Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Communication
Introduction:
Over the past few decades the science behind the certainty of climate change
has become more confident, the last IPCC report on climate change released in the fall
of 2018 states that it was ‘…extremely likely… that anthropogenic climate change was
occurring (IPCC, 2018). With this and the general consensus in the scientific
community, one might expect to see people from all walks of life coming together to
solve a problem that will impact them all, unfortunately one would be disappointed.
Instead, we are mired in a divisive war between political, ideological, and religious
This is not an issue of science but of how science and reality have been communicated
catastrophe which subsequently helped deepened the political divide in the United
States of America. That is not to say that it is a lost cause, in fact we may have the
means to bring about awareness and social change by altering the way we present
climate change to specific audiences. It is my belief that there is a small set of climate
may not be concerned about the future climate change can cause. The issues that are
resilience planning, and lack of general empathy felt for one another. These may not
seem like they are very related, but I would postulate that these issues are highly
1
intertwined when it comes to people’s perception of risk and acceptance that something
is changing with our climate. I will explore how these issues have or have not been
utilized by various agents when communicating to stakeholders, the public, and what is
or is not working.
The Issues:
In the past, many groups have tried using global message framing through
highlighting the aspect of climate justice, a term to describe how those who are least
responsible for climate change are sometimes the most at risk. They wish to play on
one’s innate sense of morality and ethics in hopes that people’s empathy for those
in order to achieve action this type of framing requires someone to take the blame and
shoulder the responsibility. George Marshall states this well in his book Don’t Even
Think About It, ”… they will doggedly insist that any loss [taking the blame] is unfair,
even if, by delaying an agreement, they end up paying far more” (Marshall, 2014). I
think that one of the reasons that many don’t feel empathy for those in distress is
because of the psychological distance between the story and the audience. It is hard to
feel empathy for people that are separate from one’s self. We are a species that
become culturally bound to our own areas and values, reaching past those is very
difficult for people because they have a difficult time finding what connects them with
Due to this, I believe that to increase the awareness and engagement in the
issue we must focus on local message framing, staying within those cultural boundaries.
This is still quite the broad topic, so we will go farther and look at a specific type of local
2
message framing, place attachment (Gifford, R. 2011). This is a term used to describe
the way that people feel attached to a certain location. This can be due to sentimental
reasons, pride felt in the area, or any reason why an individual would feel a connection
with a specific place. For instance, people often feel very attached to their hometown
and are likely to defend it if someone attacks (Scannell, 2013). When compared to the
stays within those cultural boundaries where people can empathize with their neighbors
and because what effects the area will also affect themselves. Research has found that
this type of message is even effective for increasing engagement by those that are
skeptical of the climate change issue or are not concerned about the potential impacts
(Scannell, 2013).
Another communication issue that has arisen from the climate change debate
comes from the difference between the immediate response of disasters and resilience
planning/adaptation. A way to think about this can be explained with the following
3
The introduction is normal life, the day to day actions of people. The second is the rising
action, for instance a hurricane may have formed and is projected to make landfall
where you live. It strikes and the immediate response becomes the climax. This is how
people initially respond to the disaster. Interestingly, this stage is full of people
emphasizing with those stricken by disaster. Following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti,
more than $8 million was donated to the relief fund by average citizens in just 48 hours,
not including food, clothes, shelter, and ect. that were also donated (Gao, 2011).
However, after this immediate response phase turns to the falling action the news
coverage tends to fade and with it the attention of the public. This is the period where
people begin to work toward bringing their lives back to normal. Finally, we reach the
conclusion where people have returned more or less to their normal stable life.
reality this is just one part of the overarching story which might look something like the
following graphic.
Figure 2
And yet when these events occur, we only talk about it for that single event when we
should be discussing this as a series of events. We can’t begin to plan for future
disasters until we discuss what is going on when there is attention being paid to the
4
issue, not when everything is back to normal. This is partly because of our innate hubris
in that we won’t be affected by another disaster even though the last disaster may have
destroyed everything that we owned (Marshall, 2014). This can be tied into place
attachment when it is asked why those that suffer from these events receive the
empathy of strangers when those promoting climate justice do not? I believe that the
news coverage of these events highlights, though temporary, one’s place attachment
beyond their own area on a national scale. In these moments political discourse is
minimized in favor of a we are all Americans approach, but this only lasts until the
immediate response gives way to rebuilding. After that the media attention falls away
and people begin to forget what is going on far away to focus on what is going on in
their immediate vicinity (Altinay, Z., 2017). This has to do with who is or isn’t
communicating the information to the stakeholders, the general public, and what they
Today people constantly have information being directed at them from various
groups. In modern society, one of the best ways for people to learn about what is going
on has been from the various media outlets CNN, MSNBC, BBC, FOX, and the list goes
on. These outlets each have their own way that they tailor what they present in order to
fit within their audiences’ values. However, quick searches through each of these outlets
after a natural disaster will come up with many articles and clips talking about recovery
and relief efforts. They all talk about solidarity with our neighbors and helping each
other, even conservative bastions like FOX News, and yet these stories become a rare
sight as time goes by and the event is forgotten. When looking on FOX News under the
5
tag of Hurricane Harvey the last story about the storm was published in November of
2017, just two months after the storm hit but nothing since (Babin, B, 2017). This is a
trend that is seen on all major media networks. These groups have huge amounts of
influence with the various communities that rely on them for their information and
because of that these outlets have the greatest potential in encouraging action for this
problem. An important note for the outlets that aim for audiences that are skeptical or
just not concerned with climate change that action to mitigate climate change effect
does not always have to come hand in hand with acceptance of the climate change
debate. That is because place attachment can sidestep that part of the debate and lead
to people acting because it will benefit them in some way. A study was once conducted
in communities around Lake Erie that showed that those that were not concerned with
climate change were highly motivated in engaging with environmental activism when
place attachment was involved, in this case it involved cleaning pollution in the area
The way that the media networks are communicating the immediate response to
natural disasters is great because it is bringing together the many different communities
in this divided country to empathize with one another. What it they are lacking is staying
on the issue while those afflicted are rebuilding their lives. After Hurricane Katrina hit
New Orleans causing the massive damage that shocked the world the media did
eventually move on, but not everyone. In this case, the government actually contracted
a well-known local photographer Donn Young to document the recovery efforts of the
society and create an exhibit that showcased the struggles and solidarity of the issue.
