Addressing climate misinformation: How we help policymakers build community resilience against far-right narratives
How is Ripple Research using large-scale data analysis to uncover the drivers of climate misinformation? We share key insights from our recent investigations in a conversation with C40's David Miller.
Summary
Ripple Research uses large-scale data analysis and behavioural insights to uncover how climate misinformation breaks down trust and impedes action at both individual and systemic levels. Our work shows how narratives like “soyboys,” which weaponise masculinity to undermine sustainable diets, and conspiratorial framings of farming policies as “climate communism” distort public perception and obstruct meaningful climate action. In this piece, we discuss the mechanisms driving these narratives and offer strategies for policymakers to rebuild trust, counter disinformation, and strengthen community resilience.
The climate crisis is one of the most pressing challenges of our time. Rising temperatures, extreme weather events, and environmental degradation have severely impacted communities worldwide, threatening public health, food security, and economic stability. In the last few years, we have seen an increased focus on meaningful climate action, with governments announcing robust, science-backed policies to drive the transition to a low-carbon economy, focusing on mitigation, adaptation, and resilience. However, achieving the necessary shifts in public behaviour and policy frameworks is not that easy.
In the digital age, misinformation about climate change has become increasingly pervasive, distorting public understanding of both the severity of the crisis and the efficacy of proposed solutions. Ripple Research has been actively working to understand the contours of climate polarization and its impact on public opinion and policy reforms. We harness massive amounts of public data—millions of people’s genuine, unfiltered opinions and insights shared online—and analyze them to reveal the social and cultural forces shaping today’s climate discourse. Our research, featured in numerous global media outlets, breaks down the complex landscape of misinformation narratives that fuel climate scepticism, amplify divisive rhetoric, and hinder policy action.
Last week, our Policy and Research Lead Pragnya Senapati sat down with David Miller, Managing Director of the C40 Centre for City Climate Policy and Economy and host of the Cities 1.5 podcast, to discuss how Ripple Research uses a combination of large-scale data, behavioural, and cultural insights to identify, analyze, and address the pervasive impact of climate-related dis- and misinformation. The conversation focused on our extensive research uncovering the mechanisms behind dis- and misinformation at the nexus of climate and health—the sources, the denialist network strategies, and the tactics used to impede progress on climate action.
The context:
While misinformation has permeated nearly every facet of modern life—spanning politics, policy, and health—climate misinformation remains a massive yet largely under-explored issue. Ripple Research’s foray into the climate misinformation space stemmed from our extensive experience addressing health misinformation during the COVID-19 pandemic. One of our first major projects was a ten-country analysis focused on how misinformation influenced health-seeking behaviours during public health emergencies. Through large-scale sentiment- and demographic audience analysis, we identified how misinformation narratives surrounding vaccines fueled health hesitancy, shifting collective action into doubt and resistance.
When we turned to climate change, we noticed similar patterns. Misinformation has given rise to climate hesitancy—the belief that climate solutions are unnecessary, too costly, or even harmful—further entrenching societal divides and obstructing collective action on climate change.
For many organizations, including governments, NGOs, advocacy groups, and academic institutions, this widespread hesitancy can pose several challenges: public reluctance to participate in climate action efforts, adopt climate-friendly lifestyle choices, or support regulatory changes needed for systemic transformation.
Why it matters:
We recognized early on that climate change is an inherently personal issue. The choices people make daily—around food, travel, and lifestyle—are directly linked to the climate action outcomes that we seek. False or misleading narratives, particularly around food systems and sustainable diets, exacerbate confusion and in the absence of a reliable information ecosystem, one struggles to make choices that are beneficial for the planet.
Ripple Research’s investigation into misinformation surrounding animal-centric diets, and later the 2022-23 Dutch Farmers' Protests against the national nitrogen policy, reveals how climate change discussions are increasingly hijacked by far-right elements online. This surge in right-wing activity strategically intertwines concepts of individual liberty, scepticism towards climate science, and conspiratorial narratives, framing climate action initiatives and policies as overreach and tyranny. The primary objective of these misinformation narratives is to erode trust in governments and science, particularly in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Deploying proactive measures to counter misinformation is crucial for transparent governance and a well-informed electorate. That’s why our work aims to rebuild trust, foster agency, and create a healthier, more resilient information ecosystem. After all, information drives behaviour, and behaviour determines outcomes—whether for personal well-being, planetary health, or democratic integrity. With this in mind, here are three key insights from our research and podcast conversation that highlight the mechanisms driving climate misinformation and the strategies needed to address it.
Insight 1: Misinformation is overwhelming the conversation around farmer protests, sowing doubt and distrust, and making it harder for governments and farmers to reach common ground
Over the past year, we have seen farming communities worldwide mobilize in response to the perceived disconnect between environmental policy frameworks and the operational realities of agriculture. In Canada, farmers protested regulatory measures that they believed jeopardized their economic sustainability. Similarly, in the UK, widespread frustrations over initiatives like the Sustainable Farming Scheme sparked protests outside Westminster. And across the EU, from Brussels to Berlin and Madrid to Paris, farmers have voiced their opposition to policy-driven restrictions on pesticide use, and water allocation, amongst others. This wave of protests reflects a deepening global tension, with farmers increasingly feeling they are being asked to bear a disproportionate share of the climate policy burden.
