Climate change isn’t a losing issue, but the way we talk about it risks losing the public

By John Marshall, Executive Chair, Potential Energy Coalition

The wider potential consequences of the Makerfield by-election will inevitably spark a familiar debate in Westminster. What does the result tell us about voters? Have political parties moved too far on climate policy, or not far enough? Should politicians double down on climate action, or quietly retreat?

Too often, debates about climate change are driven by assumptions made by political, media and business elites rather than by data. As a result, a growing conventional wisdom has emerged that climate action has become politically toxic, that voters are turning away from the issue, and that leaders should talk about it less. New research suggests the opposite.

The reality is climate change is a winning issue with the public, if you talk about it the right way.

I run a nonprofit devoted to educating people about climate change. We’re driven solely by data, ruthlessly evaluating what narratives work, what don’t, and why. For nearly a decade, we’ve spent thousands of hours in focus groups, surveyed over half-a-million people, and tested hundreds and hundreds of messages. Most recently, Potential Energy Coalition, with support from The Rockefeller Foundation, completed one of the largest climate opinion studies conducted in recent years, surveying more than 83,000 people across the UK, US, Canada, France, Germany and Italy. The findings reveal important truths about what matters to people, the words that deepen divisions, and the ones that can build consensus.

Across all six countries, overwhelming majorities support government action on climate change. Support extends well beyond traditional progressive audiences, including among many centre-right voters and younger conservatives. In the UK, 90% of people say climate change is happening, 78% are worried about it, and 78% support clean energy solutions.

Despite strong and bipartisan public support, over the past few years, a phenomenon known as “climate hushing” has taken hold. Climate coverage in the media has fallen sharply from its 2021 peak. Corporate discussion of climate and ESG issues has dropped dramatically. Political leaders who once spoke openly about climate increasingly appear reluctant to do so. This retreat reflects a growing institutional assumption that climate has become too politically difficult to discuss.

Part of the problem is that the language most leaders turn to does, in fact, narrow the audience. “Achieving net zero” ranks near the absolute bottom on the public’s list of concerns. Anytime the word “ban” or “mandate” is mentioned, public support drops as much as 20%. “Green jobs” sound more like a promise than a reality, a “massive energy transition” sounds difficult and expensive, and the scolding “shoulds” and “sacrifices” of traditional environmental communication increasingly turn people off to the cause.

What we need isn’t a massive shying away from the issue, but a new narrative. We can recapture momentum and broaden support if we shift the way we’re telling our stories.

First, we need to focus on the human and material consequences of climate change. Across all six countries, the three messages most effective at increasing support for policy action–boosting support by up to 9 percentage points in the UK–centered on the everyday impacts on our health, our money, and the people and places we love. Human stories about tangible consequences beat abstract arguments every time.

Second, we need to make the cause concrete: “pollution” reminds people climate change is a problem we can solve. Framing the challenge as “reducing pollution” (versus the more abstract, “fighting climate change”) makes the problem feel 10-20% more solvable.

Finally, we need to make the cure exciting. By a ratio of more than 2 to 1, people across the globe think building ‘all or mostly clean’ is a better way to meet growing demand for energy than ‘all or mostly fossil.’ Instead of focusing solely on the things we’re banning and blocking, spend time on what we’re building toward: more energy to affordably, securely meet rising demand.

Audiences want climate action. What they reject is language that feels abstract, ideological, or disconnected from reality. As political leaders, businesses, and campaigners prepare for London Climate Action Week, they should dispense with the language of pathways, mandates, and technical targets in favor of vivid, human narratives that make the climate change consequences clear, the cause concrete, and the cure exciting.

Bold leadership has never been more necessary, and the latest data shows the right leaders can win solid majorities and rescue us from this dangerous decelerating cycle of ambition. Now is not the time to shy away from climate change. Now is the time to cement a new narrative.