Search Climate Insights Directory

The briefing identifies a systematic 'escalation of doubt' strategy used by disinformation actors to minimize the role of climate change in wildfires. It details how narratives shift from attributing fires to criminal acts or government mismanagement to more extreme conspiracy theories, such as claims that fires are started to clear land for wind farms or lithium extraction. The document highlights the role of digital platforms' 'attention economy' in amplifying these lies, noting that in Canada, such disinformation has interfered with emergency services and public safety during crises. It concludes that 86% of Canadians support a federal plan to regulate the spread of climate disinformation during extreme weather events.

The document analyzes how the plastics industry employs nine recurring disinformation frames—ranging from denialism and victim blaming to the promotion of pseudo-solutions like chemical recycling—to protect its legitimacy and deflect responsibility for plastic pollution. It argues that these narratives are amplified by digital algorithms and AI, and recommends upstream policy interventions, including production caps and legal accountability for producers, to address the root causes of the plastics crisis.

The report argues that Brazil's digital infrastructure development is characterized by a 'narrative of progress' that obscures ecological damage and marginalizes affected communities. Through media analysis, community surveys, and official information requests, the study finds a systematic lack of environmental impact assessments and a significant gap between the government's 'green' rhetoric and the reality of resource consumption. In Rio Grande do Sul, the Scala AI City project is situated in a flood-prone area, while in Ceará, the TikTok-partnered project by Casa dos Ventos faces opposition from the Anacé Indigenous community over land and water rights. The study concludes that the 'burden of the cloud' falls disproportionately on vulnerable populations through a combination of regulatory vacuum and strategic disinformation.

The briefing examines the digital presence of fifteen influential agribusiness, mining, and fossil fuel companies in Brazil, finding that many employ corporate greenwashing and climate delay tactics. These tactics include the use of vague language, nature-rinsing imagery, and claims that lack supporting investments or actions. The report also notes the use of influencer partnerships and targeted digital advertising to amplify these messages, contrasting them with the companies' actual environmental records.

The report identifies 128 instances of climate disinformation and 373 narratives of inaction in French audiovisual media between January and March 2025. It highlights a significant concentration of disinformation in private media, particularly Sud Radio, and notes spikes in misleading content during major political events such as Donald Trump's inauguration. The analysis finds that energy and mobility are the most targeted sectors, with a strong tendency to discredit green transition solutions and messengers. The authors argue that traditional media are becoming catalysts for the normalization of climate disinformation, exacerbated by low overall airtime dedicated to environmental issues (2%) and a lack of journalistic challenge to inaccurate claims during interviews.

The author analyzes news coverage from right-wing, centrist, and centre-left outlets to identify how the framing of climate activists affects public support for climate action. The analysis identifies three discursive patterns: 'dismissive' framing, which redirects attention to antisocial behavior; 'vilifying' framing, which uses semantics of danger to portray activists as a threat; and 'humanizing' framing, which emphasizes the morality and rationality of the activists' cause. The author concludes that the asymmetrical use of these tactics, particularly by right-wing media, polarizes the climate issue and obstructs the cross-partisan collaboration necessary for effective climate action.

The report documents how at least 39 oil and gas companies and 12 industry-tied organizations influence Canadian school curricula through direct sponsorship, government partnerships, and funding of third-party nonprofits. It identifies 'petro-pedagogy' strategies—such as 'bias-balancing,' greenwashing, and a focus on individual rather than systemic action—designed to obscure the industry's role in driving climate change and delay the energy transition. The authors recommend that federal and provincial governments prohibit fossil fuel sponsorship in schools, mandate comprehensive climate justice education, and provide public funding for teacher training and resources to ensure education is free from corporate conflicts of interest.

The document analyzes how Colombia and Nigeria use narratives of development, energy security, and energy transition to maintain dependence on fossil fuels. It argues that these narratives are often inaccurate or outdated, contributing to 'carbon lock-in'. The briefing suggests that civil society and researchers can counter these claims by demanding transparency, highlighting the benefits of renewables, and promoting science-based alternatives for a just transition.

The study finds that the Mekong River Commission frames climate change policy as science-based and short-term, while expanding its discourse to include justice, security, and development to attract donor support. However, the authors argue that these discursive trends result in the production of studies and project scoping rather than substantive adaptive actions in the basin.

The research analyzes the Climate Security Strategies of eight Western national militaries, finding that these documents predominantly frame climate security as a matter of national security. The analysis reveals that military responses focus on adapting the military apparatus to protect the state and ensure mission success, often prioritizing national objectives over human and ecological security. Furthermore, the study finds that vulnerable groups in the global south are frequently framed as threats rather than as victims of climate change, which can lead to security measures that further harm these populations.

