Effective Climate Communication

Effective Climate Communication

Understanding communication struggles and solutions towards effective communication around climate change is critical for building the climate justice movement. Climate communication as an area of interdisciplinary study has been growing considerably in the past 10 years, yet continues to face challenges of sharing this information with communicators, organizers and educators.1


Effective climate communication
is critical since public awareness and knowledge about climate change hasn’t generated the level of response necessary for addressing the level of the threat climate change poses.2

People’s Climate March. New York City, NY, U.S. 2014.
People’s Climate March. New York City, NY, U.S. 2014.

History has shown us, however, that rapid change in individual behavior can occur. “Stricter laws, penalties and enforcement measures related to smoking, seat belts, drunk driving and littering…led to rapid increases in seat-belt use and actual reductions in smoking, drunk driving and littering.”3 Knowing that policies have helped with rapid individual behavior change, climate change poses a complex set of challenges that have proven to be difficult to create policy toward change. The complex challenges are evident by a crisis that crosses boundaries and political differences along with changing climate impacts, continued debates over cost coverage, and lack of political will by the people since the crisis isn’t visibly on the forefront of people’s minds. The Paris Agreement provides hope for governmental efforts to support carbon reductions across the globe. Under the new Trump administration in the United States, however, it may prove to be difficult to create and pass measures to reduce carbon reductions. Knowing this, it is clear that cities and states will need to lead on this issue. This will require citizens to demand local and state action.

Effective climate communication can help direct the conversations towards collective action. According to Leiserowitz, Parris and Kates, to increase collective action on climate change, the following conditions are required: “changes in public values and attitudes, vivid focusing events, an existing structure of institutions and organizations capable of encouraging and fostering action, and practical available solutions to the problems requiring change.”4 Effective climate communication influencing these conditions can help drive social change.

Climate communication has been extensively studied in recent years to provide insight in both barriers and effective strategies towards taking action at the individual level and collectively. Climate communication research is appearing in over 400 different journals and other outlets, which provide effective climate communication tips and strategies.5 In 2015, climate communication reached a profound level of broad public outreach globally with the release of the Pope’s Encyclical, Laudato Si’, “with its particular focus on climate change, accentuating the cultural and moral turn in communication practice witnessed over the past 5 years.”6 The Encyclical, along with the Paris Agreement, provide hope and direction towards climate action and a call or mandate to act and act swiftly. While there is no set prescription towards effective climate communication as the issue is very complex, I will address how more effective communicators can help move people to climate action.

Messaging and Framing

Communication and rhetoric around climate change plays a key role in helping people understand the climate crisis as well as how we deliberate and advocate to implement solutions, according to Endres and DuPont.7 They state further that “we need to think about and understand issues of framing that affect the way people engage with climate change and the environment.”8 Studies have shown that apocalyptic messaging has not been effective in moving people to action because of the “paralysis that can happen in the face of such a large, complex intergenerational issue.”9 In terms of increasing the number of citizens to become active on climate and build the climate justice movement, effective climate communication with messages of hope is imperative.10 Hope may counteract despair and encourage action, and create a sense that people can make a positive difference.11 In addition, climate communication that focuses on strategies and solutions helps foster the belief that the problem of climate change is solvable which then increases the perception that the problem is important.12 Patt and Weber also found that when people see that solutions to climate change are possible, they are more likely to accept that it’s a problem in the first place.13 This provides the case of the importance of sharing solutions in climate communication rather than framing climate change in the context of a problem. “It is also important to emphasize the fact that every human being has the capacity to make a difference in fighting climate change.”14

Climate communication is most effective if it is a two-way dialog with messages or framings specific to the audience, in order to have people with varying values to be heard and be part of the contribution to the societal response.15 Communicating the science of climate change creates a rift between the listener and the speaker because the listener doesn’t take ownership of the information and it’s still left to the experts.16 One of the most effective methods of increasing climate activism is by discussing the issue with family and friends since people are more influenced by those they know.17

No Coal Exports Rally. Seattle, WA, U.S. 2015.
No Coal Exports Rally. Seattle, WA, U.S. 2015.

