Search Climate Insights Directory

The report identifies six climate opinion segments in the US: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. As of Fall 2023, a majority of Americans (56%) are either Alarmed or Concerned, with the Alarmed group growing from 15% in 2013 to 28% in 2023. The Cautious group saw the largest decline over the same decade, falling from 26% to 15%.

The report identifies six climate opinion segments in the US: Alarmed, Concerned, Cautious, Disengaged, Doubtful, and Dismissive. As of Fall 2023, 56% of Americans are either Alarmed or Concerned, with the Alarmed segment growing from 15% in 2013 to 28% in 2023. The Cautious segment saw the largest decline over the same period, dropping from 26% to 15%.

The report reviews global research on the intersection of climate change and health, finding that framing climate change as a public health issue—particularly through the use of trusted health professionals and positive, solutions-oriented messaging—can increase public engagement and support for climate policies across political divides. It notes a significant lack of representative data from the Global South and highlights the need for better integration of climate-health curricula in medical education and stronger engagement from public officials.

The document argues that reducing petrol car use is essential for the UK to meet its Paris Agreement commitments, citing the Climate Change Committee's recommendation for "fewer car miles travelled" and the Department for Transport's goal of an "accelerating modal shift to public and active transport". It highlights the communication challenges associated with these goals, noting how Oxford's traffic filter system in 2023 was misconstrued as "15 minute cities" and became a "global conspiracy". The guide aims to provide tactics to discuss scientifically necessary transport changes without triggering a "culture war" among Persuadables.

The report finds that 27% of U.S. Republicans are either Alarmed or Concerned about global warming. These individuals are more likely to be younger, female, politically moderate, and people of color compared to other Republicans. While they hold stronger pro-climate views and support policies like renewable energy research and carbon dioxide regulation more than the average American, they are no more likely to discuss climate change with others. The authors suggest that engaging this group—estimated at 29 million registered voters—through conservative values and social communication can build political will for climate action.

The document outlines guidance for communicating the relationship between care and climate crises, proposing four specific framing examples: care for nature, care for humans, climate justice, and the role of care in improving the economy and society. It emphasizes the necessity of addressing systemic oppression, colonial legacies, and gender stereotypes to ensure that care-work is not romanticized or oversimplified while pursuing equitable low-carbon lifestyles.

The study finds that 27% of U.S. Republicans are Alarmed or Concerned about global warming. These individuals are more likely to be younger, female, politically moderate, people of color, and suburban residents compared to other Republicans. While they hold stronger pro-climate views and support policies like renewable energy research and carbon dioxide regulation more than the average American, they are no more likely to discuss or hear about climate change in their social circles.

The document outlines four key principles for effective public engagement on climate change: connecting with deeply held values, using inclusive and participatory approaches, engaging positive social norms, and creating honest, empowering stories. It illustrates these principles through three case studies: a diverse network of small-scale environmental initiatives in Egypt, a community-led relocation project for the Carteret Islands in Papua New Guinea, and a citizens' assembly in Scotland. These examples demonstrate that bottom-up, deliberative, and co-creative processes can lead to a stronger public mandate for climate policies and resilience.

The document argues that energy efficiency is essential for climate and development goals and can be accelerated by shifting individual and business decision-making through positive, emotion-based narratives. It outlines a framework for communication based on four pillars: empowering people, fostering positive emotional connections, recognizing champions, and innovating communication channels. The compendium utilizes case studies from G20 countries across sectors including buildings, industry, and transport to share lessons for global energy-efficiency actions.

The data tables detail the information needs of 1,033 U.S. adults, showing a general preference for questions about climate solutions, though this varies significantly by political affiliation and climate belief groups. While 44% of the total population prioritizes solutions, those in the 'Alarmed' group are most focused on solutions (82%), whereas 'Dismissive' individuals are most interested in evidence (50%).

The guide outlines a 'ripple effect' model for individual climate action, structured as five concentric circles: Learn, Do, Share, Advocate, and Amplify. It argues that while individual lifestyle changes like eating less meat or biking are starting points, the greatest impact is achieved by expanding one's sphere of influence to include community communication and the urging of high-impact 'change makers' such as lawmakers and CEOs to implement systemic solutions.

Climate Outreach argues that public support for net zero remains high and that the UK government should address cost-of-living concerns through a transparent public engagement strategy and visionary communication rather than by backtracking on climate policies.

The guide distinguishes between 'above the line' advertising (TV, out of home, press, and radio) and 'below the line' methods (social media, digital, and mail campaigns). It notes that the climate sector typically favours below the line methods due to misconceptions about budget and timeline constraints, and aims to debunk these myths to help NGOs increase campaign effectiveness.

The document highlights the critical link between food systems and climate change, noting that while agriculture is a high environmental cost and vulnerable to rising temperatures, misinformation is increasingly shaping the views of 'Persuadables' on climate action. It aims to equip communicators with strategies to address four major misleading narratives in the food and climate information environment.

Based on a December 2022 survey of 1,085 U.S. adults, this report finds that individuals experiencing climate-related distress—such as anxiety or depression—are significantly more likely to engage in and be willing to undertake climate actions compared to those without such distress. While climate distress can be maladaptive, the findings suggest it can also serve as a motivator for proactive behavior, including political advocacy and community engagement, which may in turn help individuals cope constructively.

The study found that while messages describing the harms of fossil fuels and benefits of renewable energy are effective at increasing support for an energy transition, adding explicit moral claims—such as stating that fossil fuel use is 'unethical'—does not further enhance persuasiveness or the long-term durability of the effect.

The document outlines ten strategies to make climate communications more effective for 'Persuadables' in the UK. Key recommendations include leading with personal benefits rather than climate science, avoiding adversarial approaches to misinformation, and removing middle-class 'class codes' by using diverse, non-London-centric messengers. It suggests engaging men through manual job market opportunities, platforming non-white voices to address historical mistrust, and using humor to increase approachability. Additionally, the guide advises matching hope with concrete plans, leveraging hyperlocality to tap into community pride, broadening the definition of 'climate action' to include community-led efforts, and utilizing traditional media channels like local newspapers and billboards over social media, which was found to be the least trusted channel.

The analysis finds that a majority of Americans (63%) rarely or never discuss global warming. Those most likely to engage in these conversations include Democrats, individuals with higher education, urban residents, Gen Z and Millennials, and Hispanic/Latino Americans. The study highlights a strong correlation between climate concern—specifically those in the 'Alarmed' category—and the frequency of discussion, as well as the influence of supportive social norms and media exposure in encouraging climate conversations.

The analysis finds that a majority of Americans rarely or never discuss global warming, with the highest rates of conversation occurring among Democrats, educated urban residents, Gen Z and Millennials, and Hispanic/Latino Americans. The study highlights a strong correlation between talking about climate change and being in the 'Alarmed' category of the Global Warming’s Six Americas framework, as well as the influence of supportive social norms and frequent exposure to climate discussions in social circles and the media.

The document introduces ChatGPT as a tool for climate communications, detailing its application in analyzing web-based media sources and using personas based on the British press to understand bias.