Attitudes of Farmers and Rural Area Residents Toward Climate Change Adaptation Measures: Their Preferences and Determinants of Their Attitudes

摘要

In this study, data obtained from an online survey were analyzed to identify the perception gap between farmers and nonfarmers (rural area residents) toward climate change adaptation measures with conventional and new elements of the psychological mechanism. Key findings from the study were as follows. First, the perception of climate change risk and awareness of impacts of climate change had strong effects on the preferences for and willingness to participate in measures rather than trusting the government and values pertaining to the policy decision-making process. Second, farmers tended to prefer “protection” and “transfer of risks (insurance)” as climate change adaptation measures more than nonfarmers did. Farmers also tended to be unwilling to participate in “withdrawal”, reflecting the difficulty of relocating agricultural land. Third, farmers’ willingness to participate in climate change adaptation measures was determined strongly by their preferences. Therefore, to increase preference, there needs to be communication about multiple risks including climate change risks associated with not only “adjustment” and “protection”, which tend to be preferred, but also “withdrawal”, which tends to not be preferred. Contrasting with these, nonfarmers tended to prefer any particular climate change adaptation measures statistically-significantly, but they tended to be willing to accept “self-help” absolutely and “withdrawal” relatively. Also, farmers’ willingness to participate in climate change adaptation measures was determined strongly by their preference. One of the ways to increase the preference is communicating about the multiple risks including climate change risks associated with “adjustment,” “protection” and “transfer” which tend to be preferred more than nonfarmers did. Finally, trust in the government and values pertaining to the policy decision-making process did not necessarily have a serious impact on policy preferences and willingness to participate, both for farmers and nonfarmers. More analyses for other sectors will be needed for further study.