Climate change communication – time for the stage?

A very useful insight given by Ricardo Ramirez on behavior change for climate change and his conceptualization of who constitute audience groups and the drivers which motivate people to take decisions against or for mitigation of climate change is very interesting.
I would like to build on it further by saying any communication which wants behavior change on climate change should focus always on positive changes an individual get and its impact on climate change. Any new behavior change on any aspect relating to human life can be only possible through integrated approach. Hence any behavior change towards climate change is interrelated to health, economy and social life of the society.
For instance, In India if I want people to use cycle often then the communication should focus on improvement in health of a person if he/she uses cycle often. Also the group which wants to use cycle should also influence policy makers to make separate way for bicycle in the main roads so that it is convenient for people to adopt this change in behavior and do not give excuses that we don’t have roads suitable for riding bicycle.
The focus of the communication is climate change but if out of 10 people 5 start cycling to the office, school and market the effect will be that it will reduce use of cars and bikes. Hence I feel climate change mitigation is an interrelated aspect with life style and the communication for behavior change need not be all the time focused on climate change.

I would suggest that climate change communication needs to use the same strategies as other successful campaigns. Remember that people in the US did not stop smoking in great numbers until it became low-life. Remember how Nike drove women to buy sports shoes? They made lifestyle campaigns that showed sports as an elite thing. The various actions to contribute to a reduction in green house gases and other life style choices that contribute to climate change - these actions need to be addressed. What are the things we do in every day life that contribute to climate change? What are alternatives to these? How can we make these alternatives look 'sexy' and create a feeling of 'the new culture to aspire to'? This is the ONLY thing that works. IMHO.

As communicator, we were initially at loss on how to communicate messages on climate change to our Ugandan audience. We immediately realised that potential educaters did not have ample information about climate change themselves. We used an existing film to make policymakers and other potential educaters aware of the different aspects of climate change - causes and impact of adverse use of environment, and possible mitigation ways.

Climate change seemed an aspect that people could not relate with easily. It seems too far from an individual. We slowly learned aspects of climate change that individuals co
uld relate with more easily. Thus, villagers know that long ago they never used to look for firewood from far away places. Trees have disappeared and so they have to look for ffirewood further and further away from their homes. Individual households have ability to grow their own wood lot. In that way they will get fuel for use easily, they will have shelter during hot days and there will be cooler breezez, the trees will act as windbreaks.
Villagers have seen the usefulness of trees and they are growing them. They are seeing the impact of their actions in their lifetimes.

Nuestra visión

El aire de Cancún, viene limpio?

La Asociación Proteger, de Argentina, Miembro Observador Permanente de la Convención de Cambio Climático, insta a los estados Miembros replantear su sistemática negación a producir un quiebre cultural de los medios de: producción, consumo, comercialización y financiero, que son verdaderamente insustentable.

El actual paradigma, esta completamente sumergido en una crisis socioeconómica que impacta fuertemente, en los medios mencionados más arriba, acrecentando la exclusión social, basta con mirar alrededor o poner noticieros donde son miles y miles de personas que salen a las calles, tanto de países desarrollados , como los que no lo son, esto demuestra cabalmente que el paradigma dominante, esta totalmente agotado.

Pero la alerta mayor y altamente preocupante se centra en los recursos más importantes y vitales para el futuro de la humanidad:, el aire, el agua ,la energía, el suelo y la diversidad biológica.

Es tan perverso el actual sistema, que concientes de todos los efectos negativos que produce el Cambio Climático y conociendo además las soluciones, incluyendo los compromisos asumidos por los estados a través de; Convenios y Tratados Internacionales, oficinas por aquí, oficinas acullá, es decir, la dilatación permanente de los problemas que afecta a todo nuestro planeta, es constante y sistemático

Existen en el mundo, toda la información necesaria, como lo es; el conocimiento científico, el conocimiento tradicional, el conocimiento de las personas que son afectadas por los problemas, pero siguen primando los intereses espurios, de las 500 multinacionales que manejan más del 50% cuyos únicos responsables directos son los dirigentes políticos.

Lo indicado anteriormente, lo sabemos todos, como también sabemos, que lo único que hace falta es la famosa, quizás triste , quizás olvidada, quizás presionada por un grupo de interés, que los “Jefes de gobiernos” quizás también por error u omisión estos “señores” se olvidan, o quizás también son miopes o quizás también hasta sordos, que permiten que 500 multinacionales manejen más de 50 % del PBI mundial. Pero nosotros los ciudadanos y el mundo entero sabemos, lo que define la cosa es la “Voluntad Política”, por un lado y de nos ser así, seremos los ciudadanos con todos nuestros derechos capaces de revertir esta inmoralidad o perversidad del actual sistema.

Por ahí, el aire de Cancún, les hace bien y se despiertan de su letargo o de su amnesia y se atreven a darle el verdadero sentido y compromiso a las dos palabras que estamos esperando, Voluntad Política. Todo los demás que firmen, sin esta Voluntad implícita, se transformara una vez más en simples papeles mojados.

Se agradece su difusión.
Juan Ortiz Burgos
Presidente
Mail: a_proteger@yahoo.com.ar

Felicidades al autor, es fundamental la preocupación por el tema. Habla de escenarios sin embargo la comunicación debería figurar en los escenarios, aunque va a ser parte de la estrategia y de las acciones.
No pretendamos sobre diagnosticar, la comunicación puede actuar desde el presente si queremos tener futuro. La acción comunicativa debería estar en la resiliencia característica de los sistemas socio ecológicos. La comunicación puede ayudar a incrementar la capacidad de aprendizaje social y de adaptación. Construir la resiliencia requiere de visiones integradoras (ecológicas, sociales y económicas) La gente tiene que entender con claridad el problema, por ejemplo, si los focos ahorradores en realidad pueden mitigar las emisiones o en realidad son los transportes los provocadores de la mayor parte del problema. El comunicador está obligado a indagar, a tener la visión de los especialistas, los científicos nos deben decir a qué se deben los fenómenos perturbadores y cómo podemos enfrentarlos: resiliencia es una clave estratégica.
Dra. Guillermina Baena Paz

La comunicación para el cambio climático es uno de los temas más importantes que en los momentos actuales debemos abordar. Hay que tener claro que la comunicación, aunque debe formar parte de los escenarios está inserta en las estrategias y en las acciones. El comunicador puede empujar el futuro, porque de no actuar ahora, no lo tendremos o cuando mucho será catastrófico como parece presentarse ahora. Una de las claves estratégicas para el cambio climático es la resiliencia característica de los sistemas socio-ecológicos. La comunicación tiene un terreno enorme en la resiliencia con información clara, suficiente y fidedigna puede ayudar a construir e incrementar la capacidad de aprendizaje social y la adaptativa. Hay que formar comunicadores que puedan manejarla porque requiere de una visión holística que integre perspectivas ecológicas, sociales y económicas.
De igual manera una comunicación especializada como esta requiere de tener contacto específico y participativo con los miembros de la comunidad a la que se dirige. Encontrar a los nuevos actores para el debate estratégico de un asunto crucial que no se arregla con focos ahorradores cuando los transportes son los mayores emisores de contaminantes.
Felicitaciones al autor por su artículo. Es importante provocar el debate.

Ricardo raises very important and pertinent points on how to get the message across to people on climate change issues. I think we have to move beyond all the models we know off. All current communication systems focus on rewards, the "do this and you get something" concept (never mind if the something we get is useless). In the climate change case we have to move to a much deeper level which reaches the inner conscious level in a person. We have to go back many centuries to see how this was done, in India this was done by appealing to the religious/spiritual consciousness of an individual, a consciousness that makes one do and act because it is the right/just thing and not expect anything out of it. We have far moved away form this type of a system both in space, time and collective consciousness but it does not mean it is not possible. An example is current urban planners in Tokyo looking at the highly successful urban agriculture model when Tokyo was called Edo. The answers to effective climate change communication may possibly lie in some our long forgotten and discarded traditional knowledge systems in the many cultures around the world.

Mientras los grandes medios de comunicación, tengan intereses en empresas que destruyen el medio ambiente, es impensado que se puedan expresar sobre la necesidad de modificar una cultura que nos lleva a la extinción. Nadie pregunta cómo financian su funcionamiento los grandes grupo de comunicación. Muchas veces el poseer, diarios, revistas, radios, canales de TV,etc. sirve como pantalla para otro tipo de negocio. Mientras, nosotros, los comunes somos rehenes de la miserable des-comunicación.

Sergio Peralta
Los Barriales

I read the opinions expressed by Ricardo Ramirez with keen interest. I have nothing more than admiration to him for generating this new perspective, when the world is berserk with this irreversible phenomenon of climate change. However, it is also a time for serious introspection and optimism founded on the positive role that development communication can play.
To my mind, climate change communication is ill targeted. Perhaps the strategy itself could have been misplaced. It is my personal viewpoint that economically powerful nations and politically powerful people should not forget the interdependent nature of human existence. Just like the sun, moon, oceans, rivers, trees, plants, soil, rock, animals, humans etc. have a distinctive and mutually interdependent relationship of existence; nations whether developed or developing, economically rich or poor, big or small should appreciate that ideological and political constraints should not be allowed to dictate conditions for this naturally beautiful relationship. The possible solution for behaviour change in climate communication is hence not so much at the personal or individual level but lies at the structural or ideological level. We just have to peek into the outcomes of the numerous climate change consultations held in the recent times.
There is no doubt that reducing the carbon foot print is a great initiative at the personal or individual level but how much can we keep harping that “person-individual-blame” is inherently biased with the biases of pro-source, pro-persuasion and one-way message flow. As such the primary target of climate change communication should be the political and social leaders.? “Advocacy” as a process of gathering, organizing and formulating information into arguments targeted to the political and social leaders to gain their active involvement should be the leading strategy. Parallel actions must also begin earnestly to study international laws governing the state of the world environment, revise and even re-enact new laws in keeping with the current state of climate change. Once the political, structural, ideological and social constraint are aligned along the climate change problem, other communication strategies as “social mobilization”, “programme communication” and “community/individual participation” can be formulated in a systematic and logical order. We must accept though that communication planning is as challenging and sensitive as well.
I personally feel that one of the predominant “drivers”(borrowing Ricardo’s term) that interplay with climate change and climate change communication is poverty. Its impact can be seen at various levels of the society as it manifests in multi-dimensional forms. A family or an individual can be considered poverty stricken due to inadequate income, unmet basic needs, or both. Moreover, it is also an accepted belief now that poverty can be attributed to the state of unhappiness among its people as perpetuated by social exclusion, discrimination and indignity. But how does this effect climate change? Poverty can drive nations, communities and people to become economically well off, driven by the desire to increase its GDP, purchasing power and state of happiness. This leads to an unbridled commercialization of economic activities, production, consumption etc.; reversing ideal behaviour for environment conservation and ultimately contributing to climate change. Poverty reduction strategies should therefore consider linking to efforts for reducing climate change as well.
Another factor with far-reaching implications on climate change communication at the country level is the kind of development communication policy in place. As a result of the advent of ICT and other newer communication means, development communication interventions have started to become increasingly technology and product driven. The practice of “participatory communication” spelling out the importance of involving the “people” to evolve the desired behavior has been replaced by rather “top-down one-way communication” enticing the audience with pre-determined pro-source biased messages through the awesome digitized new media forms. And as it is, this anomaly is further exacerbated by the rather wide literacy gap in the poorer countries. If this is the likely scenario, the suggestion to begin climate change communication by clarifying the meanings of “mitigation” and “adaptation” becomes even more pronounced, not only to the “unaware” but to the “educated”, as well.
I am in full concert with the fact that we live in a dynamic environment with an ever increasing competing priorities in all spheres of life. While making the most judicious mix of the existing communication means (interpersonal, mass media, new media etc.), we must re-acknowledge the potential role that “culture” can play as a facilitator in climate change mitigation. There is perhaps a ray of hope that can light the dormant sensitivities of our audience through what I may call a cultural approach, using the secular forms.

Disclaimer: The views expressed are solely of the writer and does not represent the views of any institutions, entities, bodies (govt./non govt. etc.) that may be in anyways linked to the writer.