HIDE CONTENTS
SHOW CONTENTS

Is Doomism the New Delay?

“Doom-mongering has overtaken denial as a threat and as a tactic. Inactivists know that if people believe there is nothing you can do, they are led down a path of disengagement.”
MICHAEL MANN

When we discuss climate change, the way we discuss potential futures dramatically influences our public response. Many of us are inundated with images and stories of melting ice caps, raging wildfires, and species extinctions. This deluge of negative information, while factual, can often induce a sense of fatalism. A significant portion of the population, both young and old, believe that the future looks grim. Such bleak perspectives lead many to feel that the situation is hopeless — but overly positive framings highlighting only successes can lead to complacency, and the belief that the necessary work is being done already.

There is a middle ground between these extremes. Balancing our narratives doesn't mean diluting the truth — it means presenting a holistic picture. Recognizing the urgency of the climate crisis is just as essential as celebrating progress. By connecting the stark reality of climate change with evidence-based hope, we can foster a sense of informed optimism, and motivation to be part of the solution.

Zoe Tcholak-Antitch

Strat Comms Specialist
Global Commons Alliance + Global Optimism

Why We Need New Climate Narratives

The current narrative on climate is not helping us create a better world. 63% of people under the age of 25 in OECD countries believe that humanity is doomed in their lifetimes. Increasing numbers of young people are choosing not to have children as a result. Some are already thinking of themselves as the “last generation”.

This is also felt among older generations, where resignation that 'we are doomed' is settling in. 73% of adults in Europe and 66% in North America believe that climate change is real, serious and happening now, but only 25% and 12% respectively believe we can do anything to avert it at this point in time.

This fatalism is spurred on by media, social media and creative content, and often deliberately constructed. We could even go so far as to say that this defeatism is the new denialism - the doubt we are good enough to turn things around has become a huge burden we keep dragging around.

Many media articles still describe our toughest challenges - especially on climate - as invincible and hopeless. Is it any wonder that people are beginning to give up? We need stories of possibility and interconnectedness more than ever. We need to feel like we are part of a great generational endeavor where we can actually, yes, really, create a better world for everyone.

Depictions of the future with regards to the climate crisis are often dire. The belief that it’s already too late for humanity to avoid runaway climate change, social collapse, or near-term human extinction, climate doomism, has been criticized for being a “slippery slope to losing hope”,1 and a new form of climate denial. While some proponents of doomist narratives build their careers on those narratives, they are qualitatively different from fossil fuel companies’ discourses of delay. 

Climate doomism, or the belief that the impacts of climate change are inevitable and beyond our control, poses a significant threat to climate action — potentially leading to the same inaction as outright denial. Often stoked by inactivists, doomism disengages people from the issue and even plays into the hands of deniers by discrediting firmly established science. The belief that people need to be shocked into action has been proven counterproductive — instead, emotions like worry, interest, and hope have been shown to be more motivating.

Marcy Franck

Sr. Communications Strategist
|
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

The Media Focus Needs to Change

In 2022, climate change accounted for only 1% of all coverage in U.S. broadcast media, and over 40% of that coverage focused on disasters like extreme weather events, heatwaves, and water shortages, according to Media Matters. Only 6% focused on the Inflation Reduction Act—America’s largest-ever investment in climate action—and only 2% focused on COP27, where world leaders moved forward with international cooperation on climate progress. 

When you combine negative news coverage with misinformation campaigns funded by the fossil fuel industry that spread climate doom and denial, it’s no wonder that doom has permeated our psyches, harming mental health and convincing many that climate action is futile. But just beyond the headlines, the world is already transforming how it generates energy, transports people and things, designs buildings, and grows food. These actions can create a thriving, equitable future, and we urgently need to change the narrative to reflect this reality—because to be successful, we’ve got to hurry up, and we need all hands on deck. 

“Inactivists”, a term coined by climate scientist Michael Mann, use doomism to drive disengagement and dampen the momentum of climate activists. They also use it to feed into anti-climate action narratives, discrediting science and causing confusion. The best antidote to doomism is to foster cautious optimism that the worst impacts of climate change can still be averted.2 Rather than attacking scientists or ambitious climate policies, doomists instead imply that climate action is futile. These narratives of climate action can take the form of ‘doing the inner work’ or ‘making peace with the inevitable’. While climate doomism is seen as fringe in the scientific community, it has proliferated on social media platforms such as TikTok. While some ‘climate doomers’ are part of the scientific community, many of the most extreme predictions about future climate change are rooted in speculation, rather than sound scientific evidence.3

Will Hackman

Senior Officer, Environment
|
Pew

How “World-on-Fire” Messages Push Us Away from Climate Solutions

There are countless examples of climate activist messages that rely upon images of doom. Perhaps one of the most widely recognizable is one that depicts the entire Earth held in the palm of a human hand, one side of the Earth Garden of Eden and the other side fire and brimstone. The message is clear -- we have the power to “Save The Earth;” that the fate of nature is literally in our hands.

