Research Question Discussion
Climate change has become one of the hottest issues not only for environmentalists but also for policymakers and their subjects in their respective jurisdictions . With research and news-related reports about the consequences of climate change such as the increasing frequency of natural disasters, the unpredictability of previously predictable disaster models, among others, proliferating, there is no other perfect time to start acting than now ; one of the first steps needed would be to conduct a situational analysis, that is, knowing the world’s position as far as climate change is concerned. Such analyses can be supported by researches such as the one currently being proposed.
This is what convinced the author of this paper to focus on the research question (a close-ended one) that aims to verify whether the awareness of people on issues related to climate change have indeed become heightened, in the wake of the circulating reports and issues about it, especially in the past years. Policymakers play a crucial role in making changes to society and so as a secondary objective, the impact of the verifiable results (whether there was indeed a heightened level of awareness on the targeted subject population) on government policy making would be qualitatively evaluated. Without government intervention, key findings from studies such as the one being proposed in this paper would be nothing but mere findings; it is the government, through their policymaking processes, and the mandate given to the public (i.e. the citizens) to follow the ratified and enforced policies), the does the real job. This is, in fact, one of the major rationales that convinced the author of this paper to conduct the present study. Nonetheless, the main research question that this paper aims to answer would be whether there has been a change, specifically an increase, in people’s awareness regarding climate change.
Literature Review
A brief literature review was conducted in order to provide the author and also the readers the context needed to understand the importance of public awareness on climate change. A literature review also serves as a standard, a source of inferences, and a baseline of information from which explanations for future findings (especially in researches where raw data or primary information coming from a respondent population are to be collected) can be obtained.
According to a report authored by Anthony (2009), climate change and how it will be addressed in the future is and will most likely continue to be based on the outcomes of politics. ‘Climate change is now a mainstream political issue; however, as yet, there is no substantive framework for policy which offers coherence and consistency as to how national governments should cope with the long term political challenges of climate change” . He recognized the role of the state in spearheading policies and programs that are directed against the exacerbation of climate change (and climate change outcomes) and towards its eventual resolution. Anthony (2009) also recognized that despite the fact that politics is expected to play a key role in the resolution of this global problem, there are certain aspects of it that can potentially make the otherwise simple task of tackling climate change with a united front, more complex. One of the factors he identified was the difference in political ideologies between two countries.
There are, for example, significant differences between democratic and communist countries. A perfect example would be their differences when it comes to how they solve social, political, economic, and environmental problems, or even the way how they cooperate with other countries in solving regional or international issues. What is recommended is a code of conduct between countries (apart from the fact that each participating state’s commitment and dedication to the resolution of the issue would really be required) that will set forth long term planning and execution of anti-climate change policies and programs.
There are numerous factors that may affect an individual’s perception and awareness on climate change. In an increasingly becoming globalized world, the extent of mass media’s influence is only expected to increase. This is what a pair of researchers from the Journal of Global Environmental Change focused on in their study. Specifically, they assessed the influence of mass media on public awareness on climate change issues, and its implications on Japan’s national campaign to reduce greenhouse gas emissions .
What makes this study remarkable is the fact that it involves the same independent and dependent variable being proposed in the present study namely: public awareness on climate change issues (as the dependent variable) and climate change itself (independent variable). There are, however, additional variables considered in Sampei and Usui’s study namely the role that mass media plays and the politics involved in the management of climate change issues. The researchers in that paper concluded that “coverage of global warming had an immediate but short term influence on public concern” and that because of this, high levels of media coverage may be recommended in order to energize and motivate the public to participate in more meaningful activities aimed at furthering the government’s efforts towards the resolution of climate change and other related issues.
Scientific and academic awareness in relation to climate change is also a necessary tool to address this worldwide issue. The importance of this kind of awareness is what a group of researchers from Nature Climate Change focused on in their study. They claimed that the public just knows too little of the science behind climate change, the factors causing (and exacerbating it) and the most effective and efficient solutions to it. They conducted a study to test this hypothesis; their study involved interviewing individuals with the highest degree of science literacy and technical reasoning capacity.
It turned out that such individuals were the least concerned about climate change and that the most concerned were the ones among whom cultural polarization was the greatest . What this study shows is that the real cause of public divisions when it comes to climate change awareness is not the public’s lack of scientific knowledge about the issue but rather the distinctive conflict of interest between the involved parties (e.g. the government, businesses that may become subject to heavy regulation, among others). Ideally, however, improved scientific literacy and technical reasoning capacity in relation to climate change issues should be used as an asset in solving the problem.
Research Method
In order to answer the chosen and rationalized research question, the author of this paper is planning to utilize a quantitative and descriptive research design. It is important to note that the research question that was formulated earlier was a close-ended one. Within the context of academic research, close-ended questions are best confirmed by quantitative studies . What makes the quantitative descriptive research design the most appropriate for the current research is the fact that numbers offer a precise answer for a question, especially if it is a close-ended one. Close-ended questions are those that can be answered by yes or no. Basically, in the present study, the primary research goal of the author is to determine whether there has been an increase in the respondent population’s awareness of climate change or none. There are only two possible ways to this question: yes or no.
In order to collect the necessary information from the respondents, a research questionnaire will be used. The questionnaire will contain 3 items. These three items are basically statements that the respondents can answer using a three point scale. Each number in the scale represents a certain responses. Specifically, an answer of 1 means that the respondent has disagreed to the statement; 2 means that he is not sure (i.e. undecided); and 3 means that he has agreed to it; it is worth noting that the items in the questionnaires are not really questions but statements. The statements in the questionnaire are in favor of the research hypothesis for this paper which suggests that there has been increase in the public’s awareness on climate change issues. Below is a copy of the questionnaire that will be used to obtain information from the respondents.
