Climate change policy as risk governance

The Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is held annually between November and December. At COP, 198 countries and organizations (the "Parties") from around the world participate to discuss various agreements aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions and minimizing the impacts of climate change. Following these discussions, each Party is expected to develop domestic systems and work toward achieving its targets. At present, discussions are primarily based on the Paris Agreement, which entered into force in 2016. However, such efforts have not progressed smoothly due to instability in energy and resource conditions caused by conflicts in various regions, including the current situation in the Middle East. On the other hand, various public opinion surveys (for example, Ipsos, 2025) indicate that public awareness of the risks of climate change and related issues is increasing. Until now, discussions have often been led primarily by G7 (or G8, etc.) countries and China, which are major emitters of greenhouse gases. However, new developments are emerging, such as cases in which countries previously considered negative toward mitigation measures (including oil-producing nations) are now hosting recent COP meetings.

Climate change is a major risk that will determine our future. How can we avoid such a significant risk? In fields such as food safety, disaster prevention, public health, and the environment, there has long been a concept known as risk management. It is generally understood to consist of three elements: risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication (for an easy-to-understand explanation, see the Codex Committee, etc.). This three-part approach is simple and easy to understand. This concept is based on a framework in which the managing authority (i.e., administrative bodies or, in the case of climate change, governments) makes decisions and manages risks. However, climate change mitigation cannot be undertaken by governments alone. It requires decision-making and action across all sectors of the socio-economic system. So, the risk governance framework introduced in this article is necessary as a framework that reflects this reality. Specifically, it is a system for societal risk response advocated primarily by the International Risk Governance Council (IRGC, 2005). It seeks to reduce risk across society through risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication conducted by various sectors and stakeholders, as well as collaboration among sectors based on their own perspectives.

Public opinion and risk governance

Members of society hold opinions on various social issues. Among these opinions, those that reflect a certain shared consensus are referred to as public opinion. It can also be described as views and ideas among the public that have gained a certain level of support. Public opinion surveys are a scientific method for assessing the extent to which such widely supported views are endorsed in society.

Discussions of governance position the general public, consumers, and customers as important stakeholders. Communication is positioned as a key element within the risk management framework, with the aim of deepening understanding of risk events and promoting appropriate responses. In contrast, the risk governance framework requires that public opinion be incorporated at various stages of decision-making, including public concern assessment, risk acceptance, and support for response options. In other words, it is not limited to the role of understanding and responding within risk management; instead, it defines citizens as subjects in each stage of risk assessment, management, and communication. Accordingly, various social research methods, including public opinion surveys, are essential tools for capturing such views of citizens.

Public opinion and the mass media on climate change issues

I have conducted public opinion surveys focusing on climate change and related energy issues. These include risk perceptions regarding climate change issues, preferences for various energy sources that are key to addressing climate change issues, attitudes toward international agreements such as the Paris Agreement, and support for various policy measures. At the same time, we established an international network (MeCCO: Media and Climate Change Observatory, https://mecco.colorado.edu/index.html) with researchers abroad to study trends in media coverage of climate change and build a database. This is because public opinion is strongly influenced by mass media coverage, and that itself is influenced by major related events not only within Japan but also internationally. Examples include annual COP discussions under the UNFCCC, the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reports published every few years, and increasing references to climate change in the context of recent natural disasters. Various events increase media coverage, and this increase in reporting in turn raises public interest in climate change. Although the rise of social media is said to be changing the role of conventional mass media, the latter still plays a central role in disseminating information at present. There is also debate as to whether the media amplifies or attenuates information. Public opinion is not straightforward. People do not simply accept media reports at face value. Rather, they often select and interpret information in light of their past experiences and examine it with other sources. Climate change should be understood as a risk while taking into account not only mass media but also other information channels, and the views of citizens as manifested in public opinion should be properly incorporated into its governance. At the same time, we must also examine various sentiments shaping mass media, which influence public opinion. A system should be built in which these elements are properly utilized within a risk governance framework. This will enable actors in various positions to reduce risk through response from their respective standpoints.

---

Reference

• Ipsos (2025) PEOPLE AND CLIMATE CHANGE.
  https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2025-04/People%26amp%3BClimateChange2025.pdf (Access as of June 1, 2026)
• IRGC (2005) White paper on RISK GOVERNANCE TOWARDS AN INTEGRATIVE APPROACH.
  https://irgc.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/IRGC_WP_No_1_Risk_Governance__reprinted_version_3.pdf
  (Access as of June 1, 2026)
• FAO (2025) Risk assessment in the framework of Codex.
  https://elearning.fao.org/course/view.php?id=1368.
  (Access as of June 3, 2026)

Midori Aoyagi／Professor, Faculty of Policy Studies, Chuo University
Areas of Specialization: Sociology of Risk, Environmental Policy, and Public Opinion Survey

Her areas of specialization are sociology of risk, environmental policy, and public opinion survey.

Midori Aoyagi was born in Nagano Prefecture. She graduated from the Department of Agricultural and Forestry Economics in the Faculty of Agriculture, Kyoto University in 1985. She earned a Ph.D. in Agriculture from Kyoto University in 1992. After working at the National Institute for Environmental Studies (NIES), she moved to her current position in 2025. Current research themes include climate change issues and public opinion, particularly the influence of mass media reporting and people’s risk perceptions. She participates in projects such as MeCCO (Media and Climate Change Observatory), centered at the University of Colorado (https://mecco.colorado.edu/index.html), and studies the relationship between media coverage and public opinion.

• Share articles
• 
• 
•