ABSTRACT The concept of ‘climate crisis’ has a long history and has been increasingly employed by media and politics in recent decades, shaping collective perceptions of climate variability and change. However, in the absence of a critical definition, it risks fostering unrealistic interpretations – either alarmist or overly optimistic. To promote a rational understanding of ‘climate crisis’ we propose a framework of Response Indicators (RINDs) based on the IPCC AR6 Climate Impact Drivers (CIDs). The Mann-Kendall trend test applied to RIND time series reveals that most indicators do not exhibit statistically significant worsening trends. This challenges crisis narratives in specific contexts and highlights the need for localised, data-driven adaptation strategies rather than generalised alarm. We advocate annual updates of indicators to create an evolving ‘crisis index,’ mirroring the shift in economics from qualitative crisis definitions (e.g. recessions as ‘two consecutive GDP quarters’) to a quantitative metrics. Such an approach would help prevent subjective uses of ‘climate crisis’ while enhancing the scientific reliability of the concept; it would also acknowledge regional variability and prioritise targeted interventions over blanket terminology. By linking ‘crisis’ to measurable benchmarks, policymakers gain clearer adaptation priorities.