According to Moore and Russell, it’s important to connect actions and events with meaning for people because, “if something is meaningful, people believe it to be true.”18 People will believe their facts, wherever they learn them and it’s important to meet people where they are at, in relation to their knowledge of climate change. The stories or narratives that we communicate can make meaning from these facts. “Communication experts now point increasingly to the importance of story-telling and using narrative formats to convey climate change.”19 To move people to action, there must be meaning behind their truth that will propel them to act.20 Furthermore, people are more motivated to act if their concern is brought about through personal experience that has an emotional impact versus having a concern driven by intellectual understanding.21

“The values we hold affect not only our perceptions and interpretations of the climate and our acceptability of climate science, but—crucially, and often more prominently—the acceptability of anticipated or proposed behavioral changes, technological solutions, or climate policies.”22 Tailoring communication to reach a specific audience matters because of various values, beliefs, world views and group identities. Climate deniers or conservatives are more likely to be persuaded by messages that are patriotic or the impact of their action can improve health or save money.23 Climate action programs using messages that focus on local or immediate climate impacts versus global or future impacts, along with adding health and economic concerns, can increase participation or action.24 Messages that involve sharing the uncertainty or risk of unstable oil supply moves people towards supporting climate policy without necessarily understanding climate change.25

Women’s March. Seattle, WA, U.S. 2017.
Women’s March. Seattle, WA, U.S. 2017.

Communication that highlights co-benefits to a community, such as development (economic and scientific advancement) and benevolence (moral and caring) further engages a community to influence governmental action, regardless of their ideological divides, according to Bain et al.26 Communicating with inclusive words like ‘we’ and ‘us’ can shift perceptions and increase support for a normative vision within groups and increase intentions to act.27 According to a study by Shi, Visschers and Siegrist, people were more inclined to change their behaviors when climate communication included more climate friendly behaviors people could take, and less inclined to change when the communication was providing more knowledge about the negative consequences of climate change.28

Furthermore, communications with framing that expresses environmental protection as protecting a way of life or making society a better place can increase environmental citizenship amongst skeptics and conservatives.29 Moving climate deniers through effective climate communication is also possible. “Framing climate change action in terms of producing greater interpersonal warmth or societal development was more effective in promoting environmental citizenship than a frame focusing on the reality and risks of climate change, and this was particularly the case for deniers.”30

According to Dr. Robert Bullard, it’s important how we frame and communicate problems as well as who is the messenger. Bullard states that “presenting the information is perhaps as important as the information itself. I have said this many times that the people of color, who are in positions of power, in academia and elsewhere, need to come forward as messengers.”31 Bullard also suggests that equity be given equal weight to science in climate communication while also focusing on current impacts that are effecting populations today.32 Messaging that includes “recognition of the interconnections between environmental destruction and systems of oppression” are essential contributions to “creating a just and sustainable world,” otherwise we are just solving climate change without addressing justice.33

D12 Rally. Paris, France. 2015.
D12 Rally. Paris, France. 2015.

Channels of Communication

While people are moved to action through personal connections to others and to local impacts, other channels of communication can also have an influence on public perception of climate change. In the U.S., manufactured doubt about climate change by the fossil fuel industry penetrated mainstream media channels, according to Oreskes and Conway.34 “Journalists were constantly pressured to grant the professional deniers equal status – and equal time in news print space – and they did.”35 This has created an uphill battle for scientific knowledge to be trusted by the public even when 97% of scientists agree that global temperatures are increasing due to human activity.36 “Manufacturing doubt about the scientific consensus on climate change is one of the most effective means of reducing acceptance of climate change and support for mitigation policies.”37 Researchers have found that when the 97% scientific consensus is communicated to the public, climate change acceptance increases, especially among conservatives.38 All channels of communication can increase trust from their readers or their audience by referring to the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming.

D12 Art Space. Paris, France. 2015.
D12 Art Space. Paris, France. 2015.

Over the past 5 years, researchers have found that channels of communication that are not just information presented but rather through dialog and “deliberative processes can open minds, deepen understanding, foster empathy, change attitudes, and increase receptivity to policy alternatives.”39 How the dialog can be shifted by specific social, psychological and cognitive processes involved is still being examined.40 Furthermore, Kahan suggests that for communicators about science to be more effective, they must consider the evidence-based methods of integrating communication science into their messaging.41 “If communication researchers want climate communication to be as effective and impactful as it could be, their work must connect more effectively with those who do most of the talking (climate scientists, policy-makers, advocates in all sectors of society, journalists, editors, and public intellectuals).”42 To be a more effective climate communicator, it is essential to have the latest knowledge from the researchers who should make that connection happen, according to Moser.43 Furthermore, Moser states, “because climate change affects everything and everyone everywhere, effective communication about it should involve and reach across disciplinary, sectoral, and geographic boundaries, aiming to reach colleagues wherever they work.”44

