Chapter 3. Appropriate Climate Communication

Best Practices in Climate Communication

As highlighted by the examples above, climate communication is appropriate when it follows high standards. In doing so, the stakes are unusually high: climate information can influence public behavior, mental well-being, and trust in institutions. Appropirate communication is not about spin or propaganda – it’s about honesty, accountability, and respect. By communicating ethically, governments honor their responsibility to inform and protect citizens without causing undue alarm or mistrust. In fact, ethical storytelling is vital in climate communication as it shapes perceptions, drives action, and fosters a just, sustainable future (1). This means messages need to be truthful and sensitive, acknowledging the real risks of climate change while honoring the experiences of affected communities. Maintaining ethical rigor in communications helps counter misinformation and “climate fatigue.” It also models the transparency that governments expect from others, thereby strengthening credibility. In short, when officials speak about climate change with integrity – citing sources, owning uncertainties, and centering human impacts – they lay the groundwork for public trust and meaningful engagement.

Ethical climate communication is more than a lofty ideal; it translates into concrete daily practices for government staff and spokespeople. Some of the most important practices include:

• Accuracy and Citation: With climate topics often subject to misinformation, a government communicator must be a beacon of accuracy. Always double-check facts against scientific consensus and use precise language that won’t mislead. Cite scientific reports, expert assessments, and policy documents so that audiences can verify information for themselves. Providing references to credible sources not only educates the public but signals that nothing is being hidden or invented. For example, a public briefing might reference findings from the Health of Canadians in a Changing Climate assessment or a World Health Organization brief to back up statements about mental health impacts. Being meticulous about facts and transparent about sources builds confidence: effective government communication can enhance trust in public institutions when there is transparency about the evidence behind decisions. In practice, this could mean publishing online bulletins with footnotes or links to the scientific studies behind a new climate policy, or explicitly mentioning the source of a statistic during a press conference. If information is uncertain or evolving, say so – clarity about what is known and unknown is crucial. Never “cherry-pick” data or exaggerate claims to make a point; such tactics inevitably backfire by eroding credibility. Consistent accuracy, on the other hand, sends a message that the government deserves the public’s trust.

• Transparency of Influences and Uncertainties: Ethical communication also requires shining light on the processes and partnerships behind climate policies. Governments should openly disclose which experts, community organizations, or industry partners contributed to a communication or policy, especially if those partners might be seen as having an agenda. For instance, if a municipality collaborates with an energy company on a climate resilience campaign, the materials should acknowledge the partnership to preempt any public perception of a hidden motive. Similarly, be upfront about the limits of current knowledge. Climate science can be complex and probabilistic; rather than presenting projections as certainties, explain the ranges or confidence levels. By communicating uncertainty clearly, officials actually strengthen public trust – research shows that when authorities admit what they don’t know or what could change, people tend to find them more credible, not less. A useful strategy is to phrase uncertainty in plain language (e.g. “We’re about 90% confident in this forecast, but there’s a small chance things could be different, and here’s why…”). During crises, transparency might involve daily updates even when the situation is fluid, just to let people know the government isn’t concealing anything. In all cases, the guiding principle is: no surprises. Citizens should never feel that information was withheld. Even difficult news – like a climate target being missed – should be shared honestly along with an explanation and a plan to improve, rather than quietly swept under the rug.

• Respectful Storytelling and Data Ethics: Climate change is ultimately about people’s lives and stories. Using narratives and data ethically means obtaining consent and input when sharing community stories, and presenting data in a way that illuminates rather than manipulates. Governments often highlight individuals or communities who are adapting to climate impacts or leading solutions – these stories can inspire and inform, but they must be told with respect. Always ask: does the community endorse this narrative? Are we protecting privacy and dignity? For example, if sharing the story of a remote northern community experiencing permafrost melt, ensure the community’s leaders are involved in crafting the message, and avoid sensationalizing their hardships. Ethical storytelling recognizes cultural sensitivities, challenges power imbalances, and avoids stereotypes. It might mean using an Indigenous community’s own words and framing rather than imposing a government lens. Data visualization and use is another area that demands integrity. Climate data – from temperature graphs to mental health statistics – should be presented truthfully and accessibly. Cherry-picked or confusing graphs can mislead and erode trust. According to communications experts, ethical data visuals must be accurate (based on reliable sources), clear (easy to interpret), and unbiased in presentation. A best practice is to always label charts with their source and clearly explain axes, timeframes, and any uncertainties. If a graph shows rising heat-related hospitalizations, for instance, the communicator should note the data source (e.g. health department records), the timeframe (e.g. 1990–2020), and factors like margin of error or confounding variables if they exist. By treating both human narratives and numerical data with care and humility, communicators demonstrate respect for the truth and for the people behind the numbers.

• Balancing Honesty with Empathy and Empowerment: One of the trickiest aspects of climate communication is striking the right tone. Government officials must relay serious information – sometimes frightening projections or difficult adaptation measures – without inducing despair or panic. The key is to pair honesty about risks with messages of efficacy and hope. Research indicates that fear-based messages can grab attention, but if overused or unaccompanied by solutions, they lead people to tune out or feel helpless. As UNESCO’s policy analysts note, purely dire messaging can even be counterproductive, causing people (including leaders) to disengage in order to defend their sense of stability. Ethical communicators avoid hyperbole and instead use a tone of “urgent optimism.” This means clearly acknowledging the reality – e.g. “Yes, our community is at risk of more extreme wildfires” – while immediately following with empowering context: “Here’s what we’re doing about it, and here’s how you can be part of the solution.” Indeed, fear appeals are most effective when combined with concrete pathways for action and positive efficacy cues, which invoke a sense of hope rather than paralysis. For example, a campaign about extreme heat could frankly state the dangers (heat stroke, mental health strain, etc.) but also highlight new cooling centers, tree-planting initiatives to create shade, and steps residents can take to protect neighbors. This approach validates the public’s anxieties without leaving them in despair. It is also important to use trauma-informed principles in messaging to avoid retraumatization of survivors. When communicating about past disasters or risks to communities that have already endured climate trauma, do so with sensitivity: provide content warnings for graphic content, stress the community’s resilience, and ensure mental health support information is included. Ethical communication never seeks to shock or guilt-trip the audience. Instead, it centers honesty and empathy – telling the truth while reminding people of their collective strength, available supports, and the progress (no matter how small) being made. The goal is to keep people informed and emotionally safe. As one guide on climate messaging puts it, we need “more cheer and less fear” – not by downplaying the threat, but by highlighting unity, agency and hope even in the face of serious challenges.