Visuals as a Catalyst for Climate Science Communication

Abstract

Visual science communicators (aka science illustrators) are an underutilized resource in the collaborative effort underway to foment changes in policy and behavior necessary to address the unfolding climate crisis. While science illustrations have a robust history in textbooks and picture books, they are quickly replaced with stock imagery outside those realms, particularly when describing climate change topics. Visual science communicators are practitioners who have a mastery of graphic design principles and various art forms, but are also, importantly, fluent in scientific concepts. With this unique combination of skills, the visuals they produce can deliver complex information in concise, easy-to-understand ways and make climate information more culturally accessible, ultimately resulting in broader community engagement. In order to bring the benefits of illustration into the climate education effort effectively, climate advocates must budget for visuals and bring professional visual science communicators into the fold.

If someone told you that your city produced 54 million tons of carbon dioxide gas each year in emissions, you might be impressed. But then you would realize you really have no idea what 54 million tons of gas looks like—is that a lot? A little? Is that concerning? And you’re suddenly lost. In 2012, a data visualization firm called Real World Visuals and the Environmental Defense Fund recognized this as an opportunity to experiment with how they could make this very statistic, the annual CO₂ emissions for New York City, instantly understood by audiences “who don’t know they need to know” (Real World Visuals, 2017).

Their brilliant solution was to translate the volume of a single metric ton of carbon dioxide gas into a large blue sphere measuring 33 feet across. They then animated the streets of New York as these spheres accumulate at the rate of one per 0.58 s. A single day’s emissions form a pile of spheres roughly the height of the Empire State Building. Eventually, 1 year’s worth of carbon emissions forms an imposing mountain of blue balls covering Manhattan Island. Since its publication, the animation has been cited in over 100 articles and blogs (Fig. 1) and viewed over 400,000 times on YouTube (Real World Visuals, 2012).

Fig. 1

Stills from the animated sequence “Carbon Emissions in New York in 2010” (courtesy of Real World Visuals). (a) Each 33-foot sphere represents 1 metric ton of CO₂ emissions. (b) Daily emissions. (c) Annual emissions. (d) Collage of some of the >100 articles and blogs featuring the images and animation (Real World Visuals, 2012). (Images used with permission)

Carbon Visuals and the Environmental Defense Fund could have simply shared the numbers with the world: 54,349,650 metric tons of carbon dioxide added to the atmosphere by New York City in 2010—that’s 148,903 tons a day, 6204 tons an hour, and 1.72 tons a second. But they would have lost most of us who aren’t accustomed to dealing with large numbers and/or who don’t have a working concept of how much gas weighs (beyond “very little”). Their great insight was that we are visual animals. Making the invisible visible was all that was needed to get an important point across about the untenable rate of greenhouse gas emissions coming from New York. And we can look to the overwhelmingly positive media response and high engagement numbers on YouTube as evidence of the potential for great visuals to carry science messages far and wide (Real World Visuals, 2012).

The success of Carbon Visuals’ animation was no accident. Their creatives have backgrounds in both art and science. They are able to delve into the details of the science without intimidation and then zoom out to apply their understanding of how people see things to create visuals that are intuitive and striking. They are quintessential examples of what we call visual science communicators.

In this chapter, we aim to draw back the curtain on what visual science communicators can bring to the table on climate change communications. We break down the many fronts on which visual collaborations can effectively push climate science forward. With visuals that have the power to transcend language and cultural barriers, learning differences, and knowledge or skill gaps (between highly specialized scientists and your average Weather Channel watcher, for example), we have the opportunity to broaden and deepen engagement as quickly as possible—improving understanding and increasing the rate of cultural uptake of mitigation and adaptation skills. We are here, with our sleeves rolled up, ready to work with scientists, policymakers, and communications teams on the critical work of climate communication.

From Science Illustration to Visual Science Communication

Science illustration is a natural collaboration between two disciplines—science and art—with common roots in observation. In the Age of Exploration, scientists routinely documented their discoveries, mapped out their knowledge, and drew elaborate illustrations of exotic species to share their stories with people back home. In the twentieth century, our increasingly specialized world siloed scientists apart from artists. Exacerbating this gap was fine art’s turn away from realism toward abstraction and modernism in the nineteenth century where concepts and processes eclipsed technical skill (Remington & Pontis, 2021). Despite this increasing trend of siloed disciplines, an enthusiastic group of practitioners known as science illustrators persevered, bridging the gap between science and art.