This exhibit was titled 40 Days and 40 Nights which was a resounding success in
6
showing the empathy of people from all over the nation is still there even after the news
cameras were gone. I believe that the news outlets could take a leaf from Young’s book
in how they represent the rebuilding efforts. People from all walks of life had come
together to rebuild even if they were not affected by the storm personally (Young, D,
2019). The news outlets should show this as part of their coverage of the disaster in
order to get others behind the recovery efforts. People stay within their own groups that
share their values, but if they see on their news station people that also share their
News outlets are only a single actor in communicating climate change issues.
disaster strikes, they are among the first to talk about the communities and how they will
recover from the incident. For those afflicted, elected officials can bring forth the pride
that they feel in the area and solidify their intents to rebuild and carry on. When
Hurricane Harvey struck Huston, the U.S. Representative for the area, Rep Brian Babin
R-TX, was interviewed by FOX News and the first words that he uttered were about how
proud he was in the locals and local officials (Babin, B, 2017). Bringing out the pride in
his constituents fuels actions to rebuild and return to some semblance of normalcy after
important to motivate people to get back to their lives, however I believe that it also
provides a great opportunity to encourage those to plan ahead for the next disaster.
This is a unique period when a politician will have the ear of those who need that
encouragement to rebuild where s/he could push resilience. This is not a conversation
7
that needs to actually discuss climate change, but merely encourages resilience to
future events. Elected politicians also can help keep the attention and empathy of those
around the nation not letting the issue slide into the back of our memories. From their
unique position they can take the idea to the national stage and address all those about
how they can help and/or protect themselves from potential disasters.
But perhaps the greatest area of climate change communication can come from
the scientist. In the past, communication from scientist on this issue led to the issues
that we see today with the controversy surrounding climate change. But in recent years,
the focus of climate change communication from scientist has changed a lot. By their
nature, scientist want to discuss the science aspect of the issue which makes sense as
it is their field. However, this is not effective because people just have a hard time
understanding the complexities of science. Scientist are changing the way that they
There are several great examples of this, one of the best takes place in North
Carolina with the North Carolina Sea Grant program. In an effort led by Dr. Jessica
Whitehead, they have decided rather than trying to educate the stakeholders in the area
in the complexities of atmospheric and hydrological sciences, they would talk to the
people in the area. This program is called Vulnerability, Consequences, and Adaption
Planning Scenarios (VCAPS) and instead of telling the people what they need to know,
it focuses on supporting the local communities’ concerns and issues regarding coastal
management and a changing climate (Kettle, N et al, 2014). The VCAPS members will
gather as many different stakeholders in an area from local business owners, home
8
owners, local officials, and anyone from the community to talk about their issues and
how region-specific problems may affect their homes and businesses. From here the
scientist will work from the issues raised by the community itself find solutions. This
approach to climate change communication pays attention to the fact that science itself
isn’t the solution to climate change and telling people what to change, but rather it
listens to people. By working within the issues that communities bring up, VCAPS gives
them agency to frame the issues that arise within their own worldviews and ideologies.
The limits to this type of communication is that it needs the communities to reach out to
them in order to begin. What could help would be if elected politicians and bureaucrats
presented this as an option to assist in the rebuilding process. That way measures
discussed during the VCAPS process could be implemented as people rebuilt and
returned to their normal life more prepared for the impacts of climate change.
