Why do we fail to act in an emergency?

Scientists are in agreement. Our planet is getting hotter.

Global warming, of course, is not exactly breaking news. Stories about climate change have been around for many years. Nevertheless, we continue our daily activities with little thought of a looming disaster. What psychological explanation could account for our complacency in the face of predicted irreversible global calamity?

Although the Earth’s temperature has fluctuated naturally over the past 4.5 billion years, it has remained relatively stable since the end of the last ice age. Changes currently underway, however, provide a reason for particular concern. That is because they have occurred relatively suddenly, are accelerating rapidly, and appear to be driven largely by human activities since the industrial revolution.

According to scientists, the major factor responsible for producing today’s climate change is the burning of fossil fuels, gas to power our cars, and coal and oil to generate electricity. The byproducts of these activities, the so-called “greenhouse gasses” are emitted into the atmosphere, trapping light and heat from the sun which otherwise would be released back into space.

Scientists also agree that left unchecked, the consequences of global warming will have dramatic and far-reaching effects upon life on the planet, some of which are already being experienced. Experts indicate that warming has begun destroying ancient mountain glaciers, the source of water for millions of people. As the process continues, northern forests will shift further north. Melting polar icecaps will produce rising sea levels, flooding the world’s coastal areas, including our beloved Pattaya and Thailand’s eastern seaboard. The list of warming effects reads like a horror story.

As a solution, scientists have suggested reducing human consumption of fossil fuels, and protecting threatened forests that store carbon in their biomass. They warn, however, that the window of opportunity to take effective action will close, roughly within the next 17 years. Beyond that time, global warming effects may become irreversible.

The issue of climate change was a major item on the agenda of the G8 Summit last week in Scotland. All countries except for the United States have demonstrated a willingness to cooperate by signing the Kyoto Protocol agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, without the participation of the U.S., the world’s leading consumer of fossil fuels, efforts to halt global warming seem doomed to failure. Even with an agreement by the leaders of all nations, the willingness of the world’s people to take the tough steps necessary to avoid disaster seems highly questionable.

Humans have never before faced a problem of such global magnitude, one whose solution demands a concerted effort by so many around the world. Will we act in time to save our planet? What psychological process could explain our current inaction?

It could be an issue of “denial,” the human capacity to ignore or reject an unpleasant or unacceptable reality. Another possibility is a profound feeling of “helplessness,” the decision that a problem lies beyond our capability to solve or make a meaningful difference. Maybe it’s a case of “habituation:” we’ve gotten so used to hearing the warnings; they have become part of the background noise, no longer commanding our urgent attention.

Another explanation might rest on a theory from social psychology known as “diffusion of responsibility.” This notion is based upon the observation that often, when a large group of people witnesses an emergency in progress, no one provides assistance, perhaps assuming that others will. There are numerous anecdotal examples of this phenomenon, exemplified by the infamous Kitty Genovese rape and murder. This vicious attack took place on a populous city street before many onlookers, none of whom took immediate action to intervene or to summon help.

Laboratory investigations into diffusion of responsibility suggest that as the number of bystanders to an emergency increases, the likelihood that someone will intervene decreases. The idea is that with many observers present, the responsibility for taking action is shared, each person experiencing a diminishing portion of the total responsibility.

There is, nevertheless, evidence that people can and will take action, even at extreme personal sacrifice, during certain types of emergencies. Evidence of this appeared during the terrorist attacks upon New York, Madrid, and London, and in the aftermath of the Asian tsunami.

By contrast, global warming is an invisible problem, and thus, easy to ignore. The effects, so far, are subtle, and hard to detect without sophisticated scientific techniques of observation and analysis. Its victims are not bruised, bloodied, and crying for help on CNN.

It would be unfortunate if we must wait until global warming reaches a stage of vividness comparable to a devastating tsunami before taking action. Such delayed action, according to the experts, would likely be too little, and too late.