Climate Change Messaging

To many people, 'climate change' feels boring, technical, or just plain abstract. There’s a growing ravine between the science and the public. Many of us rely heavily on jargon, fail to connect with people’s everyday lives, and leave our humanity at the door. I often find climate conferences overwhelming and confusing (impressive, after a decade of working in this space). Yet climate is endlessly fascinating... It intersects with every part of our lives: from the food we eat, and the clothes we wear; to the people we elect into power, and the cultural narratives we all subscribe to. It is the greatest threat we’ve ever faced as a civilisation, and the biggest invitation to reimagine so much of how we live. As I shared with Robin on his Eco-Business podcast, we need to tell better stories — and we need to elevate solutions that don't paper over problems, but go to the heart of them. I don’t want to see a handful of people get richer, but the majority of people’s lives getting better. I’m tired of attending workshops that aim to craft the ‘perfect’ climate narrative (there’s no such thing). We need a diversity of voices, speaking to different groups, through different channels. We need millions of micro-shifts in the way we communicate; from producers integrating climate into your favourite Netflix show, to media outlets telling stories of hope. We all have the ability to be climate communicators… with our own friends, families and colleagues. If you’re a human on this planet, you have a story to share; and you don't need to be an 'expert’. You simply need to care. . . . . . . . . . . #climatecrisis #climateaction #activism #action #speaker #business #sustainablebusiness #climateanxiety #ecoanxiety #leadership #people #inequality #climatejustice #storytelling #story #media #climatechange

Discourses of Climate Delay 🌎 Discourses of climate delay subtly undermine urgent climate action by framing it as either unnecessary, too disruptive, or impossible to achieve. These narratives don't deny climate change but instead promote inaction through complex messaging, effectively slowing progress toward meaningful environmental goals. One common approach is to redirect responsibility. This discourse suggests that the burden of action lies primarily with individuals or other entities, rather than addressing the systemic changes required from industries and governments. By focusing on personal responsibility alone, broader, impactful initiatives can be sidelined. Another tactic is to emphasize the downsides of change, portraying climate action as a source of economic hardship or social disruption. This discourages support for essential policies by highlighting potential challenges rather than long-term benefits, impeding collective progress. The push for non-transformative solutions is also prevalent. This narrative often suggests superficial fixes, like minor fossil fuel improvements, as adequate steps. By promoting incremental changes rather than systemic transformation, these approaches can delay necessary shifts in energy and resource management. Finally, surrender narratives frame climate change as an unsolvable problem, encouraging resignation rather than action. This viewpoint implies that adaptation is the only feasible response, discouraging mitigation efforts. Addressing these delay discourses requires a clear focus on accountability, transformative solutions, and sustained commitment. Recognizing these tactics is critical to advancing genuine progress in climate action. #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #climateaction

Why big problems need small wins For decades, Enrique Ortiz has worked to protect some of the world’s most vital ecosystems. In a recent Mongabay commentary, he voiced a truth that many in conservation rarely say aloud: Environmental messaging is failing to inspire enough people to act. The facts are known, yet they rarely change minds. To break through, Ortiz argues, we must tell stories of tangible change—rooted in real places, people, and results—so hope becomes not just a feeling, but a reason to act. The science is not flawed, nor the dangers overstated. The problem is relying too heavily on facts to change minds in a world where facts alone rarely do. Research shows people decide through a mix of emotion, experience, and social cues—not purely data. This mismatch explains why so many accurate messages fall flat. Climate change, framed mostly in planetary terms, can feel so vast & distant that individuals see no way to influence it. Ortiz calls for a narrative “revolution”—stories of adaptation & resilience, grounded in lived experience, over abstract warnings. When he taught students about plant-animal interactions, they forgot the scientific details but remembered the stories. This is “narrative transportation”—a neurological process that helps ideas stick & decisions shift. The bigger the problem, the smaller an individual feels. “Solve climate change” can seem visible but unreachable. People retreat from news they find exhausting, while opponents of climate action exploit this futility to erode momentum. The antidote is not to downplay the crisis, but to scale part of the narrative so people can see the difference they make. Optimism is not naïve—it is an engine for agency. Local action makes results tangible. In the Philippines, communities replanting mangroves can measure shifts in tides & storm protection. In the Comoros, a no-take fishing zone means fuller nets just outside its boundaries. These are not diversions from the bigger fight; they are proof that people respond to challenges they can touch, shape, and witness. Local victories ripple outward, offering blueprints others can adapt. They turn abstractions like “protecting biodiversity” into bringing salmon back to a river or keeping sea turtles nesting on a beach. A steady diet of doom breeds political stagnation. People who believe nothing can be done rarely act. Those who have seen a wetland restored tend to keep showing up. Ortiz’s call is to reframe the vantage point. The global crisis is real, but change grows from local soil. By linking a patch of prairie to global biodiversity or a rooftop solar panel to energy transformation, we make a global problem feel solvable. Global change won’t happen in one leap, but through thousands of small, visible wins that build momentum for systemic shifts. Local victories & systems change are inseparable; each creates space for the other. The outcome is unwritten—but at the human scale, it is possible.

