Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Commentary
  • Published:

Mitigation win–win

Nature Climate Change volume 3, pages 611–613 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Win–win messages regarding climate change mitigation policies in agriculture tend to oversimplify farmer motivation. Contributions from psychology, cultural evolution and behavioural economics should help to design more effective policy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Flying the flag for low-carbon farming.

SRUC

References

  1. Dietz, T., Stern, P. C. & Weber, E. U. Daedalus 142, 78–89 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Attari, S. Z., DeKay, M. L., Davidson, C. I. & de Bruin, W. B. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 16054–16059 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Joint Working Party on Agriculture and the Environment Farmer Behaviour and Management Practices in Relation to Mitigation and Adaptation to Climate Change (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2011); available via http://go.nature.com/NVXRtr

  4. Wreford, A., Moran, D. & Adger N. Climate Change and Agriculture: Impacts, Adaptation and Mitigation (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010); available via http://go.nature.com/EFMuF5

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Zhang, W. et al. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1210447110 (2013).

  6. Moran. D. et al. J. Agr. Econ. 62, 93–118 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kahneman, D. Thinking Fast and Slow (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2011).

    Google Scholar 

  8. Cialdini, R. B. Influence: The Psychology of Persuasion (HarperCollins, 2007).

    Google Scholar 

  9. Dietz, T. J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 57, 205–225 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ostrom, E. et al. The Drama of the Commons (National Academies, 2002).

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tennie, C., Call, J. & Tomasello, M. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 364, 2405–2415 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Boyd, R., Richerson, P. J. & Henrich, J. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 108, 10918–10925 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Chudek, M. & Henrich, J. Trends Cogn. Sci. 15, 218–226 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Tomasello, M., Melis, A. P., Tennie, C., Wyman, E & Herrmann, E. Curr. Anthropol. 53, 67–692 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Whiten, A. & Erdal, D. Phil. Trans R. Soc. B 367, 211–2129 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Boyd, R. & Richerson, P. J. Culture and the Evolutionary Process (Chicago Univ. Press, 1985).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Henrich, J. & Gil-White, F. J. Evol. Hum. Behav. 22, 165–196 (2001).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rogers, E. M. The Diffusion of Innovations (Simon & Schuster, 2013)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Burton, R. J. Sociol. Ruralis 44, 195–216 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Anti-Idling Final Report (McKenzie-Mohr Associates, 2003).

  21. Vohs, K. D., Mead, N. L. & Goode, M. R. Science 314, 1154–1156 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Schwartz, S. H. in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (ed. Zanna, M.) 1–65 (Academic, 1992).

    Google Scholar 

  23. Evans, L. et al. Nature Clim. Change 3, 122–125 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Pretty, J. Science 302, 1912–1914 (2003).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Burton, R., Kuczera, C. & Schwarz, G. Sociol. Ruralis 48, 16–37 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank A. Dunsire for designing Fig. 1. We also acknowledge our financial supporters: the Scottish Government Rural and Environmental Science and Analytical Services division through ClimatexChange (http://www.climatexchange.org.uk/) and AnimalChange, financially supported from the European Community's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/ 2007–2013) under the grant agreement number 266018.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dominic Moran, Amanda Lucas and Andrew Barnes are at Scotland's Rural College, Kings Buildings, West Mains Road, Edinburgh EH9 3JG, UK,

    Dominic Moran, Amanda Lucas & Andrew Barnes

Authors
  1. Dominic Moran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amanda Lucas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andrew Barnes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dominic Moran.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moran, D., Lucas, A. & Barnes, A. Mitigation win–win. Nature Clim Change 3, 611–613 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1922

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate1922

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing Anthropocene

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Anthropocene