Strategies to counter climate change disinformation

Why should we focus more on communication than on concrete problems like meat consumption or recycling?

We know a lot about the political and economic changes needed for a more livable future. However, there currently seems to be a lack of a communication model that helps citizens, civil society organizations, progressive think tanks, and political parties to better coordinate.

So both experts and personalities, see Greta Thunberg, lack a communication strategy?

Environmental activists are good at talking about environmental problems, but they lack a broader political strategy and a strong message on the economy. This is a problem, because if you want to solve the environmental crisis, you cannot ignore economic needs and political realities.

Communicating climate policy is not getting any easier in the face of increasing organized attacks on climate research.

It's nothing new that the general public sees self-profiling behind every extreme opinion, greenwashing behind every environmental measure. Do you have any current examples?

I'm thinking of some social conflicts: both political movements - for example, groups fighting immigration or defending fracking - and specific politicians and lobbies engage in disinformation.

Unlike the nationalist right, sustainability actors have powerful knowledge on their side. However, there is a significant lack of coordination between sectors, research institutes, think thanks, etc.. This results in poor communication that renders all this scientific knowledge ineffective.

However, in a democracy, you can also vote for politicians. In addition, many reports on environmental issues are circulating on social media. What do you understand by leadership in this context?  

Without the connection of businessmen and women to elected politicians, the disinformation about climate change, globalist conspiracies, and other nationalist issues in the daily news would not be so rampant. Except that influencers and journalists can't stop reporting what Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, or Alexander Gauland are doing and not doing.

That's why we need an environmental movement that stops devoting itself to individual interests and acts against other individual groups. It is not about propagating every problem or that solution.

"It's not about propagating every problem or that solution."

What can environmental managers do differently?

What is missing is a comprehensive economic concept that political parties and decision-makers can champion. To this end, however, leading organizations, think tanks, and donors must seek out networks of ideas.

First of all, they need to develop more positive economic ideas. Ideas in which investment and growth are better balanced against resource consumption, waste utilization and social welfare.

 Have you observed any recent developments that successfully combine economic, political and environmental goals? 

The Green New Deal being discussed in the U.S. and among some Greens in Europe is a good example of how the intersection of politics, economics and the environment can work. This simple idea creates a positive image of jobs, family and community in productive economies that are better for people and the planet. Such ideas have a much stronger impact - especially with the younger population - than always sounding the alarm about a dying planet or presenting narrow and negative-sounding solutions like carbon taxes that alienate many voters.

So better cooperation is the key to implementing a more ambitious climate policy?

In some ways, this is a model for the development of public will and political power behind a fragmented environmental movement that could accomplish much more politically than it does. In most nations, much of the population is already concerned about the problems we face. But the fragmentation of environmentalists into so many groups makes the movement a collection of narrow interests fighting for political space.

Meanwhile, well-organized business leaders and cautious politicians can simply say that all these concrete environmental measures would hurt the economy. After losing so much ground for years, a more rational movement could devote itself to developing better economic ideas and communication strategies.

It is time to develop stronger communication networks. Their focus should be on economic systems that invest in more sustainable societies and manage consumption and waste in an exemplary way.

Science is attacked from many sides. But the job of scientists is to provide good information, not to develop policies. Relating scientific findings to the root causes of sustainability problems is the job of NGOs, funders, activists, and policymakers. They need to develop clearer visions of how people can work and live in prosperity in the future.

About the IASS

The Institute for Advanced Sustainable Studies IASS conducts research with the aim of identifying, promoting and shaping transformation processes towards a sustainable society, both in Germany and globally. The Institute's research approach is transdisciplinary, transformative and co-creative: the development of problem understanding and solution options takes place in collaborations between the sciences, politics, administration, business and society. A strong national and international partner network supports the work of the institute. Central research topics include the energy transition, emerging technologies, climate change, air quality, systemic risks, governance and participation, and cultures of transformation.

iass-potsdam.com