Expanding climate change narratives beyond environment

#NarrativeTips, Why climate communications needs to go far beyond climate A friend of mine Nadine Hura reminded me some years back that for many people, the issues that climate disruption bring are not (only) about the climate. Rather the climate problems we face now are simply a symptom of a set of problems deeply rooted in how modern economic systems have treated people and the environment for hundreds of years (extractive I think is a good metaphor here). While some groups are now experiencing the downstream impacts of that via climate disruption, many people have experienced the impacts for much much longer. So simply raising the climate disruption red flag doesn't actually have the resonance many of us communicating about it feel that it should. That is why I believe people will often rate cost of living, or day to day issues more critically than climate. The real pain they feel right now is top of mind BUT it has the same root cause. It's why some researchers talk about poly crisis - extract extract extract across people, systems for long enough and everything falls apart for most people. But different people will experience that differently depending on their context— their historical, cultural, social, physical context. So the same frame (climate) doesn't engage people. For me, in my early years doing this work, I thought the job was to try and explain this complexity at the heart of multiple systems breakdown (and that is part of it to some extent). However, to invite people into this story, and see themselves as a character in it, I have come to understand, through observation, listening, that a more compelling frame is that of a better life. Here is why: 👉 For many groups, framing loss and risk leads to defensive processing (fancy words for putting your hands over your ears and hoping it will all go away). 👉 Modelling increasingly shows robust and just (justice is key here not as a frame but as a value to drive decisions) responses to climate come with multiple benefits across different people’s lives from health, employment, air quality, community connection, power and food security. These things have enormous intrinsic and extrinsic value to people, a city and country over the long term. 👉 Disruption from climate is a sure thing. We are more sure of this than any other future modelling we do. 👉 While we could discuss how to determine the level of response given uncertainty on about predicted scale of the disruption, these are fundamentally *narratives of delay* that come from industries that don’t like what robust action would do to their profits (and practices of extraction). 💡By communicating the benefits, in terms of the day to day facets of different people’s lives, that robust, just, and bold climate action offers, we can better capture the needs and real concerns of many different groups, and engage better. Image by Megan Salole of a cityscape where effective climate action has led to better lives

New Clean Energy Narrative: Economic Arguments Replace Climate Urgency For years, the push for renewable energy has been framed primarily as an environmental imperative: reduce carbon emissions, combat climate change, and save the planet. But a fascinating shift is occurring in how clean energy is being promoted—and it might be the key to broader support across political divides. A recent Associated Press article highlights how clean energy advocates are now emphasizing job creation, economic growth, and national competitiveness rather than environmental benefits. During recent lobbying efforts in Washington, renewable energy representatives wore lapel pins saying "American energy dominance" and focused their pitch on economic opportunity. This represents a significant evolution in how the clean energy transition is being framed. Here's why this matters: 1. The Political Reality - Traditional environmental appeals often hit roadblocks with certain political constituencies - Economic arguments can create common ground across partisan divides - National security and energy independence resonate with broader audiences - Job creation speaks to local communities regardless of climate views 2. The Economic Case Taking Center Stage - The UN Climate Executive now emphasizes the "$2 trillion flowing into clean energy projects." - Industry leaders highlight manufacturing jobs and economic competitiveness - Even conservative voices are finding entry points through wealth-creation narratives - Local tax revenue and economic development are powerful motivators for communities 3. A Strategic Adaptation in Challenging Times - This approach creates multiple paths to the same destination: a cleaner energy system - Meeting audiences "where they are" may be more effective than changing deeply held beliefs - The transition still happens, even if motivated by different priorities - Economic and environmental goals can align even when the messaging emphasizes one over the other For those working in clean energy, sustainability, or climate advocacy, this shift poses important questions about effective strategy. Is emphasizing economic benefits over environmental urgency a pragmatic necessity or a concerning departure from climate priorities? What's clear is that different messages resonate with different audiences. Perhaps the most successful approach is having multiple compelling narratives that can be deployed depending on who's listening. #CleanEnergy #EnergyTransition #BusinessStrategy #ClimateAction