Science illustrators comprise a specialized group with advanced training in both science and art. Their work has been, until recently, primarily descriptive with most of their efforts spent documenting the anatomy of plants and animals. Traditional science illustration work goes back well beyond the Renaissance and scientists/artists like Leonardo da Vinci (d. 1519), human anatomists like Andre Vesalius (d. 1564), and botanical artists like Leonhart Fuchs (d.1566), to the exacting botanical paintings of Xu Xi (China, d. 975) and the painters of the Tomb of Nebamun (Egypt, 1350 BCE). You’ll recognize contemporary practitioners’ work in medical settings (patient pamphlets and doctors’ offices), in resources like birding books, specialty science journals, and popular science magazines.

As science advances into understanding more and more of what cannot be seen easily, or seen at all, traditional scientific illustration is changing too. It has become a valuable method of conveying complex concepts like minute cellular and molecular structures and biochemical mechanisms and processes (see, for example, Jennifer Fairman’s spectacular depictions of SARS-CoV-2 done for the Johns Hopkins medical community at the height of the pandemic (Fairman Studios, 2020) and Mesa Schumacher’s spread for National Geographic on viruses in general (Mesa Studios, 2021)). At the other extreme of the scale of scientific exploration, it is an invaluable tool for describing the vastness of space and our understanding of the physics of the universe (see space artists such as Mark Garlick (n.d.) and Lynette Cook (1998)). Of critical importance to us at this moment in history, it can also be used to illustrate complex systems and how they work, as in Xavier Pita’s masterfully executed tableau titled “Sea Change in the Red Sea; Adapting to Climate Change” (Fig. 2).

Fig. 2

In this sweeping depiction of how rising sea levels will affect the Red Sea coastline, visual science communicator Xavier Pita literally brings a solution-minded approach to the fore by illustrating two scenarios—how the coastline might change if we invest in infrastructure adaptations (front) and what we might face if we do nothing (back). In this way, Pita unpacks the suite of changes that may or may not unfold in the complex interplay of climate change and mitigation efforts. (Illustration by Xavier Pita/King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST, 2021). Image used with permission)

In these cases, what a select few scientists can view directly with highly specialized equipment or understand via complex calculations is made accessible to much larger audiences with images that feel intuitive and real. Creating these illustrations requires a significant understanding of the science and the ability to translate and crystallize complex information into an image that tells the story and can be readily understood.

Reflecting this change in how science has advanced, the skill set of science illustrators has also changed in stride to stay relevant. Consequently, many science illustrators have adopted the title “Visual Science Communicator” to more accurately reflect the broad array of visual art tools and science communication skills they have at their disposal. Visual science communicators typically have formal training in both science and art, which results in a unique combination of skills: a high level of understanding of the science and the ability to distill and communicate that information visually. They excel at telling engaging stories through well-designed graphics and illustrations that appeal to wide and varied audiences. These are the people who are critical to establishing a robust catalog of imagery that accurately and effectively conveys the seriousness of our climate situation and spurs policymakers and the public to act swiftly and decisively.

Why Are Visuals More Effective Than Words Alone?

A striking characteristic of human memory is that pictures are remembered better than words (Grady et al., 1998, p. 2703).

If a story does not sustain our attention, then the brain will look for something else more interesting to do (Zak, 2015, p. 6).

With the proliferation of the Internet, smartphones, and ubiquitous online publishing, information is more accessible than ever. Our attention has become a valuable commodity, with advertisers finding more ways to monopolize it and monetize it (Iyengar & Massey, 2018). As a result, accurate information has a tougher slog to break through the never-ending scrolling we engage in, and people increasingly ask the question “why should I care?” or “what can I possibly do about it?” when confronted with challenging scenarios. We need tools to compete effectively, engage viewers, and inspire action. Visuals—particularly those with a narrative bent that engage our emotions and trigger the neurotransmitter oxytocin—are a powerful tool to harness in this pursuit (Zak, 2015).

Research supports the assertion that visuals add to the impact of scientific endeavors by improving dissemination and deepening engagement (Ibrahim et al., 2017; Zaelzer, 2020). Aside from the anecdotal evidence members of the general public can easily conjure (e.g., school textbooks chock full of explanatory figures, museum displays employing heavy use of two-dimensional and three-dimensional visuals, and a nearly endless supply of social media feeds populated with eye-catching imagery), studies suggest that when put into the world with imagery, original scientific papers enjoy more engagement on platforms like Twitter than papers that are tweeted without (Ibrahim et al., 2017; Koo et al., 2019). Simply put, using effective imagery translates to increased visibility for scientists’ research. The value in increased visibility need hardly be argued among researchers, but it begs the question: How does this ultimately translate to a better informed and engaged public, particularly on the vexing problem of implementing climate change solutions?

