Search results

The climate crisis presents a global threat. Research shows the necessity of joint communication efforts across different arenas—media, politics, business, academia and protest—to address this threat. However, communication about social change in response to the climate crisis comes with challenges. These challenges manifest, among others, in public accusations of inconsistency in terms of hypocrisy and incapability against self-declared change agents in different arenas. This increasingly turns public climate communication into a “blame game”.

Strategic communication scholarship has started to engage in this debate, thereby acknowledging climate communication as an arena-spanning, necessarily contested issue. Still, a systematic overview of specific inconsistency accusations in different public arenas is lacking. This conceptual article provides an overview based on a macro-focused public arena approach and decoupling scholarship.

Drawing on a systematic literature review of climate-related strategic communication scholarship and key debates from climate communication research in neighboring domains, the authors develop a framework mapping how inconsistency accusations of hypocrisy and incapacity, that is, policy–practice and means–ends decoupling, manifest in different climate communication arenas.

This framework creates awareness for the shared challenge of decoupling accusations across different climate communication arenas, underscoring the necessity of an arena-spanning strategic communication agenda. This agenda requires a communicative shift from downplaying to embracing decoupling accusations, from mutual blaming to approval of accountable ways of working through accusations and from confrontation to cooperation of agents across arenas.

This study identifies measures to recover economic growth and build sustainable societies and markets in post-COVID-19 scenarios – with a perspective of resilience and adaptability to climate change and massive biodiversity loss. Additionally, this study uncovers the interventions implemented to address economic, environmental and social consequences of past crises based on a systematic literature review. Specifically, this chapter provides answers to the following six questions:

1. What has been done in the past to rebuild social, economic and environmental balance after global crises?

2. Where (geographical region) did the analysis on measures taken concentrate?

3. When have scholars analysed past measures to rebuild business and society after a global crisis?

4. How did the past measures to rebuild business and society after the global crisis take place?

5. Who promotes the measures to rebuild business and society after a global crisis takes place?

6. Why is it important to study the previous literature on past measures to rebuild business and society after a global crisis takes place?

What has been done in the past to rebuild social, economic and environmental balance after global crises?

Where (geographical region) did the analysis on measures taken concentrate?

When have scholars analysed past measures to rebuild business and society after a global crisis?

How did the past measures to rebuild business and society after the global crisis take place?

Who promotes the measures to rebuild business and society after a global crisis takes place?

Why is it important to study the previous literature on past measures to rebuild business and society after a global crisis takes place?

Finally, this chapter identifies future research opportunities to rebuild business and society after the past global crises.

This chapter provides an overview of how, from a multi-stakeholder approach, Brazil can recover, fight against climate change and build an inclusive and sustainable future for itself. The interdependencies of the climate change action and current COVID-19 pandemic are discussed through extensive secondary data research to provide an updated context on Brazilian initiatives or the lack thereof. Through a multi-stakeholder methodological approach, the response and recovery actions of Brazil's government are assessed and future scenarios are developed for the country.

Economic and social inequality in Mexico presents a challenge in the transformative recovery of the country. This chapter aims to identify opportunities and multi-actor actions in the different scenarios of economic growth and sustainable development for Mexico in the coming years. We managed to propose public policy recommendations for the country by building future scenarios along with the participation of representatives from government, business, civil society and academia. A regenerative Mexico by 2030 requires policies that encourage private, domestic and foreign investment; regulatory frameworks for investment in clean technologies; implementation of tax incentives to promote a green economy and cooperative and inclusive models, such as the social and solidarity economy. Inclusive and collaborative multi-actor actions among the country's sectors become the common denominator of future scenarios for Mexico from an optimistic, resilient and hopeful perspective for its population.

The purpose of this paper is to consider the climatic variables and evaluate the role of non-climatic factors that delicately influence agriculture. This study has come across various adaptation strategies such as modification in cultivation practices such as shifting planting dates, water-saving techniques and strategic nutrient management. Meanwhile, we are trying to forget the ground reality that a majority of the farmers are not aware of climate-resilient production technologies. However, farmers modify themselves in this climate change scenario for sustainable production. The practise of these adaptation strategies helps to reduce vulnerability to improve their “socio-economic status” and the “quality of life”.

The present study was attempted to document all the indigenous practices, which are practised by paddy-growers over time for confronting the climate crisis in the Hyderabad-Karnataka region of Karnataka state, India. A cross-sectional and questionnaire-based survey was conducted to collect primary data. The pre-tested interviewing questionnaire consisted of 7 sections with 51 questions. A total of 90 paddy-growing farmers of the region was selected as respondents for the survey. The descriptive statistics was used to analyse the collected data.

