Search Climate Insights Directory

The report details a survey of US broadcast meteorologists, finding that over 90% believe climate change is occurring and most believe it has already influenced local weather, water resources, and agriculture. While many feel it is appropriate to report climate science, they face obstacles such as lack of time in newscasts. The survey also highlights a gap between the meteorologists' perception of scientific consensus on human-caused climate change and the actual consensus reported in literature.

The research evaluates how numeric assertions and an 'estimation and reveal' technique influence the American public's perception of scientific agreement on human-caused climate change, finding both methods effective across different political ideologies.

The document is a practical guide designed to help campaigners and lobbyists communicate with centre-right MEPs. It is based on 2014 research and analysis of language used by these politicians, though the author notes that the proposed narratives have not been formally evaluated or tested.

The March 2015 survey 'Climate Change in the American Mind' reveals that while a majority of Americans (63%) believe global warming is happening and support various mitigation and adaptation policies, there is a significant gap in understanding the scientific consensus. Only 10% of respondents are aware that over 90% of climate scientists agree that global warming is human-caused. Public worry remains stable but low, with only 11% being 'very worried.' Trust in information sources is highest for climate scientists (70%) and family and friends (67%), while trust in political leaders is fragmented. Most Americans view global warming as a major environmental, scientific, or agricultural issue, and a majority believe it is humankind's responsibility to care for the Earth.

The report finds that while majorities of Catholics and non-evangelical Protestants believe global warming is happening and human-caused, evangelicals are more split. There is broad support across all three groups for renewable energy research and infrastructure resilience, though evangelicals are more likely to prioritize religious beliefs over scientific explanations when they conflict. Pope Francis is identified as the most trusted religious leader on the issue, despite low general awareness of his forthcoming climate encyclical.

The report finds that Americans are generally unaware of the health risks associated with global warming, with 70% having given the issue little or no thought. Only 31% believe global warming is currently harming the health of people in the U.S. to a moderate or great deal, and only 27% could name at least one related health problem. While there is limited awareness of current risks, 34% to 38% of respondents believe conditions such as air pollution, pollen allergies, and heat stroke will become more common in their communities over the next 10 years. Public trust for information on this topic is highest for primary-care doctors (49%), followed by family/friends, the CDC, climate scientists, and the American Medical Association. Additionally, nearly half of respondents believe federal agencies like the CDC, NIH, or FEMA (47%) and the U.S. Congress (46%) should do more to protect the public from these health problems.

The report finds that while a majority of Americans believe global warming is occurring and support various mitigation and adaptation policies, there is a significant gap between public perception and scientific consensus regarding the human cause of climate change.

The October 2014 survey reveals that while 66% of Americans believe global warming is happening, only 50% attribute it to human activities, and only 33% believe people in the U.S. are currently being harmed. Despite these gaps in perception, there is strong public support for a variety of climate policies, including renewable energy research (77%), carbon dioxide regulation (75%), and infrastructure improvements for extreme weather (83%).

The report finds that while a majority of Americans believe global warming is bad for health, very few can identify specific health risks or recognize that certain populations are more vulnerable. There is significant public support for increased government action and funding to protect public health from climate change, with primary-care doctors and the CDC being the most trusted sources of information.

The October 2014 survey 'Climate Change in the American Mind' reveals that while 66% of Americans believe global warming is happening, there is a significant gap between public perception and scientific consensus regarding its causes. Only 50% of respondents believe human activities are the primary cause, and only 33% believe people in the U.S. are currently being harmed. Despite this, there is broad support for clean energy research, carbon dioxide regulation, and infrastructure improvements to resist extreme weather, with majorities believing that corporations, citizens, and government officials should do more to address the issue.

The report finds that while a majority of Americans believe global warming is bad for health, very few can identify specific health risks or recognize that certain populations are more vulnerable. There is significant support for increased government action and funding to protect public health, with primary-care doctors and the CDC being the most trusted sources of information.

The report finds that most Americans, including those most concerned about global warming, have a shallow understanding of its specific health impacts. While the 'Alarmed' and 'Concerned' segments generally believe global warming is harmful to health and support government action and funding, they struggle to name specific health threats unprompted. Trust in information sources varies by segment, with primary care physicians and family and friends holding the highest overall credibility across the population.

The study assesses an 'edutainment' high school assembly program using a random sample of 49 schools and 1,241 students. Results indicate that the program positively influenced youth knowledge and behavior, shifting students into audience segments more engaged with climate change and inspiring further personal, political, and consumer advocacy.

The document argues that successful climate diplomacy for LDCs requires integrating climate change as a core national interest, mainstreaming it into development planning, and strategically engaging the media. It highlights the Gambia's appointment of its first special climate envoy in 2013 as a step toward building the capacity to influence international negotiations, such as those leading to the 2015 global climate agreement. The brief emphasizes that domestic political consensus and institutional reform are prerequisites for diplomats to effectively link national priorities with global climate regimes.

The study finds that conservative media use is negatively related to global warming belief certainty and policy support, while nonconservative media use is positively associated with them. It further demonstrates a reinforcing cycle where initial media consumption shapes beliefs, which in turn increases the likelihood of continuing to consume the same type of media, subsequently strengthening those beliefs.

The document highlights a significant discrepancy between the scientific consensus—where 97% of peer-reviewed papers acknowledge human-caused global warming—and the American public, where only 44% believe it is both happening and human-caused. It further notes that only 12% of Americans are aware of the high level of scientific agreement, a misunderstanding that may hinder support for climate action.

The report argues that the IPCC's current approach of providing robust scientific assessments is insufficient to create political change, as facts alone do not convince the public. It recommends that the IPCC integrate human stories that illustrate climate impacts and provide public insight into the personal motivations and experiences of its authors and key figures.

The research identifies key psychological and social drivers of climate activism in the U.S., finding that activists are more likely to view global warming as a serious but solvable threat and believe in the efficacy of collective action. The authors recommend that climate messaging combine threat warnings with actionable steps and support for social opinion leaders to overcome widespread public skepticism regarding the effectiveness of political activism.

The document highlights a significant disconnect between the scientific community and the American public regarding the consensus on human-caused climate change. While nearly all climate scientists agree that human-caused climate change is occurring, approximately half of Americans are either unaware of or do not believe in this consensus. The author asserts that this lack of understanding is critical and calls for climate science societies and individual scientists to take action to correct the record.

The report finds that 'global warming' and 'climate change' are not synonymous for many Americans, with 'global warming' generally being more engaging and evoking stronger negative emotions, a greater sense of urgency, and higher levels of personal and familial threat. While the terms are largely synonymous for Republicans, the use of 'climate change' appears to reduce engagement among Democrats, Independents, liberals, and moderates.