Scientists, presidents, and pandemics-comparing the science-politics nexus during the Zika virus and COVID-19 outbreaks.

Objective: We investigate how beliefs about scientists and presidents affect views about two pandemics, Zika virus (2016) and COVID-19 (2020). Methods: Three New Hampshire surveys in 2016 and 2020 provide data to test how beliefs about scientists' practices and presidential approval relate to pandemic views. Results: Support for presidents consistently predicts perceptions of scientists' integrity and trust in science agencies for information, but the directionality changes from 2016 to 2020-increased trust among Obama-supporters; decreased trust among Trump-supporters. Respondents who believe scientists lack objectivity are also less likely to trust science agencies during both Zika and COVID-19 and are less apt to be confident in the government's response in 2016. Assessments of pandemic responses become increasingly political during 2020; most notably, support for President Trump strongly predicts confidence in the government's efforts. Conclusion: Results highlight how beliefs about scientists' practices and presidents are central to the science-politics nexus during pandemics.

Flood Realities, Perceptions and the Depth of Divisions on Climate.

Research has led to broad agreement among scientists that anthropogenic climate change is happening now and likely to worsen. In contrast to scientific agreement, US public views remain deeply divided, largely along ideological lines. Science communication has been neutralised in some arenas by intense counter-messaging, but as adverse climate impacts become manifest they might intervene more persuasively in local perceptions. We look for evidence of this occurring with regard to realities and perceptions of flooding in the northeastern US state of New Hampshire. Although precipitation and flood damage have increased, with ample news coverage, most residents do not see a trend. Nor do perceptions about past and future local flooding correlate with regional impacts or vulnerability. Instead, such perceptions follow ideological patterns resembling those of global climate change. That information about the physical world can be substantially filtered by ideology is a common finding from sociological environment/society research.

Tracking Public Beliefs About Anthropogenic Climate Change.

A simple question about climate change, with one choice designed to match consensus statements by scientists, was asked on 35 US nationwide, single-state or regional surveys from 2010 to 2015. Analysis of these data (over 28,000 interviews) yields robust and exceptionally well replicated findings on public beliefs about anthropogenic climate change, including regional variations, change over time, demographic bases, and the interacting effects of respondent education and political views. We find that more than half of the US public accepts the scientific consensus that climate change is happening now, caused mainly by human activities. A sizable, politically opposite minority (about 30 to 40%) concede the fact of climate change, but believe it has mainly natural causes. Few (about 10 to 15%) say they believe climate is not changing, or express no opinion. The overall proportions appear relatively stable nationwide, but exhibit place-to-place variations. Detailed analysis of 21 consecutive surveys within one fairly representative state (New Hampshire) finds a mild but statistically significant rise in agreement with the scientific consensus over 2010-2015. Effects from daily temperature are detectable but minor. Hurricane Sandy, which brushed New Hampshire but caused no disaster there, shows no lasting impact on that state's time series-suggesting that non-immediate weather disasters have limited effects. In all datasets political orientation dominates among individual-level predictors of climate beliefs, moderating the otherwise positive effects from education. Acceptance of anthropogenic climate change rises with education among Democrats and Independents, but not so among Republicans. The continuing series of surveys provides a baseline for tracking how future scientific, political, socioeconomic or climate developments impact public acceptance of the scientific consensus.

Environmental awareness and public support for protecting and restoring Puget sound.

In an effort to garner consensus around environmental programs, practitioners have attempted to increase awareness about environmental threats and demonstrate the need for action. Nonetheless, how beliefs about the scope and severity of different types of environmental concerns shape support for management interventions are less clear. Using data from a telephone survey of residents of the Puget Sound region of Washington, we investigate how perceptions of the severity of different coastal environmental problems, along with other social factors, affect attitudes about policy options. We find that self-assessed environmental understanding and views about the seriousness of pollution, habitat loss, and salmon declines are only weakly related. Among survey respondents, women, young people, and those who believe pollution threatens Puget Sound are more likely to support policy measures such as increased enforcement and spending on restoration. Conversely, self-identified Republicans and individuals who view current regulations as ineffective tend to oppose governmental actions aimed at protecting and restoring Puget Sound. Support for one policy measure-tax credits for environmentally-friendly business practices-is not significantly affected by political party affiliation. These findings demonstrate that environmental awareness can influence public support for environmental policy tools. However, the nature of particular management interventions and other social forces can have important mitigating effects and need to be considered by practitioners attempting to develop environment-related social indicators and generate consensus around the need for action to address environmental problems.

Public perceptions of the response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill: personal experiences, information sources, and social context.

The 2010 British Petroleum (BP) Deepwater Horizon oil spill highlighted long-standing questions about energy exploration and its social and environmental implications. Sociologists studying environmental disasters have documented the social impacts resulting from these events and dissatisfaction with government and industry responses. In this paper, we use data from a survey conducted during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill to examine how Louisiana and Florida residents' social backgrounds, experiences with the spill, and trust in information sources predict their perceptions of governmental and BP response efforts. We find that direct personal impacts and compensation strongly influence the evaluations of responding organizations. Age and place of residence also predict such assessments. Finally, levels of confidence in television news and BP as sources of information appear to shape Gulf Coast residents' opinions about the work of organizations responding to the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

Water water everywhere, but not enough for salmon? Organizing integrated water and fisheries management in Puget Sound.

Natural resource management has traditionally been organized within discrete land, water, and fishery resource sectors. However, emerging environmental problems often cross these boundaries, and managers have struggled to find effective planning approaches for multi-resource concerns. No case better exemplifies these challenges than efforts to ensure sufficient flows of water for salmon in the Pacific Northwest. In this study, we investigate the organizational experiences of collaborative water and salmon recovery planning groups in the Puget Sound region of Washington. Using conceptual frameworks from organizational sociology, we examine how different regulative, normative, and cultural-cognitive institutional forces shape the structure and behavior of both water and salmon recovery planning groups. Data obtained through content analysis of planning documents and interviews with natural resource planners illustrate that legal structures, shared intra-group norms, and the distinct organizational cultures of water and salmon recovery groups constrain these organizations' ability to address linked water-for-salmon concerns. These findings illustrate that assessing institutional and organizational arrangements may be equally as important as understanding hydrology and biology when attempting to forward an integrated approach to water and fisheries management.