The mighty pen: how can we use communications to combat climate fatigue?

Of all the lessons I learnt during my time as a journalist, one stands out most: an appreciation of the power communication holds. This inevitably works both ways: good communication is as valuable as bad communication is detrimental.  

A new phenomenon – climate fatigue 

Those who work in environmental communications face a challenging yet vital battle ahead. A study at the end of last year examining public attitudes across eight countries found that 63% of respondents felt concerned after receiving climate change news, with 44% describing feelings of anger. These emotions are not conducive to empowerment or effective action, but instead are more likely to cause disengagement – or ‘climate fatigue’.   

Why have we reached this state? 

Climate fatigue is in large part the product of a history of muddled and contradictory communications – from early efforts to downplay the severity of climate change made by the oil and gas lobby to the use of unfamiliar and seemingly abstract scientific concepts. Communicators have arguably failed to emphasise the urgency of climate change without using apocalyptic language; to address the information gap; and to correct the perception of climate change as a temporally and geographically-distant phenomenon. 

Whilst there have been some welcome steps, for example The Guardian’s decision in 2019 to change its editorial guidelines and replace ‘climate change’ with ‘climate crisis’ to reflect the urgency of the situation, the climate remains a sensitive and convoluted communications problem. Blurred co-founder Stuart Lambert argued recently that the term ‘ESG’ has been ‘ruined’ by inconsistent and ambiguous communications. The politicisation of net zero (see for example Republican-affiliated press attacking ESG wokeness) has only exacerbated this challenge. 

What can we do about it? 

But as recent heat waves and wildfires have demonstrated, there is an urgent need to remedy this disengagement. Climate fatigue is not an option. So what can we do, as communicators, to drive action?  Our job is to change people’s perception of climate change – to ensure they perceive it as an issue that can be addressed, something that they understand, and that the right courses of action can improve lives. 

Effective communications should reflect three considerations: proof, personalisation, and positivity. 

1. Provide proof:  

The age-old knowledge gap must be addressed. Communicators should avoid jargon and use graspable terms. There is a perception of climate change – particularly net zero – as an abstract concept, particularly for those in developed countries less susceptible to the climatic changes much of the world is already experiencing. Research undertaken by communications consultancy Firstlight found that 56% of participants could not confidently explain net zero.  We need simple, clear communications with a focus on familiar concepts.  The source of information is equally important: a study from the Scottish Government on public engagement in climate change concluded that only 7% of participants trusted information from businesses/private companies, compared to academia at 58%. The better people understand these issues and trust those who communicate them, the more likely they are to take action. 

2. Make it personal:  

Communications around nature and net zero must make these concepts personal and relevant. The importance of nature and biodiversity is quickly moving up the ranks in national discourse. Although we have seen punchy disagreement between the government and the green sector recently over whether trade-offs between environmental protection and development are necessary, it would be risky to try and turn the protection of nature into a wedge issue. There is indication that, for now, terms like nature and biodiversity are less politically-charged – providing a fresh opportunity to ensure communication is as impactful as possible. Nature restoration not only addresses climate change but also has a positive impact on communities’ wellbeing, making it more a tangible achievement. This personal and often visible element is fundamental to effective communications. Wildlife and Countryside Link’s ‘Nature For Everyone’ campaign epitomises this personalised type of engagement, aiming to create green spaces for communities whose access to these areas is often limited.  

3. Be positive:

With so much despondency surrounding environmental issues, focusing on the solutions and delivering actionable communications has never been more important. A focus on ‘small’ and attainable wins could result in greater reception from people who tend to prioritise other issues, while alleviating some of the anxiety for those who feel overwhelmed or helpless. One of the Dasgupta Review’s recommendations was to “empower citizens to make informed choices and implement change”; yet empowerment is practically impossible if people feel their actions will make no difference. Campaigns such as the Great British Spring Clean or the Bugs Matter citizen science survey are prime examples of actionable initiatives. As Guy Newey (CEO of Energy Systems Catapult) said at the Institute for Government’s Net Zero Conference over the summer, we must reinvent environmental action as a cause that leads to better choices rather than sacrifices. Perfecting communications holds the key to this. 

The importance of communications in fostering public engagement cannot be overstated. Communication is vital to strengthening understanding of this connection, helping to reframe sustainability within the parameters of everyday life as something that adds value rather than strain.