Author
Jacob Ainscough & Rebecca Willis
Set up of research
In this research by Ainscough and Willis, the authors employ a two-part process. The first phase consists of a small, representative “jury” of 25 British people learning about the climate crisis and various ways people have tried to address it, then coming up with climate policy proposals, and finally ranking which of the suggested proposals they like most. After this in-depth research phase, a polling of the resulting policy proposals took place among a larger population (N=2000) to see what a generally less-informed public tends to favor.
Citizen's jury concerned about self-regulation of ads
The jury expressed concern about the current system of self-regulation of the advertising industry, and was strongly in favor of the idea of establishing an independent body to govern the climate impact of marketing. Regulating high carbon ads was seen as an effective way to firstly inform and educate the general public about the climate crisis, and secondly to incentivize companies to emit less carbon. The researchers highlight the fact that most people support the idea of advertising regulation, but that this support is predicated upon such regulation being part of a larger set of measures. Moreover, they indicate that people don’t usually recognize the importance of social norms, as these tend to remain invisible. Research participants tended to discuss ads’ influence in terms of individual consumption choices rather than shaping social norms. A full ban on high carbon advertising, though not the most popular measure discussed by the jury, received 47% percent approval during polling.
Conclusions
The polling phase of the research revealed that most people think the current system of self-regulation is flawed and needs changing. Additionally:
Climate Citizens; Lancaster University
https://climatecitizens.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Lancaster-University.-Public-attitudes-to-management-of-advertising-for-high-carbon-products-and-services.pdf