In respect of adopted strategies, the vast majority (96.67%) of the farmers had used crops as livestock fodder as they fall back in case of failure, followed by the majority (72.22%) of the selected appropriate varieties. Cent per cent of the farmers adopted the construction of waterways along the slope for safe disposal of rainwater. An overwhelming portion of the farmers adopted levelling of the land in between the bunds (96.67%) and construction of bunds to conserve moisture (95.56%). The majority (76.67%) of the farmers intensified agricultural activities on irrigated land. Nearly half of them (47.78%) paddy growers were practising zero tillage to save time and money.

The current study was carried out in a few districts of Karnataka. Hence, any policy framed based on the outcomes of this study may not conform to the policy specification needs in general to other parts of the country. The farmers did not maintain record books for updating various records. Therefore, the accuracy of data depends on the memory of the respondents. However, the researcher had made every possible effort to make sure that the data collected are the best of the knowledge of the respondents and bear minimal distortions.

The major constraints to applying agricultural adaptation strategies in the study area have been a general lack of knowledge, expertise and data on climate change issues; a lack of specific climate change institutions to take on climate change work and the need for a better institutional framework in which to implement adaptation. Actions to address these gaps include, namely, training programmes for local government officials, dedicated research activities and post-graduate courses and the initiation of specific institutional frameworks for climate change. Furthermore, improving and strengthening human capital, through education, outreach and extension services, improves decision-making capacity at every level and increases the collective capacity to adapt.

Hyderabad-Karnataka is already under pressure from climate stresses, which increases vulnerability to further climate change and reduces adaptive capacity. The adverse effects of climate change have a devastating effect particularly on paddy cultivation, which is the mainstay of most Hyderabad-Karnataka Region. This has affected food production with its resultant effect on widespread poverty. Farmers in the study area have developed traditional agricultural adaptation strategies to cope with climate variability and extreme events. Experience with these strategies needs to be shared among communities.

Though the many literatures were available on the adaptation strategies for climate change this research is one of the few studies to document the farmer led adaptation strategies. This study provides a better understanding of the importance of farmer led adaptation strategies which in turn helps to develop or modify the existing adaptation technologies to cope up with climate change. The authors have come across various adaptation strategies such as modification in cultivation practices such as shifting planting dates, water-saving techniques and strategic nutrient management. Meanwhile, we are trying to forget the ground reality that the majority of the farmers are not aware of climate-resilient production technologies. However, farmers modify themselves in this climate change scenario for sustainable production. The practise of these adaptation strategies helps to reduce vulnerability to improve their “socio-economic status” and the “quality of life”. Therefore, farmer-led adaptation strategies to confront with a change in climate require to be recorded.

This paper investigates both similarities and differences between two global threats represented by climate change (CC) and Covid-19 (CV). This will help understand the reasons behind the recognition of the CV as a pandemic that requires global efforts, whereas efforts to tackle climate change still lack such urgency. This paper aims to answer to the following questions: What are the elements that make CV restrictions acceptable by both the public and policymakers? and What are the elements that make CC restrictions not acceptable?

This paper analyses the situation reports released by the World Health Organisation between the 11th of March (declaration of pandemic) and the 22nd of April, and their associated documents such as the Strategic Preparedness and Response Plan (WHO), the Risk Communication and Community Engagement Action Plan (WHO) and its updated version (WHO) and the Handbook for public health capacity-building (WHO). The analysis ends one week after President Trump’s announcement to suspend US funding to WHO (Fedor and Manson, 2020) and his support to public demonstrations against restrictions.

The application of the second stage of the “Crisis and Emergency Risk Communication” model identifies five lessons that can be learned from this comparison. These relate to the necessity to simultaneously warn (about the severity of a threat) and reassure (by suggesting specific courses of action) the public; the need for multilevel collaboration that integrates collective and individual actions; the capacity to present cohesive messages to the public; the risk of politicisation and commodification of the issue that might undermine global efforts to tackle the threat; and the capacity to trigger individual responses through the promotion of self-efficacy.

This paper identifies both similarities and differences between CC and CV managements to understand why the two threats are perceived and tackled in different ways. The analysis of official documents released by both the World Health Organisation and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate CV outbreak as a crisis, whereas climate change is still anchored to the status of a future-oriented risk.

Drawing on my own experiences at the University of California, Santa Barbara as a college professor of radical social change for 31 years who has been focused on the climate crisis for the past 10, I explore the crisis of higher education with respect to this most pressing existential challenge of the twenty-first century and propose various approaches, actions, activities, and projects for both classroom teachers and networks of educators.

These include the UC-CSU NXTerra Knowledge Action Network, the UCSB-developed nearly carbon neutral conference, and engaging students in designing and implementing systemic alternatives outside the classroom in their own communities such as Eco Vista in the 23,000-person community of Isla Vista just adjacent to UC Santa Barbara, among others.

The essay will end with a vision of a new type of university, exemplified in the world-spanning Ecoversities Alliance, and dreamed of in Transition U and Eco Vista U, two prototypes that I have been involved in co-creating with students, staff, faculty and community members in Santa Barbara, California, and in the Transition US movement.