Search Climate Insights Directory

The document argues that effective climate adaptation requires a comprehensive information system comprising basic climate data, economic cost-benefit analyses, adaptation best practices, and vulnerability assessments. It emphasizes that information must be user-centered and iterative, moving beyond simple scientific publication to a collaborative dialogue between providers and decision-makers. The author highlights significant gaps in observational data, particularly in the developing world, and the difficulty of scaling global climate models to local levels. To ensure equitable and effective use, the paper suggests the use of 'boundary organizations' like NGOs and local universities to translate complex data into locally relevant knowledge, while adhering to specific communication principles to overcome barriers like scientific jargon and uncertainty.

A 2008 survey of 2,164 American adults found that while the economy was the highest priority for 76% of respondents, a majority believe global warming is a real, human-caused threat. Over 90% of participants supported U.S. action to reduce global warming despite potential economic costs, and 67% supported unilateral action regardless of other countries' efforts. The most valued positive outcomes of action were providing a better life for future generations and protecting God's creation, while the primary concerns were increased government regulation and rising energy prices.

The report identifies six distinct audience segments within the U.S. adult population—the Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive—that vary significantly in their level of concern, belief in the reality of climate change, and willingness to take action. While the Alarmed and Concerned are convinced of the threat and support aggressive national policies, the Doubtful and Dismissive either deny the phenomenon or believe it is caused by natural changes. The analysis highlights that communication strategies must be tailored to these specific psychological and political profiles to effectively motivate climate action.

The report identifies six distinct audience segments within the U.S. adult population—the Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive—that vary significantly in their level of concern and engagement with climate change. These groups are distinguished by their certainty that global warming is occurring, their perceived risk to themselves and future generations, and their support for specific national policies. While the Alarmed and Concerned are most likely to support aggressive carbon reduction and engage in consumer activism, the Doubtful and Dismissive are more likely to attribute warming to natural causes and oppose government regulation. The analysis highlights that effective climate communication requires tailored messaging based on these psychological, cultural, and political differences.

The document outlines how to write letters to the editor (LTEs) to reach wide audiences and influence legislators and corporations. It recommends responding to specific articles, following submission guidelines, sharing personal expertise, and using a structure that refutes claims, advocates for a position, and ends with a call to action.

The document details how federal agencies like NOAA and NASA used media policies to control scientists' public communications on climate change. It provides specific examples of scientists, such as Dr. Thomas Knutson and Dr. Kevin Trenberth, whose media appearances were blocked or diverted to political appointees or scientists with opposing views when their research highlighted human influence on the climate or hurricane intensity.

The report details a project in Sachs Harbour, Banks Island, where Inuvialuit observations confirm significant climate warming, including later autumn freeze-ups, earlier spring thaws, and melting permafrost. The project combined participatory workshops and scientific interviews to produce a broadcast-quality video and seven journal articles, aiming to raise public awareness and influence decision-makers. Findings highlight the value of traditional knowledge in providing detailed historical narratives and identifying environmental linkages that complement Western science.

The study demonstrates that health-related climate messages are twice as likely to shift public attitudes compared to non-health messages across four countries. While a high baseline of concern for climate change exists globally, specific health themes—such as extreme heat, food and water insecurity, and children's health—consistently increase demand for urgent government action and policy support. The report emphasizes that the most impactful health messages vary by country, suggesting that communications should be tailored to local public health priorities to maximize effectiveness.

The appendix details the effects of various health-related messages on public perception of climate change, concern levels, and support for specific climate policies in four countries. It uses a scoring system to identify which messages most effectively increase the salience of climate change and support for mitigation efforts.

The document outlines a shift from climate denial to 'discourses of climate delay' and provides a toolkit for 'pre-bunking' and rebutting misinformation. It emphasizes targeting 'Persuadables'—people without strong opinions on climate action—and using specific framing and paid media to break through social media echo chambers.

The document outlines strategies for making National Frameworks for Climate Services inclusive by diversifying institutional workforces, tailoring impact forecasts to different genders and abilities, and engaging grassroots organisations. It emphasizes the need for accessible communication channels—such as braille and sign language—and the consideration of local knowledge and daily schedules to ensure critical weather announcements reach marginalized groups, including women, indigenous people, and people with disabilities.

The 'Shubh Kal' pilot project tested a communication model in Bundelkhand, Central India, using community radio to connect vulnerable farmers with scientific and government experts. By training 35 radio reporters in climate change journalism, the project produced 12 radio shows per station using an 'infotainment' approach in local dialects. Findings indicate that the project improved reporters' technical knowledge and confidence, increased farmer awareness of adaptation measures like organic composting and rainwater harvesting, and provided scientists with insights into traditional farming knowledge. The project concluded that community radio can effectively facilitate two-way communication to support climate-resilient development.

The Raising Risk Awareness (RRA) project focused on applying extreme event attribution to understand the role of climate change in specific weather events in Ethiopia, India, and Kenya, while using the Surging Seas tool to assess coastal flooding risk in Bangladesh. The project sought to bridge the gap between science, communication, and policy to improve disaster risk management in developing countries.

Clean Creatives calls on Netflix to implement fossil-free procurement criteria for its agencies and urges Dentsu, which recently secured a $190 million partnership with Netflix, to offramp all fossil fuel clients.

A group of creators and experts argues that Edelman's simultaneous representation of COP30 hosts and at least 10 fossil fuel polluters, including Shell, creates a conflict of interest that threatens the integrity of climate communications. The signers call on UN leaders and the Brazilian government to ensure COP30 updates are untainted by oil industry influence, suggesting Brazil should terminate its relationship with Edelman if the firm does not drop its fossil fuel clients.

Climate Central provides free, fact-checked news packages for broadcast and digital use, provided that media partners maintain attribution, preserve logos and sign-outs, and refrain from unauthorized editing or repurposing of the content.

The document argues that climate change is the biggest health threat of the 21st century and that health professionals are uniquely positioned as trusted voices to build public support for climate action. It provides a framework for communicating these risks and benefits, emphasizing simple, human-centric messaging over technical jargon or alarmist language. The toolkit outlines specific health risks—such as air pollution, heatwaves, and food insecurity—and highlights the 'win-win' nature of climate solutions, noting that every dollar spent on reducing emissions saves approximately $2 in health costs.

The document argues that broadcast meteorologists are uniquely positioned as trusted scientific sources to combat climate misinformation. It advocates for the use of 'psychological inoculation'—exposing audiences to misinformation techniques before they encounter them—and the 'Fact-Myth-Fallacy-Fact' structure to effectively educate the public. The guide details the FLICC taxonomy of science denial (fake experts, logical fallacies, impossible expectations, cherry picking, and conspiracy theories) and provides specific debunking scripts for ten common climate myths, such as the claim that the sun is the primary driver of current warming or that climate models are unreliable.

The document argues that traditional climate change imagery often relies on stereotypes or distant, 'sublime' disasters that can lead to public apathy or feelings of powerlessness. By reviewing a decade of research, the author suggests that effective communication requires a balance of threat and self-efficacy, recommending the use of local images, human presence, and depictions of innovative solutions rather than solely focusing on victims or destruction.

The document argues that television meteorologists are uniquely positioned as trusted scientific sources to combat climate misinformation. It introduces 'psychological inoculation'—exposing audiences to the techniques of disinformation to build cognitive resistance—and provides a specific 'Fact-Myth-Fallacy-Fact' structure for debunking. The guide details the FLICC taxonomy (Fake experts, Logical fallacies, Impossible expectations, Cherry picking, and Conspiracy theories) and applies it to common climate myths, such as the claim that the sun causes current warming or that climate models are unreliable.