Climate Security and Misinformation: A Baseline

The report argues that climate change and the energy transition provide new vectors for mis- and disinformation that extend beyond simple climate denialism. It categorizes these threats into physical risks (e.g., misattributing disasters), cascading risks (e.g., xenophobic narratives around climate migration), and response risks (e.g., backlash to green policies). The document highlights the role of geopolitical competition, particularly involving Russia and China, and the amplifying effect of low institutional trust and AI technology. It recommends integrating misinformation risk assessments into climate policy design and strengthening monitoring capabilities.

• Climate security risks are categorized into three types: physical risks from direct impacts like flooding, cascading risks from indirect socio-political consequences such as conflict over resources, and response risks arising from the negative consequences of emissions-cutting or adaptation policies.
• State actors use climate disasters to advance foreign policy disputes; for example, Chinese networks falsely attributed the 2023 Maui wildfires to a US "weather weapon," and Iran has alleged that weather manipulation by Israel, the UAE, and Turkey causes its droughts.
• Climate-driven migration is being weaponized through xenophobic misinformation, including "ecobordering," where environmental degradation is falsely blamed on immigrants. This has contributed to violence, such as the 2019 El Paso shooting justified by a manifesto alleging a "Hispanic invasion of Texas."
• The energy transition creates "response risks" where petrostates and corporations use disinformation to protect economic interests. Examples include inauthentic accounts boosting the UAE's climate credentials before COP28 and pro-Russian actors attempting to entrench natural gas interests in Europe.
• Climate policies have triggered domestic polarization and protests fueled by falsehoods, such as 2024 European farmer protests against EU Green Deal policies and UK misinformation claiming emissions reductions were a pretext for a "net zero prison."
• Vulnerability to climate misinformation is amplified by declining institutional trust, fragmented media ecosystems, and AI. A 2023 Edelman survey across 14 countries found that trust in climate information from journalists, CEOs, or government leaders is below 50%.

APA

The Council on Strategic Risks (2024). Climate Security and Misinformation: A Baseline. https://councilonstrategicrisks.org/2024/04/23/climate-security-and-misinformation-a-baseline/

Chicago

The Council on Strategic Risks. Climate Security and Misinformation: A Baseline. 2024. https://councilonstrategicrisks.org/2024/04/23/climate-security-and-misinformation-a-baseline/.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=The Council on Strategic Risks |title=Climate Security and Misinformation: A Baseline |date=23 April 2024 |url=https://councilonstrategicrisks.org/2024/04/23/climate-security-and-misinformation-a-baseline/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{thecouncilonstrategicrisks2024climate, author = {{The Council on Strategic Risks}}, title = {{Climate Security and Misinformation: A Baseline}}, institution = {The Council on Strategic Risks}, year = {2024}, month = apr, url = {https://councilonstrategicrisks.org/2024/04/23/climate-security-and-misinformation-a-baseline/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }