Climate Advocacy Research Articles

Seven Barriers to U.S. Business Leadership on Climate Policy and How to Break Them Down

This paper identifies barriers that prevent corporations in the United States from advocating for climate policy so that companies can break them down and embrace climate advocacy. We find companies face seven key barriers to comprehensively adopting a science-based climate policy agenda. None of these barriers are an excuse for inaction. The purpose of this paper is to help individuals within a company anticipate and overcome these obstacles. In the conclusion, we offer a checklist of specific actions and strategies to clear multiple barriers (e.g., conducting a risk analysis) and to help advance essential public policies that address climate change. The audience for this paper is C-suite and other key staff members within large (Fortune 500) companies that strive to be climate leaders. Though the United States grants companies of all sizes the right to engage in political lobbying and campaign financing, those that have larger operations and revenue have a greater capacity, empowered by greater resources, to directly participate in the federal policymaking process. Similarly, this paper focuses on political influence at the federal level.

How Celebrities’ Green Messages on Twitter Influence Public Attitudes and Behavioral Intentions to Mitigate Climate Change

This research adds to the growing body of literature on the role of celebrities as emergent spokespersons in climate advocacy using Twitter. This study investigates the effects of framing of celebrities’ messages (emotional framing and framing of celebrity involvement) on public attitudes and behaviors to address climate change. A sequential mediation process is examined with structural equation modeling. In addition, this study assesses the role of parasocial relationship (PSR) with celebrities as predictors and moderators of the impact of framing of celebrity involvement. The results indicate that fear appeals were more effective than hope appeals in driving participation in activism, but emotional framing did not affect any other variables. Framing of celebrity involvement appeals using first-person pronouns led to more positive attitudes, but had no effect on behaviors. In addition, PSR was a strong positive predictor of attitudes and behaviors.

Intersectionality and collective action: visioning a Feminist Green New Deal in the US

ABSTRACT In the wake of the introduction of the Resolution for a Green New Deal to the US House of Representatives in 2019, feminist climate justice activists and organisers initiated and cultivated the Feminist Coalition for a Green New Deal. The Coalition advances an intersectional feminist analysis as part of the national conversation about the Green Deal, which entails elucidating and enacting processes for coalition-formation and creating shared values, principles, and policy positions. This article shares insights from interviews with five Coalition members about the relevance of the Coalition’s creation, operating processes, and key outcomes – namely the principles for a Feminist Green New Deal – for communities, advocates, and policymakers, particularly in this moment of reckoning with a global pandemic. Their reflections illustrate their fervent dedication to the feminist tool of intersectional analysis, their proposals for an alternative economy centred on principles of care and regeneration as the essential scaffolding for a Feminist Green New Deal, and their commitment to the power of collective action as the most effective means of movement building. The responses also demonstrate the interconnectedness of feminist climate advocacy with feminist development critiques, the essentiality of a comprehensive reframing of governments’ general policy processes and aims, and the criticality of movement building that is intentional and responsive.

Understanding national barriers to climate change adaptation for public health - a global survey

Abstract Background Climate change has introduced a series of unprecedented threats to human health, ranging from rising food and water insecurity to deteriorating air quality, novel disease outbreaks, and intensifying natural disasters. The Paris Agreement pushes countries to develop adaptation plans that will protect human health from the worst impacts of climate change -a process referred to as climate change adaptation (CCA). Yet despite international pressure and escalating health threats, vast shortcomings persist in national CCA for public health progress. Thus, we investigated the major governance constraints underlying these trends. Methods A mixed-methods online survey was distributed to representatives of national public health associations and societies of 82 member countries under the World Federation of Public Health Associations. Results 9 of the 11 respondent countries (82%) affirmed the existence of a national CCA plan that includes an explicit public health focus. All respondees listed governance challenges in developing and operationalising their national CCA agenda. The major identified barriers to CCA for public health progress were lack of inter-government policy coordination and insufficient political will to mobilize human and non-human resources in support of public health-oriented adaptation efforts. Conclusions Climate change-driven amplification of global health risks necessitates that all nations generate clear CCA plans to protect human health. Our findings assist by highlighting the need for new platforms for organizational collaboration/networked governance and enhanced forums for CCA agenda-setting and ambition-raising. Such forms of enriched knowledge may facilitate decision-making amongst key public health stakeholders and global institutions for how best to align climate advocacy and country-wide support initiatives with cross-cutting national needs and constraints. Key messages Climate change-driven amplification of global health risks necessitates that all nations generate clear climate change adaptation plans to protect human health. New platforms for organizational collaboration/networked governance and enhanced forums for adaptation agenda-setting and ambition-raising may significantly bolster public health adaptation progress.

The Implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards and the Tumultuous Fight to Implement Climate Change Awareness in Science Curricula

The following article examines the implementation and controversy that surround climate change education and the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). In order to fully understand why NGSS and climate change education continue to generate significant public debate, one must examine the work of both climate advocates and detractors. Therefore, this paper first examines the manner in which climate change continues to remain a debatable topic of discussion throughout American classrooms despite overwhelming scientific consensus. After, it explores how the debate over climate change stems from differing ethical cornerstones. Moreover, it delves into the oppositional perspective on climate change implementation by exploring the work of Truth in Texas Textbooks (TTT). Subsequently, it introduces and analyzes the creation and implementation of NGSS and discusses how adoption of NGSS and stronger levels of opposition to TTT is responsive policy that remains a necessary step to challenging global issues created by climate change.

Between crisis and care: Projection mapping as creative climate advocacy

At this critical crossroad of climate crisis, environmental advocates have turned to projection mapping (also known as ‘guerrilla projections’, ‘digital graffiti’, etc.) to foster an ethic of care. This article focuses on two 2015 projection mapping events: one in Vatican City and the other in Paris. Although imperfect, projection mapping may orient attention, transform locations into public spaces for political engagement and cultivate collective imaginaries. By rethinking environmental media between climate crisis and care, we may define the agenda of this journal as not only centred on critique but also regenerating creative communication for a just and vibrant future.

School Nurses and Climate Change.

Climate change is a serious threat to human health. Nurses recognize vulnerable populations are disproportionately affected by the consequences from climate change, especially the elderly, pregnant women, and children. Children with asthma and chronic health conditions are at the greatest risk for negative health outcomes and are the most important reason for climate advocacy. This descriptive correlational study seeks to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of school nurses related to the health impacts of climate change. School nurses are in a unique position to address the health impacts of climate change and become fierce advocates of climate justice because of population they serve. School-age and adolescent students are particularly vulnerable to the consequences climate change, which include poor air quality, increasing temperatures, and increasing pollen counts. School nurses were invited to participate in the study via email and provided information about the Nurses Climate Change Challenge. It was the goal of the study to assess these domains in school nurses' and later develop continuing education to support the care and advocacy of students. The results suggest more continuing education on climate change and climate conscious care is needed for school nurses. The current challenge is not only to be more prepared to treat a greater number of illnesses induced by climate change, it is also to maintain expertise and adapt to a changing environment. Nurses must address the impact of climate change on a local level by making changes in practice and engaging in research so that they are prepared with the knowledge, and skills to offer expertise in environmental health and the care of school-age populations.

Strategic Gestures in Bill McKibben's Climate Change Rhetoric

Although Bill McKibben is widely recognized as one of the leading strategists of the US climate change movement, several observers identify significant limitations to his approach to climate advocacy and politics. These criticisms are based on his reliance upon “symbolic gestures,” such as campaigns to promote fossil fuel divestment and stop fossil fuel infrastructure construction. In this essay we reconsider McKibben’s work, drawing specifically on his speeches given from 2013-2016 in support of the fossil fuel divestment campaign and campaigns attempting to block the construction of fossil fuel infrastructure, in order to show how McKibben’s strategic orientation is grounded in a politics of gesture. His speeches provide a model for how to reconceive gestures and assemble them for political ends. Beyond the case of McKibben our analysis contributes the concept of strategic gestures to identify and theorize social movement interventions that have significant symbolic and material consequences.

Coalitions and counter-coalitions in online contestation: An analysis of the German and British climate change debate

We seek to understand the role of the Internet in policy monopolies characterized by a dominant coalition in traditional political venues. In these settings, we identify coalitions and counter-coalitions on the Web and ask how these coalitions differ resource-wise and where these differences come from. To do so, we combine link tracing and quantitative content analysis in the field of climate change in Germany and the United Kingdom. Our results show that online contestation is indeed structured by competing coalitions of climate advocates and skeptics. Moreover, the counter-coalitions of climate skeptics turn out to be the true winners of online communication: they have not only incorporated conservative media as their allies, but also managed to make themselves more visible than climate advocates. This visibility stems from their own link setting activity, which makes climate advocates’ passive online strategy of just ignoring the skeptical camp ineffective.

Global sustainability under uncertainty: How do multinationals craft regulatory policies?

