Speaking of Climate Change: Reframing Effective Communication for Greater Impact

Abstract

Effective climate change communication is central to public engagement, self-efficacy, and support for mitigation and adaptation policies. Yet, communicators face numerous challenges, such as misinformation, climate despair, and the complexity of climate science. This study examines the views of 29 climate change communicators from Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand to evaluate the alignment between practitioner insights and research-backed strategies. Findings confirm the significance of audience segmentation, localized, and solution-focused messaging and collaborative approaches. A four-pillar framework, consisting of simplicity and local relevance, audience segmentation, storytelling, and actionable steps, emerges as a strategic model for enhancing the communication impact. This study offers a structured guide for improving climate communication effectiveness within diverse sociopolitical contexts by integrating theoretical insights with practitioner perspectives.

1. Introduction

Effective communication can build public support and foster a strong societal response to climate change [1]. Recent studies highlight the pivotal role of effective climate messaging in generating and sustaining self-efficacy, public understanding, pro-environmental behaviors and support for climate change adaptation and mitigation policies [2,3]. Despite these findings, effective communication remains challenging, as climate messages often fail to translate into sustained action [4].

Barriers, such as climate misinformation, perceived inaction, and public disengagement, necessitate re-evaluating communication strategies. While previous research has identified these barriers [5,6], there are few studies that have investigated how CCCs, particularly those that directly engage with audiences, conceptualize and navigate these challenges in specific regional contexts such as Australia and Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ).

Evaluating the nature of climate communication is an emerging area of research, and innovative approaches are needed to create dynamic communication contexts that establish the social conditions essential for climate action and policy engagement [5,7]. Yet, existing literature often highlights theory-driven models while failing to give equal weight to practitioner insights [8,9]. This study addresses this gap by integrating empirical data from CCCs working in the unique sociopolitical landscapes of Australia and NZ, areas where climate politics and public sentiment can differ from other Global North contexts, such as the United States and Europe.

This study explores how 29 leading Australian and NZ climate change communicators (CCCs) conceptualize effective communication strategies and compares their views with existing research on climate communication efficacy. Additionally, this study considers the limitations of current communication strategies, including the frequent reliance on the deficit model of communication, which can overlook localized knowledge, as well as the underutilization of culturally embedded approaches, like Talanoa [10]. By identifying areas of convergence and divergence between practitioner insights and academic findings, this paper aims to bridge gaps in research–practice alignment. Two research questions guide the study:

• What strategies do CCCs perceive as effective in communicating about climate change?
• How do CCCs’ views align with current research on climate communication efficacy?

This study aims to fill a gap that Susanne Moser [8] describes as the “lack of exchange among those doing the communicating and those researching it” and Nicholas Badullovich [9] identifies as a dearth of climate change communication scholarship focusing on CCCs’ perspectives. In response, this study proposes a four-pillar framework consisting of simplicity and local relevance, audience segmentation, storytelling, and actionable steps. Unlike previous studies that focus on individual elements, such as audience segmentation or framing, this framework integrates several best-practice components drawn from a systematic synthesis of existing literature and the perspectives and experiences of CCCs in two under-explored regional contexts. Each pillar plays a crucial role in addressing specific challenges in climate communication because climate change communication extends beyond disseminating scientific knowledge. Effective climate communication requires approaches, such as a nuanced audience understanding, clear messaging, and culturally relevant framing [11].

Effective Climate Change Communication Approaches

Raising awareness is a key aim of effective climate communication, and generating support for shifts in climate change adaption and mitigation policies and encouraging individuals and communities to take relevant social and political climate action are considered increasingly critical [7,12]. Yet, despite increasing urgency, progress in addressing the climate change crisis remains sluggish, hindered by political polarization, misinformation and disinformation, insufficient cooperation among consumers, governments, and corporations, and a public preference for short-term policy responses over long-term solutions [13]. The challenge for CCCs is effectively engaging diverse audiences who have a wide range of pre-existing views and risk perceptions [14,15].

