This article has been reviewed according to Science X's editorial process and policies. Editors have highlighted the following attributes while ensuring the content's credibility: Every year, public authorities and nongovernmental organizations spend millions on communication campaigns designed to encourage people to take action on climate change. But which strategies work best?
Should campaigns rely on fear or positive messages, prioritize facts or appeal to emotions, and focus on words or visuals? A team from UNIGE's Consumer Decision and Sustainable Behavior Lab, part of the Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences and the Swiss Center for Affective Sciences, has conducted the first large-scale study of its kind. The researchers analyzed and synthesized the findings of 71 studies examining the impact of specific climate communication strategies, drawing on data from a total of 216,000 participants.
The work is published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology. The strategies reviewed encompassed 15 different approaches, ranging from providing factual information to fill knowledge gaps to appealing to emotions—for example, by evoking a sense of wonder or awe at the beauty of nature. They also included approaches based on the principle of bounded rationality, which are designed to facilitate decision-making by highlighting specific aspects of climate change, such as its health or financial consequences.
"Our research shows that almost all of these strategies are likely to have a positive effect on people's intentions and behaviors, as well as on their support for climate policies," explains Tobias Brosch, director of the laboratory, who led the study with Mario Herberz, a postdoctoral researcher. "Only strategies based on individual and collective responsibility—with messages such as 'success depends largely on you'—appear to have little or no effect. They may even foster reactance." But not all effective strategies are equally effective.
"Campaigns that evoke a strong emotional response—particularly through storytelling or by inspiring a sense of wonder at the beauty of nature—are significantly more effective than simply presenting facts and scientific evidence. Messages that draw on moral, ethical or even religious considerations, highlighting our connection to something greater than ourselves that we have a responsibility to preserve, also achieve better results." The researchers also found that messages are more effective when they include images. "Despite these differences, the fact that almost all of these strategies can have a positive effect is encouraging," Brosch says.
"This is particularly encouraging given that the studies reviewed mainly measured the effects of messages to which people were exposed only once. Yet we know that repeated exposure can strengthen their impact. At a time when the scientific evidence is well established and the challenge is to turn knowledge into action, there is considerable scope to improve climate communication." Mario Herberz et al, A systematic review and meta-analysis of communication strategies to promote climate action, Journal of Environmental Psychology (2026).
Extract — continue reading at the source.