Figure 71: The “World-on-Fire” vs "Save The World". Credit: ParabolStudio.

While true in some regards, this image doesn’t do much to build advocacy messages that connect to a broader audience. Fear-based messages only tend to work for those already committed to an issue. World-on-fire messages can be disempowering and breed apathy, resentment, and escapism. They can cause people to emotionally shut down if they believe that an issue is too large for them to solve, that there’s nothing they can do.  

Similarly, framing climate activism from the perspective of saving the Earth can convince many that humanity and nature are inherently pitted against one another in a zero-sum game. Creating this false separation between us and a natural world we are very much part of and rely on for our own survival is a tactic we can no longer afford. Certainly, human industrial society and plain greed have depleted many of our natural resources. I get that, as I work every day to conserve land and marine ecosystems. But the reality is that we are also the only ones who can counteract the damage we have caused. 

If our message is one of hopelessness and the pitiable plight of the natural world we have ruined, we will not galvanize audiences to positive action. We must convince more humans that the threat to our environment is crucial to them, personally. Why should a Midwestern farmer care about melting glaciers thousands of miles away? Because it is not just the polar bear that suffers from the worst drought in twelve centuries or deadly flooding – both of which can cause crops to fail. Nature-based messages don’t work with everyone and images associated with them, like the polar bear, may even be contributing to polarization. 

As the impacts from climate change get progressively more severe each year, apocalyptic messages may seem warranted. But, in fact, they are overly simplistic, mostly inaccurate, and contribute to a negative and divisive advocacy that pushes us further away from solutions.

Humans have evolved to pay more attention to negative information as a survival mechanism. Media outlets are aware of this and bombard us daily with news of disasters, freak accidents and murders, skewing our perception of how often these events occur. The same is true for reporting on climate change, with the latest series of IPCC reports having sparked dire headlines for weeks. But the reality is that fear and anxiety are more likely to make us shut down rather than change our behavior, triggering our biopsychological flight and freeze responses – or, as some psychologists started calling it, “headline stress disorder”.4 Negative information on climate change should always be followed up on with concrete and accessible action points, as well as framings of hope and opportunity (see Training the Communicators).

“I don’t actually think we are equipped, physiologically or mentally, to be delivered catastrophic and confusing news and pictures, 24/7. We are analog creatures in a digital world.”
KRISTA TIPPETT, ON BEING PODCAST

Dire headlines such as "now or never" might deter action as they suggest an unattainable goal, leading to resignation rather than motivation. This feeling of hopelessness can be exploited by vested interests such as the fossil fuel industry. Fear-based framings of climate change are dominant in media portrayals and political campaigns — but research shows that an overemphasis on the magnitude of climate risks and impacts may be ineffective in changing behavior or triggering meaningful personal engagement. 

If threatening media frames are not balanced with solutions and actionable coping strategies, negative feelings can lead to reduced motivation to act. While fear-based framings do capture audience attention, an over-reliance on them has mixed outcomes and can even lead to counterproductive reactions. These include psychological resistance to climate action when audiences feel that their personal freedom may be constrained, reduced perceived credibility of the news source itself, or even denial and avoidance.5 Instead, climate communication experts advocate for acknowledging the urgency of the climate crisis, while emphasizing our agency and the importance of each fraction of a degree in reducing climate impact. Anger, rather than anxiety or depression, could be a more effective motivator for climate action.7

Overly grim scenarios should generally be avoided in climate communications as they run the risk of causing anxiety, despair, and inaction. However, some scholars worry that overly optimistic portrayals may foster complacency,6 which highlights the need for framings of hope and opportunity to be followed by concrete and accessible action suggestions. This is not to say that we should ignore the very real threat that climate change poses to our planet, and communicators should convey both the dangers of climate change alongside opportunities for action. However, climate doomism can be a dangerous trap that prevents us from taking the transformative action that’s needed in order to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or less. Research shows that while fearful representations of climate change have more potential for attracting people’s attention, they are an ineffective tool for motivating genuine personal engagement.7 Therefore, climate change threats should be framed through a lens of action, rather than fear and doom.