Could dry British humor help solve climate change? The biggest problem companies face is that people don't understand their industry. But Jo Brand might be the solution: She doesn’t talk about climate change like an activist or an academic. She makes it relatable, memorable, and simple. Example: When discussing ocean acidification, she doesn’t explain it with pH levels or CO₂ absorption rates. Instead, she says: "Imagine you left a Coke can open overnight, took a sip in the morning, and it tasted off. That’s happening to our oceans right now.” Why does it work so well? 3 reasons: ✅ It’s a mental shortcut. Anyone who’s left a Coke open gets it instantly. ✅ It makes people feel the problem. Not only hear about it. ✅ It removes complexity. Climate tech brands could learn from this. If more brands communicated like Jo, we’d have beaten fossil fuel companies in every ad campaign. And maybe even solve global warming.

𝑱𝒐 𝑩𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒍𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒎𝒚 𝒔𝒄𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆. 𝑰’𝒎 𝒄𝒆𝒓𝒕𝒂𝒊𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒅𝒚 𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒏𝒆𝒄𝒕 𝒑𝒆𝒐𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒕𝒐 𝒄𝒍𝒊𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆 Climate Science Breakthrough has paired leading comedians with climate scientists to present a novel way to communicate the climate crisis. “If people like me have to get involved, you know we are in deep shit,” says Jo Brand, renowned British comedian and The Great British Bake Off host. Why? Because she has joined the ranks of other notable comedians such as Nish Kumar, Kiri Pritchard-McLean, and Jonathan Pie in Climate Science Translated, a project that translates complex climate science into accessible and funny content to spur millions of people into action. Even though climate change is the greatest threat humanity has ever faced, research by the Climate Science Breakthrough team shows that just 2% of the public can name a climate scientist. Nearly everyone knows Jo Brand. Getting famous comedians to translate what climate scientists are saying in a funny, ironic and often blunt way makes the science much more accessible. And it works. Research shows that humour can be a transformative tool in science communication and have a positive impact on people’s understanding of climate change. So far, my video with Jo Brand has been viewed more than 3 million times and has gained mainstream attention, with celebrities like Ellie Goulding, Gary Lineker, Rainn Wilson and Thom Yorke retweeting the videos. Each time, that brings the core message to a broader audience. May be Donald Trump should watch it before he takes up office? #climatechange #comedy #COP29 #sustainability

