How the co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action across the world

It is traditionally thought that the public must be convinced of the reality and importance of anthropogenic climate change in order to take personal and political action. However, convincing the broad public involves overcoming powerful ideological obstacles1-4, and in many places climate change is slipping in public importance5,6. Here we examined whether beliefs about the “co-benefits” of mitigating climate change7 can avoid these obstacles by motivating behavior in both those who accept climate change and those who are unconvinced or unconcerned. We describe an integrative framework for assessing co-benefits8, distinguishing sociological dimensions (e.g., pollution, disease, economic development), and community character (e.g., benevolence, competence). Data from all inhabited continents (24 countries; N=6059), showed that two types of co-benefits, Development (economic and scientific advancement) and Benevolence (a more moral and caring community), rivalled climate change importance in the strength of their relationships with motivations to act. These co-benefits showed effects independent of climate change importance beliefs, and showed similar effects for both climate change believers and skeptics. Communicating these co-benefits of addressing climate change can help motivate action on climate change where traditional approaches have stalled

Time trends in socioeconomic differences in incidence rates of cancers of gastro-intestinal tract in Finland

BACKGROUND: The magnitude of socioeconomic differences in health varies between societies, and over time within a given society. We studied the association between social class and incidence of cancers of the gastro-intestinal tract over time in a large cohort in Finland. METHODS: We studied social class variation among 45–69 year-old Finns during 1971–95 in incidence of cancers of the gastro-intestinal tract by means of a computerized record linkage of the Finnish Cancer Registry and the 1970 Population Census, which included social class data. RESULTS: There were 2.3 million individuals in the cohort under follow-up, with 1622 cases of cancer of the esophagus, 8069 stomach (non-cardia), 1116 cardia, 408 small intestine, 6361 colon, 5274 rectum, 1616 liver, 1756 gallbladder, and 5084 pancreas during 1971–1995. Cancers of the esophagus, stomach, cardia, gallbladder and pancreas were most common among persons belonging to a low social class. Cancers of the small intestine in males only, colon in both genders, and rectum in females were most common in the higher social classes. Incidence of stomach cancer decreased and incidence of colon cancer increased over time in both genders in all social classes, and the large differences between social classes remained unchanged over time. Incidence rates of cardia cancer did not change substantially over time. CONCLUSION: There is a large variation in incidence of cancer of the gastrointestinal tract by social class in Finland. Although much of the observed social class differences probably could be explained by known etiological factors such as diet, physical exercise, alcohol consumption, smoking and exogenous hormone use, part of the variation is apparently attributable to largely unknown factors

Threat and Oblivion: Interpreting the Silence Over the Spanish Flu (1918–19)

The Spanish influenza epidemic (1918–19) was the biggest demographic disaster in the 20th century and, for some, the greatest epidemic in human history. Despite its enormous worldwide relevance, until recent years there were few studies on this catastrophe. This silence has been usually understood as the result of the competition with another worldwide event—the Great War. In this chapter, based on a social memory approach, we propose some other interpretations. Firstly, the absence of the flu in collective memory is a way of concealing an event that was experienced as a threat to the existing health services and a failure of the medical science of the time. Secondly, in terms of risk perception, the flu has some attributes that justify its lack of notoriety and normalization. Finally, the lack of collective meaning conferred upon the disease makes it easier to understand how Spanish flu survived in family memories as a traumatic event but not in public, national ones. Overall, this paper illustrates how social and cognitive processes can contribute to the oblivion of a disaster.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio