Search Climate Insights Directory

The document outlines the critical role of scientific research in climate litigation, emphasizing how experts can help hold corporations and governments accountable for climate damages and disinformation. It identifies key research priorities—such as attribution science and the study of climate obstruction—and provides actionable ways for scientists to engage, including serving as expert witnesses, contributing to amicus briefs, and designing research specifically relevant to legal proceedings. The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) Science Hub for Climate Litigation is presented as a central resource to bridge the gap between the scientific community and legal practitioners.

The case study examines a collaboration with the Local Storytelling Exchange to promote heat pump installation to tradespeople through a 38-second video on green reskilling. The campaign found that Facebook's advertising algorithms, targeting mechanisms, and political categorizations hindered the ability to counter topical misinformation, particularly when operating with a small budget.

The case study describes a collaboration with the Local Storytelling Exchange that used a 35-second video on Facebook to promote the cost effectiveness of home insulation. The campaign aimed to establish positive narratives before misinformation could embed itself, resulting in more than twice as many people agreeing with the key message.

The document is a collection of research papers and reports focusing on the intersection of media literacy, audience engagement, and media accountability. It examines how these elements can counter political polarisation and fake news in India, prevent extremist violence in the United States, and support peace-building in Colombia. It also analyzes structural challenges to media accountability in Africa and Latin America, specifically highlighting gender inequalities in Argentine media and the role of audience ombudspersons in Mexico. Additionally, it discusses the digital divide and the need to decolonize digitality in Asia.

The document traces the erosion of Brazilian democracy from the 2013 protests through the presidencies of Michel Temer and Jair Bolsonaro, highlighting the role of digital disinformation and institutional interference. It concludes that the 2023 return of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva requires a broad coalition and urgent public policies to combat manipulation and restore institutional normality.

The document outlines 13 best practices for climate reporting, emphasizing the need to connect stories to climate causes and consequences, integrate climate coverage across all news beats, and center climate justice by highlighting marginalized and Indigenous voices. It advises journalists to avoid jargon, report on solutions alongside problems, and remain skeptical of greenwashing and corporate spin. Furthermore, it argues against platforming climate denialists in the name of balance and encourages the use of representative visuals and self-care for reporters facing burnout.

The document outlines strategies for engaging people of faith in England and Wales regarding climate change, noting that 56.8% of the population identifies with a faith. It highlights the effectiveness of frames like stewardship and moral challenge, warns against language involving judgment or the word 'religion', and recommends centering campaigns around local faith leaders and centers.

The report outlines the results of a cross-sectoral workshop that analyzed climate security scenarios for Sweden. It identifies key drivers of risk, such as the strength of democratic institutions and domestic resilience, and proposes four potential future scenarios ranging from 'Utopia' to 'Panic'. The findings emphasize that governance, trust, and the integration of climate data into the 'Total Defense' program are as critical as physical infrastructure for maintaining national security in the face of climate-driven threats.

The 2023 IPIE expert survey of 289 researchers across 54 countries identifies the availability of accurate information and diversity of opinion as critical features of a healthy information environment. Social media platforms and politicians are viewed as the primary threats globally, though specific concerns vary by political regime: experts in democratic systems emphasize foreign interference and climate misinformation, while those studying autocratic systems highlight threats from central governments and gender-related misinformation. A significant majority of respondents believe the information environment will worsen by 2024, citing a lack of platform data access as a major barrier to research and a lack of accountability for social media companies as a key policy failure.

The IPIE 2023 expert survey of 289 scientists across 54 countries identifies the availability of accurate information and diverse opinions as critical for a healthy information environment. Social media platforms and politicians are cited as the most significant threats globally, while researchers highlight a lack of platform data access as a primary barrier to understanding these trends. The report notes a divergence in perceived threats based on political regimes: experts in autocracies emphasize central governments and state media, while those in democracies are more concerned with foreign interference and climate-related misinformation.

The 2023 IPIE expert survey of 289 scientists reveals that information accuracy and opinion diversity are the most critical features of a healthy information environment. Social media platforms and political actors are identified as the primary global threats, with specific concerns regarding the lack of accountability for social media companies and poorly designed AI-supported content moderation. Experts noted a divergence in perceived threats based on regime type: those studying autocracies emphasize threats from national governments and state media, while those studying democracies are more concerned with foreign interference. A majority of researchers (54%) predict the information environment in their primary study countries will worsen by 2024, and 72% cite insufficient platform data accessibility as a major research barrier.

The Climate Solutions Reporting Guide, produced by Covering Climate Now and Solutions Journalism Network, argues that while problem-focused reporting is necessary, newsrooms must broaden their coverage to include solutions to empower audiences and policymakers. It advocates for a rigorous approach that interrogates the effectiveness and limitations of proposed solutions rather than 'cheerleading'. The guide emphasizes equity and justice, noting that marginalized communities often possess effective climate action records despite contributing the least to the crisis. It organizes potential story ideas into five categories: politics and government, economics and business, technologies and practices, civil society, and culture. Key technical distinctions are provided between 'mitigation' (reducing emissions and drawing down existing gases) and 'adaptation' (increasing resilience to unavoidable impacts).

The document synthesizes evidence from 4,798 peer-reviewed publications to evaluate strategies for improving the global information environment. It identifies a scientific consensus that content labels and corrective information are effective in reducing the impact of misinformation on user perception. However, it notes significant gaps in research, including a lack of non-English language studies, insufficient access to corporate social media data, and a lack of standardized definitions and metrics across the field.

The document analyzes 4,798 peer-reviewed publications to determine which social media design interventions effectively reduce misinformation. It identifies a scientific consensus that content labeling and correction information are effective, while the impact of other strategies remains unproven. The report emphasizes the need for more diverse, multi-lingual research and standardized metrics to improve the global information environment.

The report identifies content labeling and corrective information as the most scientifically validated methods for reducing the impact of misinformation on user perception. While other strategies like content management and media literacy are recognized as plausible, their effectiveness remains uncertain due to a lack of rigorous, standardized, and diverse empirical data. The authors call for more research in non-English languages and across more diverse geographic regions to improve the global information environment.

The report examines climate misinformation surrounding extreme weather in Latin America, focusing on case studies in Brazil, Chile, and Peru. It finds that highly visible, multi-causal, and emotional events are frequently weaponized by political figures to assign blame to scapegoats or promote conspiracy theories, thereby obscuring the scientific drivers of the climate crisis.

The document presents data from a 2019 nationwide survey and several state-level polls showing that a majority of US voters believe oil and gas companies should pay for climate change damages. It highlights that support for suing these companies and requiring them to cover costs often increases after respondents are informed about the industry's history of deception.

The document explores the 'anti-green backlash' and the practical dilemmas of the energy transition, focusing on social inequality, territorial disputes over renewables and mining, and the geopolitical implications of critical raw material sourcing. It argues that a just transition requires rebuilding the welfare state, increasing democratic participation, and addressing historical ecological debts to avoid 'eco-apartheid' and political polarisation.

The report identifies a predominantly right-leaning, Spain-based network that drives anti-renewable energy discourse in Spanish. It highlights how these actors use conspiratorial narratives—such as claims that wildfires are intentionally set to clear land for wind farms—and leverage cross-platform tactics to amplify misinformation. The analysis shows that while anti-renewable posts make up less than half of a sampled set, they generate 66% of total engagement, indicating a high impact relative to their volume.

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.