By: Varvara Vasylchenko, Madison Polidoro, Siena Anand and Belle Cosgrave

“The most important thing you can do to fight climate change: talk about it.” – Katherine Heyhoe

Your neighbours claim to not care about climate change? Talk about it.

Your classmate thinks they can’t make a meaningful difference alone? Talk about it.

Your grandfather believes it’s not happening at all? Talk about it.

Changing people’s minds through talking about climate change is the first step to catalysing climate action. In an increasingly polarised society, there is reluctance to take meaningful action against climate change while there is still time, or even outright opposition to climate action. There are many factors holding people back from acting; from deeply rooted social identities to a perceived lack of self-efficacy and motivation. Overcoming these barriers seems impossible, however, there is a deceptively simple solution: talking about it.

Let’s start with one of the worst-case scenarios: the individual dismissively says “I don’t care”. In this situation, don’t start citing statistics and facts: although the consequences of climate change are undeniably serious, this way of persuasion may come across as a personal attack. In the most likely turn of events, the individual will argue with you or simply respond with “So what?”, and the conversation will quickly reach a dead end. Play it smart and appeal to the person’s existing values rather than imposing your own. To do this effectively, you need to understand what genuinely matters to the individual you want to influence, as well as what their fears, hopes and beliefs are. Once you know that, leverage this knowledge to build your argument around the positive co-benefits of climate action that would actually hold value for them. For example, if the person cares about financial security, you could explain that combatting climate change makes economies more stable. The individual worries about the competitive job market? Then say that developing green technologies creates new high-paying jobs. If the person is passionate about a healthy diet and sports, the arguments are even more intuitive: switching from cars to walking or cycling will bring more physical activity into their life, while cutting excessive red meat consumption will lower risks of cancer and cardiovascular disease.

If you don’t know the person well enough, then have a conversation, get to know each other, figure out their plans for next weekend and what they like doing in their free time. In essence, all you need is to discover what makes their eyes light up and what they worry about most, and then simply connect the dots between their passions and core concerns with the benefits they would get from climate action and advocacy. “I truly believe, after thousands of conversations that I’ve had over the past decade and more, that just about every single person in the world already has the values they need to care about a changing climate,” said Katharine Hayhoe, an atmospheric scientist committed to climate change research and environmental communication, during her TED Talk speech six years ago. “They just haven’t connected the dots. And that’s what we can do through our conversation with them.”

Meeting people on common ground by appealing to their interests and identity groups is an important aspect of talking about climate change. The idea of message framing takes this one step further, focusing on what kinds of information individuals will respond well to. Framing a message can be as simple as emphasizing the positive changes that would come from stronger climate policy, rather than focusing on the threats and consequences of inaction. The effectiveness of different kinds of message framing was investigated by Dasandi and colleagues in 2022. Their study revealed that in high emitting countries such as the US, UK and China, positive framing was overall more likely to increase support for climate policy than negative framing. Additionally, there was an increase in support when messaging was presented through a health frame, highlighting the improved health benefits which would come with more regulated greenhouse gas emissions.

Importantly, this study found that while some countries’ participants responded well to positive framing, participants from Germany were more likely to show support in response to a negative frame. The idea of framing, as well as communicating co-benefits of climate policy, centers around peoples’ unique context they’re operating from. If the goal is to spur climate action in the form of organizing or supporting climate policy, it’s important to consider messaging at the community level. According to the Irish EPA’s survey in 2023, 82% of Irish people are alarmed or concerned about anthropogenic climate change. The goal for an audience that is already on board with climate science is to activate their sources of agency and motivation to act. Alternatively, in a highly polarized nation like the US, belief in climate science and support for climate policy is heavily entangled in political and social identity. Because of this kind of socio-political environment, messaging for climate skeptics might need to be tailored closely to values that comprise their identity groups. One study by Feygina and colleagues in 2010 found that “a message that framed pro-environmental action as patriotic and system-preserving” predicted conservatives being more receptive to pro-environmental action.

Tafel and Turner assert that “people define themselves according to membership in social groups”, this is what’s known as social identity. When a particular social identity is active, we are more likely to feel, act and process information in ways that align with this identity. Moreover, we are more likely to want to protect these identities, viewing anyone with an opposing view as an ‘outsider’. In today’s society wherein social media is integrated into every part of life, we live in an information overload, it is very easy for people to find others whose beliefs and attitudes align with theirs, perpetuating their beliefs. This can be a significant barrier to climate action. If we surround ourselves with like-minded people who claim to not care about climate change or who do not recognise the severity of the threat, we are unlikely to act since we want to align with our social group.

It could be possible, however, to apply these same psychological principles to someone who does not care about climate change to at least move them in the direction of wanting to act positively. Connecting someone who is reluctant to support climate action with those who are passionate about it could allow them to see that they are not alone in their fears, if they have any, or understand the need to act. A recent poll asserts that 81% of Irish people are at least somewhat worried about the climate crisis, an overwhelming majority. Perhaps, through conversations with one another, they will become more motivated to partake in climate action when they realise they are not alone.

Thus, it is evident that we are not as alone in our fears about the climate crisis as we might believe, we are simply just not talking about it. Climate change is not just a scientific problem, it is a social one too. Facts alone cannot deconstruct the barriers created by identity, social norms and misinformation, instead we must communicate about the climate crisis in ways that resonate with people’s values, reflect their circumstances and remind them that they are not acting alone. While communication alone will not dismantle the rhetoric and deep-seated beliefs that are being perpetuated by industries such as the oil industry, it will bring a new perspective to light and allow people to begin to form their own opinions. The climate crisis is a very real issue that requires action from everyone and we cannot act if the people around us claim indifference or even ignorance to this problem. While this can feel overwhelming, perhaps the first step towards that action is simpler than we think.