Another approach can be seen from the newly developed resilience forum
created by NOAA to help people, including other scientist, understand the risks and
make decisions based on local stakeholders. The point of this exercise is to help people
understand the circumstances of others and take their concerns to heart when working
to find mitigate and adapt to climate change. By taking upon roles of various
stakeholders you have to decide what they would be concerned about rather than using
your own background. With this you come to a conclusion as a group what would work
It is easy to think of the issue of climate change as a ‘us versus them’ scenario
with staunch religious conservatives on one side and socialist liberals on the other, but
in reality, it is much more difficult to ascribe such traits. As George Marshall discovered
9
when he interviewed members of the Texas Tea Party, there are more than a few
similarities between these two groups. After talking to the Tea Party members Marshall
is convinced that it isn’t ignorance or unwillingness to learn about the science that
prevents them from joining the climate change movement (Marshall, 2014). So how can
we communicate climate change in a way that will reach everyone, or at least the
majority of people? It won’t be an easy task, but I think the answer lies with the public
themselves.
Strategy
Since climate change first was defined there has been a great debate about
whether or not it is really and whether we should care even if it does exist. This problem
has divided members of the general public, separating them into their own ideological
camps with others that share their values. This might be the result of how climate
deal with the consequences by finding some sort of middle ground where people from
both sides of the spectrum can come together and agree so we can start preventing the
In order to achieve this, we cannot ignore either side, their thoughts and
concerns when confronting the problem. There are three main issues that should be
addressed when communicating climate change that we have discussed in this report.
climate change as it relates to their location. This is because people feel a connection
with where they live for various reasons. Along with this is the difference in
10
longer-term planning for future events. Such communications are vital when it comes to
the issue of climate change because the drop of attention to an issue after the
adaptation measure that an be taken. Finally, we need to find a way to rouse empathy
from individuals and aimed at the issue if we are to come together and work toward
finding a solution. This is not a guide for a solution, this is merely a recommendation of
strategy to communicate climate change in order to bring people together so they can
find the solution that works best for them and the environment.
together a community to discuss the issues that they are faced with. However, it can be
difficult to bring all the stakeholder of the situation together when many do not believe
there is a problem or are concerned with how climate change may affect their lives.
international attention is being paid to a select region it would be a great place and time
to bring together people in solidarity. This would require the various media outlets to
As we have seen, after the immediate response has worn off the news wish to
move to other stories that are newer. However, these media companies are great at
gathering people together that share the same values and ideologies. Through
broadcasting the plight of their followers, it should raise the awareness of the problem to
others that share the same cultural boundaries and are more likely to emphasize with
those victims. It is important insure that these outlets don’t drop the ball and lessen the
coverage of the issue. Going back to the figures included above, we cannot let this go
11
back to an event by event discussion. We must carry through the conversation as a
series because as more and more people are added to the discussion, we might be
able to keep the normalcy to come back and people just accepting what has happened
as the norm. By preventing that, it gives a chance to add in the other aspects to this
strategy.
people back to rebuild, we need to bring those in the community together and start a
discussion about how they were affected. What are their concerns? The various science
and engineering communities should be there to support, rather than rule, the
conversations of the public. In areas that may have been affected by severe floods, the
scientific community could bring together ideas and designs that would be better
equipped for coping to floods that may occur more often in the future. The point of
having these as community led is to give the locals the agency in the decisions that
politicians and local officials should help unify their constituencies by being vocal and
appealing to their concepts of place attachment. People feel a great amount of pride in
where they live, and when that place is threatened or destroyed like after a natural
disaster, they are quite vulnerable. Though they have the desire to rebuild what was
lost, as it is hard for people to move away from the area where they have such
attachments. The politicians can help by facilitating the discussions and forums that
bring together the local and scientific communities around the issues.
intriguing because it does not necessarily need to include the actual discussion of the
12
science behind climate change itself. By skipping over this debate, we can also jump
past many of the aspects of what are dividing the populaces on the issue, allowing for
more concerted efforts to mitigate and adapt to the changing climate without ever
Conclusion
I believe that though there have been many differences in the debate about
climate change in the past, as a society we can move on and engage in activism toward
the issue. Everyone in this country comes from different walks of life, different
upbringings, and different values. Yet there are times that we can come together as a
whole in response to disaster to offer help to our neighbors even if they are on the other
side of the country. Times when we are not divided by our political parties or religion
and focus on what we have in common. The changing climate does not abide by
political and cultural boundaries, it affects all those in front of it indiscriminately. I hope
that the strategies presented in this report enable the various actors of information
proper outlook to the future. Only with the input from all the stakeholders will we be able
13
References
Gifford, R. The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change
Gao, H., Barbier, G., and Goolsby, R. Harnessing the Crowdsourcing Power of Social
Media for Disaster Relief. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 26, 2011, 10-14
IPCC. Global warming of 1.5⁰C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global
warming of 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas
Kates, R. W., and Wilbanks, T. J. Making the global local: Responding to climate change
Kettle, N., Dow, K., Tuler, S., Webler, T., Whitehead, J., and Miller, K. Integrating
14
Marshall, G. Don’t Even Think About It: Why Our Brains are Wired to Ignore Climate
Scannell, L., and Gifford, R. Personally Relevant Climate Change: The role of place
Spence, A., Poortinga, W., and Pidgeon, N. Psychological Distance of Climate Change.
Young, D. “40 Days and 40 Nights, Art and Disaster: A Photographers Perspective on
15