Collective Climate Action in Indonesia A Mixed-Methods Study

Hilyatuz (Lia) Zakiyyah

Advisor: Edward Wile Maibach, PhD, Department of Communication

Committee Members: Christopher E Clarke, Xiaoquan Zhao, Timothy Gibson, Ben Manski

Online Location,
July 01, 2025, 09:00 AM to 11:00 AM

Abstract:

This dissertation extends the Social Identity Model of Collective Action (SIMCA) to the study of climate change communication in the Global South, with a focus on Indonesia. Using a mixed-methods design, it integrates secondary analysis of a nationally representative dataset – the 2021 Climate Change in the Indonesian Mind (CCIM) survey (N = 3,438, weighted) – and in-depth interviews with 31 Indonesian climate activists.
The quantitative phase employed Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) using the SEMlj Interactive module in Jamovi v2.6, applying the Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (DWLS) estimator for ordinal indicators. Collective action was modeled through four subdimensions: awareness-raising, disruptive pressure, high-commitment, and resource-based support. The model incorporated social identity and moral beliefs as exogenous predictors, mediated by descriptive and injunctive norms, collective efficacy, felt responsibility, and collective guilt. The final model demonstrated excellent fit (CFI = 0.995, TLI = 0.990, RMSEA = 0.031, SRMR = 0.022). Social identity and moral beliefs significantly predicted collective action directly and through multiple mediators. Descriptive norms, felt responsibility, and identity consistently exerted strong positive indirect effects, while efficacy showed significant negative associations – particularly for high-commitment and disruptive actions. Injunctive norms and guilt displayed more variable and sometimes suppressive effects.
The qualitative phase deepened the SIMCA framework by examining how attribution framing shaped Indonesian activists’ identity formation, emotional experiences, and collective engagement. Participants who attributed climate change to systemic actors (e.g., government, corporations) were more likely to express moral outrage, felt responsibility, and a stronger collective identity – fueling sustained action. In contrast, individualized blame narratives often diluted efficacy and identity salience. Emotional experiences extended beyond guilt and felt responsibility to include anger, anxiety, hope, fear, and grief. Moreover, accounts of surveillance, repression, and authoritarian constraints underscored the structural barriers shaping perceived norms and feasibility of action—reinforcing SIMCA’s contextual assumptions.
Despite limitations such as reliance on secondary survey data and purposive qualitative sampling, this study affirms that SIMCA remains a powerful framework for understanding climate action in Indonesia. However, it must be extended to Global South realities through attention to attributional framings, emotional pluralism, and structural constraints. As a practical contribution, the study proposes a new climate activism survey instrument, grounded in the mixed-methods findings, to help predict which individuals are more likely to engage in specific forms of climate action under different framing conditions. Future research should test these framing effects experimentally, explore identity-emotion pathways longitudinally, and further adapt collective action models to diverse sociopolitical ecologies.

 https://gmu.zoom.us/j/96931793298