Even in Los Angeles communities facing the worst impacts of climate change, the term favored by advocates feels unfamiliar
The term “climate justice” is favored by some activists and policymakers to highlight the uneven impacts of climate change on low-income communities. In a recent study, we found “climate justice” is an unfamiliar term that elicits little concern in Los Angeles County, even among low-income residents who would benefit the most from climate efforts.
Low-income communities suffer the most from climate change despite contributing the least to it. Poor people tend to live in areas prone to climate-related disasters, and they have fewer resources to prepare for climate change or repair damage caused by it.
Advocates use “climate justice” to encourage support for policies that help low-income communities overcome climate change, such as legislation that funds pollution removal in low-income neighborhoods. But “climate justice” does little to promote public concern and support for action, and those seeking fairer climate policies are better off using more familiar terms.
The Study
To understand whether the term “climate justice” is more effective than just saying “climate change” or using other terms, we conducted a survey with a representative sample of 1,048 Los Angeles County residents.
There are two reasons we chose to survey Angelenos. First, the county regularly experiences wildfires, heat waves, and floods, and it is located in one of the U.S. states most affected by climate change. Second, climate injustice is particularly prevalent in Los Angeles County, which has one of the largest income gaps in the nation.
We divided participants into those with an annual household income under $60,000—considered relatively low-income for the county—and those earning $60,000 or more. Each participant received questions about one term—either “climate justice,” “climate change,” “global warming,” “climate crisis,” or “climate emergency”—and were first asked how familiar they were with it.
Climate justice was by far the least familiar term. Figure 1 shows that the term “climate justice” was less familiar than each other term, including among the low-income group. “Climate change” and “global warming” were the most familiar in each income group, followed by “climate crisis” and “climate emergency.”
Climate justice elicited the least concern and willingness to act. Participants were then asked how concerned they were about each term, how urgent they thought it was to do something about it, and how willing they were to do something about it. Figure 2 shows that “climate justice” elicited less concern than each of the other terms, including among the low-income group. “Climate change” and “global warming” elicited the most concern in each income group, followed by “climate crisis” and “climate emergency.” “Climate justice” elicited by far the least concern. The same pattern was also found for perceived urgency and willingness to act, such as supporting climate-friendly policies and eating less red meat.
It is hard to be concerned about an unfamiliar term. The relatively poor ratings of the term “climate justice” were explained by its limited familiarity. This might mean that it is hard be concerned about something that is unfamiliar, or to feel motivated to act upon it.
The Takeaway
Just say “climate change” or “global warming.” The terms “climate change” and “global warming” are widely familiar and elicit broad public concern and willingness to act. These terms work well across income groups and across the political spectrum. The term “climate justice” should be reserved for audiences that have specialized understanding of the issue. Or, if “climate justice” must be discussed, then provide an explanation. A recent Yale study similarly found that only one-third of Americans have heard of “climate justice,” but after reading a description a more Americans support it than oppose it.
Keep it simple. Advocates and policymakers often prefer to use specialized terms like “climate justice” when they communicate with each other. But the terms that they prefer may not make sense to the general public. Using familiar language like “climate change” or “global warming” will elicit more public concern and willingness to act.
Jenna Blyler is a psychology doctoral student at the USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences. Wändi Bruine de Bruin is a senior scholar and director of the Behavioral Science and Policy Initiative at the USC Schaeffer Institute for Public Policy & Government Service.