Isaias Hernandez

Environmental Educator & Creator
|
Queer Brown Vegan

Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) are often taught to normalize pain — whether it’s social, racial, or environmental. These injustices have influenced the understanding of BIPOC on how they can react in both external and internal situations. BIPOC often find themselves silencing their pain, continuing to exist in an extractive system designed to oppress marginalized communities. Climate doomism is a popularized term that has risen on social media, with many media news outlets proclaiming that there is no hope left for the planet. Climate doomism is often used as a scare tactic to disempower communities on their journey for environmental liberation. Mostly, climate doomism fails to address the role of white supremacy and how it has contributed to the degradation of land, culture, and species.

Climate doomism leads to division in movements — including harmful myths like ecofascism that blame BIPOC communities for the climate and ecological crisis. Anxious responses to climate change can look like creating brutal, isolationist views that uphold white supremacist ideologies.  There is a real risk that climate doomism can lead people to project their fear and insecurity on immigrants and other marginalized groups — especially in the US, where mass-shootings motivated by eco-fascist ideologies have already occurred8. We are also seeing countries invest in the border and surveillance industry to target, imprison, and inflict violence on those leaving their lands due to climate change. 

Climate doom is not sustainable — instead, we need to invest our energy into the communities that create change. Investing in ourselves and each other requires creating circular relationships with our community, land, and self. There are days I feel weak and strong simultaneously, times when I am told I am not doing enough — and there are days I know I am impacting at least one person in my life. The society we live in today beats us down to think we are hopeless and powerless — when, in reality, we hold much power to create unity amongst ourselves, and change in the wider world. But nourishing a better future starts with talking about it differently.

Susan Joy Hassol notes that fostering constructive hope, as opposed to passive hope, encourages more action and support for climate policies,9 as per a 2019 study by researchers at Yale and George Mason University.10 This involves enhancing people's belief that individual and societal actions can make a significant difference. Instead of propagating narratives of doom, it's essential to tell stories of the many benefits that can be reaped from the transition to clean energy and nature protection. Painting a vivid picture of a better, renewable-energy powered world with more walkable cities is crucial. Hassol underscores the psychological importance for people to understand that the journey towards a better world is already underway.9

Given our current capabilities, we're in the best position in history to bring about positive changes. Agencies like Accenture Song who specialize in impactful communication encourage a positive, solutions-oriented approach over focusing on negative climate imagery, which can be paralyzing rather than motivating. Highlighting inspiring solutions can spur creative thinking and productivity, ultimately driving more effective and impactful action towards sustainability. It's all about being utterly biased towards positive, actionable steps.11

“If it’s all doom and gloom, people don’t get excited about the solutions. But if you’re passionately committed to tackling inequality, for example, one of the biggest things that you can do is take climate action.”
ANNA LUNGLEY, CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER AT DENTSU

The creative community has taken up the challenge of striking a balance between the urgency of the climate crisis and humanity’s capacity to build a better future. Marketing and advertising professionals are in the best place to craft impactful campaigns thanks to their ability to shape narratives and influence public opinion. Using a mix of emotion-driven storytelling, data visualization, and innovative digital platforms, they aim to not just inform but also motivate action. By collaborating with climate experts, creative industries can ensure that their content is accurate and science-based, while design can bring climate realities to life in a way that resonates with mainstream audiences. 

Ally Kingston

Creative Lead
|
Purpose Disruptors

Imagining a Better Future

The futures we dream of depend largely on the source material our imagination is working with: images and ideas gathered from our education, our politics, life experiences, and our Netflix and YouTube habits. Exposed to a daily cocktail of cortisol-raising news media and dystopian blockbusters, we have become quick to imagine visions of some hopeless, apocalyptic future. Perhaps if pressed, we might entertain the slim possibility of some whizzy, techno-powered utopia for ourselves instead. Both options feel extreme, and neither is socially useful. 

As Geoff Mulgan said, “we can more easily imagine the end of the world than a better future.” When our imagination defaults to these extreme visions, we lose ourselves in the picture. With no agency to influence them, we feel powerless, and become apathetic about change in the present. The logic of climate doomism asks, why try and redirect our course if we’re screwed anyway? Our imaginations have in effect been taken hostage by these images of collapse, creating a tyranny of no alternatives.

To achieve our climate targets, it's crucial to imagine a better, yet realistic future. Good Life 2030, a project by Purpose Disruptors, invites culture-makers to this exercise. Surprisingly, picturing life in this greener future often leaves us at a loss. It's time we create more source material for our collective vision, giving people a compelling sense of the goal we're pursuing. The ad industry, with their knack for picturing improved lifestyles, could be invaluable in this. The average UK citizen sees 10,000 daily ads, imagine this creative power channeled towards an ecologically balanced future.

