Vollan, Björn

Rural communities worldwide face rapidly evolving and complex challenges, such as climate change. The current generation is challenged to balance its own needs with those of future generations and must decide how much to invest in adapting to climate change to secure the future. This highlights the key intergenerational dilemma at the heart of efforts to adapt to climate change. Addressing these challenges requires collective governance and innovative tools to enhance the same. This study examines whether a game combining the mechanisms of public good and dictator games framed as an intergenerational dilemma, along with a visioning workshop, can influence rural community members' perceptions of climate change, future generations, and self-efficacy. In the game, participants faced decisions that involved balancing resource use between immediate needs and future generations, simulating the trade-offs inherent in climate adaptation. The visioning workshop then facilitated discussions about long-term adaptation strategies.

Our intervention took place in 26 villages in the Zambezi region of Namibia, where participants were interviewed before or after the intervention. We conducted a follow-up survey eight months later to evaluate the persistence of the intervention’s effects. Outcomes were analyzed using ordinary least squares regression for continuous variables and multinomial analysis for categorical outcomes. Results indicate that participation in the intervention significantly increased self-efficacy, awareness of climate risks, and demand for climate change-related information. While pre-intervention participants displayed strong concern for long-term issues and future generations, the intervention broadened their focus to include both short- and long-term considerations, as well as a greater sense of responsibility toward both current and future generations. Eight months after the intervention, the overall effect of observed gains in self-efficacy remained significantly positive but weakened. Additionally, while risk awareness had decreased, the demand for climate information had increased. These findings affirm the value of experiential learning in strengthening cognitive outcomes that drive collective action, while suggesting that long-term behavioral change requires sustained engagement.

There is a clear lack of research on how policy proposals from bottom-up deliberative arenas, like Citizens' Juries, are perceived by the general public. This is especially apparent in countries of the Global South, where such policymaking approaches provide a promising case to solve pressing environmental issues. This study addresses this gap by investigating public support and the perceived legitimacy of policy recommendations emerging from Citizens’ Juries, using anti-deforestation measures in the Colombian Amazon as a case study. We aim to conduct an online survey experiment (n = 1,200) with Colombian participants to assess how the origin of an environmental policy - whether from a citizens’ jury, expert panel, or different government bodies - affects public support and perceived legitimacy. In addition, we will conduct a discrete choice experiment with the same sample, examining public preferences for Citizens' Jury characteristics. By presenting respondents with jury design variations in terms of representativeness, decision-making authority, depth of deliberation, and financial implications, we can determine which characteristics are most closely associated with perceived fairness and acceptance. Demographic and attitudinal data will also be collected to assess how factors such as political stance and environmental attitudes moderate perceptions of jury legitimacy. Our study will provide novel insight into the design of deliberative processes in Colombia and similar contexts, thereby enhancing public engagement and trust in participatory policy development.