Sustainability officers are an increasingly endangered species. Last week, I spoke with a group of sustainability officers navigating a corporate landscape where terms like CSR, ESG, and climate change have become dirty words, or at least politically charged. Many companies are pulling back from public commitments on sustainability—not necessarily because the urgency has diminished, but because the risk of backlash has grown. In this environment, nature and biodiversity are emerging as safer entry points for corporate sustainability efforts. While climate change is often framed as a divisive issue, nature remains more broadly accepted across political & ideological lines. 👉 Why nature can be a less controversial framing Many companies are using nature as a strategic way to maintain environmental commitments while avoiding political entanglements. Here’s why: 🌳 Universality & positive connotations – Nature is widely seen as something to be cherished, regardless of political views. Protecting forests, oceans, and wildlife can carry fewer ideological conflicts than decarbonization mandates or carbon pricing. 🤝 Reduced partisanship – Climate discussions frequently spark debates over regulations, economic costs, and industry impact. In contrast, nature-based initiatives—such as habitat restoration, conservation, and biodiversity projects—are less likely to be viewed as partisan issues. 🌱 Tangible local impact – Nature-focused projects have visible, immediate benefits: cleaner air & water, restored landscapes, and healthier ecosystems. These local, concrete outcomes resonate more than global climate targets, which can feel abstract or distant. ⛈️ Strategic communication – By framing sustainability efforts around nature, companies can continue advancing environmental goals—like emissions reduction—without explicitly linking them to politically charged climate policies. 👉 The resilience narrative: An even broader framework For some companies, even protecting nature is seen as too controversial. That’s where another concept is gaining traction: resilience. One sustainability officer shared how their company avoids even the word "nature" in favor of resilience-focused language: ✅ Resilient supply chains that withstand environmental & geopolitical disruptions ✅ Resilient infrastructure that adapts to extreme weather & resource scarcity ✅ Resilient business models that reduce risk & increase long-term stability By focusing on resilience, companies can integrate sustainability into their strategy without triggering resistance—not as an ideological stance, but as a smart business decision. As the political landscape shifts, sustainability officers are finding new ways to keep moving forward. Whether through nature-based solutions or resilience framing, the goal remains the same: building a future where businesses & ecosystems can thrive together. If you're in this space, how are you navigating the current climate? 📷 Olympic Peninsula by me.

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

We’re witnessing a paradox: despite a policy environment seemingly hostile to decarbonization (tariffs on cleantech imports, moratoriums on IRA fund disbursements, and the proposed rollback of DOE programs), U.S. climate tech funding surged by nearly 65% in Q1 2025. But what is perhaps more revealing than the capital flows is the rhetorical shift underway. In response to shifting political priorities, a growing number of startups are revising how they present themselves. Companies are beginning to distance their public messaging from terms like “clean energy,” “net zero,” or even “climate,” instead emphasizing “energy abundance,” “supply chain resilience,” and “domestic industrial capacity.” Others are shifting their messaging to appeal less to climate frameworks like the SDGs and more to the strategic language of national security and defense procurement. On paper, it’s a brilliant strategy. Venture funding is up. Nuclear and geothermal are gaining traction, bolstered by rising AI-driven energy demands and a revived narrative of American energy independence. In theory, this is resilience. But it prompts my question: should this reframing be seen as retreat or evolution? Language shapes how capital is allocated, which technologies are prioritized, and how legitimacy is constructed in the eyes of policymakers and markets. If climate tech can only thrive when it avoids talking about climate change, it risks becoming more about political fit than environmental impact. With that being said, it's no question the sector has always contained a range of compelling motivations (climate-first, profit-first, or both). Maybe this moment simply makes that diversity more visible. The challenge now isn’t whether the sector can adapt (it clearly can). But I wonder whether it can do so without losing sight of its core purpose. If climate ventures become contingent on ideological compatibility rather than environmental necessity, the sector may become structurally less accountable to its original goals. Would love to hear how others are thinking about this as I wrestle with it, both strategically and ethically. Source: https://lnkd.in/eCxFX8Kx #climatetech #decarbonization #energytransition #netzero #sustainability

