How Best to Navigate the Topic of Climate Change in 2021
How can COVID-19, the “Green Tea Party”, and recent psychology research inform our approach to climate communication moving forward as we seek to combat this global crisis?
Climate policy is complicated by a multitude of overlapping and interwoven challenges. However, the pressing nature of the climate crisis means we must find ways to overcome those barriers and enact bold policies to limit warming harms. What lessons have we learned about climate communication that can inform our approach moving forward?
Overcoming the Obstacles
Lessons from COVID-19 Applied to the Climate Crisis
Responses, strategies, and lessons learned in other crises can be instructive in determining effective ways to approach this issue.
The largest recent example of massive-scale scientific communication has been with the COVID-19 pandemic. Zeynep Tufekci, a sociologist and writer, focuses on the societal challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic using systems-based thinking. Tufekci discusses several key lessons regarding what kinds of effective communication successfully motivate specific action.¹
Firstly, the blatant public and online shaming that took place early in the pandemic with regard to gatherings and mask-wearing taught us that “shaming is often an ineffective way of getting people to change their behavior.”¹ Rather, it “entrenches polarization and discourages disclosure, making it harder to fight the virus.”¹ Tufekci says that “instead, we should be emphasizing safer behavior and stressing how many people are doing their part while encouraging others to do the same.”¹
This analogy can be extended to serve as a climate communication lesson, as similar “shaming” for being an imperfect environmentalist is common on social media. However, if we truly value solving this crisis over being perceived as “right” about the science, shaming isn’t helpful.¹ This isn’t to say that greenwashing (a common corporate strategy to “appear” environmental while not actually changing company policies) shouldn’t be called out, but it is an important consideration as we seek to craft an optimal public communication strategy.¹
Ignoring Complexity Creates Permission Structures that Encourage Failure
Similarly, both COVID-19 and abstinence education can offer examples of how not to offer public guidance when aiming to mitigate harm.¹ Tufekci makes the point that “pretending we can will away complexities and trade-offs with absolutism is counterproductive.”¹ Effectively, in the context of these two issues, this amounts to advising people to never leave their homes during the pandemic and to never have sex as a teen.¹ However, setting perfection as the expected standard more often allows those who do fall short (often in a relatively small way) to give up completely and pursue the exact opposite path.¹ Therefore, extending this lesson to this case, it is much more important to clearly explain how individuals, companies, and even broader policies can, even if imperfectly, mitigate harms done to the climate.¹ Small, subtle steps, when taken by everyone, put us on the right path.
How to Approach Conversations
Given polarization and its close tie with values and emotion, it is critical to approach conversations, be they individual talks or national speeches, with humility.⁴ As Stephanie Vozza, author of the article “How to talk about climate change in an emotionally intelligent way” explains, starting a conversation believing in the inherent value of the other person, regardless of their opinion, ensures that the dialogue has the chance of being productive. Otherwise, such conversations can feel like a parent lecturing to a child (a scenario that doesn’t inspire the chance to make any meaningful headway).⁴
Additionally, it is critical to understand the other person’s “need for security.”⁴ Psychologist George Kohlresier describes this as “a sense of protection and fulfillment that comes with certainty,” making a person feel threatened “when a belief is challenged.”⁴ To combat this, empathy and true active listening are critical.⁴ Some of the most successful political organizers are masters at this, knocking on the doors of voters with vastly different views and truly listening to their concerns.¹¹ By employing empathy and conversing to educate (rather than to prove oneself correct), actual progress toward a middle ground can be achieved.