Since 2021, Purpose Disruptors' Client 2030 brief has challenged creatives to build "brand warmth" campaigns for 2030, using real UK citizens' visions of a connected, nature-centric future. So far, over 500 creatives, including major agencies, have joined, with work featuring at events like COP26 and iconic places like Piccadilly Circus.

While this project has focused predominantly on advertising industry creatives, interest from the wider cultural sphere is growing. At this critical moment in history, a growing cohort of culture-makers are recognizing their responsibility to offer supportive source material for the collective imagination. And instead of feeding our minds with extreme visions that prompt apathy, doing the harder work of imagining the “practical utopias”, the plausible versions of a Good Life.

Interrupting the commercial break: Good Life 2030 takes over Piccadilly Circus - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Creatives for Climate

Climate communicators have a key role to play in shaping the perceptions and actions of wider society.  Creative industries in particular are uniquely positioned to reshape climate narratives — by striking a balance between alarming realities and inspiring possibilities, they can lay the groundwork for transformative change. By harnessing the immense power of storytelling, media, advertising and marketing have a responsibility to craft narratives that capture the urgency of our situation, while offering glimpses of hope. This has the potential to inspire broader audiences to become active participants in our collective journey towards a more sustainable future.

“As imperfect as our solutions may be, the capacity to confront and overcome great difficulties is renewable, limitless, and always worth nourishing and celebrating. The rest of the story of repair, regeneration, and connection still needs to be written, and the pen is in our hands"
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES, PROJECT SYNDICATE

|
next up

Training the Communicators

Existing spokespeople such as climate scientists, journalists and government officials have an important role in helping the public understand climate change and what it means to them. But not enough energy is invested in supporting these groups to communicate the issue effectively. While some useful resources exist, such as the IPCC’s communications handbook for climate scientists, these efforts must be more widespread and comprehensive.

Keep reading
Contributors in this section
Zoe Tcholak-Antitch
Global Commons Alliance + Global Optimism
Marcy Franck
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
see all whitepaper contributors
notes
  1. Youra S. Climate Doomism Is the New Climate Denial. Medium. Published 2021. Accessed May 23, 2023. https://medium.com/climate-conscious/climate-doomism-is-the-new-climate-denial-f4a48ddd970
  2. Mann ME. The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet. First edition. PublicAffairs; 2021.
  3. Brosch T. Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2021;42:15-21. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.001
  4. Stosny S. He once called it ‘election stress disorder.’ Now the therapist says we’re suffering from this. The Washington Post. Published 2017. Accessed May 24, 2023. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2017/02/06/suffering-from-headline-stress-disorder-since-trumps-win-youre-definitely-not-alone/?noredirect=on
  5. Perga ME, Sarrasin O, Steinberger J, Lane SN, Butera F. The climate change research that makes the front page: Is it fit to engage societal action? Glob Environ Change. 2023;80:102675. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102675
  6. Jones CA, Davison A. Disempowering emotions: The role of educational experiences in social responses to climate change. Geoforum. 2021;118:190-200. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.11.006
  7. O’Neill S, Nicholson-Cole S. “Fear Won’t Do It”: Promoting Positive Engagement With Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations. Sci Commun. 2009;30(3):355-379. doi:10.1177/1075547008329201
  8. Valle GD. 3 Years After the El Paso Shooting, “Environmental” Nativism Is Spreading. Published online August 3, 2022. Accessed August 21, 2023. https://www.thenation.com/article/society/el-paso-shooting-xenophobia/
  9. Hassol SJ. The Right Words Are Crucial to Solving Climate Change. Scientific American. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0223-64
  10. Marlon JR, Bloodhart B, Ballew MT, et al. How Hope and Doubt Affect Climate Change Mobilization. Front Commun. 2019;4. Accessed September 16, 2023. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00020
  11. Accenture Song. A Primer on Sustainable Communications. Published online 2022.
Figure 68A: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 68A: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 68B: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 68B: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 69: Share of people under 25 in OECD countries who believe humanity is doomed in their lifetimes. Source: OECD.

Figure 69: Share of people under 25 in OECD countries who believe humanity is doomed in their lifetimes. Source: OECD.