The genesis of social and political transformation lies in purposeful conversations and interactions [16]. Yet, understanding the nexus between communicated information and its interpretation by individuals and communities is complex [17]. A two-way interactive communication model appears to be optimally effective for disseminating scientific information and influencing audience attitudes and behaviors, favoring a more conversational approach [6,17]. In particular, this approach recognizes that climate change communication encompasses ideological, cultural, and symbolic phenomena, and interpretation varies depending on the audience, place, and public engagement [18].

Communication approaches acknowledging social and cultural influences appear more likely to reduce knowledge gaps, promote trust and acceptance, and enhance resiliency and community preparedness [19,20]. Specifically, bidirectional communication encourages dialogue by integrating audience perspectives, fostering collaboration, and promoting shared action [21,22]. This is akin to the Talanoa (conversations) approach, specific to the Pacific region, providing a platform for individuals to share their histories, concerns, current circumstances, and hopes [10].

Facilitating conversational approaches requires CCCs to ponder the diverse interpretations that various groups ascribe to processes of change within the natural and social worlds while simultaneously grappling with the intricacies of addressing the enablers and barriers to attitudinal and behavioral shifts [5,23]. Aligning climate messages with sustained audience behavioral change appears to be elusive, making it crucial for designing climate communication campaigns [24]. Attitudinal shifts may be temporary and insufficient to induce the behavioral change needed; thus, a multifaceted approach is necessary [7,25].

First, personalizing climate information for particular audiences is more likely to elicit pro-environmental behaviors [26]. Second, CCCs should acknowledge the diversity of audience worldviews, places, and cultures [22,27]. Third, climate communication should invite all audience members to participate in discussions and solutions, instilling a sense of coping efficacy and collective capacity [28,29]. Embracing these three elements may shift conversations towards interactive climate communication strategies that delve into the motivations behind people’s engagement (or lack thereof), viewing climate communication as a practice that reinforces shared meanings and consequently raises people’s expectations about the efficacy of their actions [30,31].

A key concern in climate communication research is the gap between best-practice recommendations and real-world implementation [8,9]. Studies highlight audience segmentation, hopeful messaging, and actionable recommendations as critical for influencing public engagement [32,33]. This study examines whether Australian and NZ CCCs’ strategies reflect these insights or diverge based on professional experiences.

2. Materials and Methods

This study draws on interviews with 29 CCCs and employs Hall’s [34] encoding and decoding communication model, focusing on message creation, the method of encoding and delivery, target audience characteristics, and the CCCs’ anticipation of audience response. Ethical approval was obtained before recruiting from the UniSC Human Research Ethics Committee (S221754).

A qualitative thematic analysis method [35] was used to examine the patterns and complexities of the interview transcripts. This involved systematically reviewing and categorizing the responses from the interviews to identify recurring themes and patterns.

Potential study participants were professionals who communicate about climate change in various fields, such as government, corporate sectors, academics, scientists (including Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) members), and environmental advocacy. Their roles ranged from offering scientific expertise and policy guidance to mobilizing grassroots activism and shaping public opinion. Additionally, recognizing the diverse ways climate messages are delivered, this study intentionally sought a broad representation of CCCs to reflect the various voices shaping climate narratives.

Recruitment efforts commenced with the dissemination of recruitment emails and Research Participation Information Sheets (RPISs) to CCCs. A total of 79 recruitment emails were sent. The responses were as follows: four CCCs requested to be contacted at a later date, 10 expressed initial interest but did not confirm a specific date and time for participation, 12 indicated that they were unable to participate in the research, and 24 did not respond at all. Twenty-nine CCCs responded and were willing to participate anonymously (

Table 1. The CCCs interviewed for this study.

Communicator’s Professional Field	Number Interviewed	Number of Australian Participants	Number of NZ Participants
Academic/Scientist/IPCC	16	13	3
Climate Advocates	3	3
Corporate	6	6
Governance	2	2
Politician	2	1	1
Total	29	25	4

). This was 37% of those initially invited, yet exceeded the adequate participation threshold suggested by Guetterman [36]. Proportional to the two countries’ populations, the interviewees comprised 16% New Zealanders and 84% Australians.

The semi-structured interviews with the CCCs were mostly conducted remotely due to COVID-19. The Zoom platform recorded and transcribed interviews, while NVivo 12 software aided in thematic data coding. The interview analysis and theme development for this part of the study centered on two questions:

• What do CCCs identify as the most effective ways to communicate climate change?
• Which communication approaches and strategies are considered by CCCs to be the most effective for increasing people’s potential and capacity to act?

3. Results and Discussion

Building on recent work that focused on the influence of perceived communicator credibility on message uptake [37] and content that engages audiences and promotes climate action and policy support [3,38], this section presents results and discusses overarching themes in relation to the views and experiences of CCCs as to what constitutes effective climate change communication.

The interviews with CCCs revealed two overarching themes: effective strategies in climate change communication (Section 3.1) and avenues for improving climate messaging to foster greater audience engagement and receptivity (Section 3.2). Additionally, this study presents a visual representation of the research results by proposing a four-pillar approach to enhance the effectiveness of climate messaging (Section 3.3).

3.1. Characteristics of Effective Climate Communication

Interviewees expressed their views on the most efficacious methods to enhance audience comprehension and engagement and boost audience readiness to contemplate or embrace pro-environmental behaviors. The four sub-themes discussed in Section 3.1.1, Section 3.1.2, Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.1.4, respectively, included simple and solution-focused messaging, relatable and tailored messaging, storytelling strategies, and hope and positive messaging. The frequency with which the interviewees referenced these sub-themes is shown visually in Figure 1.

3.1.1. Simple and Solution-Focused Messaging

A majority (69%) of interviewees emphasized the key role of simple (not unnecessarily complex) and solution-focused messaging in effectively communicating about climate change and instigating behavioral change. Representative of most responses, one interviewee stated “It’s my job to understand the research and be able to present it to them [the audience] in such a way that it makes sense to them about what they can do”.

Twelve interviewees (41%) specifically identified the need to deliver simple, clear messages that resonate with diverse audiences. One interviewee said “If you make it too complicated, you just lose people, and they think it’s too hard”, while another stressed, “It has to be really clear. It has to be simple; you don’t need to give people a lot of data and a lot of graphs”.

Reinforcing the effectiveness of concise messaging, eighteen interviewees (62%) identified the importance of providing actionable steps, particularly what the audience can do and showcasing well-known individuals already engaging in environmentally friendly activities. One interviewee recommended “Simplify not in why it’s a problem, not in how big of a problem it is, but simplify in terms of actions”. Another interviewee asserted, “The most effective things [ways of communicating about climate change] are very simple frameworks with clear steps”.

In relation to providing clear and appropriate steps for climate action to their audiences, five interviewees (17%) commented that they have experienced a shift from debate to motivation and as a result are communicating more to individuals who accept the scientific consensus about climate change. One interviewee stated “Our biggest problem isn’t actually deniers; our biggest problem is people that care and do not know what to do”, while another agreed, “I moved very much from, I have to convince you that climate change is real to I have to convince you that you as a person can act to help”.

This emphasis on actionable steps emerged as the most frequently coded theme in characterizing effective climate change communication. This is a significant finding, aligning with broader science communication research that argues for the success of simple, solution-focused messaging in alleviating climate-related distress [24,39]. Responses from interviewees and a review of the related literature indicate that crafting climate change solution-focused messages that offer clear and succinct action steps and adapt to audiences’ changing needs can support sustained pro-environmental behavior change.

3.1.2. Audience Segmentation and Regional Relevance

Eighteen interviewees (62%) in this part of the study emphasized the significance of relatable and tailored messaging. In this second most referenced theme in relation to effective climate change communication, interviewees repeatedly highlighted four specific areas: audience relevance, segmentation, message localization, and active audiences.

Audience Relevance

Acknowledging that CCCs need to recognize how an audience comprehends the reality of climate change improves audience receptivity, sixteen interviewees (55%) emphasized the importance of considering the audience’s views, priorities, level of knowledge, and personal connections to the message [5,40]. One interviewee pointed out the following:

If you can create a message that talks about the environment, talks about the impacts of that on the social situation, and links that into other issues they [the audience] may be concerned about, then I think there is a big market there that probably hasn’t been tapped as much in Australia or NZ.

CCCs noted that, when communicating climate science, it is preferable to design the message to align with audience preferences for facts and figures, education, hope, motivation, and ideas for action.

Audience Segmentation

In the context of audience-centric messaging, seven interviewees (24%) emphasized the importance of tailoring climate change messages to specific attitudes and audience segments. The debate about which are the optimal audience segments for CCCs to target is preceded by a broader discourse in climate change communication literature and governmental and intergovernmental organizations [41,42,43,44]. CCCs suggested that challenges arise from the complexity and uncertainty inherent in climate science communication, suggesting the continuing need to reform conventional top-down approaches that prioritize researcher understandings over audience understandings [32,45]. Many CCCs suggested a bottom-up approach that tailors strategies for each audience segment and emphasizes moral or economic co-benefits for sustained behavior change [46].

In the Australian context, distinct audience segments have been identified, including, in Foong and Huntley’s [47] schema, as being usefully conceptualized as alarmed, alert, concerned, cautious, disengaged, doubtful, and dismissive. Audience segmentation was highlighted by an interviewee who urged CCCs to “really hone into what messages resonate with the climate-concerned and climate-cautious audiences”. Concerned and cautious audiences largely agree with the science of climate change but view it as a future deferrable problem. This interviewee believed effective communication strategies would arise from addressing the climate-cautious segment’s beliefs and building capacity and self-efficacy through trusted CCCs to prompt immediate action.

While this interviewee highlighted the value of refining messages for the climate-concerned and climate-cautious audiences, the study also revealed strategies for engaging more skeptical or disengaged segments. As discussed in Section 3.2.2, interviewees emphasized the importance of building trust and rapport with disengaged and doubtful individuals through conversational approaches. One-on-one discussions were seen as crucial for uncovering personal values, addressing confusion or misinformation, and creating a non-confrontational space where skepticism could be acknowledged and gently challenged.

Message Localization

Local communities sometimes view climate change news as a part of an elite agenda linked to the power or authority of pundits or a government [17,48]. Many interviewees in this study agreed on the critical role of a localized audience-centric approach for increasing engagement and action. The consensus was that people are more invested in issues that impact them and the places they live, stressing the importance of the emphasis on local focus over global perspectives [49,50]. Climate message localization connects the climate crisis to place and culture.

Active Audiences

Four CCCs interviewed (14%) directly addressed the idea of active audiences, but all interviewees were of course cognizant that audiences do their own work interpreting messaging. Audiences are active, not passive, consumers of information and factors, such as culture, age, class, location, and gender, influence knowledge creation, bias, and judgments when decoding climate messages [51,52]. These interviewees identified the importance of understanding, as deeply as they could, the messages that audiences choose to engage with, the reasons behind their choices, and the barriers and motivators in communicating climate change. One interviewee stressed the need to overcome cognitive barriers, such as preconceived notions about climate change and information overload, for individuals to grasp the issue’s urgency. Interviewees suggested that recognizing audiences as active participants in the communication process allows CCCs to target specific audience segments, create appealing messages, and clearly outline the benefits of engaging with the content.

3.1.3. Storytelling as a Persuasive Tool

Using a storytelling approach when communicating about climate change is well-founded as it can overcome political, cultural, and social barriers and increase audience engagement [25,53,54], something noted by 14 interviewees (48%). Successful storytelling approaches are evident in the cultural traditions of numerous traditional/Indigenous communities, and their stories prioritize the community over the individual, presenting possibilities, challenging societal norms, and catalyzing social change [17,55]. One interviewee stated this is because “we [people] are storytellers, and we like to hear stories”. Another interviewee commented that an effective climate change storytelling approach involves “bringing a [climate change] concept into a story that resonates with people and actually gets them to engage with the topic”.

In the view of seven interviewees (24%), stories highlighting both people participating in climate change action and the communicator’s personal stories enhance audience understanding and support. One interviewee explained that effective climate change communication is “really simple messaging that plays on and into stories of the front lines and those doing it [climate change action]”. Another interviewee suggested “Tell things as a story rather than just a headline; that is where I find it [the process] to be much more effective”. Two interviewees highlighted the effectiveness of sharing “stories of what’s happening in people’s real world and everyday life” because “what works [is] definitely positive stories in locations that people know”.

While storytelling holds significant potential to increase engagement, some interviewees recognized that CCCs must be aware of its limitations. In politically polarized environments, certain narratives may risk reinforcing pre-existing beliefs or deepening divisions if stories are seen as biased or exclusionary [56]. Additionally, repetitive emotionally charged storytelling could lead to message fatigue, especially if audiences are consistently exposed to distressing or highly emotive content [57]. Thus, storytelling techniques should be carefully employed to inspire engagement without resulting in disengagement or reinforcement of biases.

3.1.4. Hope and Positive Framing

Eleven interviewees (38%) in this study highlighted the effectiveness of employing hopeful communication strategies. One interviewee articulated the importance of hope, noting that individuals “need to have some level of hope actually to get up in the morning and do something”. These interviewees say hope and positive messaging are potent antidotes to audience disengagement and a lack of climate action. For example, one interviewee remarked that those imbued with hope are more inclined to take action, as opposed to individuals grappling with anxiety who may be less proactive. Another interviewee concurred, emphasizing the universal appeal of positive messages and noting that framing communications this way is crucial because anything lacking a positive orientation can quickly be overwhelming.

An interviewee argued against the use of pessimistic messaging, noting that while it may prompt some individuals to act, others may dismiss it as alarmist and consequently view scientists as irrational. Another interviewee suggested that there is a prevailing reliance of CCCs on negative reinforcement (‘sticks’) without a proportionate emphasis on positive reinforcement (‘carrots’). This perspective highlights the potential for infusing more hopeful strategic communication into climate change discourse that nurtures a sense of self-efficacy and positive change [39,58].

Noted by many CCCs, positive and hopeful messaging, particularly information about impacts, solutions, and others doing something, can increase audience engagement and involvement in climate change initiatives while concurrently mitigating feelings of climate despair and overwhelm [1,59]. The majority of responses from CCCs who were interviewed for this study indicated that alarmist and pessimistic messaging about climate change reduces audience receptivity rather than increases conversations and efficacy. Yet, rather than oversimplifying the effectiveness of emotional framing, CCCs could evaluate their communication goals, intended emotional responses, and their audience’s cultural, political, and ideological perspectives [14,60].

3.2. Opportunities for Improving Climate Communication

In relation to what constitutes effective climate change communication, perspectives on improving climate change messaging, fostering audience receptivity, and sustainable behavioral change were discussed by 26 interviewees (90%). The two main sub-themes explained below in Section 3.2.1 and Section 3.2.2 include the importance of conversations and cooperative and collaborative communication strategies. The frequency with which the interviewees referenced these sub-themes is visually represented in Figure 2.

3.2.1. Enhancing Collaboration

The collaboration between researchers and professional communicators in the field of climate science involves a cooperative partnership that focuses on effectively translating complex scientific findings into accessible and compelling content for a wider audience. The importance of collaboration was emphasized by 17 interviewees (59%), who discussed various avenues for cooperative endeavors, co-creation, and the joint delivery of information and messages. These interviewees contended that fostering collaboration between scientists and CCCs is essential.

Researcher–practitioner partnerships and the effective co-creation of climate messaging are important [1]. One interviewee underscored the importance of involving diverse individuals in working groups contributing to reports, such as those of the IPCC, “because they bring different views about what is important to the table, as well as different people are able to communicate with different audiences”. Another interviewee stated, “I will actually work and co-create messaging with practitioners [CCCs]. And that’s where the opportunity lies, and that is where the gap is”.

Cooperation and co-creation in messaging is a growing endeavor among stakeholders because higher audience engagement is achieved when inclusive and relatable language and usable climate information are designed and delivered [61,62]. Nevertheless, one interviewee observed the following:

Good communication processes engage stakeholders, assess their needs, manage their expectations, and potentially lead to co-design, co-development, and co-delivery of communication products. This is methodological [because] when you compare methodology with practice, there is a disconnect. So, all that theory is fantastic, but it is not actually translating into reality.

This suggests that increased consideration, time, and resources should be dedicated to enhancing collaboration among researchers, scientists, and CCCs, as this would foster constructive conversations within communities and accelerate positive outcomes.

3.2.2. Conversational Approaches

Climate change conversational approaches refer to strategies designed to facilitate, identify, and encourage environments where individuals can articulate their attitudes, beliefs, emotional reactions, ethical viewpoints, and previous experiences concerning climate change issues. These conversations may occur in one-on-one interactions or within formal and informal group contexts. Studies suggest that climate change discussions play an important role in sustainable climate action, yet one study found that only 35% of Americans engage in such conversations despite their potential to mobilize widespread action [45,63].

Fourteen interviewees (48%) asserted that conversations allow for deeper connection and unlock novel possibilities for action. One interviewee stressed the potential significance of such moments and the need to ensure their malleability to allow individuals to freely articulate their sentiments about climate without feeling compelled to alter their views or undergo an immediate shift in understanding. Another interviewee expanded on the importance of one-on-one discussions for establishing common ground, building rapport, and cultivating a consensus on climate change.

One interviewee highlighted the transformative power of a conversation, recounting an encounter with a skeptical individual on a plane:

Her thing was: “I am confused. There is all this information out there. I do not know what to make of it. I do not think it matters to my lifestyle”, and she actually gave me a challenge. She said, “Okay, you have got till we get to Sydney [Australia] to convince me”.

The interviewee successfully navigated the conversation by presenting evidence for climate change, proposing actionable solutions, and contextualizing the societal impact, ultimately prompting a change in the woman’s perception by the journey’s end.

While conversation-based approaches for disseminating climate change information have recently gained scholarly attention, this research contributes to the evolving literature on generating trust and actionable outcomes through conversational strategies [7,42]. Notably, one interviewee’s approach of engaging in “conversations with people and learn[ing] about where they are at” underscores the value of adapting conversational approaches to diverse audiences’ unique perspectives and contexts.

By recognizing these audience-specific complexities and drawing from bottom-up trust-building approaches, CCCs can foster openness, reduce defensiveness, and promote meaningful engagement with skeptical or disengaged groups. These insights complement the broader audience segmentation strategies discussed in Section 3.1.2, demonstrating that nuanced conversational techniques can play an important role in connecting with harder-to-reach audiences and facilitating appropriate climate action.

3.3. The Four-Pillar Framework for Effective Climate Communication

Formulating climate communication strategies and designs requires the consideration of multiple dimensions, including the messenger’s identity, audience characteristics, message content and call to action, and identification of the potential beneficiaries of the proposed actions. This study extends the present discourse on climate change communication by proposing a four-pillar approach to enhance the effectiveness of climate messaging. The framework was developed through a combination of a thematic analysis of interview transcripts and the systematic synthesis of existing literature, ensuring that both empirical data and established research informed its formulation. Together, these elements present a visual representation of the research results and reflect the multifaceted nature of effective climate change communication.

Adopting four-pillar frameworks is a common scholarly, business, and education practice, offering schematic and theoretical representations to illustrate concepts across various domains. Examples include the four pillars of sustainable urban transportation [64], the four pillars of food security and sustainability [65], and the four pillars of corporate responsibility [66].

Illustrated in Figure 3, the four-pillar framework for effectively communicating about climate change developed from this study stands on the foundation of collaboration and conversations, featuring a canopy of credibility and trust. These elements have proven to be effective in other global risk communication campaigns. For instance, an analysis of government communication strategies during COVID-19 found that an effective communication campaign relies on establishing and preserving public trust and necessitates the inclusion of a diverse range of professionals and community members in engagement efforts [67].

The foundation and canopy are crucial components of this framework because a multifaceted approach reflects the understanding that effective climate change communication requires diverse expertise and the ability to tailor messages and conversations that resonate with various audiences’ unique perspectives and concerns. The four pillars are discussed below in Section 3.3.1, Section 3.3.2, Section 3.3.3 and Section 3.3.4, respectively.

3.3.1. Simple and Local

The first pillar underscores creating simple, succinct, and locally relevant climate change messages. Understanding a local audience’s characteristics, culture, and dominant ideologies is fundamental to communicating effectively in clear, simple, audience-focused language [68]. This study supports Elrick-Barr and Smith’s [24] and Nettlefold and Pecl’s [69] claims, which indicate a growing appetite among the Australian public for place-based information, emphasizing that local framing of climate change unquestionably enhances public engagement. For instance, rather than focusing solely on global emission-reduction targets, also engage in discussions about sustainability and resilience tailored to a local community [70]. Indeed, employing message localization strategies increases climate communication effectiveness, given its potential to provide valuable insights into local issues and solutions and foster social acceptance [19,50]. These strategies are important because messages designed to resonate with specific cohorts are more likely to influence understanding and recall and stimulate discussion [21,71].

3.3.2. Segment Audience

The next pillar emphasizes audience segmentation, which involves grouping audiences according to the psychographic traits (such as beliefs, opinions, concerns, and attitudes) they have in common [7]. Numerous studies of effective environmental communication and behavior change discuss the importance of audience segmentation [21,43,47,72,73,74]. The findings of an earthquake preparedness study highlight a need for a shift away from uniform national education campaigns and for emergency managers to conduct audience segmentation surveys before program development, communication, and implementation to effectively target distinct audience segments [75]. Audience segmentation benefits CCCs by guiding message creation, identifying the most credible communicators for specific audience segments, and selecting communication channels to gain maximum reach and engagement.

3.3.3. Storytelling

The third pillar supports the use of storytelling strategies to convey experiences and connect with the social contexts of individuals and communities [11,76]. A North American study demonstrated the effectiveness of story-based text messages in enhancing mental wellness, finding that participants most appreciated a portrayal of realistic struggles alongside positivity and were more likely to seek additional online resources [77]. The choice of narratives concerning climate change holds significance, as these stories have the potential to facilitate or impede the adoption of appropriate sustainable behavior by audiences [53,54]. This is attributed to the role of storytelling in shaping meaning and its impact on audience perceptions and actions regarding climate change.

This study and much literature recognize that sharing relevant and realistic stories about how individuals and groups are being (or have been) affected by climate change, such as health implications and extreme weather events, and how their pro-environmentalist activities are helping to remedy the situation is something that enhances individual and collective engagement, information seeking, and action [28,29,45,78]. Additionally, this study emphasizes that, in many contexts, storytelling makes science communication more appealing to an audience and can result in significantly increased engagement and climate action.

3.3.4. Steps to Action

The final pillar highlights the potential of solutions-focused messaging to elevate message impacts, transform behaviors, and empower communities [79,80]. Despite its effectiveness, interviewees suggested that steps to climate action and solution-focused messaging remain underutilized by some CCCs. Increasing public understanding and action requires the communicator to deliver clear expectations and solutions to climate problems to an audience [11]. In another environmental communication context, an analysis of message-framing strategies for effective marine conservation communication found that solution frames affirming individual and collective efficacy, supported by immediate action steps, resulted in a marine litter campaign success [81]. This study supports Howarth et al.’s [11] claim that providing steps to action in all climate messaging is key, particularly because solution-focused and hope-focused messages promote capacity and self-efficacy and counter feelings of anxiety, apathy, or denial.

Departing from simplistic, linear communication models to effectively engage diverse audiences on climate change, this research aligns with recent studies emphasizing the importance of fostering dynamic conversations anchored in a nuanced understanding of audience contextual factors [9,12,18]. Significantly, trustworthy CCCs addressing local concerns contribute to audience receptivity and social connections, similarity, and relatability emerge as key factors in promoting message uptake. The findings of this study have important implications for CCCs and communication practices.

