Roundtable Recap

We’ve been asking Climate Access members what they think the biggest takeaways are from 2011 and two issues are rising to the top: Extreme weather serving as a wake-up call (34 percent) and federal inaction inspiring community responses (31 percent). While both catalysts are quite unfortunate, I find it notable that both takeaways indicate progress on engaging the public. It’s in part why I came out of our Dec. 13 roundtable discussion on Climate Attitudes cautiously optimistic about what 2012 will bring.

It’s hard to condense an hour-long discussion with the likes of Dr. Anthony Leiserowitz (Yale Project on Climate Change Communication), Eileen Quigley (Climate Solutions) and Matt Lappé (Alliance for Climate Education) into a few paragraphs, but I wanted to share a few things that really stood out from our conversation. (Listen to the full roundtable - exclusive for members.)

The writing is certainly on the wall when it comes to climate change and though some people still cannot make out the writing, there is public acceptance that it is there. Extreme weather in 2011 made sure of it, as “freak” events such as this fall’s massive East Coast snowstorm hit home like never before. This is in part why, despite the continued economic woes and strident opposition (though the public thankfully saw right through the blatant attempt to create ClimateGate II), the research by Leiserowitz and others this year identifies an overall increase in concern. This, once again, illustrates how climate communications need to focus on local threats that will affect people personally.

A related takeaway from the roundtable is that in tough economic times, people are looking for stability, a sense of control and hope. In response, we need to convey how climate solutions can mean increased self-sufficiency for individuals and global leadership as a nation, which are both quintessential American values. Quigley explained how in the communities in the rural West where she works—often explicitly warned not to mention climate change—people want to see solutions. Despite some of the perceived failure to deliver on green jobs, rural stakeholders want clean energy investments and innovation to drive their economies, get the country off foreign oil and to promote self-sufficiency.

This poses a dilemma for climate communicators; we want to tout responses that indicate control when, in reality, we have to get used to uncertainty and be ready and willing to adapt. It’s a hard framing choice.

This issue of control is perhaps less critical for youth, who are, according to research into social values, are more comfortable with ambiguity.

Hearing from Lappé about his work educating young Americans about climate change and connecting them to solutions, it’s abundantly clear that youth engagement is an important piece of the communications education. Young people tend to be more alarmed about climate change than the average American and are quite often influential agents of change within their families. A sense of efficacy is needed as research shows how easy it is to feel fatalistic about these issues.

The 2012 presidential campaign will likely be the first American election where climate change will be a major part of the political discourse. With the Keystone pipeline project coming to another head, energy issues will continue to be in the forefront. Within that context, amplifying the solutions being pursued at the state, regional or local level is critical. When asked for final words of advice, Leiserowitz said his research points to three things—“organize, organize, organize”—meaning climate communicators need to work together to create a choir or many choirs of voices that carry mutually reinforcing narratives about the need to act to address climate change and the benefits of taking that action.

That is what we are trying to do with Climate Access, and I’d like to thank all of our members who participated in this month’s roundtable. Stay tuned for details about the next one.