Figure 70: Percentage of adults who believe climate change is real, and that we can do anything to change its course. Sources: Eurobarometer and Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Figure 70: Percentage of adults who believe climate change is real, and that we can do anything to change its course. Sources: Eurobarometer and Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Surce: NRDC Rewrite the Future, Sundance 2021

When we discuss climate change, the way we discuss potential futures dramatically influences our public response. Many of us are inundated with images and stories of melting ice caps, raging wildfires, and species extinctions. This deluge of negative information, while factual, can often induce a sense of fatalism. A significant portion of the population, both young and old, believe that the future looks grim. Such bleak perspectives lead many to feel that the situation is hopeless — but overly positive framings highlighting only successes can lead to complacency, and the belief that the necessary work is being done already.

There is a middle ground between these extremes. Balancing our narratives doesn't mean diluting the truth — it means presenting a holistic picture. Recognizing the urgency of the climate crisis is just as essential as celebrating progress. By connecting the stark reality of climate change with evidence-based hope, we can foster a sense of informed optimism, and motivation to be part of the solution.

Zoe Tcholak-Antitch

Strat Comms Specialist
|
Global Commons Alliance + Global Optimism

Why We Need New Climate Narratives

The current narrative on climate is not helping us create a better world. 63% of people under the age of 25 in OECD countries believe that humanity is doomed in their lifetimes. Increasing numbers of young people are choosing not to have children as a result. Some are already thinking of themselves as the “last generation”.

This is also felt among older generations, where resignation that 'we are doomed' is settling in. 73% of adults in Europe and 66% in North America believe that climate change is real, serious and happening now, but only 25% and 12% respectively believe we can do anything to avert it at this point in time.

This fatalism is spurred on by media, social media and creative content, and often deliberately constructed. We could even go so far as to say that this defeatism is the new denialism - the doubt we are good enough to turn things around has become a huge burden we keep dragging around.

Many media articles still describe our toughest challenges - especially on climate - as invincible and hopeless. Is it any wonder that people are beginning to give up? We need stories of possibility and interconnectedness more than ever. We need to feel like we are part of a great generational endeavor where we can actually, yes, really, create a better world for everyone.

Depictions of the future with regards to the climate crisis are often dire. The belief that it’s already too late for humanity to avoid runaway climate change, social collapse, or near-term human extinction, climate doomism, has been criticized for being a “slippery slope to losing hope”,1 and a new form of climate denial. While some proponents of doomist narratives build their careers on those narratives, they are qualitatively different from fossil fuel companies’ discourses of delay. 

Climate doomism, or the belief that the impacts of climate change are inevitable and beyond our control, poses a significant threat to climate action — potentially leading to the same inaction as outright denial. Often stoked by inactivists, doomism disengages people from the issue and even plays into the hands of deniers by discrediting firmly established science. The belief that people need to be shocked into action has been proven counterproductive — instead, emotions like worry, interest, and hope have been shown to be more motivating.

Marcy Franck

Sr. Communications Strategist
|
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

The Media Focus Needs to Change

In 2022, climate change accounted for only 1% of all coverage in U.S. broadcast media, and over 40% of that coverage focused on disasters like extreme weather events, heatwaves, and water shortages, according to Media Matters. Only 6% focused on the Inflation Reduction Act—America’s largest-ever investment in climate action—and only 2% focused on COP27, where world leaders moved forward with international cooperation on climate progress. 

When you combine negative news coverage with misinformation campaigns funded by the fossil fuel industry that spread climate doom and denial, it’s no wonder that doom has permeated our psyches, harming mental health and convincing many that climate action is futile. But just beyond the headlines, the world is already transforming how it generates energy, transports people and things, designs buildings, and grows food. These actions can create a thriving, equitable future, and we urgently need to change the narrative to reflect this reality—because to be successful, we’ve got to hurry up, and we need all hands on deck. 

“Inactivists”, a term coined by climate scientist Michael Mann, use doomism to drive disengagement and dampen the momentum of climate activists. They also use it to feed into anti-climate action narratives, discrediting science and causing confusion. The best antidote to doomism is to foster cautious optimism that the worst impacts of climate change can still be averted.2 Rather than attacking scientists or ambitious climate policies, doomists instead imply that climate action is futile. These narratives of climate action can take the form of ‘doing the inner work’ or ‘making peace with the inevitable’. While climate doomism is seen as fringe in the scientific community, it has proliferated on social media platforms such as TikTok. While some ‘climate doomers’ are part of the scientific community, many of the most extreme predictions about future climate change are rooted in speculation, rather than sound scientific evidence.3

Will Hackman

Senior Officer, Environment
|
Pew

How “World-on-Fire” Messages Push Us Away from Climate Solutions

There are countless examples of climate activist messages that rely upon images of doom. Perhaps one of the most widely recognizable is one that depicts the entire Earth held in the palm of a human hand, one side of the Earth Garden of Eden and the other side fire and brimstone. The message is clear -- we have the power to “Save The Earth;” that the fate of nature is literally in our hands.