Communication Strategies
for Public Engagement

Along with effective communication, it is important to foster the sense that it is a social norm to act on climate change through public engagement, especially in relation to policy support.45 A social norm, in relation to climate change, is when it becomes the norm in society to take action on climate change. Norms can “refer either to what is commonly done-that is, what is normal-or to what is commonly approved-that is, what is socially sanctioned.”46 Social norms are powerful sources of influence and play an important role in human decision-making.47 Societal transformation to take action on climate change through collective action has proven to be successful and thought to be required by a broad consensus.48 They state that this collective action framework, based in a social norm context, could involve community-based initiatives as well as protest movements. People are more motivated to engage in collective action if is conceptualized as a social norm.49

Break Free 2016 March. Anacortes, WA, U.S. 2016.
Break Free 2016 March. Anacortes, WA, U.S. 2016.

Communicating the contributions of personal behaviors to collective action to reduce global warming may be a powerful motivator for people to take personal action, according to Roser-Renouf, Atkinson, Maibach and Leiserowitz.50 Once people start acting on an individual level, they begin to advocate and show interest in policy changes. Some will become influencers of policy change and others will join advisory councils.51 Individual actions lead people to support action at the community level.

Recent research focusing on the impact of messaging around health impacts that are harming people now and not in the future are more likely to support climate policies.52 “A large literature in the field of health and risk communication points to an individual’s personal sense of risk as the most powerful motivator of behavioral change.”53 A health frame can move more people to support climate policy than using the environmental frame since health values are more widely held.54 Also, it’s important to plan your messaging based on the audience’s beliefs on climate change. For example, “disengaged climate change believers might pay attention to climate change messages framed in terms of public health, whereas climate deniers might respond negatively and radically to those messages framed in terms of national security.”55

Divest Western March. Bellingham, WA, U.S. 2016.
Divest Western March. Bellingham, WA, U.S. 2016.

Businesses can also shift public opinion by the commitments they make in becoming more sustainable.56 Effective climate communication can also include the impact that the market can have as a messenger for change since ‘money talks.’57 “Money tells us what we value, what we cherish and the challenge is to “teach” our markets to speak with wisdom on the issue of climate change.”58 Communicators can increase climate action by sharing messages that consumer activism is a person’s responsibility for creating change. Encouraging consumer activists to share their opinions with others can have a much greater impact versus their individual purchases because their opinions influence others around them.59 Furthermore, it is important that consumer choices aren’t substituted for collective action.60 People will still need to demand climate policies. “Public policies drove consumer choices in the case of taxing cigarettes and for carbon pollution. If policy could make polluting financially and socially unfavorable, this could change consumer habits.”61

COP 21 Billboard. Paris, France. 2015.
COP 21 Billboard. Paris, France. 2015.

Barriers to Action

Part of effective climate communication is addressing barriers to climate action. “While we strongly believe that better understanding has an important role to play, communication that does not keep barriers to behavior and social change in mind is unlikely to be effective or sufficient.”62 Individual barriers to climate action such as a lack of knowledge, belief that it won’t make a difference, not having enough time or money, how others would view them, skepticism, and fatalism are identified in a study by Semenza et al.63 Barriers to public engagement on climate change include: low public awareness, low awareness on climate change consensus, viewing climate change as a distant issue, belief that it is the responsibility of government or industry and not individual were identified by Whitmarsh, O’Neill and Lorenzoni.64 Moser and Dilling identified cognitive, psychological and technical barriers along with organizational inertia and resource constraints, lack of peer support, lack of political will and leadership.65 The main themes in the literature on moving people to climate action suggest that effective climate communication, increasing public engagement and building collective action will help address these barriers to action, and provide key strategies to increasing public support and action.

Locations around Paris where activists gathered during the COP21 Summit

D12 Art Space. Paris, France. 2015.
D12 Art Space. Paris, France. 2015.

In terms of collective action, the participants’ campaign messages or framing used regarding climate solutions at the Copenhagen COP 15 Climate Summit was the focus of the survey studied by Wahlström, Wennerhag, and Rootes.66 Most of the protesters stated that change ought to be a result of individual behavior followed by legislative or policy changes while few named solutions involving systems change or global justice.67 Considering the findings from this previous study, this research project also includes an analysis of a survey (Climate Activist Survey) given to climate activists that attended the Paris COP 21 Climate Summit. The Climate Activist Survey provides a collection of qualitative data in the form of written responses to questions on current climate activism, future climate activism and barriers to climate action. The responses are categorized into themes or constructs of climate actions and barriers based on the themes previously identified in the research. An analysis of the data includes total number of similar constructs, patterns, and correlations. This analysis may validate findings in the literature regarding climate action strategies and identify which strategies to put into action in the future as well as identify current barriers to climate action. 