4. Conclusions and Implications

Effective climate change messages require a combination of a wide range of elements and, as this study demonstrates, the critical importance of an inclusive approach that fosters audience deeper engagement with climate change science and social issues. This study calls for more hopeful, solution-focused, and action-oriented messages balanced with those depicting the urgency and impact of climate change. This highlights the necessity for audience-centric and succinct messaging.

Aligning with recent research, CCCs articulated the importance of sharing stories about people participating in climate action and engaging in environmental work. Such narratives increase engagement, stimulate conversations, and promote climate action. The research further suggests the need for more interactive communication practices to encourage public discussions, particularly within communities, peer groups, and families. One-on-one discussions were highlighted as crucial for establishing common ground, building rapport, and cultivating a consensus on climate change. Additionally, localized messages tailored to specific audiences were found to optimize engagement and receptivity, with the most effective interactions occurring in person and with trusted individuals.

The findings suggest a complex interplay among the communicator, the audience, and the reception of key messages. Through interviews with Australian and NZ CCCs it captures insights from message creators, addressing gaps in climate communication research. This research emphasizes the importance of including the perspectives of professionals in the field, highlighting how inclusive and nuanced communication strategies can enhance audience engagement and promote climate action.

4.1. Practical Implications

This research sought to elucidate effective climate change communication strategies, emphasizing localized, participatory, audience-centric, and diverse approaches. These insights are critical for developing communication strategies that inform and inspire action towards a sustainable future. The study culminated in formulating a four-pillar framework for effective climate change communication, designed primarily for CCCs and science communicators. This framework reflects the understanding that effective communication requires diverse expertise and the ability to tailor messages to resonate with various audiences’ unique perspectives and concerns.

By incorporating social, cultural, and political perspectives and emphasizing the importance of segmenting audiences and tailoring messages to resonate with specific cohorts, the study offers a more nuanced approach to climate communication. It also highlights the active role of audiences in creating meaning from targeted climate messaging, considering factors, such as understanding, interpretation, agreement, and recall. Thus, this climate change communication framework has the potential to support CCCs in creating (encoding) sustainable messaging that helps people meaningfully navigate (decoding) the challenges and opportunities of climatic changes.

4.2. Limitations of the Study

While this study contributes to bridging the gap between expert knowledge and a popular understanding of climate change science and addresses the limited exchange between CCCs and researchers, several limitations are acknowledged to contextualize the findings and guide future research.

Firstly, the effectiveness of the four-pillar framework has not yet been empirically tested. Although preliminary indications suggest that campaign success is optimized when the framework is applied comprehensively, ensuring appropriate attention to each element, the impact may vary depending on the context in which it is implemented.

This study’s demographic composition presents some constraints. Most participants were from Australia, which constrained the ability to conduct a robust comparison across different countries and genders. This demographic skew may influence the findings and their applicability to broader populations. Further, most CCCs were academics and researchers, which may not fully represent the diversity of professionals working in climate change communication. These limitations indicate areas for future research.

4.3. Future Research

The limitations acknowledged above, along with this study’s findings, provide a platform for future research. Opportunities for future research are suggested to build upon the insights gained.

Firstly, an empirical and applied evaluation of the four-pillar framework across various sectors is recommended. This would provide valuable insights into refining strategies for more impactful climate communication. Also, recruiting a more diverse participant pool could enable robust comparisons and a deeper understanding across different audience segments. These approaches would help to address the demographic limitations noted in this study

Secondly, future research should consider longitudinal studies to track changes in audience perceptions and behaviors over time. This would provide a dynamic view of how climate change communication strategies can be adapted to evolving public awareness and attitudes.

This study has presented some novel conclusions and contributions to the scholarship of climate change communication and provides valuable insight to crisis communicators, political communicators, and science communicators, particularly those focused on climate change, offering CCCs strategies to reach and resonate with their audiences effectively. Consequently, this research has established a robust empirical platform for further research within the relevant disciplines.