AbstractMultinational corporations (MNCs) are increasingly mindful of the significance of sustainability transitions and the need for operations that are energy efficient and environmentally sound. Achieving sustainability under conditions of uncertainty entails the involvement of multiple stakeholders in initiating and carrying out sustainability‐focused initiatives. Using longitudinal analysis of Royal Dutch Shell's sustainability policies, we developed an integrated model to elucidate how uncertainty influences sustainability policies in the specific context of MNCs. We identified three phases in the evolution of Shell's sustainability innovation: a self‐reflective phase (2000–2003) characterized by intense pressure from climate advocacy groups, an investment phase (2004–2006) for which the MNC attempted to rise to the waste disposal and pollution challenge through renewable sources of energy, and a reorganization phase (2007–2010) to streamline operations. We also uncovered themes that influence how regulatory policies are crafted: responding positively to the “community's voice,” risk spreading through joint ventures, revenue transparency for government accountability, and reporting innovation that confronts hard truths. The practical implications are outlined.

Evaluating the perils and promises of academic climate advocacy

What are the causes and consequences of academic climate advocacy in contemporary times? Should it be celebrated and pursued, or derided and eschewed? Does advocacy in various forms tarnish or enhance the reputation of science? This research examined conditions whereby some in academic communities facilitate various forms of engagement relating to their research while others shy away from applications of their work and avoid the “advocate” label. Through an exploratory survey of US-based natural and social science climate researchers/scholars and through analysis of interviews of US-based climate change academic researchers/scholars as part of an “Inside the Greenhouse” and “More than Scientists” collaboration, we explored academic advocacy in a twenty-first century climate communications environment. Among our findings, there was broad agreement that climate change is a pressing issue, yet among social scientists, women are more likely to agree that advocacy should not be criticized than their male social scientist counterparts. Younger respondents were more likely than older respondents to be compelled to change by advocacy from someone with a smaller carbon footprint. Meanwhile, social scientists were more likely than natural scientists to be compelled to change by someone with a smaller carbon footprint. The associated effect of age differences was stronger than the associated differences with profession. Together, we examined these dynamic conditions that animate advocacy opportunities and tensions in the context of contemporary climate change research and engagement. Through conflation between advocacy for evidence-based climate science and advocacy for particular policy outcomes (with coincident dangers of individualism and apolitical intellectualism), we found that academic climate advocacy remains an unresolved subject.

Framing clean energy campaigns to promote civic engagement among parents

Civic engagement is one important way citizens can influence the rate of decarbonization in the electricity sector. However, motivating engagement can be challenging even if people are affected and interested in participating. Here we employed a randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of clean energy campaigns emphasizing cost savings, health, climate, or health and climate, or no additional information at all (control) on civic engagement behaviors (signing a petition or making a phone call). We targeted parents as they have been shown to be powerful agents of political and business practice change in other contexts, and hence, could play an important role in the decarbonization of the electricity sector. In Study 1, we recruited n = 292 parents already engaged in climate advocacy; in Study 2, we recruited a representative sample of n = 1254 parents drawn from the general public. Both studies were conducted in Michigan, Florida, and California, as these states have sizable advocacy group membership, divergent energy profiles, and strategic importance to the climate movement. In both studies, we find the odds of taking action are reduced by over 90% when participants are asked to make a phone call and leave a voicemail message, versus signing an online petition. Among the parents already engaged in advocacy, we observe a ceiling effect regarding attitudes towards clean energy and find the cost campaign produces unintended consequences. Among our public sample, we find that participants who believe the campaign to be credible and comprehendible are more likely to take action than those who discredit the campaign or do not understand its message. Additionally, we find parents who have children under the age of 18 negatively adjust their attitudes towards fossil fuels after being presented with health information. Ultimately, we find that campaign messages can influence energy attitudes and parents are willing to take action on the topic if the advocacy action seems like an effective approach.

The “Third Sector” and Climate Change Adaptation Governance in Sub-Saharan Africa: Experience from Ghana

In spite of growing evidence of non-governmental organizations’ (NGOs) active participation in both bottom-up and top-down climate change policy negotiations and implementation, a research effort that focuses on the former barely exists. Grounded within the qualitative research approach, this paper contributes to the emerging climate policy literature by drawing on experiences from three purposefully selected non-state actors’ adaptation program in Ghana. The paper observes that through tripartite mechanisms—climate advocacy, direct climate service provision and local empowerment, NGOs significantly play a complementary role in building local adaptive capacities, especially among people who are already living at or close to the margins of survival. The paper again found that NGOs tacitly explore four interrelated “social tactics” (rulemaking, alliance brokerage, resource brokerage, and framing) to gain the cooperation of local actors for the implementation of adaptation interventions. In order to improve the performance and sustainability of adaptation interventions, the paper puts forward that NGOs should, among other things, harmonize their interventions to resonate with local interest and identity and also nurture capable project caretakers before community exit.