Place to B. Paris, France. 2015.
Place to B. Paris, France. 2015.
D12 Rally. Paris, France. 2015.
D12 Rally. Paris, France. 2015.

Climate communication plays a pivotal role in moving people to take action on climate change. Because of the immediate need to address the climate crisis, communication science has focused on how to be more effective in moving people to action. There are extensive communication resources developed and shared online to provide tools for communicators, community leaders, policy makers that can also be accessed by everyone’s neighbors. In-person communication continues to play a role in shifting societal views and as soon as it becomes the norm to take climate action, we will begin to see a rapid shift in policy support for addressing the climate crisis. Climate communication needs to be far reaching into all aspects of society’s communication channels, since the issue effects everyone everywhere. A list of climate communication resources can be found in Appendix C.

COP 21 Billboard. Paris, France. 2015.
COP 21 Billboard. Paris, France. 2015.
End Notes — Effective Climate Communication

     1. Moser, S. C. (2016). Reflections on climate change communication research and practice in the second decade of the 21st century: What more is there to say? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 7(3), 345-369. doi:10.1002/wcc.403

     2. Moser, S. C., & Dilling, L. (Eds.). (2007). Creating a climate for change: Communicating climate change and facilitating social change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

     3. Ibid., xiv.

     4. Ibid., xiv.

     5. Moser, “Reflections on climate change.”

     6. Ibid., 347.

     7. Endres, D., & DuPont, M. D. (2016). Rhetoric, climate change, and social justice: An interview with Dr. Danielle Endres. Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis, 5(2).

     8. Ibid., 4.

     9. Ibid., 5.

     10. Smith, N., & Leiserowitz, A. (2014). The role of emotion in global warming policy support and opposition. Risk Analysis, 34(5), 937-948. doi:10.1111/risa.12140

     11. Stevenson, K., & Peterson, N. (2015). Motivating Action through Fostering Climate Change Hope and Concern and Avoiding Despair among Adolescents. Sustainability, 8(1). doi:10.3390/su8010006

     12. Drews, S., & Van den Bergh, J. C. (2016). What explains public support for climate policies? A review of empirical and experimental studies. Climate Policy, 16(7), 855-876. doi:10.1080/14693062.2015.1058240

     13. Patt, A. G., & Weber, E. U. (2014). Perceptions and communication strategies for the many uncertainties relevant for climate policy. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 5(2), 219-232. doi:10.1002/wcc.259

     14. Masud, M. M., Akhtar, R., Afroz, R., Al-Amin, A. Q., & Kari, F. B. (2015). Pro-environmental behavior and public understanding of climate change. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, 20(4), 592. doi:10.1007/s11027-0139509-4

     15. Moser, S. C., & Dilling, L. (2011). Communicating climate change: Closing the science-action gap. The oxford handbook of climate change and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 161-174.

     16. Moser and Dilling, Creating a climate for change.

     17. Roser-Renouf, C., Maibach, E. W., Leiserowitz, A., & Zhao, X. (2014). The genesis of climate change activism: From key beliefs to political action. Climatic change, 125(2), 163-178. doi:10.1007/s10584-014-1173-5

     18. Moore, H., & Russell, J. K. (2011). Organizing cools the planet: Tools and reflections on across navigating the climate crisis. Oakland, CA: PM Press, 26.

     19. Moser, “Reflections on climate change,” 350.

     20. Moore and Russell, Organizing cools the planet.

     21. Patt and Weber, “Perceptions and communication.”

     22. Moser. “Reflections on climate change,” 350.

     23. Whitmarsh, L. (2009). Behavioural responses to climate change: Asymmetry of intentions and impacts. Journal of environmental psychology, 29(1), 13-23. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.003

     24. Sussman, R., Gifford, R., & Abrahamse, W. (2016). Social mobilization: How to encourage action on climate change. Victoria, BC: Pacific Institute for Climate Solutions.

