There is a widespread assumption that most people will not effectively respond to climate risk until they personally experience its negative effects. Yet this assumption raises some interesting questions in the Swedish context. The majority of Swedes say that they have not experienced the negative effects of climate change, but they are among the world's citizens most concerned about and active on the issue. These observations raise the questions – why do many Swedes act progressively if they do not feel environmental risks “closer to home”? Is there something exceptional about Swedish environmental ethics, political culture or governance structures? This paper explores these questions, using the Swedish case to challenge essentialising concepts such as “Giddens’ paradox” which, too often, equate risk perception with self-interest, neglect concern for climate justice and depoliticise climate knowledge. This research suggests that concern for climate justice, rather than self-interest, proves to be a more powerful motivator for climate action in the Swedish context and potentially beyond.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cindy Isenhour (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: