Darrick Evensen

COVID‐19 substantially disrupted daily life globally. Human geography and environmental psychology scholars have argued that dramatic shifts in how people used urban environments during the pandemic could have important implications for those studying human–environment relationships and for planners designing urban spaces. Nevertheless, empirical data that examine shifts in human–environment relationships in urban areas during the pandemic are still limited. We explored how COVID‐19 influenced sense of place and investigated how sense of place and changes to daily life because of the pandemic affected environmentally friendly behaviours. A case study involved working with 10 interview participants and 302 survey respondents in Wuhan, China—the city where the pandemic started, and which experienced very strict lockdowns. Data collection occurred in June 2021. The results reveal three main findings. First, stronger emotions directed towards the pandemic and heightened pandemic responses positively affected sense of place, with response behaviours including taking disease prevention measures, spending more time with families/friends, and helping others during the crisis. Second, sense of place and behavioural response to the pandemic were both associated with environmentally friendly behaviours, but not with environmentally friendly attitudes. Third, the nation and city, rather than the community level, are the geographic scales most consonant with respondent notions of place; sense of place grew most at these scales during the pandemic. We conclude that contrary to some speculation, sense of place was enhanced during the pandemic, at least in Wuhan. The pandemic also provided an opportunity for behaviour transitions, but not necessarily via changes in sense of place.

Most Americans fail to recognize widespread public support for climate change action. Here we investigate how this phenomenon differs for Republican supporters versus opponents of several climate change policies. Surveying a representative sample of Republican voters (N = 1000), we find that misperception of in-group support for climate action is primarily restricted to Republicans already opposed to action. Specifically, those in the minority (i.e., Republicans opposed to climate action) were more likely to erroneously perceive other Republicans as holding views on climate change policy similar to their own. While Republican supporters recognize that most Republicans support climate change policy, they may be discouraged from expressing their support due to an information environment disproportionately portraying Republicans as opposed to climate change action.

We explore how Swedish and Danish leaders used framing in crisis communication to mobilize support for their Covid‐19 mitigation policies. This research note is grounded in social constructionism and framing theory, analysing how framing in crisis communication is used as a political tool to justify a chosen pandemic strategy. We employ content analysis to compare Swedish and Danish press conferences during the early stages of the Covid‐19 pandemic. Denmark and Sweden are politically and culturally similar countries; however, in March 2020, they chose radically different strategies to respond to the escalating Covid‐19 pandemic. Denmark was one of the first countries in Europe to initiate a lockdown, whereas Sweden kept much of society open. Our findings indicate that Swedish and Danish leaders strategically used framing in their communication to convey understanding of the pandemic that supported their respective agendas. Furthermore, the study contributes insight on how framing is used to justify or question the basis of decision‐making in crises. We argue that through constructing a sense of urgency and emphasizing the uncertain nature of the crisis, scientific evidence as the appropriate basis of decision‐making is challenged, prompting a discussion about the political nature and responsibilities in crisis management.