Figure 71: The “World-on-Fire” vs "Save The World". Credit: ParabolStudio.

While true in some regards, this image doesn’t do much to build advocacy messages that connect to a broader audience. Fear-based messages only tend to work for those already committed to an issue. World-on-fire messages can be disempowering and breed apathy, resentment, and escapism. They can cause people to emotionally shut down if they believe that an issue is too large for them to solve, that there’s nothing they can do.  

Similarly, framing climate activism from the perspective of saving the Earth can convince many that humanity and nature are inherently pitted against one another in a zero-sum game. Creating this false separation between us and a natural world we are very much part of and rely on for our own survival is a tactic we can no longer afford. Certainly, human industrial society and plain greed have depleted many of our natural resources. I get that, as I work every day to conserve land and marine ecosystems. But the reality is that we are also the only ones who can counteract the damage we have caused. 

If our message is one of hopelessness and the pitiable plight of the natural world we have ruined, we will not galvanize audiences to positive action. We must convince more humans that the threat to our environment is crucial to them, personally. Why should a Midwestern farmer care about melting glaciers thousands of miles away? Because it is not just the polar bear that suffers from the worst drought in twelve centuries or deadly flooding – both of which can cause crops to fail. Nature-based messages don’t work with everyone and images associated with them, like the polar bear, may even be contributing to polarization. 

As the impacts from climate change get progressively more severe each year, apocalyptic messages may seem warranted. But, in fact, they are overly simplistic, mostly inaccurate, and contribute to a negative and divisive advocacy that pushes us further away from solutions.

Humans have evolved to pay more attention to negative information as a survival mechanism. Media outlets are aware of this and bombard us daily with news of disasters, freak accidents and murders, skewing our perception of how often these events occur. The same is true for reporting on climate change, with the latest series of IPCC reports having sparked dire headlines for weeks. But the reality is that fear and anxiety are more likely to make us shut down rather than change our behavior, triggering our biopsychological flight and freeze responses – or, as some psychologists started calling it, “headline stress disorder”.4 Negative information on climate change should always be followed up on with concrete and accessible action points, as well as framings of hope and opportunity (see Training the Communicators).

“I don’t actually think we are equipped, physiologically or mentally, to be delivered catastrophic and confusing news and pictures, 24/7. We are analog creatures in a digital world.”
KRISTA TIPPETT, ON BEING PODCAST

Dire headlines such as "now or never" might deter action as they suggest an unattainable goal, leading to resignation rather than motivation. This feeling of hopelessness can be exploited by vested interests such as the fossil fuel industry. Fear-based framings of climate change are dominant in media portrayals and political campaigns — but research shows that an overemphasis on the magnitude of climate risks and impacts may be ineffective in changing behavior or triggering meaningful personal engagement. 

If threatening media frames are not balanced with solutions and actionable coping strategies, negative feelings can lead to reduced motivation to act. While fear-based framings do capture audience attention, an over-reliance on them has mixed outcomes and can even lead to counterproductive reactions. These include psychological resistance to climate action when audiences feel that their personal freedom may be constrained, reduced perceived credibility of the news source itself, or even denial and avoidance.5 Instead, climate communication experts advocate for acknowledging the urgency of the climate crisis, while emphasizing our agency and the importance of each fraction of a degree in reducing climate impact. Anger, rather than anxiety or depression, could be a more effective motivator for climate action.7

Overly grim scenarios should generally be avoided in climate communications as they run the risk of causing anxiety, despair, and inaction. However, some scholars worry that overly optimistic portrayals may foster complacency,6 which highlights the need for framings of hope and opportunity to be followed by concrete and accessible action suggestions. This is not to say that we should ignore the very real threat that climate change poses to our planet, and communicators should convey both the dangers of climate change alongside opportunities for action. However, climate doomism can be a dangerous trap that prevents us from taking the transformative action that’s needed in order to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees or less. Research shows that while fearful representations of climate change have more potential for attracting people’s attention, they are an ineffective tool for motivating genuine personal engagement.7 Therefore, climate change threats should be framed through a lens of action, rather than fear and doom.

Isaias Hernandez

Environmental Educator & Creator
|
Queer Brown Vegan

Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC) are often taught to normalize pain — whether it’s social, racial, or environmental. These injustices have influenced the understanding of BIPOC on how they can react in both external and internal situations. BIPOC often find themselves silencing their pain, continuing to exist in an extractive system designed to oppress marginalized communities. Climate doomism is a popularized term that has risen on social media, with many media news outlets proclaiming that there is no hope left for the planet. Climate doomism is often used as a scare tactic to disempower communities on their journey for environmental liberation. Mostly, climate doomism fails to address the role of white supremacy and how it has contributed to the degradation of land, culture, and species.

