The impact of place and legacy framing on climate action: A lifespan approach

utility in promoting sustainability behaviors through legacy-based or place-based message framing or other forms of intervention, and so warrant further research. Our theoretical model hypothesized separate pathways for the impacts of the legacy induc- tion and place induction on legacy motivation and biophilia respectively. Although we did find that the Legacy induction was associated with significantly greater legacy motivation than the Place induction, we found higher legacy motivation and biophilia attitudes in both the place and legacy conditions, when compared to the control condition. This warrants further attention. It may be that our operationalization of the two inductions was not sufficiently dif- ferentiated (e.g., mention of “future generations” in the place induction may have elicited leg- acy concerns). It also may be that both inductions affected an underlying third element that itself affected both legacy motivation and biophilia. Future research should explore these possi- bilities, as well as the mechanism underlying why increased legacy motivation increases biophilia. We had hypothesized that the Place induction would impact environmental hazard belief or environmental hazard concern: the belief in the general connection between natural haz- ards, climate change, and salient danger. However, there was no effect of either induction on hazard belief and concern. It is possible that if these items had been reworded to focus on the specific concern of the place to which participants were attached, the Place induction would

have had a positive impact on hazard concern and belief. Additional research should continue to explore whether inductions that enhance one’s connection to a place can be used to change risk attitudes related to natural hazards. The current study has a number of strengths and limitations. One important limitation is that we did not have a direct manipulation check for place-based attachment—had we included this in addition to our biophilia measure, we could have more clearly and precisely discerned the relationships between these variables. The balanced age sampling allowed com- parisons to be made across young, middle aged and older adults. However, the results are based on self-report from participants in a paid online survey, which may limit generalizabil- ity. Further research on the impact of these inductions on behavior in non-experimental set- tings would be useful. Additionally, the sample used in this research was limited to American participants. Future work could evaluate whether these findings generalize cross-culturally [41]. The time of measurement may also have unintentionally affected the patterns of results: data was gathered from participants in the month following the 2016 presidential election in the United States. President-elect Trump had already signaled his intention to leave the Paris climate accords and to roll back a variety of EPA regulations. Public discussion of these devel- opments may have affected the participants’ responses. In addition, evaluations of the impact

of combining moral framing [42] with legacy or place inductions would be useful. Finally, the outcome variables were limited in scope. Additional research in non-experimental settings could expand the outcome variables to sustainability behaviors such as recycling, changes in dietary and travel patterns, or changes in commuting behavior. The world is experiencing two, simultaneous, global patterns: population aging and climate change. Despite generational differences in climate concerns [43], more than half of older adults are in the “worried middle”: they know something is happening to the world’s climate but they are unsure about what to do. The challenge is how to tap into this concern and move older adults from anxiety to pro-environmental action. Thus far, climate advocacy and mes- sage framing has not given adequate attention to older adults who have time, talent, and moti- vation to engage in issues beyond themselves. This study suggests that legacy and place message framing may prompt positive climate actions by adults of all ages. Those concerned with increasing individual and community responses to climate change must expand their age Impact of framing on climate action PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228963 February 25, 2020 13 / 17