For one, images are processed differently than words and seem to engage the memory centers of the brain more directly (Grady et al., 1998). Furthermore, imagery that is novel and/or triggers emotions can heighten attention and memory in ways that words cannot (Grady et al., 1998; Zaelzer, 2020; Zak, 2015). After all, there’s only one way to write the word “water” but near-infinite ways to depict it visually. In this way, images can serve as a universal communication tool reaching beyond language and education barriers (Zaelzer, 2020). They can communicate large data sets and real-world impacts “at a glance” (e.g., weather patterns), allowing easier comparison of findings. And they have the power, as with infographics, to mitigate information overload by visualizing findings and solutions in more succinct and appealing ways (Houser, 2020).

When paired with storytelling principles, images can invite viewers along for a ride, increasing their sense of empowerment and belonging. This often entails utilizing artistic techniques that evoke feelings in a viewer, ideally allowing the transfer of information in nonthreatening ways, such as by adding culturally sensitive, emotionally moving, and/or entertaining content (Hassenzahl et al., 2013; Houser, 2020). Neuroscientific studies have shown that areas of the brain involved in processing visual, esthetic, and emotional stimuli—the prefrontal cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, amygdala, and insula (the limbic system)—are closely linked to learning and memory, as well as decision-making under social pressure (Zaelzer, 2020). All of these aspects give visual science communication in government, NGOs, news media, pop culture, youth education, and informal learning environments an outsized role in educating the public and spurring societal change.

Invisible Visualizers?

Increasingly, there is a trend in academic circles to train scientists and educators to be better science communicators (Thorp, 2021). Organizations like the Alan Alda Center for Science Communication and conferences like ComSciCon do an admirable job of training thousands of scientists each year in this endeavor. Typically, these programs focus on written communication, but conversations about visual communication do occasionally seep into their curricula. This training for academics has great value, as scientists benefit from an increased understanding of the importance of communication in everything from grant writing to reporting results, but also an appreciation of the skill set that is required to be a good communicator. However, this cannot be a replacement for collaborating with trained science communicators.

As H. Holden Thorp points out in a recent editorial for Science, “not every scientist wants to take time away from research to be a voice for science… most scientists prefer to persuade by performing meticulous, credible work” (Thorp, 2021, para 3). Though he is referring specifically to science writers, the same holds true for visual science communication—expecting every scientist and researcher to also be a graphics expert is unrealistic. For most people then, teaming up with professionals who specialize in communicating with the public is the best use of their time and funds. The time is ripe to recognize that science research and science communication are different, equally skilled, technical specialties. We must build teams of professionals with the broad array of skills necessary to disseminate research, make it relevant, and make it actionable to critical masses of people around the globe. These teams absolutely should include specialists such as visual science communicators.

Astonishingly, an outsized portion of people looking to increase their reach via visual science communication (often referred to as “SciComm”) have no idea where to find professionals in the field or how to go about productive collaborations. In a pinch, academics equip graduate students with Adobe Photoshop or Illustrator and ask them to create figures with little or no training in visual arts. Likewise, publishers may tap social media editors and graphic designers who may well have good design skills, but lack sufficient understanding of the science. Despite the rise in popularity of the “graphical abstract” in a number of peer-reviewed medical journals, numerous guidelines available to authors on the nuts and bolts of creating graphical abstracts fail to mention that there are visual science communicators trained to do this work. Contributing to the problem with advocating for the use of trained visual science communicators in science outreach efforts are the multiple terms we use to describe what we do: “science illustrator,” “data visualizer,” “information architect,” etc., all describe various specialties that can all fall under the umbrella of visual science communication. Adopting the overarching umbrella term as an industry standard with subspecialties such as “data visualizer,” “infographics specialist,” etc., contained within will only help others conceptualize what we can offer.

Finding a visual science communications professional is easy if you know where to look. There are several professional associations of visual science communicators in the United States and Europe, each with hundreds of skilled and accomplished members. These include the Guild of Natural Science Illustrators (GNSI), the Association of Medical Illustrators (AMI), and the Association Européenne des Illustrateurs Médicaux et Scientifiques (AEIMS), among others. More specialized organizations cater to subfields such as the International Association of Astronomical Artists, the American Society of Botanical Artists, and the UK-based Society of Botanical Artists. There are also numerous small companies in the USA and elsewhere that specialize in science-based visual storytelling. Figures in published works often include a credit line or acknowledgment of the artist (or at least they should) allowing one to find reputable illustrators that way. Resources such as the AMI’s Medical Illustration and Animation Sourcebook (2019) and GNSI’s (n.d.) online gallery of practicing visual science communicators offer a convenient concentration of professionals who advertise their portfolios to potential clients in the science and medical illustration realms. Additionally, medical illustration programs and the numerous certificate programs in science illustration can serve as valuable resources (see the AMI’s list of Graduate, Undergraduate and Certificate Programs for training medical illustrators at the Association of Medical Illustrators (2000) and the GNSI’s expansive list including single courses and certificate programs for people interested in broader science illustration on their website’s education page and via their monthly newsletter (2019)). Often, emailing the instructor of a science illustration program can open the door to many talented and eager professionals, some fresh out of school and others with years of experience.

Though we highly recommend seeking out visual science communicators to collaborate with, there are other models that exist. Recognizing the very real constraints of funding, companies like BioRender are attempting to create tools that assemble icons and spot images in automated ways to create figures for research papers and presentations—a sort of DIY tool for researchers on a budget. ClimateVisuals.org has built a curated library of photographs depicting positive and inspiring actions by communities worldwide as they adapt to their new climate realities. These photographs are available for use by climate communicators free of charge, many under Creative Commons licenses. But though these types of resources have real benefits, they do not yet approach the utility of having visual science communicators embedded in outreach and communications efforts across research, news media, public health, and educational institutions.

PART I: What Visual Science Communicators Bring to the SciComm Table

I work with some of the best science communicators in the world, and I see how hard they have endeavored to hone their craft. This is a profession and a full-time job - not something that can be picked up in a workshop. —H. Holden Thorp, Editor-in-Chief, Science journals (Thorp, 2021, para 4).

Drawing is really hard (Colbert & Munroe, 2014, 01:35).

Research Publications and Academic Training

There are many situations in which academics working on climate research could take better advantage of the power of visual science communication. Poster sessions—where research results are displayed visually with text and graphics—have been integral parts of scientific conferences for decades. Yet the concept of submitting a graphical abstract, also known as a visual abstract, to be shared in online settings where scientists convene is relatively new (Ibrahim et al., 2017). Despite the widespread adoption of graphical abstracts in at least 75 medical journals (Ramos & Concepcion, 2020), a quick survey of author guidelines for the top journals publishing climate science reveals no mention of graphical abstracts to promote engagement or dissemination of critical research.

In the current landscape, without access to staff visual science communicators, researchers’ graduate students, lab techs, and postdocs—who are often not interested in or able to provide satisfactory graphics for their papers—may resort to repurposing old publication graphics. If a repurposed diagram is not laser-focused on communicating the author’s intent, it fails to inform quickly and seamlessly and risks losing the viewer altogether. In teaching, this is particularly important, but nowhere is it more important than on social media, where scientific conversations and informal learning are increasingly happening (Ramos & Concepcion, 2020).

Ibrahim et al. (2017) found that adding quality graphics to Twitter posts about scientific research leads to higher impact factors for published papers and greater reach in the scientific community, the news media, and beyond. It follows that dedicating resources to at least one visual science communicator in an academic department, or even one position shared across closely related departments (where budget constraints are real), is well worth the investment.

External impacts are not the only benefits of working with a good visual science communicator. Working with someone who brings a different set of skills and perspectives to the workspace can allow researchers to see their work in new ways and even open new lines of inquiry (Schwabish, 2021). Good visual storytelling can make potentially inaccessible research sing, inspiring students and colleagues to pursue new lines of research that suddenly spark their interest. It can also reveal patterns in the data, clarify thinking, and/or expose areas in which further research is needed. In one example, Kalliopi Monoyios, working as a staff illustrator at the University of Chicago, was given video footage of African lungfish engaging in a walking behavior and was tasked with finding an elegant way to show the novel fin locomotion for publication in two-dimensional media. By illustrating stills from the video footage (Fig. 3), Monoyios created a stacked time-lapse depiction of the walking movement that highlighted pivot points around which the lungfish was propelling itself forward. This visual prompt in turn sparked new questions for the researcher as she pondered whether future experiments could quantify how much force was exerted with each “step.” It is well accepted that having diverse perspectives in a boardroom leads to better business outcomes; the same holds true for scientific laboratories.

