Social Constructions of Climate Futures: Reframing Science’s Harmful Impact Frame Across News Media, Social Movements, and Local Communities

Figures & data

Table 1. Summary of the identified frames across arenas.

	Problem definition	Causal interpretation	(Moral) Evaluation	Treatment recommendation
Arena: science
Harmful impacts frame	Global temperature increases cause, e.g. weather extremes, ocean acidification, glacier retreat, sea level rise	Anthropogenic sources such as emissions	Negative, urgency to act	Mitigation and adaptation measures, through global international cooperation
Arena: news media
Global doom	Distant, global temperature increases, extreme consequences; often triggered by science	Anthropogenic causes explained in detail (fossil fuels, greenhouse effect)	Negative, alarming, often apocalyptic	Mitigation and adaptation measures, (international) treaties
Distant threats to humanity (39%)^a	Distant, global temperature increases and severe consequences; often triggered by science	Variety of causes given (mostly emissions, but also political aspects)	Negative, urgency to act	Variety of solutions, mostly mitigation and political measures
Local tragedies	Regionally bound aspects of climate change; often triggered by events (e.g. fires, storms) or research	Global (in connection to climate change) and local (e.g. land use) causes mentioned	Negative, urgency to act (locally)	Some global (e.g. technologies) or local (conservation) solutions
Distant threats to ecosystems (28%)^a	Distant, global and mostly single effects of climate change on ecosystems; often triggered by events or research	Climate change in general or human-nature interactions	Negative	Often fails to mention solutions
Sustainable future	Limiting the temperature increase to 1.5/2 degrees Celsius; many triggers for reporting; references to the Paris Agreement	Often fails to mention causes; if mentioned, then anthropogenic causes	Negative if limit is exceeded, hopeful if kept	Variety of different solutions, including individual behavior
Solutions to climatic and social consequences (19%)^a	Effects of climate change on ecosystems and socio-political systems; many triggers for reporting; references to the Paris Agreement	Climate change in general	Negative	Large variety of solutions mentioned and advocated
Economic opportunities (14%)^a	Effects of climate change on economic systems; often triggered by political assessments and economic ideas	Largely emissions, often financial, economic, or political aspects	Negative, mixed, and positive evaluations	Advocated are mitigation, adaptation, renewables, and most strongly, political actions
Arena: climate movements
Evidence first	Distant: climate change as global crisis situation; notion of future harmful impacts and that knowledge about threats has been available for long	Anthropogenic sources (following scientific reports); limited public awareness and political inaction	Mixed; negative: evaluation of a lack of action (thus, negative projected futures); positive: can-do mentality, “solutions are ready to go”; urgency	Political action and commitment (scientific targets); techno-based mitigation options; stronger integration of science in policy-making
Inter-generational injustice	Climate change (consequences) as a threat for the freedom and justice of future generations	Former generations due to their way of life; these are the people in (economic, political) power and are therefore called into action	Mixed: anger and despair, but also hope; notion of moral (in)justice	No specific policies but targets and planning; limiting freedom (in terms of emissions) of current generation
Global climate justice and intersectionality	Climate change intersects with injustice; oppression and power imbalances; future harmful impacts and unjust distribution in certain regions (i.e. Global South)	Historical responsibility of the Global North, often specific actors are blamed (e.g. fossil fuel companies, conservative politicians, media)	Negative: historical and moral injustice	Climate policies; social justice; technological innovation; changes in ownership structures, consumption, power, and commitment to justice for historical debt (international cooperation)
System change – disruptive change	Global and abstract; system inhibits a life in harmony with nature; existential crisis	Anthropogenic causes; toxic systems; the last 30 years have shown that the political system is incapable of real action	Negative: “courage, not hope” – sacrificial, spiritual, anger, negative future scenarios seen as likely	No specific recommendation; deliberation and system change; construct a society that can live in harmony with nature
System change – localization and value change (from 2021)	Economic systems and culture based on extractivism, profit, and growth; reasons for societal ills, including climate change; general overuse of resources	Over-consumption, profit orientation, and societal values that build on nature-human duality; lack of democracy	Negative: questioning the probability and timelines in comparison to urgency; positive: providing a (local) positive vision and hope	Reorientation of fundamental societal values towards sufficiency, community, and post-productivism; degrowth; democratization of social spheres; localization
Political fight	Global problem definition, yet regionalizing: economic injustice and climate change as “twin crises” that can only be solved together	Fossil fuel industry and lobby interests are blocking progress on action; hence, economic and political reasons	Mixed; negative: militaristic tone, “fight and defeat” logic; positive: hopefulness, visionary, “as the sun rises each morning”	Opportunity for progressive policies; renewables; changes in ownership structures, community development, redistribution, and adaptation
Arena: local communities
Pessimistic	Climate change triggers a range of negative thoughts and emotions: nuances of doom, helplessness, grief, and distant threats	Anthropogenic climate change (especially thoughts of extreme weather events frighten people)	Negative (e.g. grief, helplessness)	Policy changes, international cooperation; changes in consumption; land back to Indigenous groups (US)
Tentative	Climate change is real and it is happening; the effects might be bad but not a complete “doom”	Both anthropogenic and natural causes (long term climate cycles)	Mixed and not hopeless; nuances of agency (e.g. planting trees)	Adaptation; local solutions
Optimistic	People feel capable to face climate change; it also entails (economic) possibilities	Both anthropogenic and natural causes (long term climate cycles)	Positive: resilience (of forest/“nature”/ people); new opportunities for tourism/ agriculture	Not applicable
Scientific solutions	Science holds the solution for climate change	Stronger emphasis on anthropogenic climate change, although natural causes were also mentioned	Climate change is seen as something negative yet solvable (by others)	Research; techno-based solutions; no individual changes (e.g. consumption) needed
Distrust in science	Questioning scientific authority and the existence of climate change in general	Conspiracy; linked to COVID-19 and other socio-political issues	Negative	No climate action needed

Notes. ^aIndicates frequency across the quantitative content analysis (Guenther et al., 2023b).

Guenther, L., Meyer, H., Kleinen-von Königslöw, K., & Brüggemann, M. (2023b). A distant threat? The framing of climate futures across four countries. Environmental Communication, 17(7), 775–793. http://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2023.2253500

 Google Scholar

Data availability statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author [LG], upon reasonable request.