Looking for a coffee read…. The Creative Commissions for Climate Action programme is a series of British Council-supported projects across the world that combined art, science and climate action/activism to address climate change and related environmental crises. This external evaluation report details activity from 2021 to 2023. The combination of arts, science and technology has been at the heart of the Creative Commissions, finding innovative ways of addressing diverse climate challenges at a global scale and bringing to life the data. They highlight the personal stories and local contexts of some of those most affected by climate change, humanising an otherwise overwhelming and complex narrative of the climate emergency and biodiversity loss. Through diverse artforms and culture-led initiatives, the Creative Commissions build understanding and increase dialogue between communities, artists, scientists and digital innovators, and inspire hope for a brighter future. This external evaluation of the commissions serves to provide evidence of the impact and value of such projects when arts and culture are at the heart of climate action. It also helps us to reflect on the process, and learn from the experience to improve future initiatives. Humanizing the climate narrative: By combining art, science, and technology, the commissions made the climate emergency more personal and understandable for diverse audiences. Inspiring action: The projects demonstrated how arts and culture can motivate wider climate action and build understanding among communities, artists, and scientists. Encouraging collaboration: They fostered dialogue and new collaborations, often involving UK-based artists and cultural partners working with international counterparts. Addressing diverse climate themes: Projects addressed a wide range of issues, from deforestation and rising sea levels to sustainable consumption. #cop #climate #MutiraoCOP30 #cop30 #copbrazil #BelémBrazil https://lnkd.in/eyNRiq3u.

How do we make climate communication resonate with the very people it affects the most? 💡 🌎 In my latest essay for Question of Cities, I reflect on this pressing question, drawing on my experience in journalism and storytelling, as well as research and fieldwork in the climate space over the last few years. The article outlines how dominant climate narratives often remain inaccessible, overly technical, and disconnected from everyday lived realities. Some key takeaways: 🔁 1. Translation isn’t enough—localisation matters. Efforts like the UNDP Climate Dictionary are welcome, but we need to go further. People don’t say “Jalvayu Parivartan”—they talk about rain delays, changing festivals, and crop failures. Climate terms must emerge from how people experience change, not how we define it. Climate must be framed as an everyday issue. For most people in India, climate change competes with daily concerns like food, housing, and livelihoods. 📚 2. Storytelling enables agency. We need to shift from policy briefs to bottom-up storytelling, where a fisherwoman in the Sundarbans or a tribal woman in Odisha becomes the knowledge holder. 🎭 3. Embrace diverse media and people’s science. From metaphor-rich language to theatre, dance, and music—creative formats hold emotional and cultural power. Even community-defined terms like “wet drought” offer nuance and should shape climate adaptation strategies. 📰4. Mainstream media must build capacity. At a recent workshop in Maharashtra, we saw how rural reporters struggle to differentiate between climate and weather. There’s little support for them—especially women—to cover these stories. Climate needs to be integrated into all beats, not confined to disaster or weather coverage. 🎯 5. Climate communications is not just outreach—it’s strategy. Too often, communication is underfunded and under-prioritised. But to build inclusive, impact-driven programmes, we must invest in grassroots media literacy, storyteller training, and long-term behavioural change campaigns. 🌏 In the coming years, we will witness a growing wave of efforts to communicate climate change in new and compelling ways as climate becomes centre stage in policy and mainstream narratives. But the real test of these approaches won’t lie in international recognition or polished campaigns. It will lie in how meaningfully they resonate on the ground—in how a coal worker in Jharkhand or a landless labourer in Maharashtra understands, imagines, and navigates a world that is 1.5 degrees C warmer. 🔗 Read the piece here: https://lnkd.in/dGG8ZNZn A big thanks to Smruti Koppikar and Shobha Surin for trusting me with this piece. And of course, this would not be possible without Asar and all the fabulous work that I have got to be a part of in the last 3+ years! #ClimateCommunication #ClimateJustice