Climate doomism leads to division in movements — including harmful myths like ecofascism that blame BIPOC communities for the climate and ecological crisis. Anxious responses to climate change can look like creating brutal, isolationist views that uphold white supremacist ideologies.  There is a real risk that climate doomism can lead people to project their fear and insecurity on immigrants and other marginalized groups — especially in the US, where mass-shootings motivated by eco-fascist ideologies have already occurred8. We are also seeing countries invest in the border and surveillance industry to target, imprison, and inflict violence on those leaving their lands due to climate change. 

Climate doom is not sustainable — instead, we need to invest our energy into the communities that create change. Investing in ourselves and each other requires creating circular relationships with our community, land, and self. There are days I feel weak and strong simultaneously, times when I am told I am not doing enough — and there are days I know I am impacting at least one person in my life. The society we live in today beats us down to think we are hopeless and powerless — when, in reality, we hold much power to create unity amongst ourselves, and change in the wider world. But nourishing a better future starts with talking about it differently.

Susan Joy Hassol notes that fostering constructive hope, as opposed to passive hope, encourages more action and support for climate policies,9 as per a 2019 study by researchers at Yale and George Mason University.10 This involves enhancing people's belief that individual and societal actions can make a significant difference. Instead of propagating narratives of doom, it's essential to tell stories of the many benefits that can be reaped from the transition to clean energy and nature protection. Painting a vivid picture of a better, renewable-energy powered world with more walkable cities is crucial. Hassol underscores the psychological importance for people to understand that the journey towards a better world is already underway.9

Given our current capabilities, we're in the best position in history to bring about positive changes. Agencies like Accenture Song who specialize in impactful communication encourage a positive, solutions-oriented approach over focusing on negative climate imagery, which can be paralyzing rather than motivating. Highlighting inspiring solutions can spur creative thinking and productivity, ultimately driving more effective and impactful action towards sustainability. It's all about being utterly biased towards positive, actionable steps.11

“If it’s all doom and gloom, people don’t get excited about the solutions. But if you’re passionately committed to tackling inequality, for example, one of the biggest things that you can do is take climate action.”
ANNA LUNGLEY, CHIEF SUSTAINABILITY OFFICER AT DENTSU

The creative community has taken up the challenge of striking a balance between the urgency of the climate crisis and humanity’s capacity to build a better future. Marketing and advertising professionals are in the best place to craft impactful campaigns thanks to their ability to shape narratives and influence public opinion. Using a mix of emotion-driven storytelling, data visualization, and innovative digital platforms, they aim to not just inform but also motivate action. By collaborating with climate experts, creative industries can ensure that their content is accurate and science-based, while design can bring climate realities to life in a way that resonates with mainstream audiences. 

Ally Kingston

Creative Lead
|
Purpose Disruptors

Imagining a Better Future

The futures we dream of depend largely on the source material our imagination is working with: images and ideas gathered from our education, our politics, life experiences, and our Netflix and YouTube habits. Exposed to a daily cocktail of cortisol-raising news media and dystopian blockbusters, we have become quick to imagine visions of some hopeless, apocalyptic future. Perhaps if pressed, we might entertain the slim possibility of some whizzy, techno-powered utopia for ourselves instead. Both options feel extreme, and neither is socially useful. 

As Geoff Mulgan said, “we can more easily imagine the end of the world than a better future.” When our imagination defaults to these extreme visions, we lose ourselves in the picture. With no agency to influence them, we feel powerless, and become apathetic about change in the present. The logic of climate doomism asks, why try and redirect our course if we’re screwed anyway? Our imaginations have in effect been taken hostage by these images of collapse, creating a tyranny of no alternatives.

To achieve our climate targets, it's crucial to imagine a better, yet realistic future. Good Life 2030, a project by Purpose Disruptors, invites culture-makers to this exercise. Surprisingly, picturing life in this greener future often leaves us at a loss. It's time we create more source material for our collective vision, giving people a compelling sense of the goal we're pursuing. The ad industry, with their knack for picturing improved lifestyles, could be invaluable in this. The average UK citizen sees 10,000 daily ads, imagine this creative power channeled towards an ecologically balanced future.

Since 2021, Purpose Disruptors' Client 2030 brief has challenged creatives to build "brand warmth" campaigns for 2030, using real UK citizens' visions of a connected, nature-centric future. So far, over 500 creatives, including major agencies, have joined, with work featuring at events like COP26 and iconic places like Piccadilly Circus.

