Building diverse climate coalitions: The pitfalls and promise of equity- and identity-based messaging.

Abstract

In response to the largest climate demonstrations in history and growing recognition of the disproportionate impacts of climate change on disadvantaged communities, environmental organizations are increasingly looking to diversify their memberships and enhance public outreach. In this review, we consider unique challenges inherent in building racially, ethnically, and socioeconomically diverse climate coalitions and highlight three often implicit assumptions that may undermine the effectiveness of equity-and identity-based climate communications and public outreach efforts: (a) that prodiversity messaging is viewed as inclusive by both racial and ethnic majority and minority groups; (b) that making specific identity groups salient will engage targeted individuals; and (c) that enhancing the salience of climate-related inequities bolsters public support for efforts to reduce those inequities. Drawing from psychological research and theory as well as real-world examples, we discuss problems with each of these assumptions, highlight current knowledge gaps, and offer practical recommendations for more effectively tailoring communications to broaden public engagement across differences.What is the significance of this article for the general public?The present review suggests that many appeals designed to promote diversity and broaden public engagement may in fact impede the formation and growth of racially and socioeconomically diverse climate coalitions. We highlight three tacit assumptions often present in equity-and identity-based organizational communications that may undermine their effectiveness. We offer practical recommendations for strengthening inclusive messaging and enhancing public support for equity-based climate policies and initiatives.

A Global Review of Research on Effective Advocacy and Communication Strategies at the Intersection of Climate Change and Health

“…(2) that highlighting specific groups based on their identity will engage the targeted audiences; and (3) that enhancing the salience of climate-related inequities bolsters public support for efforts to reduce those inequities (Tsai & Pearson, 2022). Those developing climate and equity messages should therefore be wary of these assumptions, as they are often developed with the expectation of enhancing message effectiveness, while in reality they may produce the opposite of the desired effect.…”

The connections—and misconnections—between the public and politicians over climate policy: A social psychological perspective

“…Yet, the underestimation effect, or inaccuracy of people's second‐order beliefs about climate change, is particularly pronounced when people are estimating the climate concerns of nonwhites and lower income people. That is, the U.S. public, as a whole, underestimates dramatically the extent to which these groups are concerned about the environment; this occurs in large part because people possess stereotypes about those who are environmentally concerned as being white and affluent, which could negatively impact the forming of diverse climate coalitions (Pearson et al., 2018; Tsai & Pearson, 2022).…”

Psychological contributions to advancing global health.

“…Yet, despite their recognized necessity and good intentions, Tsai and Pearson (2022) outline environmental organizations' assumptions about how to engage these groups that might inadvertently fail and, worse, discourage participation. For each flawed assumption (Tsai & Pearson, 2022) describe, they proposed better ways to be more inclusive.…”

“…Last, Tsai and Pearson (2022) challenge environmental organizations that want to respond to environmental problems to apply research on intergroup relationships to aid in their efforts to be more inclusive of people of color and low-income community members in their organizations. As also argued by Schmitt and Sullivan (2022) noted above, it is morally imperative to integrate members of social groups most vulnerable to environmental problems when developing effective responses to environmental conditions that threaten their health and well-being (Pearson et al, 2021).…”

“…As also argued by Schmitt and Sullivan (2022) noted above, it is morally imperative to integrate members of social groups most vulnerable to environmental problems when developing effective responses to environmental conditions that threaten their health and well-being (Pearson et al, 2021). Yet, despite their recognized necessity and good intentions, Tsai and Pearson (2022) outline environmental organizations’ assumptions about how to engage these groups that might inadvertently fail and, worse, discourage participation. For each flawed assumption (Tsai & Pearson, 2022) describe, they proposed better ways to be more inclusive.…”