We need to get better at talking about the environment

The heat dome over Canada was a tipping point in public opinion. People are ready for change, and ready to act. But for that to happen, we have to do things differently. And we have to learn to talk about the environmental problem differently. It’s time to learn from our mistakes, and to do things differently. Here’s 11 things we can all do to have more impact when we communicate about the environment.

1) We frame this as a science problem. It’s not.

The environmental crises are presented as scientific stories. We rush to report the latest science that proves climate change is real/worse than we thought/happening now. We celebrate technical breakthroughs in carbon sequestration or ‘sustainable’ fuels.

We’ve got it all wrong.

We already know what the problems are. The planet is too warm, and getting warmer. The oceans are full of plastic. Species are dying out at a mind-boggling rate.

And the latest science that proves we’re right? It’s not going to make an ounce of difference.

It’s no more likely to change anyone’s mind, or spur them to action, than the same kind of science story from yesterday, last week, last month or last year.

Solving our environmental crises isn’t a science problem. It’s a change management problem; and a communications problem.

Once we reframe it like that, it becomes easier to talk about the environmental crisis in terms that influence change.

Photo by Jason Rosewell on Unsplash

2) Stop talking about the climate crisis

We’re never going to solve the problem until we define it accurately.

We’re focused on the symptoms - not the cause. We focus on climate change. But we don’t ‘just’ face a climate crisis. Treating the environmental issues - plastic pollution, biodiversity loss, rainforest destruction and so on - as separate problems is tying us in knots.

The focus on climate change means that Grant Shapps can get away with brazenly saying (in relation to net zero and aviation): "It's not about stopping people doing things: it's about doing the same things differently. We will still fly on holiday, but in more efficient aircraft, using sustainable fuel. We will still drive, but increasingly in zero-emission cars."

This statement is horrifyingly wrong - it’s impossible to solve any of our environmental crises with business as usual. Switching to electric vehicles has moved the environmental problem - mining metals for batteries has created multiple ecosystem disasters. The solution is to drive less, in smaller cars, which we keep for longer.

If we were talking about the real problem - that we consume too much - the transport secretary wouldn’t be able to state this untruth.

Call it what you will: a consumption problem, an over-consumption issue, or the environmental crisis.

But we’ve got to stop focusing on climate change, if we’re to have any hope of progress.

3) This is happening, here and now.

“By 2100”… “In 30 years’ time”... “It’s likely that”... “The polar ice caps...”

We’ve made the environmental crisis seem distant and far away, by talking about polar ice caps and distant islands. We need to talk about places we can relate to: our own towns and villages, or places we can relate to - like British Columbia.

From a scientific perspective, it’s important to understand and model the scale and severity of the problem - how many fish will be in the sea by 2050; which Pacific Islands will disappear by 2100. From a communications and change management perspective, it’s a nightmare.

If it’s far into the future, it’s too distant for us to comprehend or focus on. What’s on the table for tea, or whether your child is going to have to isolate when you’ve got a ton of deadlines, is far more pressing.

And it gives the illusion of time to spare. Anyone who has ever had weeks to complete a project, only to finish it the day/night/hour before it’s due, can appreciate that’s how the human brain works.

It’s too geographically distant. A Pacific Island, that we’ve never heard of, gently slipping into the seas doesn’t spur us into action. A small flood in the next town has the ability to affect us far more profoundly.

But we no longer have to do this. We no longer need to talk about the environmental crisis in terms of what ‘might’ happen in the future, to far away islands and ice caps.

The environmental crisis is here. It’s happening, now, and it’s affecting people like us. That’s why Canada matters; that’s what spurs people to act.

4) We’ve created the impression that climate change is gradual and incremental

With targets for ‘net zero’ by 2050; and statistics like sea levels are likely to rise by a few centimetres here and there - you’d be forgiven for thinking that the environmental crisis is going develop slowly. And that gives us breathing space - time for the boffins to find some innovative new technological solutions.

Islands disappearing by 2100? That leaves plenty of time for a nice calm, planned evacuation.

Except climate change doesn’t work like that. We need to take care not to perpetuate that myth. Even better, we need to dispel that myth.

Language that implies there’s time to plan, or that change will happen slowly, needs to be called out. Climate change is sudden, extreme and brutal. It looks like forest fires that burn towns to the ground, alongside flooding from the rapidly melting snow and glaciers.

5) It’s not about sea levels and average temperatures

Climate change isn’t about average rises of 1.5C.

Climate change about 49C in Canada and -5C in Kerala. It’s about 38C in Siberia.

We need to stop talking about the averages - and translate that into the reality of what it looks like on the ground.

But that’s just the first step. We need to go beyond ‘38 C in Siberia’ and ‘49C in Canada’.

6) The environmental crisis is a human problem, not a scientific one

The facts and figures surprise us. But it’s their impact that matters.

We weren’t spurred into action because Canada hit 49C. What shocked us was people dying and towns burning.

Siberia at 38C? It sounds bizarre. But not frightening.

But what happens when we describe what 38C in Siberia actually means? That, at 38C, the permafrost melted and caused a pipeline to collapse: which led to economic disruption as well as an ecological catastrophe. That the unusually warm water caused fish to swim deeper, making it impossible for fishermen to catch them. That the heat meant Siberian silk worms proliferated - and as they stripped the needles from the pine trees, the trees became even more susceptible to the forest fires that raged.

For the environmental crisis to become meaningful and relatable, we need to understand the impact and consequences for us humans.

7) This is personal

• The parent who chokes back tears because the children will never be able to learn the traditions and skills of their community as the ice melts.

• The gentle, unassuming family who can no longer hunt and gift their neighbours the food they need, because the caribou are now too scarce.

• The Oregon pre-school teacher who, in the middle of a pandemic, cannot open the windows or let the children play outside because of the air quality during forest fire season.

As humans, we don’t respond to the facts about mass migration. But we respond to the image of a dead boy on a beach.

We don’t respond to the horrors of war. But we react to a little girl running, naked, as her body burns from Napalm.

As humans, we react when it’s individual and relatable - when it touches us.

When it’s personal.

The environmental crisis is a human story - and it needs to be a personal one, too.

8) Scare tactics don’t work

People are scared; some more than others. Most people have doubts, fears, or their head in the sand. But you won’t get it out by scaring them even more.

We acquired a guinea pig who was such a little runt that he ran and hid every time we went near him. The gut reaction was to show him he was being stupid - grab him, and show him the reality that being lifted means he get treats.

It doesn’t work.

He needs time, he needs reassurance - and he needs to learn for himself. We can encourage him - we can show him treats, and move forward on his terms. But go too far - try to touch him before he’s ready? It’s one step forward and six steps back. He’ll become even more determined to ignore us.

If people are already scared to the point of inaction, then scaring them even more doesn’t work. It paralyses them, just like our little piggy. People need support, empathy, encouragement and understanding. Not more fear or threats.

We may get impatient because we’re running out of time. But forcing the issue will, ultimately, make it slower and more difficult to reach the desired outcome.

9) Timescales need to be reframed

Let’s go back to the transport secretary Grant Shapps, who thinks that most domestic flights will be emission-free by 2040.

Which sounds like a step in the right direction - until we rephrase it.

Rewritten, the same statement reads that it’s a minimum of 19 years before domestic flights will be emission free (but it’s OK to keep flying until then).

Ouch.

Too many of the timescales we’re being offered are too far in the future.

But because they’re presented as progress, with a timeline, we don’t always pick that up.

When we reframe 2030 as ‘nine years’, or 2050 as ‘29 years’ - it puts the fragility and meaninglessness of these pledges and promises into context.

Anything that’s badged as 2050 needs to be treated with caution - or derision. The leaders who make those pledges won’t be around to see them through, and aren’t accountable for them. The leaders who are in place in 29 years can easily blame their predecessors for not doing enough to make the goals achievable.

And if we do see timelines for 19 or 29 years time? Perhaps it’s worth a gentle reminder that we’re likely to hit 1.5C in the next ten years.

10) Offer solutions

One of the most important reasons to talk about the consumption problem, instead of the individual symptoms, is that even the name offers a solution. Not only that, but it’s one that’s easy to understand - and easy to implement. Consume less.

No more waiting, powerless, for governments to save us. No more wringing our hands as we decide between the organic produce in plastic; or the naked avocado with air miles. Just a simple, achievable, workable and manageable change in attitude.

11) Treat the solutions as positives

Ask anyone about behaviour change as a solution to the environmental crisis - and the conversation will soon turn to ‘sacrifices’, and ‘cost’, and ‘losing our standard of living’.

Solutions to the environmental problems are associated with negatives: which makes change unpalatable.

But what if consuming less offers us benefits? Less time organising, tidying, cleaning and disposing of our clutter. Happier, healthier lives - less obesity and better mental health. Comfortable homes that are warm in winter and cool in summer; and cheaper to run. A slower pace, with more time for friends, family, hobbies and adventures; and more financial stability and disposable income.

Making our planet a better place doesn’t sound so hard after all.