This Black History Month and every month, I share the story of Prince Edward County, VA and the closing of the schools from 1959 to 1964. I share this story often when I’m asked to talk about the importance of climate change and storytelling. Whether at the Planet Forward Summit, The Great Northern Festival, the Marketplace of the Future, the National Environmental Justice Conference, the Ingka Group Action Speaks Summit, the Society of Environmental Journalists Conference, on dozens of other virtual and in person stages (with Climate Generation, SEI, NOAA: National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, FEMA, FXB International, Rotary Club of Fort Wayne, The Climate Museum, etc) and in this video at the The Nest Climate Campus summit, I’ve shared this story and the story of my dad Moses, who passed away 7 years ago. I’m so thankful for everyone who has given me the mic. It can understandably be hard sharing the story of losing your dad with tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of people. Often, I’m in front of rooms of white strangers and speaking about the insidious racism that my dad and his community faced and that still drives us to overlook the incredible power that Black and Brown people can have in the face of the climate crisis. I share that story though, not because it’s easy, but because it’s a huge reason that I work as a storyteller, amplifying the stories and humans who often go unheard — specifically from underrepresented communities, including Black communities. With the help of Jothsna Harris of Change Narrative LLC, and with support from my team at Project Drawdown, I finally published a post about this piece of Black history and its parallels to the climate space and my experience in it especially as a young, Black, queer person: https://lnkd.in/eW2wZdNV If you do anything today, I hope: 1) you read the story linked above about my dad and the climate space, 2) you share this post and that story with your community, and 3) you consider what history and stories that you’re not seeing, and ways we can all do better to pass the mic and shift power to those who often go unheard. Cover our lives and work. Circulate our resources. Promote us as experts. Trust us to lead. Question limited narratives. Showcase us, not as victims or villains, but as the heroes we are and can be. #blackhistorymonth #climatechange #climatejustice #representationmatters

Can we talk about climate change without talking about climate change? Purpose Climate Lab along with Bring Back Green Foundation presents ‘Avocado’, a story of love and resilience in the face of climate change. The infusion of climate change into mainstream visual media and entertainment stories in regional languages and with local contexts is critical to building relevant and relatable narratives on climate and nature. With this short film, we use the powerful and relatable language of love to subtly communicate the impacts of climate change. News media often reduces the Shanus and Sumas to numbers when reporting about climate events such as landslides, floods, heatwaves and other natural disasters. ‘Avocado’ tells the story of regular people who's lives have been profoundly impacted by climate change. Link - https://lnkd.in/gM3ZjcR2 YouTube | Johny Pictures അവക്കാഡോ - ഒരു ഫീൽ ഗുഡ് കഥ  | AVOCADO- Malayalam Short Film | Love Story | Johny Pictures |   Harpreet Bagga Charlie Roper Kritica Mahajan Vincy Abraham Akhilesh Anilkumar Saudamini Zutshi Komal Chaudhry Simon Goff Mrinalini Ray Mehta Harpreet Bhullar

In a world bombarded with existential threats, the narrative of doom has become a familiar refrain. Yet new research involving over 255 behavioral scientists and climate change experts tested the effects of 11 common messages meant to boost climate change beliefs, policy support, and concrete action. Their extensive study reveals that while doom-laden messages capture social media attention, they fail to inspire real-world action against climate change. Among the various strategies tested, one particularly effective approach stood out: emphasizing the impact of one's current actions on future generations. This intervention involved asking participants to write a letter to a socially close child, who would read it in 25 years as an adult, describing their current efforts to ensure a habitable planet. This strategy not only personalized the issue but also framed climate action within the context of legacy and intergenerational responsibility. This result highlights how effective it is to present climate action as the legacy we're creating for future generations. It connects with our basic wish to be remembered positively, to make a meaningful contribution, and to safeguard our loved ones. This method goes beyond the immobilizing effect of doom and gloom, encouraging a feeling of responsibility, optimism, and a drive to take real action. Moreover, the research highlights the importance of tailoring messages to diverse audiences, acknowledging the complex landscape of climate communication. What resonates in one country or culture may not hold the same power in another, reminding us of the need for nuanced and context-sensitive strategies. The study also reaffirms the effectiveness of messages that emphasize scientific consensus and moral imperatives, suggesting a path forward that is both hopeful and grounded in shared ethical responsibilities. Fear alone cannot drive sustainable change; we need narratives that empower and unite us in collective action. #climateaction #climatecommunication #climatecrisis https://lnkd.in/dGzgMCyY