How climate-related events become climate governance problems: climate change attribution divergence as an interpretive mechanism

Climate-related events are often viewed as potential catalysts for policy learning and changes in climate governance. Floods, droughts, heatwaves, wildfires, and other environmental changes can expose vulnerabilities in infrastructure, land-use planning, and emergency preparedness, drawing attention to the need to reassess existing practices. However, events can be associated with different responses, proving that exposure and scientific information alone do not determine collective action. Governance responses depend not only on institutional, political, and socioeconomic conditions, but also on how actors interpret experienced environmental changes in relation to anthropogenic climate change. These subjective interpretations are distinct from scientific event attribution and vary in strength across actors. Differences in attribution may contribute to divergent problem definitions, shaping which issues are prioritised and the type, scale, and temporal orientation of adaptation, mitigation, and other governance responses. Building on empirical research documenting variation in climate change attribution strength across actors and contexts, this paper introduces climate change attribution divergence, defined as differences among actors in the strength with which experienced environmental events and impacts are attributed to anthropogenic climate change. While existing research has examined attribution primarily at the individual level, less attention has been given to how differences in attribution may matter within shared governance contexts. The paper develops a conceptual framework specifying how subjective attribution, variation in attribution strength, and problem definition are linked, and how attribution divergence may contribute to divergent governance responses. The framework offers an interpretive mechanism for understanding why environmental events may give rise to different governance pathways.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2026-11-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31223/x5mz3s
Primary Topic
Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
Type
preprint
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
preprint

How climate-related events become climate governance problems: climate change attribution divergence as an interpretive mechanism

Johannes Persson, Kristina Blennow
1 links
Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
preprint

How climate-related events become climate governance problems: climate change attribution divergence as an interpretive mechanism

Johannes Persson, Kristina Blennow
preprint en

Abstract

Climate-related events are often viewed as potential catalysts for policy learning and changes in climate governance. Floods, droughts, heatwaves, wildfires, and other environmental changes can expose vulnerabilities in infrastructure, land-use planning, and emergency preparedness, drawing attention to the need to reassess existing practices. However, events can be associated with different responses, proving that exposure and scientific information alone do not determine collective action. Governance responses depend not only on institutional, political, and socioeconomic conditions, but also on how actors interpret experienced environmental changes in relation to anthropogenic climate change. These subjective interpretations are distinct from scientific event attribution and vary in strength across actors. Differences in attribution may contribute to divergent problem definitions, shaping which issues are prioritised and the type, scale, and temporal orientation of adaptation, mitigation, and other governance responses. Building on empirical research documenting variation in climate change attribution strength across actors and contexts, this paper introduces climate change attribution divergence, defined as differences among actors in the strength with which experienced environmental events and impacts are attributed to anthropogenic climate change. While existing research has examined attribution primarily at the individual level, less attention has been given to how differences in attribution may matter within shared governance contexts. The paper develops a conceptual framework specifying how subjective attribution, variation in attribution strength, and problem definition are linked, and how attribution divergence may contribute to divergent governance responses. The framework offers an interpretive mechanism for understanding why environmental events may give rise to different governance pathways.

Lund University (SE), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SE), Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Alnarp (SE)
Climate action, Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Sustainability and Climate Change Governance
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon