Computers, Environment and Urban Systems

29 (2005) 255–273
www.elsevier.com/locate/compenvurbsys

Representing climate change futures: a critique

on the use of images for visual communication
Sophie A. Nicholson-Cole *

School of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK

Abstract

How people perceive their role and the responsibilities of others in determining the out-
comes of climate change is of great importance for policy-making, adaptation and climate
change mitigation. However, for many people, climate change is a remote problem and not
one of personal concern.
Meaningful visualisations depicting climate change futures could help to bridge the gap
between what may seem an abstract concept and everyday experience, making clearer its local
and individual relevance. Computer aided visualisation has great potential as a means to
interest and engage different groups in society. However, the way in which information is
represented affects an individual’s interpretation and uptake, and how they see their present
choices affecting their future and that of others.
The empirical content of this paper summarises the results of an exploratory qualitative
study, consisting of 30 semi-structured interviews investigating people’s visual conceptions and
feelings about climate change. The emphasis of the inquiry is focussed on eliciting people’s
spontaneous visualisations of climate change and their feelings of involvement with the issue.
The insights gained from the described empirical work set the scene for further research, which
will employ the use of a range of images and visualisations for evaluation.

2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Climate change; Visualisation; Communication

1. Introduction

This paper assesses the use of visualisation for communicating climate change
issues to the public, with reference to the broader theme of visualising scenes of the

*
Tel.: +44-1603-593990; fax: +44-1603-591327.
E-mail address: s.nicholson-cole@uea.ac.uk (S.A. Nicholson-Cole).

0198-9715/$ - see front matter
2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2004.05.002
256 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

future or ‘futurescapes’. Fig. 1 illustrates how its various facets interact with each
other. The paper begins by introducing the concept of decarbonisation as a miti-
gative approach to dealing with climate change, highlighting some of the barriers to
domestic decarbonisation and public engagement more generally. The potential for
visualisations of climate change to motivate and engage people with the issue is
addressed, and is linked to how various forms of visualisations are already being
employed in other fields, for example, landscape management and landscape valu-
ation research. In addition, the various methodological and ethical concerns asso-
ciated with creating and using computer-generated visualisations for climate change
science communication are addressed. The empirical component of this paper re-
ports on the results of a qualitative study consisting of 30 semi-structured interviews,
which were designed to explore people’s visual conceptions of climate change, and
how these relate to their perceptions of the issue and their behavioural intentions to
decarbonise.
Because of the great potential for using visualisations to motivate and engage
people with issues like climate change, this paper emphasises the necessity for people
working in the field of visualisation and visual communication to remain aware of
the ethical and methodological issues associated with using computer-generated vi-
sualisations. These include issues of differential interpretation on behalf of the
viewer, subjectivity in the selection of images, and prior assumptions in the creation
of images. Fig. 1 makes clear that in environmental visualisation research, there are
many potential influences and consequences on the creation and success of digital
visualisations. Also that there are many parts to the whole, and that taking a holistic
approach to researching and reading in this field is necessary.

1.1. Introduction to climate change

The emerging scientific consensus is that in the last century, human interventions
with the Earth combined with natural events have led to a climate change phe-

Fig. 1. The overall links between the dimensions of this paper.

 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 257

nomenon (IPCC, 2001). Due to our dependency on fossil fuels, climate change will
undoubtedly continue in the future with relatively unpredictable impacts on humans
and the environment. Future climate change projections are based on the possible
rates of resource use in the future, and the associated greenhouse gas emissions (e.g.
Hulme, Turnpenny, & Jenkins, 2002; IPCC, 2001; Nakicenovic & Swart, 2000). Our
long-term climate future depends therefore, on how human activities progress from
now on, predominantly in terms of our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and how
the climate system responds. As part of a response to climate change the Intergov-
ernmental Panel on Climate Change (2001) advocate decarbonisation as a mitigative
approach. Decarbonisation mainly involves changing the way we generate and use
energy in ways that reduce carbon dioxide emissions (the main GHG) into the
atmosphere.
This paper concentrates on the role of individual members of the public in col-
lectively reducing carbon dioxide emissions from the UK domestic sector. The
general public needs to understand and accept adaptation and mitigation policies if
they are to be successful, particularly if we are going to reach the 60% reduction in
GHG gas emissions by 2050 as proposed by the Royal Commission on Environ-
mental Pollution (2000) and by the UK Government in the most recent Energy
White Paper (Department of Trade & Industry, 2003). People will certainly have to
make lifestyle changes in many aspects of their lives (household, travel, leisure, etc.)
and will need to feel motivated to take responsibility for their personal reductions in
fossil fuel consumption. They therefore need to be able to link their day-to-day use
of energy with fossil fuel consumption and climate change, and make behavioural
changes accordingly.

1.2. Public perception of climate change and barriers to decarbonisation in the

domestic sector

Successfully engaging the public involves having an understanding of how people

relate to climate change and what might potentially drive them to act (e.g. Bord,
Fisher, & O’Connor, 1998). Researching how visualisations of climate change might
be able to motivate people to change their behaviour must build on such a basis
because people’s interpretations of climate change visualisations are built on their
prior perceptions of the issue, which influence their likelihood and motivation to take
action.
Lorenzoni and Langford (2001a, 2001b) present a set of typologies based on a
study of public perceptions of climate change. The four broad groups are termed
‘denyers’, the ‘disinterested’, the ‘doubters’ and the ‘engaged’. The majority of
participants in their research were found to fall into the denying, disinterested and
doubting types, suggesting that much needs to be done to move people towards
being ‘engaged’ with the issue. However, even amongst people who express concern
for climate change, there are very few who are deeply committed when it comes to
making real lifestyle choices towards a decarbonised future. In sociological research
this is often termed ‘the attitude-behaviour divide’ (e.g. Blake, 2001; Grob, 1995).
Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) refer to this phenomenon as the ‘gap’ between the
258 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

possession of environmental knowledge and actively engaging in pro-environmental

behaviour.
There are many barriers preventing people from really engaging and changing
their behaviour according to potential policy options. Climate change is an abstract
issue, with a long time horizon and global boundaries. These make it difficult to
relate to and to see how personal efforts to reduce emissions might really have an
effect. Climate change is also an uncertain and confusing issue, characterised by a
lack of political commitment. There are few immediate drivers for change (e.g. lo-
cally serious effects of climate change) and the options to continue as usual seem
more attractive than those suggested for carbon reduction––to many it seems alto-
gether easy and acceptable to do nothing. These examples help to explain why people
can believe climate change to be a problem yet take little or no personal action (e.g.
Bostrom, Morgan, Fischoff, & Read, 1994; Kempton, 1991, 1997; Read, Bostrom,
Morgan, Fischhoff, & Smuts, 1994; Seacrest, Kuzelka, & Leonard, 2000; Stoll-
Kleemann, O’Riordan, & Jaegar, 2001).

1.3. The potential role for visual communication with some environmental examples

The nature of climate change and people’s perceptions of it brings challenges to

the successful communication of a motivating message (Stamm, Clark, & Eblacas,
2000). Visualisation has great potential to be used more extensively as a means to
communicate and stimulate public willingness to engage with the issue. Robins
(1996) states that we are undergoing an ‘image revolution’, and the proliferation of
visual media, current examples of environmental visualisation research and the
expanding capacity for innovative computer-generated visualisations highlight
the good reasons for employing a visual approach. Other advantages include the
capacity to: convey strong messages, making them easy to remember; condense
complex information and communicate new content; provide the basis for personal
thoughts and conversations, contributing to people’s memory and issue-awareness;
communicate ideas in an instant using many different media and contexts.
The media is the most substantial source of information about climate change
(particularly visual information) for the public. Environmental interest groups ex-
pend considerable resources via the media on motivating supporters, visual appeals
playing an important role in the process (Huddy & Gunnthorsdottir, 2000). Visual
imagery is also a significant component for communication in education and in
advertising for example (e.g. Sheppard, 2001). These examples combined with the
Internet and access to desktop virtual environments through computer games offer
further potential for climate change communication and public participation (Fen-
cott, Schaik, Ling, & Shafiullah, 2003; Herwig & Paar, 2002; Honjo & Lim, 2001;
Kingston, Carver, Evans, & Turton, 2000; Wherrett, 1999). As information tech-
nology develops we can already see an increasing flow of images and pictures
depicting authentic and virtual realities appearing in the media, and there is good
reason to apply these to climate change. Trumbo (1999, p. 421) states, ‘‘Contempo-
rary science communication relies on visual representation to clarify data, illustrate
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 259

concepts, and engage a public informed through an ever-increasing arsenal of com-

puter graphics and new media tools.’’
Visualisation is used in many fields, for example, landscape visualisation for
planning and decision-making. This is partly because visual or scenic quality is a
major component of an encounter with the natural environment, making visual
assessment a key tool for participatory planning exercises and landscape quality
assessments (Al-Kodmany, 1999; Clay & Daniel, 2000). Appleton and Lovett (2003)
state that visual communication is an increasingly common part of environmental
decision-making. Visualisation technology is also employed in much research as a
tool for landscape design and preferences (examples include Bell, 2001; Clay &
Daniel, 2000; Daniel & Meitner, 2001; Gimblett, Daniel, Cherry, & Meitner, 2001;
Hands & Brown, 2002; Kaltenborn & Bjerke, 2002; Lange, 1994; Misgav, 2000;
Orland, 1994; Pullar & Tidey, 2001; Purcell, Peron, & Berto, 2001). Computer vi-
sualisations clearly have the potential to project what local landscapes under various
climate change conditions might look like in the future for example, and might
enable people to think about climate change futures in relation to present activities
of many kinds.
In landscape research, photographs have been found in the past to be acceptable
surrogates for ‘actual landscapes for judging visual quality’ (Bergen, Ulbricht,
Fridley, & Ganter, 1995, p. 135; see also Hull & Stewart, 1992). Focus is moving
toward the possibilities for using computer-generated visualisations encompassing
more ‘experiential’ elements, giving viewers some degree of control to move around
the visual field (Bell, 2001; Bishop, Ye, & Karadaglis, 2001; Danahy, 2001; Palmer &
Hoffman, 2001). For example, virtual reality makes 3D visualisation technology a
popular tool for urban planning and landscape design applications (Pullar & Tidey,
2001; Schmid, 2001; Van Maren & Verbree, 2000; Waly & Thabet, 2003). Modern
computer technology clearly has much to offer in terms of climate future visualisa-
tion for public communication and engagement purposes (e.g. Orland, Bud-
thimedhee, & Uusitalo, 2001). Appleton, Lovett, S€ unnenberg, and Dockerty (2002)
illustrate in the context of rural landscape visualisation that different situations re-
quire trade-off’s to be made in terms of the visualisation package used, according to
the purpose of the exercise and the resources available. A good introduction to the
technologies involved is provided by Ervin and Hasbrouck (2001). An illustration of
the range of current applications is presented by Buhmann and Ervin (2003) and
Buhmann, Nothelfer, and Pietsch (2002). These are also discussed by Dockerty,
Lovett, S€ unnenberg, Appleton, and Parry (this issue) and MacFarlane, Stagg,
Turner, and Lievesley (this issue).

1.4. Ethics and methodological issues in visualisation

The potential for technologies to facilitate the creation and dissemination

of science visualisation makes it more important than ever to ask ques-
tions about what and how these fascinating images of science communi-
cate. (Trumbo, 2000, p. 380).
260 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

The effectiveness of visual representations as a stimulus for behavioural change

depends on how people interpret them and respond. However, visualisations and
pictures of the future will be subject to alternative interpretations by the viewer (e.g.
Graber, 1990; Trumbo, 1999). We must remain aware of how the public will inter-
pret visualisations of climate change in different ways, and aware of the implications
of using visualisation techniques to communicate such environmental issues. Sim-
plification of the science is inevitable in the production of images for climate change
communication. Unavoidably, visualisations depicting abstract issues and the future
can only be generalised interpretations. There are also issues associated with rep-
resenting uncertainty and we must acknowledge the inherent subjectivity involved in
the selection and creation of climate change images. It is also important to consider
the effects of using emotive imagery in climate change communications, the validity
of digitally generated visualisations considering a balance between realism and
simplification of the science and so on.
People’s prior perceptions, experiences, attitudes, social background, cultural
orientation and behavioural dispositions influence the reactions they will have to
images of climate change, the messages they take away and whether they act on the
basis of the visual communication they have received (e.g. Myers, 1994). Healey and
Enns (2002) argue that people do not have a general-purpose vision; that the
interpretation of a new scene depends as much on our goals and expectations as on
the physical visual stimulus. Conceivably there are many audiences, each being made
up of a wide range of people depending on an assortment of prior conceptions of
climate change, personal circumstances, social values, etc. In other words, the het-
erogeneous nature of the audiences ensure heterogeneous interpretations. Hence, we
can never depend on one image appealing to everyone in the same way, let alone
presume that a particular message will be delivered. When considering a visual
communication activity, it is therefore crucially important to consider the charac-
teristics of a target audience and their likely range of interpretations.
A person’s response to an image is not simply rational, but has an emotional
component that raises ethical and practical issues (Myers, 1994). Daniel and Meitner
(2001) remind us of the power of visualisations to alter people’s interpretations of
complex concepts and to arouse positive and negative emotions. The symbolism
contained in a visual image can arouse emotional feelings when we look at a picture,
and to some extent these elements help to bring about a meaningful experience or
interpretation (Boholm, 1998; Oring, 1999). Presenting emotive imagery is therefore
one way in which to attract people’s attention and may motivate people to act.
However, because images can trigger powerful emotional responses, we must also be
careful to avoid conveying disturbing or misleading visions, or feelings of fear or
unease if the point is to provide a meaningful and motivating message. This is
particularly important when visual communication is being used to stimulate
engagement because of the fine balance involved in using visual communication to
provide an engaging message. It needs to be managed carefully because responses to
emotional visual appeals can simply end up triggering defensive psychological re-
sponses, leaving the audience desensitised with a sense of ‘issue fatigue’ or leading to
feelings of powerlessness to do anything to reduce the causes of climate change.
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 261

Subjectivity is inherent in the selection and creation of images that are used in
climate change communication. The choice of image or photographic representation
and the creation of digital visualisations are not value-free activities. They will al-
ways be informed by ‘expert’ judgement and social contexts, and generating visu-
alisations always involve the creator in making choices as part of the design process
(Ervin & Hasbrouck, 2001). Sheppard (2001) highlights that it is the preparers of the
visualisations who conjure up the imagery, emphasising the potential for visual
communication to put across a particular point of view in a particular way. For
example, Sheppard summarises computer landscape visualisation as constituting a
‘crystal ball’ capable of showing us views into the future and discusses the associated
risks of using these in public communication. Myers (1994) also suggests that like
texts, pictures can suggest an attitude, point of view or form of address and can play
with associations and meanings. By presenting people with a virtual image or picture
of a future in whatever context, we are framing their visualisation based on our own
information and imagination. We cannot help but influence how the viewers see a
climate future for example, when show them the picture. MacFarlane et al. (this
issue) remind us that the techniques of landscape visualisation using 3D modelling
and VR visualisations remain highly expert-oriented, raising matters about the
intersection of values, communication and audience understanding.
A long-standing question exists about the validity of using photographs and other
imagery to represent the present and future (in terms of landscapes for example, see
Daniel & Meitner, 2001). Whilst acknowledging the advantages of virtual reality and
computer-generated simulations of the future, we must remember that digital images
are still ‘virtual’ and not real and that their meanings have many offshoots (Heim,
1998). In a planning context, Lange (2001) argues that public participation is crucial
to an efficient planning process but questions whether, how, and to what degree a
real landscape can be validly represented virtually. Ervin and Hasbrouck (2001)
argue that computer models used for decision-making processes need to be fully
informed by scientific knowledge, and developed slowly with full processes of review
and validation (see also Orland et al., 2001). Appleton and Lovett (2003, this issue)
note that a starting point for ensuring validity is to be sure that computer visuali-
sations are really going to be a useful ‘tool’ for the purpose intended.
Digital visualisation will always be an act of simplification or abstraction from
reality. All visualisations based on computer models contain simplifications,
abstractions and perhaps even distortions (Ervin & Hasbrouck, 2001). We must
consider the issues of simplification and realism in an image because they can
influence a viewer’s experience (Appleton & Lovett, 2003). Daniel and Meitner
(2001, p. 69) conclude, ‘‘. . .the level of abstraction/realism provided by the final
graphic displays from environmental data visualisation systems has important
implications for the validity of human observers’ responses of those visualisations.’’
(see also Karjalainen & Tyrvainen, 2002). Ervin (2001) suggests that ‘realistic’
depictions are often desirable, however high levels of realism cannot always be
incorporated because of limitations in computer power. Lange (2001) concludes that
more and very detailed 3D-object-data and accompanying texture information
would be necessary to make GIS visualisations more realistic. However, technology
262 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

is developing all the time and the influence of new media and computing technologies
has certainly improved the ability to generate realistic visual representations,
sometimes of the future. However, we may still question whether images for certain
purposes need to be photo realistic and whether, for example, artistic impression’s
could suffice.
This leads us to the empirical part of this paper that considers people’s prior
visual perceptions and conceptions about climate change, their attitudes to it and
their likelihood for engagement with the issue. A bottom–up approach is taken
because it is thought that all these things will affect the types of image or visuali-
sation which is most likely to appeal to people and communicate a motivating
message.

2. Method

The empirical part of this paper investigates how the way in which people
interpret and visualise climate change might be employed to develop the way it is
communicated visually. Thirty semi-structured interviews were undertaken with
participants between the ages of 16 and 40 in Norwich, UK. The participants were
recruited through a purposive sampling strategy (Patton, 2002). This study therefore
does not adopt a strictly ‘representative’ or random sampling strategy but takes an
exploratory approach based on three illustrative social groupings. The three groups
were selected to represent a range of socio-demographic characteristics, lifestyle
characteristics and future outlooks. Climate change is largely a future issue and so
the differential future orientation between the groups was deemed to be an inter-
esting selection criterion. Due to the likely variation in perceptions of climate
change, individual values and experiences, etc., it was probable that both within and
between groups visual conceptions of climate change would be diverse. The three
groups can be summarised as follows:

Group one: Ten mothers living in an area of Norwich that suffers from some eco-
nomic and social disadvantage. The key to the future orientation of this group was
assumed to be their children’s lives and well-being, and possibly financial issues.
Group two: Ten 16–17 year old students at a local secondary school. The key to
future orientation for this group was assumed to be fairly immediate in terms
of their own lives, career and university choices.
Group three: Ten middle-class young professionals living and working in and
around Norwich. The key to future orientation for this group assumed to be a
mixture of career, financial and upwardly mobile aspirations, family orientation
and so on.

The semi-structured interviews used open questions and aimed to yield data to
illustrate how participants conceptualise climate change visually. The questions were
designed to evoke people’s images, thoughts and feelings about climate change in
relation to:
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 263

(a) The perceived importance of climate change to participants (its salience).

(b) Participants’ feelings of how and whether they can personally do anything about
it (how or whether they perceive themselves as part of the cause and their sense
of self-efficacy to take action and make a difference).

The initial questions were designed to explore how people imagine the future
generally and subsequently how climate change features in a global sense and in
relation to their personal futures and individual concerns in life. Several questions
sought to elicit people’s mental imagery in relation to climate change. They were
asked to describe their imagery and were later prompted to include any associations
they made with personal experiences, the media, etc. This was followed with some
questions as to whether the participants had noticed any changes to suggest that
climate change might be happening; their opinions of the causes of and who they
think should take responsibility for it, if at all; what they think they could do per-
sonally to lessen the effects, if anything; the sort of information they think would
help them to learn and do more; finally, what they think the significance of climate
change will be in 50 years time.
Climate change imagery, feelings of salience and of personal self-efficacy tie to-
gether public perceptions of climate change, the barriers individual carbon reduction
and the role of imagery as a motivating factor. As part of an ongoing exploratory
study, the interviews constitute the first stage of a project that will be taken further
by developing and presenting actual examples to the same participants. These will be
based on the visual imagery elicited in the interviews and on expert consultation. A
review of the main results from the interview stage is given, with suggestions for the
nature of the visualisations that the next phase will involve.

3. Results and discussion

Participants generally found it difficult to imagine the future, particularly in the

context of climate change in 50 years time. Regardless of their level of knowledge or
difficulty in imagining the future, all participants had rich opinions to offer. Gen-
erally, participants articulated fairly pessimistic visual conceptions of the future and
depicted climate change and the future generally to be bleak. Most participants
expressed their feelings about climate change in a negative and distant sense, abstract
from their personal lives and present situation. However, positive imagery of climate
change in the future was also described. The images participants had in their minds
of climate change and the future were broadly expressed in relation to media
exposure, education, personal experience, interpersonal influences and their imagi-
nations. The data also showed much variation within each of the groups. There
appeared also to be inter-group differences and the results suggest some links to
social class, education, life-stage and lifestyles. In general it appears that within this
sample, people have great difficulty relating to climate change as having much
personal relevance particularly in a practical sense.
264 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

3.1. Climate change imagery and its inspiration

Media: Participants’ climate change imagery was somewhat based on media

exposure and was particularly linked to the types of climate change visual imagery
that has commonly appeared on television (news, film, etc.) and in newspapers.
Participants’ imagery tended to be based on photographic or video images from the
UK and around the world. Participants described for example, their visions of the
sea level rising and inundating coastal regions/countries, polar bears and penguins
on the melting ice, and severe drought and flooding in the UK and abroad (many
described the television coverage of the Autumn 2000 floods), famines, and disas-
trous weather extremes such as hurricanes, etc. Often, descriptions in relation to
what participant’s had seen in the media were given of graphic and catastrophic
imagery (that Kasemir et al., 2000, suggest are more likely to capture the public
imagination). However, participants often elaborated that they were more touched
by national and local imagery concerning climate changes, stating that it had more
resonance than global imagery because it was easier to relate to and consequently
more upsetting in some cases. Participants also described futuristic visions of the
future based on what they had seen on television, particularly in films, and on their
imaginations. Scientific imagery such as graphical representations and diagrams were
referred to by groups two and three but not by group one. Group three attributed
these to the television and newspaper media, and group two, to the media and
educational settings.
Personal experience: Relating climate change to local examples, and perceived
personal experiences was a common feature of people’s visual expressions and
conceptions of climate change. Participants often expressed comparisons with the
past and on this basis imagined the future. The most common such examples given
by participants were mostly as descriptions of UK flooding, local coastal erosion,
and changes in the weather. Also, vehicle fumes in congested Norwich traffic, more
rain for the garden, local beach visits in hotter summers, unusual garden insects, etc.
Winter floods have not severely affected East Anglia whereas other areas of the UK
have suffered, and this has been widely covered by strong images in the media. Local
issues such as coastal vulnerability to erosion were sometimes linked to climate
change through the media imagery, but combined with personal experience. Visual
descriptions of weather change were widely expressed, mainly through very recent
personal experience of unusual weather events, and subtle changes which partici-
pants associated with climate change. This was the most salient impact of climate
change, perhaps because it is the easiest to relate to. Participants talked of being able
to ‘see’ the effects of climate change happening in the weather and the seasons,
whereas other causes and consequences that were more difficult to associate with
climate change seemed more remote. Participants often gave examples of change
which they associated with climate change and imagined would continue in the fu-
ture (e.g. more unpredictable weather).
The reliance on personal experience and local examples in peoples discourse about
climate change is possibly because it is a natural response to try and identify abstract
phenomena like climate change with familiar and concrete examples. It was easier for
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 265

participants to visualise present and future climate change issues in relation to their
personal lives and those of their families. Participants were influenced by interper-
sonal communication on the topic and often talked about climate change in relation
to what they had discussed with friends and relatives. They could easily describe
images that they connected to personal conversations about climate change, or in-
stances where they had consciously thought about it. Sometimes other people’s
experience of environmental change was taken as evidence that climate change is
happening and interpersonal communications also appeared to contribute towards
perpetuating some misconceptions for some. For example, the confusion sur-
rounding the ozone issue, and what the causes and consequences of climate change
are (e.g. Ungar, 2000).
Imagination: The strong imaginative component is driven by the many influences
on participants’ elicited visualisations. Imaginative descriptions of climate change
were often linked to people’s opinions and level of knowledge about the causes of
climate change and overlapped with personal experiences and apparent expectations
based on other influences (e.g. Rebetez, 1996, states that human perception of cli-
mate change is strongly influenced by expectations which are not necessarily sup-
ported by observational or other evidence). In cases of uncertainty or lack of
knowledge about the topic, participants were particularly likely to describe
expressions from their imaginations. These were often wildly futuristic and often
featured significant environmental change. Many of the imaginations indicated areas
of people’s confusion and brought together many issues the participants were
uncertain of. Confusion about how climate change is related to other global envi-
ronmental problems also became apparent in participants’ imaginative visualisations
of climate change (e.g. the ozone issue, waste problems and recycling). Imagery
often demonstrated confusion or literal interpretation of variations on the termi-
nology used to talk about climate change (e.g. greenhouse effect, global warming,
ozone hole, etc.). This led to some vivid expressions and highly elaborate visual
interpretations.

3.2. Climate change salience and feelings of self efficacy in relation to imagery

The apparent degree of salience of climate change to participants and their

feelings of self-efficacy seemed to have little bearing on the amount of visual
imagery or the ability of participants to reflect visually on the subject in their own
terms. However, it seems that the nature of the elicited imagery was differential
depending on these feelings. Where climate change was apparently not a personally
salient issue to participants, they were more likely to describe abstract, wild and
catastrophic imagery, based on timescales beyond the life of the current genera-
tion. Where climate change was apparently more salient, visualisations ranged
between being scientific to being more national, local and personal. It tended to be
orientated towards the efforts being made to deal with climate change (e.g. wind
power) as well as the impacts. Box 1 illustrates some of the differences between
groups.
266 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

Box 1. Inter-group differences

• Group one (mothers) had a particular orientation around the future of their
children, apparently a persistent characteristic of their visualisations of future
climate change. Beyond the lives of their children, they found it difficult to
imagine the future and what climate change might bring. Their visual expec-
tations of climate change were often framed according to how they imagined
climate change affecting the locality where they anticipated their children
growing up. The imagery described by this group was particularly local, with
global descriptions being mainly severe and based on imagination. This group
felt largely unable to do anything, mainly because they did not know what to
do, however appeared to be very willing to make changes if they knew what
they could do and could afford it.
• Group two (school) were most likely to associate their images of climate
change with graphical or diagrammatic representations and what they
had learnt at school. Their imagery was also influenced by local changes
but also by the media and they appeared to find it particularly difficult
to imagine a long-term future. Climate change was not considered an
important issue in relation to the participants’ more immediate framing
of their personal lives, although they felt that they were an important group
because of their influence on the future. However, they felt largely power-
less to make a change or ‘do their bit’ because of their age, dependence
on parents, etc. In the context of a longer-term future, visualisations were
likely to be more dramatic, catastrophic and imaginative. So while group
two participants had plenty to say on the matter, their visualisations were
typically ‘wild’.
• Group three (middle-class young professionals) did not find it too difficult to
imagine the future in 50 years time and articulated relatively more rational
visualisations than groups one and two. Group three were most factual in
their approach to thinking about climate change and their imagery was lar-
gely related to what they had seen in the media or discussed with others. They
seemed to have a fairly broad knowledge about climate change, however they
also seemed uncertain and pessimistic about what would actually happen.
This may be attributed to their requirement for relatively more scientific
proof before taking behavioural action because they generally did not see
how one person could make a difference.

Participants expressed generally that people are a cause of climate change. Many
described visions of politics, industry and the economy, visualisations involving cars,
industry and burning fossil fuels. However, few expressed a connection between their
personal activities and climate change or acknowledged their individual actions as
driving forces of climate change until prompted. They broadly imagined that dealing
with climate change should be everyone’s responsibility but that doing something
about it should be via Government-led initiatives, which should also make it easier
for people. Many participants indicated that individuals could not really make a
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 267

difference (‘drop in the ocean’), particularly when the infrastructure seems like a
barrier to doing anything and when considering scientific and political speculation.
People generally felt that the climate change would continue even if individuals in
Britain change their ways. Some stated that it does not seem worth bothering when
other people are not making an effort (particularly the USA). Some felt that they
could not directly see the effects of climate change happening and therefore saw little
reason to react behaviourally; because it is not an everyday concern, it is difficult to
remain aware and always consider one’s daily actions. It is proposed that this is
related to the distant nature of climate change and the difficulty in relating to and
visualising climate change personally. Essentially, participants were pretty certain
that they would not really become concerned enough to do much about it until some
of the effects actually hit (e.g. until Norwich was flooded). However, most stressed
that they would become more motivated if they could understand what it would
mean for them, what they could do, and be regularly reminded of that by the media,
government efforts and other everyday sources of information.

3.3. Implications for future visualisation in the context of this study

Environmental visualisation research can apply to both eliciting people’s feelings

about environmental issues such as climate change, and to engaging people through
successful visual communication. The results of this study indicate that people’s
perceptions and attitudes toward climate change are related to their visual imagery
about the issue; strongly influenced by input from various visual media as well as
personal experience. The results suggest that visualisations of climate change de-
signed to engage people with the issue must have various characteristics in order to
make them attention grabbing, memorable and likely to trigger some motivation to
make behavioural changes:

1. Easy to relate to and personally applicable both spatially (i.e. locally recognisable)
and temporally (i.e. within a perceivable length of time, not too far in the future
so as to be unrealistic), possibly involving a high level of realism.
2. As scientifically certain as possible, representing the most sound projections from
a source trusted by the target audience.
3. Instructive with a clear message in order to send the message that climate change
is an important issue, and that individuals can make a difference (by doing certain
things). These must come across as being easy to do, positive and feasible given
other life commitments.
4. Attention grabbing so that people notice the image and think about it. It seems
that pictures with people or animals in them have this characteristic. Such pictures
have an affective dimension, eliciting an emotional reaction which is perhaps more
likely to initiate a thought process or feelings that the issue is salient and worth
doing something about. However we must be acutely aware of the points made
in Section 1.4.
5. Tailored for the target audience according to their perceptions of climate change
and attitudes toward it; aiming the right tool at the right people as Appleton and
268 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

Lovett (this issue) suggest, in order to add validity to the use of computer-gener-
ated visualisations.

The art of successful computer-generated visualisation for engaging people with

climate change lies in integrating many aspects together. One image alone is unlikely
to achieve the requirements outlined in this paper. However, sets of appropriate
images accompanied by certain cues, or animated and virtual image formats are
likely to be powerful and efficient tools for climate change communication. Com-
puter-based visualisation technology clearly offers much opportunity to convey the
notion of the changing climate in relation to human activity at an individual level. In
the near future, VR visualisations for example could offer particular viewers a
simulated and interactive experience of a possible future climate future in relation to
their choice of carbon future, actions or other preferences. Through the use of
multimedia technologies such packages could enable the viewer to make choices and
decide on hypothetical actions, seeing the results. Stock and Bishop (2002), for
example, present a portable environment for landscape simulation using GIS and
VR technology. It is designed to allow a community and stakeholders to learn about
their local landscape by proposing alternative configurations, moving through
realistic renderings of the consequent landscapes and reviewing outcomes on envi-
ronmental, economic and social scales (thereby empowering them to support in-
formed decisions about local land use). With rapid developments in computer
technology and growing access to more computer power, such opportunities are
becoming increasingly possible.
It is clear that visualisation alone cannot move people to being fully engaged with
climate change. Ideally engagement will involve input from all directions, and in a
variety of media. The participants in this study suggested that the following would
make climate change seem easier to understand and more important: actual climate
changes happening to them; more community involvement; more information in
educational settings; more government commitment including the provision of easy
options which people could take to reduce their emissions and instructions about
what to do; more attention in the news, including shock-horror stories and closer-to-
home information about what is likely to happen in the future; and generally more
constant messages, rather than contradictory ones and one-off information which is
easy to forget. Visualisation in research and advertising clearly already plays a strong
part but has potential to make a stronger contribution in these areas. Whilst
acknowledging that visualisation cannot be the sole tool for motivating public
engagement with climate change, Graber (1990, p. 154) concludes, ‘‘We cannot af-
ford to ignore the major ways in which learning is shaped by the vistas gleaned by the
human eye and the cognitions, emotions, and memories that these vistas produce.’’

4. Conclusion

The study reported in this paper indicates that mass media, personal experience,
interpersonal communication and imagination all make a positive contribution to
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 269

people’s visual conceptions of climate change, their perceptions of its importance

and their level of perceived self-efficacy to do something about it. The results re-
mind us how influential visualisations can be in determining people’s perceptions of
an issue like climate change, which have strong bearings on their behavioural
choices. There appear to be many commonalities as well as differences in the nature
of participants’ visualisations between the sample groups which are broadly linked
to people’s life stage, the nature of their future orientation, their knowledge about
the issue, and their general educational background. Individual psychology must
also account fundamentally for people’s interpretation of the imagery they have
been exposed to and the visualisations that they express. People are not homoge-
nous in their visual relationship with climate change and this has implications for
motivational communication to the public. For this reason, no single image will
appeal to everyone and different messages and influences will be taken away, be-
cause of prior perceptions and expectations of climate change and the future. It is
argued though that computer-based visualisation, ranging from the production of
digital stills through to fully immersive and interactive VR worlds, has a lot to offer
the field of climate change communication. This has been emphasised by the
apparent influence that the visual media currently have on people’s visual con-
ceptions of climate change and their relation to the issue. Also because of our
increasing access to visual media in what could be termed a contemporary ‘visual
culture’.
The reported study is the first stage of a bottom–up approach to understanding
how different images could potentially engage people and help them get to grips with
climate change. It lays the groundwork for further research, which will incorporate
the use of visualisations depicting climate change and an assessment of their reso-
nance to participants. A follow-up study will be based on an image sorting exercise
and then a series of focus groups, which will give participants the opportunity to
discuss, criticise and respond to a range of images provided for them in terms of
their senses of climate change salience and personal self-efficacy. These will span a
variety of formats and will be selected on the basis of criteria constructed on the
basis of the interview data and consultation with an expert panel. The ultimate
outcome is intended to offer guidelines and contribute to research in the field of
climate change visualisation, and communicating to the public about climate
change.
This paper has touched on some genuine merits and problems facing visualisa-
tion research, which deals with the creation and use of images, and its role in
communicating to the public about climate change. The issues raised are real
problems in all image-based research and are tightly linked to issues of validity,
subjectivity and interpretation. Trumbo (1999) asks a number of questions perti-
nent to the current critique. They sum up the issues raised in this paper, and are the
sorts of questions science visualisation researchers should be asking of themselves:
What kind of images portray the appropriate level of science information? What
choices are made by the scientist to develop or select an appropriate visual repre-
sentation? How is the audience influenced? Will these images change behaviour?
Being aware of the methodological stumbling blocks is important. They must be
270 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

transparent throughout the process of creating visualisations for communicating to

the public, and it is important that they are exposed at an early stage and taken on
board. These are not necessarily new concepts, but they are key issues in the use of
visualisations and should be constantly kept in mind by those involved in such
research.

Acknowledgements

This work forms part of a Ph.D. funded by the Economic and Social Research
Council.

References

Al-Kodmany, K. (1999). Using visualization techniques for enhancing public participation in planning
and design: process, implementation, and evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 45, 37–45.
Appleton, K., & Lovett, A. (2003). GIS-based visualisation of rural landscapes: defining ‘sufficient’ realism
for environmental decision-making. Landscape and Urban Planning, 65, 117–131.
Appleton, K., & Lovett, A. (this issue). GIS-based visualisation of development proposals: reactions from
planning and related professionals. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems.
Appleton, K., Lovett, A., S€unnenberg, G., & Dockerty, T. (2002). Rural landscape visualisation from GIS
databases: a comparison of approaches, options and problems. Computers, Environment and Urban
Systems, 26, 141–162.
Bell, S. (2001). Landscape pattern, perception and visualisation in the visual management of forests.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 201–211.
Bergen, S. D., Ulbricht, C. A., Fridley, J. L., & Ganter, M. A. (1995). The validity of computer-generated
graphic images of forest landscape. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 15, 135–146.
Bishop, I. D., Ye, W. S., & Karadaglis, C. (2001). Experiential approaches to perception response in
virtual worlds. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 115–123.
Blake, D. E. (2001). Contextual effects on environmental attitudes and behaviour. Environment and
Behaviour, 33, 708–725.
Boholm, A. (1998). Visual images and risk messages: commemorating Chernobyl. Risk Decision and
Policy, 3, 125–143.
Bord, R. J., Fisher, A., & O’Connor, R. E. (1998). Public perceptions of global warming; United States
and international perspectives. Climate Research, 11, 75–84.
Bostrom, A., Morgan, M. G., Fischoff, B., & Read, D. (1994). What do people know about global climate
change? 1. Mental models. Risk Analysis, 14, 959–970.
Buhmann, E.& Ervin, S. (Eds.). (2003). Trends in landscape modelingProceedings at Anhalt University of
applied sciences 2003. Heidelberg: Herbert Wichmann Verlag.
Buhmann, E., Nothelfer, V., & Pietsch, M. (Eds.). (2002). Trends in GIS and virtualization in environmental
planning and designProceedings at Anhalt University of applied sciences 2002. Heidelberg: Herbert
Wichmann Verlag.
Clay, G. R., & Daniel, T. C. (2000). Scenic landscape assessment: the effects of land management
jurisdiction on public perception of scenic beauty. Landscape and Urban Planning, 49, 1–13.
Danahy, J. W. (2001). Technology for dynamic viewing and peripheral vision in landscape visualisation.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 125–137.
Daniel, T. C., & Meitner, M. M. (2001). Representational validity of landscape visualisations: the effects of
graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21,
61–72.
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 271

Department of Trade and Industry (2003). Our energy future––creating a low carbon economy. London:
HMSO.
Dockerty, T., Lovett, A., S€
unnenberg, G., Appleton, K., & Parry, M. (this issue). Visualising the potential
impacts of climate change on rural landscapes. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems.
Ervin, S. M. (2001). Digital landscape modelling and visualisation: a research agenda. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 54, 49–64.
Ervin, S. M., & Hasbrouck, H. H. (2001). Landscape modeling: digital techniques for landscape
visualization. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Fencott, C., Schaik, P. V., Ling, J., & Shafiullah, M. (2003). The effects of movement of attractors and
pictorial content of rewards on users’ behaviour in virtual environments: an empirical study in the
framework of perceptual opportunities. Interacting with Computers, 15, 121–140.
Gimblett, R., Daniel, T., Cherry, S., & Meitner, M. (2001). The simulation and visualisation of complex
human-environment interactions. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 63–78.
Graber, D. A. (1990). Seeing is remembering: how visuals contribute to learning from television news.
Journal of Communication, 40, 134–155.
Grob, A. (1995). A structural model of environmental attitudes and behaviour. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 15, 209–220.
Hands, D. E., & Brown, R. D. (2002). Enhancing visual preference of ecological rehabilitation sites.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 58, 57–70.
Healey, C. G., & Enns, J. T. (2002). Perception and painting: a search for effective, engaging visualizations.
IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications (Visualization Viewpoints), 22, 10–15.
Heim, M. (1998). Virtual realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Herwig, A., & Paar, P. (2002). Game engines: tools for landscape visualization and planning?. In E.
Buhmann, V. Nothelfer, & M. Pietsch (Eds.), Trends in GIS and virtualization in environmental planning
and designProceedings at Anhalt University of applied sciences 2002 (pp. 162–171). Heidelberg:
Herbert Wichmann Verlag.
Honjo, T., & Lim, E. (2001). Visualization of landscape by VRML system. Landscape and Urban Planning,
55, 175–183.
Huddy, L., & Gunnthorsdottir, A. H. (2000). The persuasive effects of emotive visual imagery: superficial
manipulation or the product of passionate reason? Political Psychology, 21, 745–778.
Hull, R. B., & Stewart, W. P. (1992). Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 12, 101–114.
Hulme, M., Turnpenny, J., & Jenkins, G. (2002). Climate change scenarios for the United Kingdom: the
UKCIP02 briefing report. Norwich: Tyndall Centre for Climate Research, School of Environmental
Sciences, University of East Anglia.
IPCC (2001). Climate change 2001: The scientific basis: contribution of Working Group I to the third
assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Kaltenborn, B. P., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value orientations and
landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59, 1–11.
Karjalainen, E., & Tyrvainen, L. (2002). Visualisation in forest landscape preference research: a Finnish
perspective. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59, 13–28.
Kasemir, B., Dahinden, U., Swartling, A. G., Schule, R., Tabara, D., & Jaeger, C. C. (2000). Citizens’
perspectives on climate change and energy use. Global Environmental Change, 10, 169–184.
Kempton, W. (1991). Lay perspectives on global climate change. Global Environmental Change, 1, 183–
208.
Kempton, W. (1997). How the public views climate change. Environment, 39, 12–21.
Kingston, R., Carver, S., Evans, A., & Turton, I. (2000). Web-based public participation geographical
information systems: an aid to local environmental decision-making. Computers, Environment and
Urban Systems, 24, 109–125.
Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: why people act environmentally and what are the
barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Education Research, 8, 239–261.
272 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273

Lange, E. (1994). Integration of computerized visual simulation and visual assessment in environmental
planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 30, 99–112.
Lange, E. (2001). The limits of realism: perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning,
54, 163–182.
Lorenzoni, I., & Langford, I. (2001a). Dealing with climate change: the role of institutions in the eyes of
the public. In Proceedings of the 2001 Berlin conference on the human dimensions of global environmental
change, 7–8 December 2001.
Lorenzoni, I., & Langford, I. (2001b). Climate change now and in the future: a mixed methodological
study of public perceptions in Norwich (UK). CSERGE Working Paper ECM 01–05. Norwich:
CSERGE.
MacFarlane, R., Stagg, H., Turner, K., & Lievesley, M. (this issue). Peering through the smoke? Tensions
in landscape visualisation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems.
Misgav, A. (2000). Visual preference of the public for vegetation groups in Israel. Landscape and Urban
Planning, 48, 143–159.
Myers, G. (1994). Words in ads. New York: Routledge.
Nakicenovic, N.& Swart, R. (Eds.). (2000). Special report on emissions scenarios. A special report of
Working Group III of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Oring, S. A. (1999). A call for visual literacy. School Arts, 99, 58–59.
Orland, B. (1994). Visualization techniques for incorporation in forest planning geographic information
systems. Landscape and Urban Planning, 30, 83–97.
Orland, B., Budthimedhee, K., & Uusitalo, J. (2001). Considering virtual worlds as representations of
landscape realities and as tools for landscape planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 139–148.
Palmer, J. F., & Hoffman, R. E. (2001). Rating reliability and representation validity in scenic landscape
assessments. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 149–161.
Patton, M. J. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pullar, D. V., & Tidey, M. E. (2001). Coupling 3D visualisation to qualitative assessment of built
environment designs. Landscape and Urban Planning, 55, 29–40.
Purcell, T., Peron, E., & Berto, R. (2001). Why do preferences differ between scene types? Environment and
Behaviour, 33, 93–107.
Read, D., Bostrom, A., Morgan, M., Fischhoff, B., & Smuts, T. (1994). What do people know about
global climate change? 2. Survey studies of educated laypeople. Risk Analysis, 14, 971–982.
Rebetez, M. (1996). Public expectation as an element of human perception of climate change. Climatic
Change, 32, 95–509.
Robins, K. (1996). Into the image: culture and politics in the field of vision. London: Routledge.
Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution (2000). Energy––the changing climate. London: The Royal
Commission on Environmental Pollution.
Schmid, W. A. (2001). The emerging role of visual resource assessment and visualisation in landscape
planning in Switzerland. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 213–221.
Seacrest, S., Kuzelka, R., & Leonard, R. (2000). Global climate change and public perception: the
challenge of translation. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 36, 253–263.
Sheppard, S. R. J. (2001). Guidance for crystal ball gazers: developing a code of ethics for landscape
visualisation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 54, 183–199.
Stamm, K. R., Clark, F., & Eblacas, P. (2000). Mass communication and public understanding of
environmental problems: the case of global warming. Public Understanding of Science, 9, 219–237.
Stock, C., & Bishop, I. (2002). Immersive, interactive exploration of changing landscapes. In International
Environmental Modelling and Software Society Conference, Lugano, 24–27 June 2002.
Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T., & Jaegar, C. C. (2001). The psychology of denial concerning climate
mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups. Global Environmental Change, 11, 107–117.
Trumbo, J. (1999). Visual literacy and science communication. Science Communication, 20, 409–425.
Trumbo, J. (2000). Essay: seeing science. Research opportunities in the visual communication of science.
Science Communication, 24, 379–391.
 S.A. Nicholson-Cole / Comput., Environ. and Urban Systems 29 (2005) 255–273 273

Ungar, S. (2000). Knowledge, ignorance and the popular culture: climate change versus the ozone hole.
Public Understanding of Science, 9, 297–312.
Van Maren, G., & Verbree, E. (2000). Virtualising the 3D real world (3). GIM International (June), 34–37.
Waly, A. F., & Thabet, W. Y. (2003). A virtual construction environment for preconstruction planning.
Automation in Construction, 12, 139–154.
Wherrett, J. R. (1999). Issues in using the Internet as a medium for landscape preference research.
Landscape and Urban Planning, 45, 209–217.