lang: en
Summary
In 2025, the Advocacy Research Network and the Climate Justice Coalition conducted research in Australia showing that values-based, relational conversations are more effective than facts alone in countering climate misinformation. The research found that such conversations build trust and community resilience, though the outcome is partial as misinformation persists. The study offers a framework for climate organisers to engage persuadable audiences through listening and shared experiences.
Background
Climate organisers across Australia face rising misinformation about climate change, seeded by vested interests and amplified by social media, which undermines trust in science and institutions. The research aimed to identify effective strategies for countering this misinformation through one-to-one conversations, focusing on the persuadable middle rather than strongly opposed individuals.
What happened
The 2025 research project by the Advocacy Research Network and the Climate Justice Coalition involved a literature review and interviews with ten experienced climate organisers in Australia [source: nv-database]. Organisers reported that fact-based approaches often fail because people who oppose climate action question the source or dismiss the messenger, and that challenging misinformation is about preserving relationships rather than winning debates [source: nv-database]. Successful programs use a ‘spectrum of allies’ approach, targeting those open to different perspectives and treating strongly opposed individuals with respect [source: nv-database]. The research developed the ‘4Cs’ framework—Connect, Context, Commitment, Catapult—to structure conversations, emphasising values-first language and avoiding polarising terms like ‘climate justice’ or ‘emergency’ [source: nv-database]. Culturally grounded approaches, such as the ‘three cuppa tea’ rule for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, prioritise relationship-building before action [source: nv-database]. The ‘three-touch strategy’ highlights that change often requires multiple positive interactions over time [source: nv-database].
Key people & organizations
- Advocacy Research Network
- Climate Justice Coalition
- 350.org
- Cairns and Far North Environment Center
- ACF
- AYCC
- Climate for Change
Tactics used
The tactics of framing-and-narrative and public-narrative work together by shifting the focus from contested facts to shared values and personal stories, reducing defensiveness and building trust. This relational approach, combined with strategic targeting of persuadable audiences, creates spaces for reflection that fact-checking alone cannot achieve. [source: nv-database]
Outcome
Verdict: partial.
The outcome is partial because while the research demonstrates that climate conversations can build community resilience and shift individual perspectives, misinformation continues to spread and the approach requires sustained, patient effort. The study provides a framework but does not claim to have fully solved the problem of climate misinformation. [source: nv-database]
Lessons
- Focus on the persuadable middle rather than trying to convince strongly opposed individuals.
- Use values-first language and personal stories instead of facts and statistics to open conversations.
- Build trust through multiple positive interactions, as change rarely happens in a single conversation.
Sources
Disclaimer: Included as a teaching example of campaign craft, not as endorsement.
Sources & verification
nv-database— grounding: primary — license: link-only- Rewritten: 2026-06-25 via
worker_casestudies_v2.py