While this project has focused predominantly on advertising industry creatives, interest from the wider cultural sphere is growing. At this critical moment in history, a growing cohort of culture-makers are recognizing their responsibility to offer supportive source material for the collective imagination. And instead of feeding our minds with extreme visions that prompt apathy, doing the harder work of imagining the “practical utopias”, the plausible versions of a Good Life.

Interrupting the commercial break: Good Life 2030 takes over Piccadilly Circus - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Creatives for Climate

Climate communicators have a key role to play in shaping the perceptions and actions of wider society.  Creative industries in particular are uniquely positioned to reshape climate narratives — by striking a balance between alarming realities and inspiring possibilities, they can lay the groundwork for transformative change. By harnessing the immense power of storytelling, media, advertising and marketing have a responsibility to craft narratives that capture the urgency of our situation, while offering glimpses of hope. This has the potential to inspire broader audiences to become active participants in our collective journey towards a more sustainable future.

“As imperfect as our solutions may be, the capacity to confront and overcome great difficulties is renewable, limitless, and always worth nourishing and celebrating. The rest of the story of repair, regeneration, and connection still needs to be written, and the pen is in our hands"
CHRISTIANA FIGUERES, PROJECT SYNDICATE

|
Figure 68A: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 68A: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 68B: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 68B: Advertisement of industry creatives - Credit: Pete Ashworth, Laura Costello & Fiona O’Grady, Creatives for Climate

Figure 69: Share of people under 25 in OECD countries who believe humanity is doomed in their lifetimes. Source: OECD.

Figure 69: Share of people under 25 in OECD countries who believe humanity is doomed in their lifetimes. Source: OECD.

Figure 70: Percentage of adults who believe climate change is real, and that we can do anything to change its course. Sources: Eurobarometer and Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Figure 70: Percentage of adults who believe climate change is real, and that we can do anything to change its course. Sources: Eurobarometer and Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Surce: NRDC Rewrite the Future, Sundance 2021

Contributors in this section
Zoe Tcholak-Antitch
Global Commons Alliance + Global Optimism
Marcy Franck
Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
see all whitepaper contributors
next up

Training the Communicators

Existing spokespeople such as climate scientists, journalists and government officials have an important role in helping the public understand climate change and what it means to them. But not enough energy is invested in supporting these groups to communicate the issue effectively. While some useful resources exist, such as the IPCC’s communications handbook for climate scientists, these efforts must be more widespread and comprehensive.

Keep reading
notes
  1. Youra S. Climate Doomism Is the New Climate Denial. Medium. Published 2021. Accessed May 23, 2023. https://medium.com/climate-conscious/climate-doomism-is-the-new-climate-denial-f4a48ddd970
  2. Mann ME. The New Climate War: The Fight to Take Back Our Planet. First edition. PublicAffairs; 2021.
  3. Brosch T. Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: a review. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2021;42:15-21. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.001
  4. Stosny S. He once called it ‘election stress disorder.’ Now the therapist says we’re suffering from this. The Washington Post. Published 2017. Accessed May 24, 2023. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-life/wp/2017/02/06/suffering-from-headline-stress-disorder-since-trumps-win-youre-definitely-not-alone/?noredirect=on
  5. Perga ME, Sarrasin O, Steinberger J, Lane SN, Butera F. The climate change research that makes the front page: Is it fit to engage societal action? Glob Environ Change. 2023;80:102675. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2023.102675
  6. Jones CA, Davison A. Disempowering emotions: The role of educational experiences in social responses to climate change. Geoforum. 2021;118:190-200. doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.11.006
  7. O’Neill S, Nicholson-Cole S. “Fear Won’t Do It”: Promoting Positive Engagement With Climate Change Through Visual and Iconic Representations. Sci Commun. 2009;30(3):355-379. doi:10.1177/1075547008329201
  8. Valle GD. 3 Years After the El Paso Shooting, “Environmental” Nativism Is Spreading. Published online August 3, 2022. Accessed August 21, 2023. https://www.thenation.com/article/society/el-paso-shooting-xenophobia/
  9. Hassol SJ. The Right Words Are Crucial to Solving Climate Change. Scientific American. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0223-64
  10. Marlon JR, Bloodhart B, Ballew MT, et al. How Hope and Doubt Affect Climate Change Mobilization. Front Commun. 2019;4. Accessed September 16, 2023. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2019.00020
  11. Accenture Song. A Primer on Sustainable Communications. Published online 2022.