A question I was curious about was relating to his comments that people probably will not understand the severity of climate change by appealing to fear or appealing to scientific statistic models with ever-decreasing uncertainty as by then it will be too late. However, they are far more likely to be persuaded to herd behavior like other cities or states or countries are doing and the impact it has on them. My question is what if some of these actions are inherently preventative of some bad future but only works if others do too, so it could be Europe did those things but we would not know till climate change fully came upon us that they survived, as it is more likely that all of us even those who took preventative action will get hurt? I assumed people are more likely to herd behavior when such behavior is considered as the cause for one's success. Developing countries looked to the west and said we need democracy because that is why these societies are successful. Today they look at China and say we need less democracy and that is why China is successful. Thus, I am not so sure how herding can be a persuasive agent for pushing people to approve of large congressional actions as opposed to just public awareness campaigns demonstrating that this is something we must act or else (aka fear!).
top of page
bottom of page
I had similar thoughts in response to Dan Gilbert's discussion of the benefits of herd behavior in getting people to act on climate change. In some ways, his idea that humans are more likely to act on an individual level when they see those around them acting similarly matches how I think about the world. He gives the example of recycling, saying that because everyone recycles now, even those more opposed to dramatic climate change action recycle as well. My first issue with this idea is that it is inherently conservative and slow-paced: if we only act once a certain threshold of other people act we will be too slow to respond to something as imminent as large scale global warming. I am curious how the theory of humans as herd animals could be used to circumvent this issue. Also, as you point out with your example of developing countries looking at the relative successes and failures of democracy, I think there are some major differences between personal action, such as recycling, and collective, political action, like deciding to sign the Paris Agreement. In order to combat global warming, I think it has become clear that large scale, governmental efforts are more important than personal actions and I am curious about Gilbert's thoughts on what kind of factors go into those decisions.