     25. Patt and Weber, “Perceptions and communication.”

     26. Bain, P. G., Milfont, T. L., Kashima, Y., Bilewicz, M., Doron, G., Garðarsdóttir, R. B., … & Corral-Verdugo, V. (2016). Co-benefits of addressing climate change can motivate action around the world. Nature climate change, 6(2), 154-157. doi:10.1038
/nclimate2814

     27. Fielding, K. S., & Hornsey, M. J. (2016). A social identity analysis of climate change and environmental attitudes and behaviors: Insights and opportunities. Frontiers in psychology, 7. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00121

     28. Shi, J., Visschers, V. H., & Siegrist, M. (2015). Public perception of climate change: The importance of knowledge and cultural worldviews. Risk Analysis, 35(12), 2183-2201. doi:10.1111/risa.12406

     29. Fielding and Hornsey, “A social identity analysis.”

     30. Bain, P. G., Hornsey, M. J., Bongiorno, R., & Jeffries, C. (2012). Promoting pro-environmental action in climate change deniers. Nature Climate Change, 2(8), 602. doi:10.1038/nclimate1532

     31. Bullard, D., Robert, D., Gardezi, M., Chennault, C., & Dankbar, H. (2016). Climate Change and Environmental Justice: A Conversation with Dr. Robert Bullard. Journal of Critical Thought and Praxis, 5(2), 3.

     32 Ibid.

     33. Endres and DuPont, “Rhetoric, Climate Change, and Social Justice,” 5.

     34. Oreskes, N., & Conway, E. M. (2010). Merchants of doubt: How a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Press.

     35. Ibid., 214.

     36. Cook, J., Oreskes, N., Doran, P. T., Anderegg, W. R., Verheggen, B., Maibach, E. W., … & Nuccitelli, D. (2016). Consensus on consensus: A synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 11(4), 048002. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002

     37. Ibid., 6.

     38. Ibid.

     39. Moser, “Reflections on climate change,” 348.

     40. Ibid.

     41. Kahan, Dan M. (2014) Making climate-science communication evidence-based — all the way down. In M. Boykoff & D. Crow (Eds.). Culture, politics and climate change: How information shapes our common future (pp. 203-220). New York, NY: Routledge Press.

     42. Moser, “Reflections on climate change,” 357.

     43. Ibid.

     44. Ibid., 349.

     45. Roser-Renouf et al., “The genesis of climate change activism.”

     46. Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. Advances in experimental social psychology, 24, 201.
doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60330-5

     47. van der Linden, S., Maibach, E., & Leiserowitz, A. (2015). Improving public engagement with climate change five “best practice” insights from psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 758-763. doi:10.1177/1745691615598516

     48. Rees, J. H., & Bamberg, S. (2014). Climate protection needs societal change: Determinants of intention to participate in collective climate action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44(5), 466-473. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2032

     49. Ibid.

     50. Roser-Renouf, C., Atkinson, L., Maibach, E. W., & Leiserowitz, A. (2016). The consumer as climate activist. International Journal of Communication, 25(10), 4759-4783.

     51. Moser and Dilling, Creating a climate for change.

     52. Akerlof, K., DeBono, R., Berry, P., Leiserowitz, A., Roser-Renouf, C., Clarke, K. L., … & Maibach, E. W. (2010). Public perceptions of climate change as a human health risk: Surveys of the United States, Canada and Malta. International journal of environmental research and public health, 7(6), 2559-2606. doi:10.3390/ijerph7062559

     53. Akerlof et al., “Public perceptions of climate change,” 2574.

     54. Ibid.

     55. Lo, A. Y., & Jim, C. Y. (2015). Come rain or shine? Public expectation on local weather change and differential effects on climate change attitude. Public Understanding of Science, 24(8), 928-942. doi:10.1177/0963662513517483

     56. Moser and Dilling, “Communicating climate change.”

     57. Ibid.

58. Ibid., 355.

     59. Roser-Renouf et al., “The consumer as climate activist.”

     60. Moser and Dilling, “Communicating climate change.”

     61. Ibid., 459.

     62. Ibid., 11.

     63. Semenza, J. C., Hall, D. E., Wilson, D. J., Bontempo, B. D., Sailor, D. J., & George, L. A. (2008). Public perception of climate change: Voluntary mitigation and barriers to behavior change. American journal of preventive medicine, 35(5), 479-487. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2008.08.020

     64. Whitmarsh, L., O’Neill, S., & Lorenzoni, I. (2013). Public engagement with climate change: What do we know and where do we go from here? International Journal of Media & Cultural Politics, 9(1), 7-25. doi:10.1386/macp.9.1.7_1

     65. Moser and Dilling, “Communicating climate change.”

     66. Wahlström, M., Wennerhag, M., & Rootes, C. (2013). Framing “The Climate Issue”: Patterns of Participation and Prognostic Frames among Climate Summit Protesters. Global Environmental Politics, 13(4), 101-122. doi:10.1162/GLEP_a_00200

     67. Ibid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *