Building an effective response to climate change that includes the public in the ownership and delivery of those goals is a complex and difficult task, especially as the political and social landscape, and public opinion alongside it, is constantly shifting. This review builds on collective knowledge about the seven British segments described in Britain’s Choice [1] and Britain Talks Climate [2], summarising the findings of eleven research projects that tested messages with the seven British segments over the past two years.

We highlight frames and language that perform consistently well, and those that need to be used in a more targeted manner and where we lack sufficient evidence to make a strong recommendation. We also note where the effectiveness of frames are stable, or changing over time, and raise key next steps.

A number of other recurring frames have been tested over the last two years; protecting nature, co-benefit frames (health, economy), responsibility frames (Britain’s role, securing our children’s future, individual behaviour change) and system change concepts (e.g. just transition).

Frames that speak to enduring concerns such as the natural environment and wildlife have remained consistently important and stable over the past two years. Similarly, there is a stable majority who agree that the UK should be one of the most ambitious countries in the world when it comes to climate action.

However, frames that speak to issues of the economy and politics need to be considered carefully according to the political and economic circumstances at the time. The economic benefits of climate action appeal more to more affluent, already-engaged segments, while making less impact on the least affluent and more conservative-leaning segments. Further, as the cost of living and energy crises deepen, we see that all seven segments show an openness to ‘doing their bit’, but this looks different depending on people’s capacity to act [3, 4].

Throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, we learned that connection and meaningful relationships with loved ones are a key part of segments’ visions of a good life. Priorities such as wellbeing, slowing down, and caring for each other came to the fore. Notably, among the top 5 reasons people were concerned about climate change was the worry that climate change will negatively impact their children’s future [3]. And while the connection between climate change and health may not be intuitive for all, the public responds well to messages about the positive consequences of climate action on our health and wellbeing.

Finally, while there are enduring and stable messages that appeal across UK society, research from the past two years also demonstrates the necessity for ongoing monitoring. Global crises in health, politics, and the economy constantly affect the public’s priorities, and evaluating these shifts through the lens of the seven British segments is a crucial part of ensuring that climate change public engagement is effective and reaching all corners of society.

The original Britain Talks Climate research comes from a collaboration between Climate Outreach, More in Common, the European Climate Foundation (ECF) and YouGov.

Climate Outreach is grateful to the Marmot Charitable Trust for the funding that made this review possible.

This review focuses on six themes; 1) Nature, 2) Health & wellbeing, 3) Money, jobs & the economy, 4) Britain’s role as a global leader, 5) Social connections, and 6) ‘Doing your bit’. These are the most consistent frames that were tested with the seven British segments over the past two years.

For each of the six themes, key recommendations have been suggested. These are explored in more detail within each section.

Protecting the environment and nature is a unifying priority across the segments of Britain [5], with ‘harm to nature and wildlife’ ranking top for all segments, except Progressive Activists, as their top reason for being concerned about climate change [3]. ‘Harm to nature and wildlife’ ranks second among Progressive Activists after ‘suffering for the world’s poorest’, however, the percentage of this segment ranking this as a top concern is higher than the percentage of all other segments who rank this at the top [3]. ‘Nature’ frames are a unifying message across the seven segments.

Evidence

In one randomised control trial, nature framing that includes ‘loss of habitats and species’ and ‘restoring the balance of nature’ inspired greater willingness to donate to an environmental charity, to reduce meat consumption, and to choose environmental home energy and transport options, compared to a control group [6].

Two pieces of research reviewed focussed primarily on levels of engagement with the Conference of the Parties (COP). This is important as engagement with COP can indicate levels of engagement with climate policy, the desire for joined-up, global climate action and a desire to be informed on up-to-date climate discourses.

Compared to other frames (global cooperation, green investment and political transparency), the nature frame encouraged a greater agreement with key COP aims and policies, such as phasing out new petrol and diesel cars, and ending public financing of fossil fuels [6]. Environment messaging that included framing around protecting habitats and species increased perceptions of the importance of COP26 among segments [7].

Talk about the local countryside and environment to reach the more Conservative-leaning segments. Nature framing that celebrates and emphasises respect for our countryside sees broad consensus [5], and may particularly appeal to some of the more Conservative-leaning segments (Backbone Conservatives and Loyal Nationals). These segments tend to identify with the statement that human activities are causing a ‘world out of balance’ that needs to be addressed, and they also agree with statements which argue we need to respect the Earth.

Evidence

Environment framing was consistently the most effective at raising intent to engage with COP26 (following and watching COP26 news and talking about COP with friends and family) especially among segments who are normally ‘least-engaged; Disengaged Traditionalists, Disengaged Battlers and Backbone Conservatives (raised by 14-19 percentage points (pp) vs no framing) [7].

For Loyal Nationals, the need to protect the environment is seen through a lens of pride for their local area, and to ‘do their bit’[4, 2]. Even those segments most sceptical of climate action tend to be swayed by messages about protecting green spaces [8].

See Table 1 in appendix 3 for various ‘nature’ frames used across reviewed research.

Stability of the nature frame over time

Reviewing these resources has shown the value of the segmentation in providing consistent, robust and nuanced guidance for engaging the British public on climate change. The strength of this approach bolsters the need to continue tracking segment views as the social and political context changes. At the end of each ‘theme’ section, we review the points of stability and change across the six themes, and areas of change that are worth monitoring.

The evidence base shows that the success of nature messaging has remained strong and stable over the past two years. Due to our time range, it is possible that the Covid-19 pandemic may have led to stronger appreciation of nature among the British public. Citizens reported feeling closer to nature as a result of the pandemic and wanted to protect rural idylls that bring joy [4]. Covid-19 was seen as another sign that the world was out of balance with nature, a realisation that we all share the same planet, and that global disasters such as Covid-19 and climate change do not respect borders [9]. For instance, Disengaged Traditionalists seemed to experience changes in levels of climate scepticism after the first UK lockdown, with many saying changes to air quality and the presence of animals helped them realise the impact of humans [9].

Next steps: outstanding questions

Focus on the positive benefits of improved physical and mental health, as well as better quality of life, that rapid and effective climate action can offer. This may work better than leading with negative messages about how climate change threatens our health.

Health is an unwavering priority for Britons, with polling consistently showing “healthcare and the NHS” as one of the top issues for the country, and a huge source of pride for Britons [5], even before the pandemic [10, 11]. While there is broad agreement with the statement that ‘net zero policies will improve health and wellbeing‘ [3], the public may be yet to form a clear understanding of Britain’s net zero future in concrete terms.

Research suggests that talking about health as a co-benefit of climate-friendly actions may convince some segments, for instance, Backbone Conservatives, to reduce their meat consumption [3]. However, negatively framed messages about health and air pollution are not often well received.

Evidence

Health messaging featured in six of the reviewed reports and resources, and may have become particularly salient as the issue parachuted into the public eye following the Covid-19 crisis. Across the segments, Covid-19 led to a greater appreciation for a “clean and healthy” environment, and an increased focus on health. When surveyed at the end of 2020, many segments spoke of clean air as a positive outcome from the Covid-19 lockdowns [9]. Covid-19 contributed to new priorities, with Established Liberals, Civic Pragmatists, and Loyal Nationals coming out of the pandemic reflecting on unhealthy work and life practices [4]. Positively framed descriptions of a clean and “healthy” environment seemed to work well [8, 4, 9] alongside themes of improving “quality of life” and mental health as co-benefits of climate action [8, 4].

Conversely, statements such as ‘air pollution is the biggest environmental threat’ were met with scepticism and dismissal, particularly from segments such as Backbone Conservatives and Established Liberals [9]. Messages about air pollution and the cost to “the air we breathe” were not popular across segments that are generally most concerned about climate change (Progressive Activists, Civic Pragmatists, Disengaged Battlers, and Loyal Nationals) [8].

See Table 2 in appendix 3 for various ‘health and wellbeing’ frames used across reviewed research.

Stability of the health and wellbeing frame over time

Across reports, there is reasonably consistent evidence that health messages do resonate across the seven segments, but only when framed positively (‘a clean, beautiful and healthy environment’), or when emphasising a positive vision for health and wellbeing. Framing health concerns negatively (‘air pollution is the biggest environmental threat’) appeared to elicit backlash. However, as our time range encompasses 2020-2022, there is a need to review evidence as health risks and the salience of Covid-19 change.

Next steps: outstanding questions

Overall, messages with economic frames tended to appeal to the segments who are already more engaged, such as Progressive Activists and Civic Pragmatists. They also appeal more to segments that (on average) report higher incomes and self-identify as middle class, while the least convinced about economic messaging are segments that report (on average) lower incomes and self-identify as working class [8]. Majorities in all segments agree that as a country, Britain can protect the economy and the environment at the same time, but messaging needs to be coupled with an acknowledgement of pressures faced as a result of rising cost of living.

Evidence

A key recommendation emerging from three of the reports is to focus on elements of “a good life” that de-emphasise growth and the pursuit of affluence [4, 8, 3]. However, the rising cost of living may pose a key risk to such messaging if it is perceived as saying that “money is not important”, and appearing ignorant or dismissive of the realities facing many families in the UK [9].

While wider concerns about the economy are raised by all, worries about the economy in relation to climate change were particularly central for Loyal Nationals, Backbone Conservatives and Disengaged Traditionalists. For these segments, the second most frequent reason for worrying about climate change was that it will cause their bills to rise within the next 10 years [3]. On the other side, cost of living concerns were lowest for Established Liberals and Progressive Activists, who were also the most positive about net zero policies increasing availability of jobs.

The segments that are more likely to be marginalised or in financially precarious positions are distrustful of the “green jobs” rhetoric, and sceptical of the promises of a green industrial transition [8]. For example, Disengaged Battlers were less positive about the potential for climate action to create green jobs than other segments [8].

Messaging about the economic co-benefits of climate action should be specific, and grounded in local stories and local solutions, rather than abstract slogans and jargon [8]. For instance, specific messaging about retraining programs that are tailored to local regions may be effective for Disengaged Traditionalists and Backbone Conservatives [3]. Relatedly, “building up local areas” is a unifying message, especially for less-engaged segments. Many segments believe they have the ability and agency to improve their local areas [12], particularly Established Liberals and Backbone Conservatives.

With the caveat of being mindful of the cost of living crisis, centering messages around redefining what is “enough” may be effective for Loyal Nationals, for whom financial security is an important foundation for finding time and space for loved ones, shared activities, and enjoyment of life and their physical surroundings [4]. Disengaged Battlers also responded well to campaign messages around “protecting the environment while ensuring everyone has a good job, good training, good pay, and a good, green economy we all benefit from” [13].

Another consideration for economic messaging is the focus on Britain and the national context. Messages about reviving Britain’s economy and exporting British products around the world work well for Loyal Nationals who tend to view climate as a local issue, unlike many other segments who may see messaging like this as overly nationalistic and inward-looking [6].

See Table 3 in appendix 3 for various ‘money, jobs and the economy’ frames used across reviewed research.

Stability of the money, jobs and the economy frame over time

The extent to which the segments resonate with economic messaging has fluctuated over the past two years, in line with the fast-moving and ongoing cost of living and inflation crises, as well as changes in political trust at a national level. This has affected the public’s trust in the government to deliver on “green jobs” promises now and although most segments view job creation as important, the way economic benefits are spoken about is often met with scepticism. For economic messaging, it is crucial to acknowledge the concerns of more marginalised segments, and frame around jobs and the economy carefully, to truly reach all of Britain.

Next steps: outstanding questions

Over the past two years, we have seen a relatively stable consensus where the majority of segments agree that the UK should be one of the most ambitious countries in the world when it comes to climate action. At the same time, the idea of UK self-reliance is appealing across the segments. Rather than solely focussing on either (being ‘self-reliant’ or ‘leading the way’), emphasise that both can be achieved by actively cooperating with other countries to take action together [3, 6, 2]. The theme of cooperation can also be extended to local action, where communities can work together to do their part in a global effort.

Evidence

Messages about Britain’s role in working together with other countries, “doing our part”, and cooperating with our partners tend to resonate more than messages about Britain leading the way – particularly among segments who are more sceptical of multilateral cooperation [6]. Digital Facebook testing found that of nine messages tested, one about cooperating with the EU (“Let’s Not Let our European Partners Down: Say You’ll Help Push the UK to Act on the Climate Crisis”) was one of the most successful, with 75% signing up to receive further email communications on the topic, and 14% sharing the message on [13].

Messages about the UK leading from the front tend to produce mixed findings [3]. The same series of Facebook digital tests found that the message “It’s Time for British Leadership on the Climate, To Create Decent Jobs and A Bright Future For Our Nation”, was not successful when compared to other digital messaging such as ‘going green’ and ‘protecting British seaside towns’, accounting for only 6% of sign-ups and 5% of click throughs [13]. There is a risk that messages about UK leadership, if not accompanied by information about what other high-emitting countries are doing, may contribute to a perception that other countries are not doing enough to take action [3].

At the same time, British segments, mainly those more Conservative-leaning segments, those who voted to leave the EU, and those aged 50+, want to be able to take care of their own, which manifests in the desire for the country to be self-reliant, and for a focus on localism [8]. Framing climate action in terms of boosting the UK’s energy independence was shown to increase segments’ support for climate change policies [7], although drawing explicit links between energy security to the Russia-Ukraine war may not resonate; messaging around ensuring Britain’s energy security worked well with the segments but seemed to backfire if Russia was mentioned [14]. It should be noted that this is a fast-moving situation and this review is based on research up until mid-2022.

While some segments, such as Loyal Nationals, feel pride about the UK leading the world, others, such as Civic Pragmatists felt such messages undermined what needed to be a global effort [6].

Segments are in favour of reducing Britain’s dependence on other countries, most of all among those who tend to vote Conservative, those who voted to leave the EU, and those aged 50+ [8]. Loyal Nationals speak about building close-knit communities, and “protecting your part of the world, while expecting others to do the same with theirs”[4] – a kind of “global localism” approach.

See Table 4 in appendix 3 for various ‘Britain’s role as a global leader’ frames used across reviewed research.

Stability of the ‘Britain’s role as a global leader’ frame over time

The evidence base suggests that the public’s views about Britain’s role in responding to climate change has remained relatively stable over the past two years. The attractiveness of messages promoting a more self-reliant, independent Britain may have grown in 2022 as a result of external pressures including the Russia-Ukraine war, but further research will need to be reviewed to track changes in these perceptions. COP26 being hosted in the UK may have also shifted the public’s views about what role they would like their country to play on the global stage.

Next steps: outstanding questions

Research suggests that connection and meaningful relationships with loved ones are a key part of segments’ visions of a good life [4]. The COVID-19 pandemic prompted segments to reassess priorities, and the desire for greater connection and care came to the fore [4, 9]. This manifests in strong themes around recentering loved ones, rebuilding communities, connecting with neighbours, and working together collectively against issues that do not respect borders. Segments may respond well to an approach to climate communication that prioritises building connection, such as reconnecting with loved ones and communities, or connecting to future children and grandchildren by helping to ensure their future.

Evidence

The theme of social connection speaks to the resonance of taking climate action collectively. Research shows that the idea of “people working together” is seen as motivating for segments [9]. Such messages can build on the desire to “rebuild community”, and forge stronger support networks in neighbourhoods to care for local areas and those most vulnerable.

The desire to ‘rebuild community’ is evident among many of the segments, with Loyal Nationals and Civic Pragmatists wanting a deeper connection with their local community, and Established Liberals desiring more shared experiences, mutual support, and conviviality [4].

Needing to act collectively to create a better future for children and grandchildren is a frame that has potential for motivating climate action [9, 4, 8]. Among the top 5 reasons people were concerned about climate change was the worry that climate change will negatively impact their children’s future [3].

However, the strength of this frame may be weakened by making this connection tenuous or overly complicated. People can make the emotional connection between climate action and protecting future generations but bringing in another factor such as COP26 can undermine the message.

Evidence

Framing messages around the moral imperative of climate action, including creating a better future for our children, increased willingness to take personal climate action across the seven segments and was found to be the joint most effective messaging when it came to engagement and the perceived importance of COP [7].

Drawing the connection between climate action and protecting future generations may also ease resistance to actions that tend to be viewed negatively. For instance, photographs showing parents and children peacefully protesting together were more engaging than other protest images across segments [14]. However, in some cases, future generations messaging may not resonate, for instance, with those without children or grandchildren, or in settings where the connection may be more tenuous.

Talking about strengthening commitments at COP26 in order to protect future generations was not positively received in focus groups with Loyal Nationals and Civic Pragmatists, who felt the link was unclear, abstract, and “wishy-washy” [6].

However, messaging framed around ‘generations working together’, ‘leaving our children with a safe and healthy world’, and ‘giving our children the best possible chances’, worked well for Civic Pragmatists, Progressive Activists and Loyal Nationals, and to a lesser extent, Backbone Conservatives [15].

Notably, while connecting to future generations has had some success, linking to the actions of past generations is a potentially thornier issue. Research suggests the majority of segments, especially the more Conservative-leaning segments; Backbone Conservatives, Loyal Nationals, Disengaged Traditionalists and Established Liberals, believe we should focus on the future and not look back to the past [5]. However, the more left-leaning segments; Progressive Activists, Civic Pragmatists and Disengaged Battlers, find it important to be open to examining pain points in British history, giving truer accounts rather than romanticising the past [5]. Such findings may be particularly important for communicating issues around climate justice and climate finance, which are increasingly urgent priorities for the climate change agenda.

See Table 5 in appendix 3 for various ‘social connections’ frames used across reviewed research.

Stability of the social connections frame over time

Many saw Covid-19 as a moment to “reset”. Strengthening social connections, whether to family, friends or community, resonated across the seven British segments, and the pandemic appears to have brought these desires to the fore, but it is an open question whether this remains the case in the face of growing cost of living pressures.

Next steps: outstanding questions

All segments want to feel represented, involved, and want to have their voices heard [5, 12]. This desire could be crucial in engaging broad segments of society and building efficacy over time. All seven segments show openness to ‘doing their bit’, but this looks different depending on people’s capacity to act [3, 4]. However, it is important to recognise that people’s motivation to take simple and affordable actions on climate change can be undermined by a lack of trust and self-efficacy.

Evidence

The segments share a common willingness to take actions with low barriers to entry (such as eating seasonally and reducing food waste), than those that may be less accessible (such as switching to a lower emissions vehicle) [7].

Despite willingness to act, many segments feel pessimistic about their ability to create change. Perceived personal efficacy is typically much lower for climate change than other issues (e.g., Covid-19) [9]. When testing digital Facebook messaging, a message designed to encourage segments to use their voice to create change and influence others did not work well overall, and neither did a message about being “left out” of the climate conversation [13].

This pessimism may be linked to a feeling that their voice will be ignored and lack of faith in governing institutions, and the view that individuals are being asked (unfairly) to take action. Communicators should be wary of segments’ fatigue and cynicism of the government being ‘all words and no action’ [6].

Consistently, Disengaged Traditionalists and Disengaged Battlers are the least persuaded to ‘do their bit’ and make any behaviour changes [7, 6, 2], but these groups have on average lower household income, and are also likely to live lower consumption lifestyles [16].

Seventy percent of Progressive Activists are dissatisfied with Britain’s democracy and 90% perceive democracy to be unfit for ordinary people – it only works for the rich and powerful [12]. This also rings true for Disengaged Battlers and Loyal Nationals who view the system as broken [12, 2].

In terms of messaging, encouraging leaders to “walk the walk” may ignite, rather than ease, feelings of political cynicism, but is still able to increase policy support and willingness to take climate actions among the more sceptical segments – Loyal Nationals and Disengaged Traditionalists [6]. However, messaging that is strongly ‘anti-elite’ may polarise the segments. For example, segments who tend to lean to the right and voted leave, including Backbone Conservatives, do not resonate well with calling out ‘elites’ [8].

Loyal Nationals feel particularly strongly that they should have a say in what changes and when, when it comes to net zero policies [3].

See Table 6 in appendix 3 for various ‘doing your bit’ frames used across reviewed research.

Stability of the “doing your bit” frame over time

Segments tend to consistently resonate with the idea of ‘doing their bit’, but especially amidst a crisis in the cost of living and energy, this seems to look different in line with people’s differing capacities to act. Across the research that has tested this frame over the past two years, personal efficacy for climate change has remained relatively low which seems to partly stem from growing political distrust.

Next steps: outstanding questions

[3] Climate Outreach, (2022), “NEW: Net zero, fairness and climate politics”, [online].

Research conducted in 2022 in collaboration with ECF and YouGov explored the views and perceptions of the four segments who tend to vote more centre-right; Backbone Conservatives, Loyal Nationals, Established Liberals and Disengaged Traditionalists. The research provides recommendations for engaging with these segments around their perceptions of ‘fairness’, Net Zero policies and their willingness to act.

[4] McLaren, L., Kingston, A., Royce, J. and Anstead, C., (2021), “Goodlife 2030, Understanding UK Citizens’ Visions of a Good Life”, Purpose Disruptors.

In 2021, research was conducted by Purpose Disruptors and Insight Climate Collective on the values-shifts that have happened since the COVID-19 pandemic and what the segments’ vision of a good life in 2030 looks like now. The segments focused on in this research were: Loyal Nationals, Civic Pragmatists, and Established Liberals.

[5] Tryl, L., Burns, C. and Dixon, T., (2021), “Dousing the Flames: How leaders can better navigate cultural change in 2020s Britain”, More in Common.

Research conducted in 2021 by More in Common explores how cultural change is navigated in Britain, and looks at the views and perceptions of the seven British segments on culture change and conflict. The report explores how leaders can navigate culture change without igniting cultural conflict.

[6] Wang, S., Latter, B., Nicholls, J., Sawas, A. and Shaw, C., (2021), “Britain Talks COP26: New insights on what the UK public want from the climate summit”. Oxford: Climate Outreach.

Research conducted in 2021 by Climate Outreach explores the challenges and opportunities of communicating about COP26. The research focused on Civic Pragmatists and Loyal Nationals, segments that were crucial to achieving a broad-reaching narrative around COP26. A randomised control trial with all seven segments tested four narratives; nature, global cooperation, green investment and transparency.

[7] The Behavioural Insights Team, (2021), “Which framing of climate communications resonates the most, COP26 Case Study”, [Internal Case Study & Blog], The Behavioural Insights Team.

Research conducted in 2022 by The Behavioural Insights Team commissioned by Cabinet Office’s COP26 Unit. The research used a randomised control trial with the seven British segments to test different ways of framing the importance of COP26.

The case study and blog summarising the key findings from this research were shared with us by the Authors, Kristina Londakova and Toby Park, via email.

[8] Raikes, L. and Cooper, B., (2022), “Talking Green: The UK Survey, Winning the Argument for Climate Action”, The Foundation for European Progressive Studies.

Research conducted in 2022 by the Foundation for European Progressive Studies and the Fabian Society tested messaging with four of the British segments, those that encompass progressive and working class groups that need to be targeted by politicians and activists; Progressive Activists, Civic Pragmatists, Disengaged Battlers, and Loyal Nationals.

[9] Shaw, C. and Wang, S., (2021), “After the lockdown? New lessons for building climate change engagement in the UK”, Oxford: Climate Outreach.

Research conducted in 2021 by Climate Outreach in collaboration with the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations. The research explores what COVID-19 means for climate communications, investigating the messaging that appeals to the seven British segments and how the experiences of the pandemic have shifted which messages resonate with the segments.

[12] Tryl, L., Burns, C.,Dixon, T. and Juan-Torres, M., (2021), “Democratic Repair: What Britons want from their democracy”, More in Common.

Research conducted in 2021 by More in Common explores the seven British segment’s views on democracy, looking more closely at the views of low-trust groups who are most disengaged from democratic participation; Disengaged Traditionalists, Disengaged Battlers and Loyal Nationals. These perceptions are explored against the democratic views of the most highly engaged group; Progressive Activists.

[13] Forward Action, (2021), “Generating digital leads using Britain Talks Climate framing”, in partnership with Hope for the Future, [online].

A case study completed by Forward Action and Hope for the Future in 2021 explores how to engage the seven British segments online using Facebook ads tailored to each segment. The facebook ads used different messaging and imagery to drive people to Hope for the Future subscriber sign-up pages which were again tailored to different segments. Resources include a web page, a video conversation, and a how-to guide. Supplementary data was shared with us by Forward Action.

[14] Extinction Rebellion UK Data Analysis and Insights Team, (2022), “Qualitative analysis of messaging for mobilisation talk promotion”, [Internal report], Extinction Rebellion UK.

Qualitative research conducted by the Extinction Rebellion UK Data Analysis and Insights Team looked at messaging to encourage people to engage with Extinction Rebellion and attend mobilisation talks. The research used the seven British segments as inspiration for designing Facebook ads, to explore content and framing that motivates different people. This research was shared with us by the Authors, Laura Thomas-Walters and Brian Spurling, via email.

[15] Tegg, B., (2021), “Findings & Recommendations for Parents for the Future (& Mothers Rise Up)”, [Internal Case Study], Climate Outreach Engagement Lab.

Research and analysis conducted by Beth Tegg in 2021 as part of a Climate Outreach Engagement Lab Innovation Partnership collaboration with Parents for the Future. The research surveyed the seven segments and used AB testing to explore frames and messaging that best resonate. The messages tested focus on children and future generations; protection of our children, ‘intergenerational togetherness’, inheritance of a healthy world, and giving our children the best possible chances. The slidedeck of results was shared with us by the author, Beth Tegg.

[1] Juan-Torres, M., Dixon, T. and Kimaram, A., (2020), “Britain’s Choice: Common Ground and Division in 2020s Britain”, More in Common.

[2] Wang, S., Corner, A., and Nicholls, J., (2020), “Britain Talks Climate: A toolkit for engaging the British public on climate change”. Oxford: Climate Outreach.

[10] Ipsos MORI, (2015), “2015 Political Monitor”, Ipsos, available at: https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/migrations/en-uk/files/Assets/Docs/Polls/Polmon-april2015-issues-charts4.pdf (accessed: 16 September 2022).

[11] Prescott-Smith, S., (2019), “Which issues will decide the general election?”, YouGov, available at: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/11/07/which-issues-will-decide-general-election (accessed: 16 September 2022).

[16] Capstick, S., Khosla, R. and Wang, S., (2020), “Chapter 6. Bridging the gap: The role of equitable low-carbon lifestyles”. In Emissions Gap Report 2020. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi.

Tables 1-6 highlight various frames that were used across the reviewed research and resources based on the six different themes focussed on in this review. The tables group together language from the different research which serve as examples of frames that were used for the overarching themes. It should be noted that this grouped together language does not signify frames that were specifically used in all sources cited, but rather serve as examples of frames used based on overarching themes.

Sign up for monthly updates on our new research and practical guides, upcoming events, team vacancies and occasional fundraising initiatives. Here is our privacy notice.