In 2022, when the Dutch government put forth an ambitious €25 billion plan, aiming to cut nitrogen emissions by half by 2030, farmers blocked roads and gathered outside politicians' homes in protest. Ripple Research created the largest dataset on online misinformation surrounding the Dutch farmers’ protests to better understand the dynamics of misleading narratives associated with the issue. These narratives, driven by far-right influencers and media, reframed the Dutch nitrogen policy as an example of a broader, conspiratorial 'green agenda'—one that had nothing to do with the policy specifics and everything to do with stoking fears about ‘globalists’ unfairly targeting and controlling hardworking, honest farmers. This distortion of facts created a polarized environment, making it difficult for farmers and governments to engage in constructive dialogue or build consensus around the policy's intended goals. The resulting division not only obstructed collaborative policymaking but also eroded trust in the public institutions responsible for crafting and enforcing regulations.
On a larger scale, it’s clear that misinformation—and particularly narratives pushed by far-right actors—benefits these same far-right groups. They’re not merely amplifying local issues; they’re co-opting the challenges facing Dutch farmers and spinning them into a broader, manufactured movement of ‘solidarity’ that advances their own anti-regulation agendas and weakens momentum for climate action. We will further explore how climate misinformation weakens grassroots support for climate policies and initiatives pertaining to sustainable agriculture in an upcoming post.
Insight 2: Misinformation uses “soy boys”, and other such weapons to turn sustainable diets into a culture war and delay action on that front
Food is central to both personal identity and cultural values, representing comfort, tradition, and even social status. Misinfluencers often exploit this emotional connection, spreading far-right narratives about climate-friendly diets by framing them as threats to personal identity, gender norms, and cultural heritage. When Ripple Research conducted an in-depth analysis of misinformation surrounding meat, dairy, and animal-centric diets, we found that these narratives often position plant-based eating as part of a "globalist agenda" to evoke fears that traditional food practices will be erased, replaced by foreign, unfamiliar diets. Framing sustainable lifestyle choices as a foreign imposition rather than a locally driven, environmentally beneficial solution turns crucial policy shifts into ideological battlegrounds, thereby undermining effective climate action.
Our dataset, created using advanced narrative and discourse analysis methods, emphasized how far-right elements in the digital space also rely on gender markers to discourage and ostracize people from adopting climate-friendly diets. Derogatory terms like "Soy boys" are commonly used to ridicule men who choose sustainable eating habits, suggesting that plant-based diets conflict with traditional masculine ideals. This gendered rhetoric not only undermines scientific evidence but further deepens societal divisions and reinforces resistance to climate solutions.
Insight 3: Misinformation is disrupting policymaking and impeding institutional climate action
Our work has revealed how misinformation disrupts policymaking processes, even when policies are designed to address specific, urgent local challenges. Scientific and evidence-based solutions often encounter resistance fuelled by disinformation, transforming practical, beneficial policies into contentious battlegrounds.
Our research on misinformation narratives found this pattern in the case of New York City. There, a city-level proposal to reduce food-related greenhouse gas emissions in public facilities by cutting back on meat and dairy—a science-backed measure aimed at improving urban sustainability. Almost immediately after the announcement, misinformation campaigns reframed the initiative as a “war on meat,” suggesting it was an attack on personal freedoms. Viral narratives spread rapidly, invoking fears of government overreach and using inflammatory phrases like "climate communism" to stoke outrage.
This pattern isn’t unique to New York - or any city, or any geography. We've seen, through our research, how policies designed to meet local climate needs, are derailed by targeted disinformation campaigns. These narratives erode public trust in both the policies and the institutions behind them, undermining progress even when the benefits of such policies are clear.
As such, policymakers must anticipate these narratives, build public trust, and engage communities with transparency to safeguard the success of local climate action.
Where do we go from here?
To combat the systemic barriers posed by misinformation, solutions must address both sides of the equation: the policymaker’s ability to foresee and counter disinformation, and the public’s capacity to navigate and resist it.
Building foresight into policymaking
One critical aspect of overcoming misinformation lies in integrating foresight into the policymaking process. Policymakers must anticipate how disinformation might target their initiatives and prepare accordingly. This involves being proactive - by understanding their constituents’ specific fears, values, and concerns, and by being aware of the undercurrent of misinformation narratives.
Empowering constituents through media literacy
The second essential component is equipping the public with the tools to critically assess the information they encounter. Media literacy—especially in the context of climate—acts as a vaccine against misinformation, enabling people to navigate the complexities of today’s information ecosystem with greater confidence.
Ripple Research has designed and implemented transformative education and engagement initiatives to build resilience against misinformation. For instance, our collaboration with Professor Gunnar Schade at Texas A&M University involved students analysing climate misinformation on LinkedIn. This project strengthened their media and digital literacy skills while contributing to a novel dataset on professional disinformation. By enabling participants to identify and categorise disinformation narratives, the programme not only fostered individual empowerment but also highlighted the role of structured learning environments in combating misinformation.
Listen to the full podcast episode on Cities 1.5. Thanks to David and the C40 team for having us!
Do you share our vision for building sustainable, more informed communities that are resilient to climate misinformation? We’d love to work together.
Subscribe to our blog and follow us on LinkedIn.