inaction, the rebound effect occurs when a positive environmental behavior is followed by one that negates it. For instance, people with fuel-efficient vehicles sometimes drive more than those without them, to the point where the net damage is greater. This is also called the Jevons Paradox or the Khazzoom-Brookes postulate.