Abstract

This article opens the “black box” of decision-making for climate change (CC) in the United States. It explores why some individuals, organizations, and groups in this country recognize CC and act, while others deny or minimize science and avoid or fight action. First, we clarify key concepts and issue-level decision templates. Second, we identify the vast range of attitudes toward CC, which are more complex than the generally accepted dichotomy between the “wise” (supporters of CC science and action) and the “wicked” (dissenters). Third, we analyze five structural factors that frame and influence climate-related opinions and decisions. One, the nature of the issue: by its magnitude, novelty, and complexity, CC vexes humanity’s capacity to think and act efficiently. Two, human nature: our cognitive, sensory, and emotional filters, and core features of our social identity can constitute obstacles. Three, the sociology (social networks, actors’ social positioning) and connected political economy (vested interests) that underpin actors’ thoughts, emotions, and actions. Four, institutions and structures that shape, facilitate, or hinder our goals. Five, the weight of history on actors today and tomorrow. These five structural factors of decision-making frame narrow, issue-specific decisional frameworks, and their complex interplay explains the varieties and paradoxes of US opinion toward CC.