What do Canadians in every riding believe about climate change?

February 22, 2016

As the Trudeau government prepares for its early March First Ministers Meetings on climate change, researchers from the University of Montreal, University of California Santa Barbara, Utah State University and Yale University have just released a new interactive tool to visualize, with unprecedented detail, the geographic distribution of climate opinions across Canada. It allows users to download the underlying estimates of public opinion for each province and riding in Canada. This new tool, presented in the form of maps, is available in English and in French.

The Canadian Climate Opinion Maps (CCOM) was created using a based on over 5,000 responses to national surveys from 2011-2015. It reveals that, nationally, 79% of Canadians believe that Earth is getting warmer, but the new maps show distinct differences among provinces and ridings. Moreover, about 67% of adults believe the Earth is warming in Alberta, for example, whereas 85% believe this in Quebec. Within federal electoral districts, percentages vary from 56% in the Souris-Moose Mountain riding in Saskatchewan, to 91% in the riding of Halifax, Nova Scotia.

"Our research shows that across the country, a majority of Canadians are aware of the problem of rising global temperature on Earth, and many believe humans are directly contributing to this warming. This is true across Canadian regions and across the urban-rural divide as well", said one of the project's lead researchers, University of Montreal Professor Erick Lachapelle.

In terms of possible solutions for fighting , the idea of implementing an emissions trading system enjoys popular support (66%) across the country. Meanwhile, a carbon tax is less popular nationally (49%), with support for more carbon taxes also being much more variable across ridings.

"Given the importance of public beliefs and perceptions about climate change for mitigation and adaptation planning, we wanted to provide this tool to the public to help foster awareness and dialogue on this crucial issue," explained University of California Santa Barbara Assistant Professor and lead author Matto Mildenberger. "Hopefully, this strong public support will be reflected in ambitious decision making in the coming months," he said.

"Thanks to this tool, we are able for the first time in Canada to visualize the geographic diversity of opinions across this vast country, at an unprecedented level of granularity," added Lachapelle. "We always knew opinions varied across Canadian provinces. Now we see that urban-rural differences are just as important, if not more important, features of Canadian public opinion on climate change" he said

"Of course, opinions and policy preferences are not uniform across the country. So this tool illustrates not only where climate policy support is concentrated, but perhaps more importantly, it depicts where enhanced outreach and engagement efforts are required to bring the public on side with what needs to happen" concluded Lachapelle.

Though high-resolution data sets for climate change risks are readily available, data on public opinion at the local level is almost non-existent. This new data set allows novel insight into public perceptions at scales much closer to where actual decisions, outreach and planning take place. This will be an important resource for decision-makers, planners, practitioners, academics, and engaged citizens.

About the tool:

Users can explore the maps and data by clicking on your province or riding, and compare results across questions and with other geographic areas. They should keep in mind that the uncertainty of the estimates increase as they refine their search to closer geographic scales.

All estimates are derived from a geographic and statistical model validated in the United States and applied to national survey data collected in Canada since 2011 (>5000 survey responses). These data were used to estimate differences in opinion between geographic and demographic groups based on data from Statistics Canada. The results account for change over time. The result is a high-resolution data set of estimated opinion at the national, provincial and riding scales for the year 2015. The accuracy of the estimates are approximately +/- 6 percentage points for provincial-level estimates and +/- 7 percentage points for estimates at the riding level (at a 95% level of confidence).

Explore further: What do Americans really think about climate change?

More information: Mildenberger, M., Howe, P.D. , Lachapelle, E., Stokes, L.C., Marlon, J., et Gravelle, T. "The distribution of climate change public opinion in Canada." (February 15 2016).

Related Stories

Not all Canadians feeling the heat of climate change

November 30, 2015

While Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is in Paris hammering out the details of the global fight against climate change, a new study out of the University of Montreal and the Trottier Energy Institute shows that Canadian ...

Climate change attitudes are reflected on social networks

May 11, 2015

People who believe in climate change have more Facebook friends than those who do not consider climate change a problem. Juha Itkonen's dissertation in economics shows that values and social networks are linked to opinions ...

Recommended for you

Mysterious deep-Earth seismic signature explained

November 22, 2017

New research on oxygen and iron chemistry under the extreme conditions found deep inside the Earth could explain a longstanding seismic mystery called ultralow velocity zones. Published in Nature, the findings could have ...

Scientists dispute missing dryland forests

November 21, 2017

Scientists are disputing the possibility that a significant portion of the world's forests have been missed in an earlier accounting of ecological diversity.

5 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

danR
1 / 5 (3) Feb 22, 2016
It's not so much about what I believe about climate-change. It's about the tendency to confuse projections with science, prognostications with data collection and analysis; the tendency to confuse advocacy with scientifically informed guidance; the preoccupation with assuming the deleterious effects of a 2 degree rise over 80 years, and then go out and do an textbook exercise in confirmation bias; the poor track-record of climatology in predicting a near 20-year almost flat T/time global atmospheric slope, even in the face of grade 12 knowledge of the specific heat of H₂O in all its phases; the remarkable denialism of AGW activists that there is any significant warming hiatus whatsoever, in spite of numerous news articles, not to mention journal research, describing the belated efforts of some more scrupulous climate scientists to hypothesize real physical causes of said supposedly non-existent T/time reduction. And so on and so forth.
thermodynamics
4 / 5 (4) Feb 22, 2016
danR went on a rant that has zero truth in it. He shows he is ignorant of the present understanding of global warming.

Regurgitating the disproven concept that there has been a 20 year "pause" in warming means he does not understand how enthalpy is distributed throughout the fluids and solids of the earth. He does not even recognize the role of the oceans and the ice distributed throughout the earth.

Try reading the peer reviewed papers and, while you are at it, take a look at what is happening in the Arctic.

http://nsidc.org/...icenews/

Pay attention and try to make more intelligent comments dan. All you have done is show your ignorance of heat transfer.
antigoracle
2 / 5 (4) Feb 22, 2016
the disproven concept that there has been a 20 year "pause" in warming

Yep, one highly contentious paper claiming the pause does not exist, versus the over 60, mostly debunked, trying to explain the pause. And, guess what, you believed all of them.
ekim
5 / 5 (3) Feb 23, 2016
I don't care if a person believes, or not, that climate change is happening. I don't care what may happen 50 years in the future. What I do care about is the actions of individuals today. No other industry is permitted to violate the rights of individuals like the hydrocarbon industry does. I can't build a dam and flood my neighbors land, I can't dump radioactive waste on his land, and my dog certainly can't crap in his yard without repercussions, usually involving some monetary recompense. Yet, to buy hydrocarbons, and dispose of the waste, without consideration of others is considered completely within my rights. Time has come to end this "socialist" form of waste disposal and make people take responsibility for the actions they engage in.
obama_socks
1 / 5 (1) Mar 06, 2016
Time has come to end this "socialist" form of waste disposal and make people take responsibility for the actions they engage in.

Excellent conclusion!!

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.