Climate change has serious consequences for human health: more intense heatwaves, the spread of diseases to new regions, wildfire smoke, and increasing allergies all directly affect people’s bodies and wellbeing. These issues impact not only vulnerable groups, but everyone, yet many people are not aware of this connection. Research shows that communicating the health impacts of climate change more clearly can lead to increased engagement with the topic—even among those who are indifferent or skeptical.
To understand why and how the link between climate change and human health can support climate communication, we look at three studies.
What questions do the studies address?
Thier et al. (2025), in “The Impact of Public Health Messages on Audience Engagement and Collective Climate Action,” examine whether and in what ways health-focused messages can strengthen engagement and willingness to act on climate issues.
Uppalapati et al. (2025), in their broad review “Public Engagement with Climate Change and Health: A Global Literature Review,” likewise investigate how the climate–health connection can be communicated effectively.
Finally, Peters et al. (2022), in “Evidence-Based Recommendations for Communicating the Impacts of Climate Change on Health,” take a more practical perspective and explore which communication strategies are best suited to convey this climate–health link most effectively.
Which methods were used, and how robust are they?
All three studies are review articles summarizing existing empirical research. The authors did not document a systematic search strategy, which makes it somewhat harder to ensure that no important publications were overlooked.
Even so, two factors contribute significantly to the robustness of these studies. First, they were written by teams at well-regarded institutions that have conducted extensive research on the topic themselves—and are therefore deeply familiar with the field. Second, the articles were published in established scientific journals, where they underwent peer review to assess their completeness and the coherence of their arguments.
What are the key findings, and why are they relevant for climate communication?
The connection between human health and climate change becomes evident when considering impacts such as more intense heatwaves and other extreme weather events, as well as the rising incidence of previously rare diseases and allergies. Yet, according to Thier et al. (2025), this link is rarely highlighted in German or international media.
Uppalapati et al. (2025) show that emphasizing this connection is an effective way to reach people who are indifferent or skeptical about climate change. Framing climate impacts in terms of health makes the issue less distant or abstract, and more tangible, with many people being particularly responsive to measures that jointly mitigate climate change and improve personal health.
Stressing the health benefits of climate action increases personal engagement and support for climate policies among broad segments of the population. This effect is especially pronounced among groups that tend to be more skeptical about climate issues—for example, many conservative voters (Uppalapati et al. 2025).
Trust is a resource
All three studies highlight that communication is especially effective when it comes from a trusted source. When it comes to climate change and health, people tend to place strong trust in individuals from their personal networks and in organizations they feel connected to.
Publicly recognized experts also enjoy high levels of trust. According to the studies discussed here, this includes especially physicians and other public health professionals. They are therefore particularly well positioned to explain the links between climate change and health.
According to Dr. Anne Reif, who researches trust in science at the University of Hamburg, climate scientists continue to be held in high regard in Germany and can thus serve as effective messengers.
More than numbers
Peters et al. (2022) emphasize that audiences should be addressed in multiple ways when communicating about health-related topics. According to the study, the literature highlights several useful approaches.
Visual information—such as graphics and images—engages people differently than text or spoken communication. Visuals can help convey risks and threats on an emotional level, and they can also link possible actions to positive feelings. This, in turn, helps temper defensive or reactionary impulses that the issue of climate change can provoke.
Another effective strategy, according to Peters et al. (2022), is to present messages in a narrative structure—using stories with relatable characters. When well crafted, such narratives allow audiences to place themselves in the shoes of the protagonists, making them more open to their perspectives and arguments.
Finally, communicators can draw on social norms, as many people orient their behavior strongly toward what others around them do (Peters et al. 2022). Survey findings can convey “descriptive” norms by showing how many people participate in or support certain climate measures. Alternatively, messages can highlight which behaviors are viewed positively or negatively by others—so-called “injunctive norms.”
What can be derived from the studies for practical application?
To begin with, the health impacts of climate change deserve greater attention, as the studies discussed here show that this perspective can help reach audiences that are otherwise difficult to engage.
Yet, the connection between health and climate is often not made—for example, in reporting on summer heatwaves, where coverage usually focuses either on climate change, or on health, but rarely on both (Thier et al. 2025).
Shifting more attention to the climate–health nexus is important partly because it equips people with knowledge needed to protect their own health. Information and guidance on what to do during wildfires or heatwaves, or on how to respond to worsening risks of infection due to climate change, for instance, empowers audiences to take action in their everyday lives to protect themselves and those close to them.
In addition, emphasizing its health consequences makes climate change more tangible for many people. When the impacts on one’s own environment are centered, climate change stops feeling like a distant issue—one that affects, for instance, polar bears or communities in the Amazon—and becomes a local, personal concern. This increases people’s willingness to engage or to support political measures aimed at protecting both climate and health.
Finally, focusing on the direct positive effects of climate action on personal health—the so-called “co-benefits”—can help depolarize politically contentious topics. For instance, the debate around emissions from combustion engines is also a debate about air quality in cities, and thus about public health.
Getting closer to the audience
The most effective strategy for reaching diverse target groups is to identify messengers who already enjoy high levels of trust with the audience. In the context of health and climate change, this can include physicians and, where relevant, public institutions such as health ministries.
However, Dr. Mike Farjam and Dr. Anne Reif, researchers at the Chair for Climate and Science Communication at the University of Hamburg, caution that existing trust can be undermined if messengers speak outside their area of expertise.
Messengers do not necessarily have to be widely recognized experts. People from an individual’s social environment, online networks, communities, or organizations to which the audience feels connected can also command significant trust.
If suitable messengers cannot be identified or engaged in such communication efforts, the values and norms of the audience can also be leveraged. For example, highlighting that many people in one’s own social circles or in groups—or in the population more broadly—are already concerned with the issue or consider it important.
Providing more than information
Information, including statistical data, is important for communicating risks, but it can easily overwhelm people. One helpful approach is to translate statistical figures into understandable metaphors to make them more tangible. A well-known example is describing a heatwave that was once a “once-in-a-century” event as something that now occurs every decade.
Visual information—such as graphics and images—is often highly effective in conveying risks and strategies for action. Ideally, visuals are combined with written or spoken information, as the combination of different stimuli helps reinforce the message.
Narratives—information presented in story form—offer another powerful way to encourage behavioral change. These stories should address problems, causes, solutions, and responsibilities, and ideally feature characters who the audience can relate to.
References
Thier, K., Campbell, E., Uppalapati, S. S., Kotcher, J., & Maibach, E. (2025). The impact of public health messages on audience engagement and collective climate action. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 64, 101539. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2025.101539
Peters, E., Boyd, P., Cameron, L. D., Contractor, N., Diefenbach, M. A., Fleszar-Pavlovic, S., Markowitz, E., Salas, R. N., & Stephens, K. K. (2022). Evidence-based recommendations for communicating the impacts of climate change on health. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 12(4), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1093/tbm/ibac029
Uppalapati, S. S., Campbell, E., Kotcher, J., Thier, K., Ansah, P., Gour, N., & Maibach, E. (2025). Public Engagement with Climate Change and Health: A Global Literature Review. EcoHealth. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10393-025-01756-4