Laila Mendy: Climate denial and scepticism in Sweden: From distrust to deliberation in an antagonistic climate

Abstract

This thesis explores climate change denial and scepticism in Sweden. The problem concerns segments of the Swedish public who exhibit low trust in scientists or hold political ideologies associated with climate change denial and scepticism. The study takes place during a period of shifting climate politics in Sweden. The objective of the thesis is twofold: to explore how denial and scepticism about the climate issue can be understood and reduced in Sweden, and to explore the relationships between researchers and their publics in this context through the lens of distrust in Sweden.

In a Swedish survey study, I find that low trust in scientists and traditional authoritarian and national ideology are most strongly associated with the denial of climate change and response scepticism. A systematic literature review explores how such negative beliefs about climate change can be counteracted. It identifies that message framing, co-benefits, trusted communicators, and more dialogical forms of science communication are useful approaches. Two interview-based case studies show that researchers experience and anticipate distrust towards their work, which influences what they communicate and how they approach their research. 

These findings suggest that researchers working on climate change in Sweden face complex challenges when engaging with the public, particularly where scientific knowledge meets distrust or antagonism. While the thesis identifies several ways forward, it also highlights the need for greater institutional support and resources for researchers working in these settings. Further research is needed in the Swedish context to assess the effectiveness of strategies and measures aimed at counteracting climate denial and scepticism. Although grounded in the Swedish case, the challenges studied are not unique to here and reflect the dynamics found in other democratic societies that are characterised by denial and distrust in climate science and policy.