Matthew J Hornsey , Jarren L Nylund , Michael Thai
{"title":"Morality, justice, and collective climate action","authors":"Matthew J Hornsey , Jarren L Nylund , Michael Thai","doi":"10.1016/j.cobeha.2025.101541","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This review synthesizes literature on the moral arguments of those who engage in collective action to promote climate reform, as well as the moral arguments of those who engage in collective action to oppose mitigation efforts. Although these groups have competing goals, we make the case that their moral arguments cluster around similar themes: the need to avoid harm, the need to preserve fairness, and the need to maintain environmental purity. We describe reasons why expressing moral arguments can amplify and polarize intergroup contests between supporters and opponents of climate action. We finish by making recommendations for how moralized polarization around climate change can be managed in a way that reduces gridlock and facilitates constructive dialogue.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56191,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences","volume":"64 ","pages":"Article 101541"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352154625000609","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This review synthesizes literature on the moral arguments of those who engage in collective action to promote climate reform, as well as the moral arguments of those who engage in collective action to oppose mitigation efforts. Although these groups have competing goals, we make the case that their moral arguments cluster around similar themes: the need to avoid harm, the need to preserve fairness, and the need to maintain environmental purity. We describe reasons why expressing moral arguments can amplify and polarize intergroup contests between supporters and opponents of climate action. We finish by making recommendations for how moralized polarization around climate change can be managed in a way that reduces gridlock and facilitates constructive dialogue.
期刊介绍:
Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences is a systematic, integrative review journal that provides a unique and educational platform for updates on the expanding volume of information published in the field of behavioral sciences.