Take Action Now: Motivational Framing and Action Requests in Climate Advocacy

ABSTRACTThis article explores similarities and differences between Internet-mediated climate change advocacy organizations and their legacy counterparts. It relies on a content analysis of advocacy emails produced by Environmental Defense Fund, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, Greenpeace USA, League of Conservation Voters, Climate Reality Project, 1Sky, and 350.org. The study finds differences and similarities in strategic Internet use, including greater emphasis by climate groups on high threshold, offline actions; greater emphasis by legacy groups on low threshold, online actions; and high reliance by both framings that demand accountability from political elites. Implications for Internet-mediated and climate advocacy are discussed.

The Importance of Physician Climate Advocacy in the Face of Political Denial.

Most physicians accept the general scientific discoveries about anthropogenic global warming and its dangers. Occasional denial by individual physicians of climate change can be readily answered by reference to the scientific consensus. But widespread, organized, political denial of climate change is hazardous to physicians' advocacy for an effective public health and health care response to climate change. This article assumes that physician climate advocacy is ethical and celebrates the many forms of health climate advocacy already under way. It concludes by drawing attention to measures that can scale up and strengthen the health care system's organized response to growing climate health hazards.

Seizing policy windows: Policy Influence of climate advocacy coalitions in Brazil, China, and India, 2000–2015

What drives the development of climate policy? Brazil, China, and India have all changed their climate policies since 2000, and single-case analyses of climate policymaking have found that all three countries have had climate coalitions working to promote climate policies. To what extent have such advocacy coalitions been able to influence national policies for climate-change mitigation, and what can explain this? Employing a new approach that combines the advocacy coalition framework (ACF) with insights from comparative environmental politics and the literature on policy windows, this paper identifies why external parameters like political economy and institutional structures are crucial for explaining the climate advocacy coalitions’ ability to seize policy windows and influence policy development. We find that the coalitions adjust their policy strategies to the influence-opportunity structures in each political context—resulting in confrontation in Brazil, cooperation in China, and a complementary role in India.

Assessing the Influence of an Educational Presentation on Climate Change Beliefs at an Evangelical Christian College

ABSTRACTDespite an overwhelming scientific consensus, a significant proportion of the American public continues to reject anthropogenic climate change. This disparity is particularly evident among evangelical Christians, for whom theological conservatism, general scientific skepticism, political affiliations, and sociocultural influences may impede their acceptance of human-caused climate change. Climate advocates have attempted to engage the evangelical community through various educational initiatives; lacking empirical measurement, however, it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding the efficacy of such programs. Here, we present the results of a study that addresses this lack by adapting questions from the Six Americas of Global Warming survey to measure the climate change beliefs of undergraduate students at an evangelical Christian college before and after attending a lecture by a Christian climate scientist. The 88 participants who successfully completed a pre- and posttreatment survey were divided into three groups: the first attended a live lecture, the second attended a recorded lecture, and the third attended a similar version of the same recorded lecture in which the presenter removed material addressing common misconceptions about climate change. The results demonstrate a significant increase in the proclimate beliefs for students in all three groups. There was no significant difference between the impacts of the live and recorded lectures or between the recorded lectures with and without misconceptions. These findings affirm the value of climate education among evangelicals; highlight the potential utility of such presentations, both recorded and live; and point to opportunities for research in the area of faith-based climate communication.

From abalone to advocacy.