The paper examines the 'petroculture' of Norway, where oil is treated as a 'sacramental substance' and a guarantor of prosperity. It analyzes how the oil industry and political actors use 'oil myths'—narratives that frame oil as a savior—to maintain social acceptance for continued extraction and to resist energy transition. The author argues that this 'petromania' creates a psychological and cultural barrier to climate action, often framing the phase-out of oil as a betrayal of national identity and the workers who built the nation's wealth.

The report analyses the 'memory wars' in Ethiopia, where political elites use 'invented traditions' and memorialisation to advance competing ideological agendas. It identifies three primary approaches to collective memory: the rejectionist approach, which seeks to deconstruct the 'great tradition' of the Ethiopian state; the revivalist approach, which seeks to restore it; and the moderationist approach, which attempts a selective balance. These approaches operate across four layers of tradition: the pre-1991 great tradition, the post-1991 federal vernacular tradition, regional traditions, and local-level traditions. The author argues that the contradictions between these approaches and the lack of a negotiated, shared collective memory have reinforced political instability and armed conflict.

The document analyzes how governments in Norway, France, and the UK moved beyond legal enforcement to motivate citizens during COVID-19 lockdowns. It identifies three evolving strategies: using national narratives to legitimize responses, managing public expectations through data and trust to 'lock in' policies, and eventually differentiating duties based on political preferences. The authors argue that civic duties are co-determined by states and citizens, warning that a shift toward differentiated duties could allow privileged groups to avoid the costs of public obligations.

The report analyzes how the Russian War in Ukraine and subsequent Western sanctions have disrupted decades of energy diplomacy. While Russian crude oil exports proved resilient by redirecting volumes to India and China, the gas sector faced a severe crisis due to its reliance on European pipelines. The document details the use of 'shadow fleets' and blending to circumvent oil price caps and the limited feasibility of redirecting pipeline gas. It concludes that Russia is becoming increasingly dependent on China and that the focus on survival and new fossil fuel markets has marginalized its domestic low-carbon agenda.

The report identifies a network of Spanish-speaking accounts, primarily right-wing and based in Spain, that disseminate misinformation about renewable energy. Key narratives include claims that wildfires are intentionally set to clear land for wind farms and that renewable technologies harm wildlife or pollute the environment. The analysis reveals that these narratives often originate in other languages, are amplified by influential right-wing figures, and correlate with extreme weather events or policy changes.

The report finds overwhelming public and organizational support for priority climate legislation in Connecticut, yet a significant gap exists between this support and legislative outcomes. While 91.7% of testimony positions supported priority bills, most legislation died in committee. The study highlights a stark imbalance in lobbying resources, with electric and gas utilities spending over $24 million—far exceeding the spending of environmental groups and renewable energy firms. Opposition to climate action has shifted from denying climate science to employing 'climate delay' discourses, such as arguing that Connecticut is too small to matter or that policies would disproportionately harm low-income residents.

The document identifies three primary narratives in Russia: a dominant 'keep coal' discourse supported by political leadership, an emerging 'low-carbon trend' discourse focused on economic competitiveness, and a 'local environmental' discourse centered on pollution and health. It concludes that while external pressures like the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and declining demand are increasing, there is currently no active 'coal phase-out' or 'just transition' discourse within Russian national politics.

The document identifies three primary discourses in Russia: a dominant 'keep coal' vision supported by political leadership, an economically-driven 'low-carbon trend' discourse, and a 'local environmental' discourse focused on pollution and health. It concludes that while external pressures like the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and declining demand may force long-term adjustments, there is currently no active 'coal phase-out' discourse or just transition planning in Russia, leaving coal communities vulnerable to economic instability.

The NATION project (2013-2017) examines national identity as a dynamic process rather than a static entity, focusing on how it is negotiated through top-down state actions, mediated public discourse, and bottom-up everyday experiences. Using data from Norway, France, and the UK, the research highlights the tension between static, often racialized conceptions of nationhood and the plural, heterogeneous reality of modern European societies. Key findings emphasize the role of 'first impressions' and race in shaping boundaries of belonging, the use of national symbols like the Norwegian King to foster inclusive identities, and the impact of religious buildings as sites of resistance and negotiation. The report argues for a plural conception of the nation to counter neo-nationalist populism and promote democratic preparedness.

The article examines the persistence of the 'women-environment' linkage in global policy, noting that women are frequently framed as both primary victims of climate change and essential agents of change. It argues that this discourse persists because it provides a strategic entry point for feminist advocacy, relies on fixed projections of women's identities to gain political access, and is reinforced by the inertia of previous environmental project frameworks.