2018
DOI: 10.5194/gc-1-9-2018
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Representing the majority and not the minority: the importance of the individual in communicating climate change

Abstract: Abstract. This research presents three case studies, through which a creative approach to developing dialogue around climate change is outlined. By working with three distinct communities and encouraging them to discuss and write poetry about how climate change affects them, we demonstrate how such an approach might be adopted at this level. By analysing the discussions and poetry that arose out of these workshops we show how this community-level approach to communicating climate change is an essential counter… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

3
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Throughout this paper, we have argued that the climate science community must evolve its practices of science communication and engagement with publics in order to address fundamental changes in the relationships between science and society. Accordingly, we argue that climate scientists not only need 625 to move beyond the predominant use of deficit model communications (Illingworth et al, 2018), but those seeking to engage in arts-based climate communication need to critically evaluate the potential limitations of employing scientific framings of advocacy (Donner, 2014;Schmidt, 2015;Schmidt and Donner, 2017) in their own practice. In addressing both the need for climate scientists to explore the issue of climate advocacy, alongside new and exciting ways of engaging publics with climate change, 630 we have argued that the arts provide an exciting opportunity for addressing current communication challenges (Nurmis, 2016;Galafassi et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Throughout this paper, we have argued that the climate science community must evolve its practices of science communication and engagement with publics in order to address fundamental changes in the relationships between science and society. Accordingly, we argue that climate scientists not only need 625 to move beyond the predominant use of deficit model communications (Illingworth et al, 2018), but those seeking to engage in arts-based climate communication need to critically evaluate the potential limitations of employing scientific framings of advocacy (Donner, 2014;Schmidt, 2015;Schmidt and Donner, 2017) in their own practice. In addressing both the need for climate scientists to explore the issue of climate advocacy, alongside new and exciting ways of engaging publics with climate change, 630 we have argued that the arts provide an exciting opportunity for addressing current communication challenges (Nurmis, 2016;Galafassi et al, 2018).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the one-way (deficit) model of science communication is hindered by an inability to address the ways in which people perceive and react to information on climate change as an issue (Illingworth et al, 2018). In the broadest sense, the delivery of abstract science-based information not only fails to inspire people, it also lacks the dimension of storytelling required to make information both accessible and engaging (Roosen et al, 2018).…”
Section: Framework For Understanding Climate Change Advocacymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In considering how best to develop such communications, a variety of media, ranging from poetry [ 5 ] and dance [ 6 ] to theatre [ 7 ] and comedy [ 8 ], have been explored. Similarly, research has been dedicated to the role that games might play in communicating scientific topics [ 9 12 ], including useful advice for game designers seeking to embed scientific endeavour within serious scientific games [ 13 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%