Three months ago, as I stood on the edge of the National Mall in Washington, D.C., I allowed myself a few moments to appreciate what I was about to do. With a few deep breaths, I reminded myself that I was probably facing an uphill battle; took one last look at the Capitol; and, with three other graduate students, began a whirlwind tour of 12 congressional offices to push for policies to address climate change. ![Figure][1] ILLUSTRATION: ROBERT NEUBECKER > “It became obvious to me that I needed to become a stronger advocate.” A year ago, I would have laughed at the suggestion that I meet with my elected representatives, whose names I certainly could not have provided. My academic goals were focused and familiar: Finish my Ph.D. studying abalone disease, do a postdoc, and become a professor at a research-intensive university. I was exploring climate change advocacy through a pilot program for graduate students, which involved seminars and a summer internship, but I considered this “extra,” not a core part of my work. After the upheaval in U.S. politics that unfolded last year, and which continues to develop, it became obvious to me that I needed to become a stronger advocate. So, when the climate advocacy program I was involved in offered funding for an extra project shortly after the presidential election, I decided it was time to step up. A number of my Ph.D. student colleagues study climate change in some way, so I proposed that we take a trip to Washington, D.C., to meet with policymakers and climate experts. Three students signed on immediately, and my dean contributed additional support once he learned of the trip. After a 2-month whirlwind of planning, the four of us boarded a plane with our pitches memorized. One of our first meetings—which was also one of our best—was with a congressional staffer from a suburban district in Pennsylvania, where Lyme disease is widespread. My colleague who studied tick-borne diseases explained how climate change will increase the prevalence of Lyme disease in the congressperson's district. The staffer told us that this was exactly the kind of science he could use to help shape policies. The meetings didn't all go as well as that one. In one case, we advocated for a climate plan that, it turned out, the congressperson was already firmly against because of its economic implications, which made for a relatively unproductive meeting. Nonetheless, it served as a useful learning experience. We adjusted our approach for the rest of our meetings and suggested various policy proposals to address climate change, without picking favorites; framed ourselves as experts in science, not policy; and urged action on any plans that addressed carbon emissions and could receive bipartisan support. We saw firsthand that we can be more effective if we talk with—rather than at—others, recognize our weaknesses along with our strengths, and seek more advice than we provide. I know that our visits didn't singlehandedly turn around the government's climate change policies, but I'm glad to be doing my part to advocate for a cause I deeply believe in. My experience in Washington, D.C., has also radically changed my career plans. Before, I was a biologist who did small-scale community outreach, such as visiting high school classes. Now, I see outreach and advocacy as the focus of my research and career. I am refocusing my Ph.D. research toward studying how animals respond to environmental change and how this knowledge can help abalone farmers. When I graduate, I plan to focus my research in areas such as how diseases and temperature change might affect global abalone fisheries, which will help fisheries and conservation managers create better, more sustainable policies. Last November, I felt defeated—like science didn't matter anymore and working on climate change resiliency was a lost cause. Now, I feel more energized than ever to fight for it. When I share my experience with other graduate students, they often lament that they don't have time to engage outside the lab. My response is simple: Find the time. The planet is worth it. [1]: pending:yes

The Socio-scientific Construction of Global Climate Crisis

ABSTRACTThis article adapts and applies a securitisation framework to produce an analytical explanation for the heightened geopolitical status of climate change over the past decade, as demonstrated by the breakthrough Paris Agreement of 2015. Rather than speech acts invoking security, the focus of this analysis is on the socio-scientific discourse of global climate crisis that emerged in the several year period leading to the 2009 COP 15 conference in Copenhagen. Two types of experts—contributory and interactional—are identified as the essential and interdependent actors that engaged in ‘crisification’, a novel crisis-based perspective on political agenda setting, in which climate crisis served as a primary discursive device employed by prominent advocates of urgent action. Contributory experts, that is, authoritative climate scientists and their institutions, together with interactional experts—non-scientist social actors who appropriated and mediated scientific data and knowledge in framing climate change as a global crisis—constituted an extended epistemic community of climate advocates. Through an array of speech acts, this extended community effectively co-constructed a convincing climate crisis discourse that consisted of quantitative data artefacts based on CO2 concentration and global mean temperature, and qualitative invocations of existential threat to human civilisation, which contributed to the ascent of climate change on the global political agenda. In proposing crisification as a complement to securitisation, the article offers a theoretical innovation that facilitates constructivist analysis of issues framed as crises, including geopolitical problems in certain non-military sectors where crisis is a favoured label for perceived threats to core values.

Air quality woes

In my previous editorial, I wrote about my recent visit to Beijing to attend a symposium organized by ACS in collaboration with the Institute of Chemistry of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. I had a very productive and enjoyable visit, but while I was there, I struggled with two things. One was the lack of access to sites such as Google, Twitter, and YouTube. This was more annoying than problematic. The second, more important and longer lasting, as I’m still feeling it, was the poor air quality. Air pollution is a well-documented problem in China, killing an average of 4,000 people per day, according to a study by the climate advocacy group Berkeley Earth (PLOS One 2015, DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135749). The largest factor is coal, with China burning almost as much coal annually as all other world countries combined. In Beijing, this is aggravated by more than 5 million motor vehicles