As can be seen, the research instrument, which is a questionnaire that is being proposed to be used, is simple enough for the respondents, regardless of educational attainment or cultural background to understand. The questionnaire was really supposed to be made up of as limited items as possible. In this case, there were only three items included. The rationale behind this is that the author of this paper wants to focus on the primary and secondary research questions at hand. In the research hypothesis that was presented in the first part of the proposal, there was only a limited number of variables mentioned—the awareness (and perception) on climate change issues would be the dependent variable; the politics and government intervention, policymakers’ decisions, would be the independent variables.
Analyzing the Results
Notice that all questions are positively implied. This means that if the respondents would agree to all of them that would essentially be interpreted as a direct confirmation and or validation of the research hypotheses presented in this proposed study and otherwise if all of them answered with a three.
Another important piece of information about the research methodology and the use of this questionnaire is that the author will not make use of an already-provided set of data. It is common among researchers who conduct empirical studies to go about doing their study using data sets from another study.
With proper referencing and in some cases approval from the original owners of the raw information, this is a legal and academically sound option. However, one disadvantage of this approach is that it does not enable the researchers to work flexibly with their own target population. There may be cases wherein there is a mismatch between the inclusion and exclusion criteria that the researcher actually wants to use and the ones that the authors of the data set that will be imported (and used) to the current study. This mismatch can be a cause of error, if not properly addressed or mitigated.
In the proposed paper, however, the author will make use of its own data set. The data set will come from a dedicated sample population. This means that for the data collection, the author will start from scratch. This is not exactly uncommon but what this option offers is a great deal of flexibility. For one, it would allow the researcher to target any population that he wants to examine. He would also be able to set his own inclusion and exclusion criteria. For this study, the initial target sample population size would be five hundred (n = 500). For a group of participants to be included, he or she should be between the ages of 20 and 40 and must know how to read and write (in order for them to answer the items in the questionnaire).
In order to interpret the results, the researcher will have to tally the number of participants who responded for each choice (1, 2, and 3) per question. The total number of hits per response should be computed as well. From there, certain inferences and interpretations can already be made.
Assuming, for example, that majority of the participants answered 1 for item 1, then that only means that they believe or perceive that their awareness of climate change issues have increased compared to in the past five years. If this would turn out to be the case, then that means that the research hypothesis proposed earlier was indeed valid. Then again, the author will have to rely on organic and raw data from the sample population before any interpretations can be made.
Resource Allocation
The resource allocation strategy has already been discussed in detail in the first part of the proposal. However, to reiterate, the researcher is planning to hire a research assistant and pay him $30 per hour for a total of five days (with 8 hours per day of work). That would be a total of $3,600 for the entire program. Assuming that the budget is $5,000 for the study, there will still be some $1,400 left. The remaining fund would be allocated for discretionary spending. In terms of the number of hours that the researcher plans on spending for the implementation phase, which is the heaviest part of the study, in terms of workload, some 72 hours will be allocated. For the drafting of the manuscript and analysis of the findings and results, however, the researcher plans to spend an indefinite amount of time or until everything has been finished.
Limitations
This research will be limited to the identification of the answer to the close-ended questions presented in the research hypothesis part and the individual questions posted on the questionnaire. There may be instances wherein the author will make discover findings that may be considered outside the scope of this paper. However, those cases would only be minimal and if any, they would have been based on observations from the implementation phase of the study, or from author conclusions (of separate studies) presented during the literature review part.
Criteria for Success
The participation rate will be a major criterion for success. What the participation rate measures is the percentage of people who were able to successfully complete the questionnaire and answer all of the questions. Fortunately, this is something that is not hard to accomplish considering the simple nature of the procedures involved and the lack of any complex task that a good number of the 500 target participants may find hard to accomplish. Another part of the criteria for success would be the ability of the researchers to prove the validity (or invalidity) of the research hypothesis and also to meet the primary and secondary research goals. This second part of the criteria supersedes all other criteria simply because of the fact that the reason why this study was initiated was to answer a research question and prove that answer (i.e. the hypothesis) through systematic and academic means. If the researcher will fail in accomplishing that goal, then that would make the entire study pointless.
Ethical Concerns
The only possible ethical issue that the author of this paper may encounter while conducting the study would be the risk of violating the respondents’ right to privacy and confidentiality. Prior to the start of the study, the respondents will be asked to attend an orientation session, during which all the procedures and processes that they will undergo will be discussed. Prior to the start of the implementation program, they will also be asked to sign an informed consent form. Their signature in the said form shall signify their voluntary participation in the study and their complete understanding of the researcher’s terms and expectations. All information obtained and accessed throughout the course of this study would not be made available to any third party entity without the concerned participant’s concern.
References
Anthony, G. (2009). The Politics of Climate Change. Cambridge, UK: Wiley Online Library, 01-19.
Davenport, C. (2015). Nations approve landmark climate accord in Paris. The New York Times Company.
Kahan, D., Peters, E., Wittling, M., Slovic, P., Ouellette, L., Braman, D., et al. (2012). The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change, 732-735.
Reja, U., Manfreda, K., Hiebec, V., & Vehovar, V. (2003). Open-ended vs Close-ended questions in web questionnaires. Developments in Applied Statistics, 159-177.
Sampei, Y., & Usui, M. (2009). Mass-media coverage, its influence on public awareness of climate change issues, and implications for Japan's National Campaign to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Global Environmental Change, 203-212.
Spence, A., Porrtinga, W., Butler, C., & Pidgeon, N. (2011). Perceptions of Climate Change and Willingness to Save Energy Related to Flood Experience. Nature Climate Change.