The era of "casual climate language" is over. Terms like "carbon neutral," once a badge of leadership, are now a liability. We're seeing this play out in high-profile lawsuits against companies like Delta Air Lines and EnergyAustralia, who are being challenged for using offsets to market their products as green. Even Apple, with its carefully crafted brand image, recently faced a German court ruling that its "carbon neutral" Apple Watch claim was misleading due to the short-term nature of its offsets. This is a pivotal moment; the credibility of a company’s climate action is no longer just about its targets, but rather about the language it uses to describe them. Take, for example - 🟢 A recent report found that only 53% of the UK public can correctly define “net-zero.” 🟢 Klarna, for example, avoids "carbon neutral" and instead applies an internal "carbon fee" to fund high-integrity climate projects, positioning its efforts as a financial contribution rather than a compensatory claim. 🟢 Microsoft, in outlining its strategy, emphasizes that deep emissions reductions come first, with carbon removals reserved for addressing truly residual emissions. This kind of transparency builds stakeholder trust. 🟢 Brands like Nestlé and easyJet have also dropped “carbon neutral” pledges, acknowledging that the term no longer aligns with consumer expectations. This shift signals a move toward a new lexicon—one that is humble, verifiable, and clear. For those of us in the industry, this is a call to action. We must advocate for and implement precise, **simple**, and honest communication that truly reflects what we're doing. This matters because the risk of getting it wrong can lead to greenhushing— whereby companies go quiet on their sustainability efforts to avoid scrutiny. This is something you've likely heard me call out before. To be clear - I think the ambition towards "carbon neutrality" is awesome, and we should applaud these companies' efforts. Instead, we can't let the fear of not being perfect become the enemy of the good. While consumers care deeply about sustainability, research shows they prioritize tangible actions like more sustainable packaging and reduced waste over complex carbon metrics and accounting. The only way to move forward is with radical transparency and a commitment to speaking a language of action, not just aspiration. Check out this great op ed in ESG Dive - https://lnkd.in/ermaxtuZ #Sustainability #CircularEconomy #Greenwashing #CorporateStrategy #ClimateAction

This new WRI research put into words something I’ve been feeling — and saying — for years in climate spaces. We’ve been told again and again that we will mostly be able to solve a big part of the climate crisis through personal behavior change. Eat less meat, fly less, buy second-hand, recycle. And yes, those things matter. But here’s what the research shows: 👉 Only about 10% of the potential emissions reduction from personal behavior change is realised without policies, infrastructure, and business support. 👉 Collective consumer pressure can help shift large companies toward more climate- and environmentally friendly practices 👉 Voting at both the national and local levels is key In short, without systemic change, the impact of individual actions is just a drop in the ocean. ✅ Want people to drive less? Give them access to safe, efficient public transit. ✅ Want more plant-based diets? Make those options affordable, tasty, visible, and attractive. ✅ Want energy-efficient homes? Support retrofits and solar with funding and policy. The call to action? Let’s stop placing the burden solely on individuals — and start leveraging our collective civic power to demand change from those truly shaping the system. 📣 And once again, we need to change the narrative. Climate action isn’t just about shrinking our carbon footprints — it’s about expanding our civic and political ones. Highly recommend reading the full piece: “The Most Impactful Things You Can Do for the Climate Aren’t What You’ve Been Told” https://lnkd.in/ezKx3gdD #ClimateJustice #SystemsChange #ClimateAction #PolicyMatters #CivicPower #BehaviorChange #CollectiveImpact

Lately I’ve been obsessed with this question: Why do some climate messages move people—and others don’t? In a new episode of Bloomberg Television's new show Quantum Marketing by Raja Rajamannar, Pranav Yadav (CEO of Neuro-Insight) breaks down how the brain actually responds to storytelling—and how that applies to climate advocacy. Around the 17-minute mark, he analyzes a well-produced climate ad and explains, through neuromarketing data, why it doesn’t stick. The key insight? Psychological distance. The ad talks about climate change, but not in a way that connects to people's personal context—what they care about in their day-to-day lives. And when something feels distant—geographically, emotionally, or temporally—the brain tunes it out. It fails to encode in memory, which means it doesn’t influence behavior. What does work? Stories that activate memory encoding by making the stakes immediate and relatable. That connect to identity, not just intellect. That meet people where they are—then move them. This kind of research lights me up. It’s why I believe we’re at an inflection point in climate storytelling. At TIME, we’re working to reframe climate not just as an environmental issue, but as an economic one. A human one. A business one. If you're doing research in this space—neuroscience, behavioral design, storytelling strategy—or want to help us build a better framework for climate narratives, let’s talk. We need to scale these insights and we have the tools to do it. Watch the whole video but especially the last bit after 17 min if you're thinking about how to communicate urgency, value, and impact in this moment. 🎥 https://lnkd.in/et_uK4c6 #climatecommunications #neuromarketing #behaviorchange #storytelling #TIME #climateaction #businesscaseforclimate