Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-18 (section)

==== 18.4.3.1 Worldviews ====

<div id="h3-16-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

Worldviews are overarching systems of meaning and meaning-making that inform how people interpret, enact and co-create reality ( [[#De%20Witt--2016|De Witt et al., 2016]] ). Worldviews shape the vision, beliefs, attitudes, values, emotions, actions and even political and institutional arrangements. As such, they can promote holistic, egalitarian approaches to enable, accelerate and deepen climate action and environmental care ( [[#Ramkissoon--2014|Ramkissoon and Smith, 2014]] ; [[#De%20Witt--2016|De Witt et al., 2016]] ; [[#Lacroix--2017|Lacroix and Gifford, 2017]] ; [[#Sanganyado--2018|Sanganyado et al., 2018]] ; [[#Brink--2019|Brink and]] [[#Wamsler--2019|Wamsler, 2019]] ). Alternatively, they can also serve as significant barriers to system transitions and transformation, based on anthropocentric, mechanistic and materialistic worldviews and the utilitarian, individualist or skeptical values and attitudes they often promote ( ''very high confidence'' ) ( [[#Beddoe--2009|Beddoe et al., 2009]] ; [[#van%20Egmond--2011|van Egmond and de Vries, 2011]] ; [[#Stevenson--2014|Stevenson et al., 2014]] ; [[#Zummo--2020|Zummo et al., 2020]] ).

Traditional, modern and post-modern worldviews have different, and in many ways, complementary potentials for enabling diverse approaches to climate action and sustainable development. They can also shift societal values and societal concern for climate change ( [[#Shi--2015|Shi et al., 2015]] ), resulting in changes in behaviour and acceptance of climate change policies ( [[#van%20Egmond--2011|van Egmond and de Vries, 2011]] ; [[#Van%20Opstal--2013|Van Opstal and Hugé, 2013]] ; [[#De%20Witt--2016|De Witt et al., 2016]] ; [[#Shaw--2016|Shaw, 2016]] ) which are predictors of concern. Among the challenges of strongly different climate-related worldviews, is that they rarely co-exist. Some worldviews become incompatible or hostile to other worldviews, openly seeking to dominate, eliminate or segregate competing perspectives ( ''medium agreement'' , ''medium evidence'' ) ( [[#de%20Witt--2015|de Witt, 2015]] ; [[#Jackson--2016|Jackson, 2016]] ; [[#Nightingale--2016|Nightingale, 2016]] ; [[#Xue--2016|Xue et al., 2016]] ; [[#Goldman--2018|Goldman et al., 2018]] ).

To address these difficult contests, worldviews regarding climate and global environmental change are often expressed in scientific language and themes ( [[#Parsons--2016|Parsons et al., 2016]] ; [[#Goldman--2018|Goldman et al., 2018]] ). This can exclude other worldviews grounded in other forms of knowledge or ways of knowing which ultimately narrows understanding of climate change and the solution space. Hence, the post-AR5 literature on worldviews focuses on the numerous meanings, associations, narratives and frames of climate change and how these shape perceptions, attitudes and values ( [[#Morton--2013|Morton, 2013]] ; [[#Boulton--2016|Boulton, 2016]] ; [[#Hulme--2018|Hulme, 2018]] ; Nightingale Böhler, 2019). The recognition of the diversity of interpretations and meanings has led to multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary research that incorporates the humanities and the arts ( [[#Murphy--2011|Murphy, 2011]] ; [[#Elliott--2017|Elliott and Cullis, 2017]] ; [[#Steelman--2019|Steelman et al., 2019]] ; [[#Tauginienė--2020|Tauginienė et al., 2020]] ), feminist studies ( [[#MacGregor--2003|MacGregor, 2003]] ; [[#Demeritt--2011|Demeritt et al., 2011]] ; [[#Bell--2013|Bell, 2013]] ; [[#Brink--2019|Brink and]] [[#Wamsler--2019|Wamsler, 2019]] ; [[#Plesa--2019|Plesa, 2019]] ) and religious studies ( [[#Sachdeva--2016|Sachdeva, 2016]] ; [[#McPhetres--2018|McPhetres and Zuckerman, 2018]] ) to examine diverse understandings of reality and knowledge possibilities around climate change. In addition, literature on cultural cognition, epistemological plurality and relational ontologies draws on non-Western worldviews and forms of knowledge ( [[#Goldman--2018|Goldman et al., 2018]] ).

On the other hand, the tendency for certain worldviews to dominate the policy discourse has the potential to exacerbate social, economic and political inequities as well as ontological, epistemic and procedural injustices ( ''very high confidence'' ). Research aimed at exploring the existing political ontology and knowledge politics of exclusion that marginalise certain communities and actors originated in academic or scientific perspectives. This includes institutions such as the IPCC and is subsequently replicated in social representations, including the media, public policy and the development agenda, narrowing possibilities for social transformation ( [[#Jackson--2014|Jackson, 2014]] ; [[#Luton--2015|Luton, 2015]] ; [[#Escobar--2016|Escobar, 2016]] ; [[#Burman--2017|Burman, 2017]] ; [[#Newman--2018|Newman et al., 2018]] ; [[#Sanganyado--2018|Sanganyado et al., 2018]] ; [[#Wilson--2018|Wilson and Inkster, 2018]] ).

<div id="18.4.3.2" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="political-and-government-arenas"></span>