Similarly, another key strategy that most experts agree proves critical when aiming to effectively communicate on climate change is connecting to individuals’ values.⁴ While Vozza advocates for using activist Jonathan Smucker’s tactic of “looking for common ground,” Chair of the Stanford Department of Earth System Science Rob Jackson argues for something even more drastic: “looking past the science.”⁵
Given that many of the challenges arise from the complexity and seemingly detached nature of the science, Jackson explains that “we need to relate to people’s daily lives” by “exploring how action…can improve areas of shared values.”⁵ Such values might include health and wellness, job creation, or safety for loved ones.⁵ For example, rather than explaining how coal power causes the release of greenhouse gas emissions which then warm the climate, one could focus on the human health impacts from coal, stating that reducing use by 20% could save the lives of 3000 people this year.⁵ Jackson explains that this strategy “can cut through stereotypes” and allow for mutual understanding to be reached.⁵
Leveraging Communication in Politics
Part of this value solution will necessitate equipping scientists to talk about what their findings mean for people’s lives as opposed to strictly explaining the data on which they report.⁵ A paper written from the University of British Columbia further explores this strategy’s applicability to political parties, finding that for conservatives, tying actions or policies to economic benefits or to becoming a more moral society can increase the effectiveness of the communication.⁶
A notable example took place in Georgia in 2013 where a coalition fought to increase the share of energy obtained from solar power in the state.⁷ This coalition consisted of The Tea Party (an ultra-conservative group) and the Sierra Club (an environmental non-profit), collectively dubbed the “Green Tea Party.”⁷ Although their motives were different, with the Sierra Club seeking to reduce climate emissions and the Tea Party fighting for a free market that gives consumers a choice in their energy source, they worked together to achieve the same end, but notably without talking about climate.⁷
The approach taken by the “Green Tea Party” follows social and environmental psychologist Reuven Sussman’s advice which boils down to avoiding discussion of climate change and “giving them a different reason” altogether for taking the desired action.⁷ Determining that reason relies on understanding the person’s or group’s values. For example, evangelical conservatives have been found to be more persuaded by the concept of “saving God’s creation” over which they’ve been given stewardship.⁴ ⁷ Business leaders might be more prone to hear an economic argument, similar to the Natural Capitalism theory made famous by Dr. Amory Lovins that showcases the competitive advantages of more sustainable practices.⁸
Another case that sheds light on a motivating value occurred in Greensburg, Kansas in 2007 when an EF-5 tornado destroyed a small town.⁹ When contemplating how to rebuild, the highly conservative district chose to build ultra-efficient buildings, mandate LEED certification for commercial spaces, and use 100% wind power for their electricity.⁹ As town council members explained, this choice had nothing to do with climate change; rather, they sought the most resilient and economic solutions to help protect their town and its people in future disasters.⁹ Overall, it is clear that communicating effectively requires an empathetic approach that seeks to connect with the specific audiences’ values.
A Public Outreach Strategy
An effective public outreach strategy to move the public consensus past 50% on climate action should incorporate these techniques.
- Surveying the target locations and tailoring specific events, addresses, and educational materials to that context — allowing communicators to actually understand how people’s values and motivations (beyond stereotypes) interact with their perceptions about climate policy and action.
- Leveraging grassroots groups to foster these empathetic conversations with their community members.
- Allowing local leaders to facilitate the community outreach efforts as they are more likely trusted than federal officials.
- Focusing messaging on what we know, rather than what we don’t (or what is uncertain) and prioritizing achieving the end goal over being viewed as “right” about the reason for taking the action.
- Ensuring that our argument doesn’t portray the policy as “perfect,” but rather, as a necessary step in the right direction as a way to avoid it backfiring when inevitable updates are needed.
- Grounding scientific research in the impact it will have on people’s lives.
Overcoming the multitude of challenges that hinder effective climate change communication proves possible by grounding outreach in these proven strategies and often “forgetting about the science!”⁵
Citations
[1] Tufekci, Zeynep. “5 Pandemic Mistakes We Keep Repeating.” The Atlantic, 26 Feb. 2021, www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/02/how-public-health-messaging-backfired/618147/.
[2] Kamarck, Elaine. “The Challenging Politics of Climate Change.” Brookings, 23 Sept. 2019, www.brookings.edu/research/the-challenging-politics-of-climate-change/.
[3] Kahan, Dan. “Why We Are Poles Apart on Climate Change.” Nature, www.nature.com/news/polopoly_fs/1.11166!/menu/main/topColumns/topLeftColumn/pdf/488255a.pdf.
[4] Vozza, Stephanie. “How to Talk about Climate Change in an Emotionally Intelligent Way.” Fast Company, 15 Nov. 2019, www.fastcompany.com/90424549/how-to-talk-about-climate-change-in-an-emotionally-intelligent-way.
[5] “Perspective: Let’s Stop Talking about Climate Change.” Stanford School of Earth, Energy & Environmental Sciences, pangea.stanford.edu/news/perspective-lets-stop-talking-about-climate-change.
[6] University of British Columbia. “How to talk to people about climate change.” ScienceDaily. ScienceDaily, 30 March 2021. <www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210330092522.htm>.
[7] Love, Shayla. “Renewable Energy Is the Climate-Change Solution That Republicans Can Get Behi.” Vice News, 24 Jan. 2020, 7- https://www.vice.com/en/article/k7eb9e/how-to-talk-to-republicans-about-climate-change.
[8] Lovins, Amory B, et al. “A Road Map for Natural Capitalism: Amory B. Lovins, L. Hunter Lovins, and Paul Hawken.” Understanding Business Environments, 2005, pp. 257–270., doi:10.4324/9780203992265–37.
[9] Gowen, Annie. “The Town That Built Back Green.” The Washington Post, 23 Oct. 2020, www.washingtonpost.com/climate-solutions/2020/10/22/greensburg-kansas-wind-power-carbon-emissions/.
[10] “Why Does Cinema Ignore Climate Change?” BBC Culture, BBC, www.bbc.com/culture/article/20200416-why-does-cinema-ignore-climate-change.
[11] About the Authors Sharona Shuster Sharona Shuster, et al. “10 Tips for Getting People to Talk Across Political Differences.” Greater Good, greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/10_tips_for_getting_people_to_talk_across_political_differences.