Fig. 3

Lungfish walking. Working with a departmental scientific illustrator led the lead researcher, Heather King, to consider designing force plate experiments she hadn’t previously considered. (Illustration by Kalliopi Monoyios (King et al., 2011). Image used with permission)

Public Outreach by Governmental and Nongovernmental Organizations

Ignoring the chance to improve our visual communication is inexcusable given the urgency of climate change… (McMahon et al., 2016).

It is important that government agencies—with their vast collection of scientific teams doing critical research on climate change and solutions—use effective visual storytelling to engage with the public. Likewise, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) such as nonprofits, social movements, and citizen science groups can amplify their efforts to combat climate change complacency with quality support from visual science communicators. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2021), the earth will warm between 2 °C and 6 °C (3.6–10.8 °F) over the next century. In many regions, warming has already surpassed 1.5 °C above preindustrial levels. The US National Intelligence Council Report (National Intelligence Council, 2021) predicts the impacts of climate change—rising temperatures, extreme weather, droughts, food insecurity, health risks, and conflict—will accelerate trends of massive migration and global instability within the next 20 years. Obviously, getting these types of academic findings seen and understood on a personal, even emotional level, by the largest possible audience is critical. We have little time to act if we are to assist governments and NGOs in the swift, decisive action that is warranted.

In the United States, 13 federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Association (NOAA), the Department of Defense (DOD), and the Department of Agriculture (USDA), worked on the 2018 Climate Change Report. All these agencies have communications departments staffed with quality journalists and “visual information specialists.” They are not staffed with “scientific illustrators” (a different US government job description series), and there is no official classification for visual science communicators. Without a formal category for specialists combining science degrees with visual communication skills, federal agencies risk hiring candidates who may unintentionally misconstrue the science and/or fall short of motivating decision-makers and the public to take action. Clearly, there is a need to create staffing structures within the communications sections of government agencies that specify an appropriate skill set for producing scientific graphic communication.

Furthermore, “existing communications teams are too dependent on stock images,” says Taina Litwak, who at the time of this writing, is the sole staff scientific illustrator we are aware of for the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), a collection of 29 units employing over 100,000 people. While stock photos can sometimes approximate what you are trying to say or establish an overall tone, rarely do they convey the context and nuance that make a scientific revelation stand out. And context and nuance are critical elements of effective graphics, according to Jen Christiansen, Senior Graphics Editor at Scientific American (Schwabish, 2021).

We also see missed opportunities and heavy reliance on stock imagery in information-heavy emails from top NGOs such as Friends of the Earth Action, Center for Biological Diversity, National Audubon Society, Climate Hawks Vote, the Climate Reality Project, the Nature Conservancy, Sierra Club, and 350.org. They are largely devoid of visual storytelling and tend to feature a sympathetic photo or two (often featuring the poster child of climate change imagery: polar bears) as a decorative afterthought to the salient information packed into the prose. These NGOs are working hard to make the world aware of the urgency of climate change and are instigating and advocating for widespread action. Yet, they could use visual storytelling to much greater effect.

Not all climate advocates are reliant on stock photography, however. Some government agencies are already harnessing the power of visual science communication professionals either as full-time staff or, more commonly, independent contractors. NOAA’s Climate Program Office (CPO) has a staff of highly trained data visualizers and mapping specialists who contract with freelance visual science communicators regularly to assist in rendering climate science illustrations and designing reports for the public and decision-makers. CPO’s Climate.gov (2022) News and Features regularly posts climate updates paired with striking visualizations on their website as well as on social media. The Climate Explorer (n.d.), as part of the U.S. Climate Resilience Toolkit, provides an innovative interactive experience where users can “get a feel for future conditions” with visual data tailored to their own city or county. The NSF has contracted with visual science communicators such as Nicolle R. Fuller of Sayo Studio to produce some wonderfully detailed, narrative graphics for their program called “The Future of Work at the Human–Technology Frontier” (Fig. 4). In another example, the USDA’s staff scientific illustrator, Taina Litwak, rendered the “Farming and Eating Insects” poster (Fig. 5) to communicate how using insects as a protein source makes sense from an environmental perspective.

Fig. 4

This very detailed visual, “The Future of Work at the Human–Technology Frontier,” was created for the National Science Foundation by Nicolle R. Fuller during her work as a contractor there. It’s a good example of the depth and breadth of a story that can be told with quality narrative scientific illustration. (Illustration by Nicolle R. Fuller (National Science Foundation, 2021). Image used with permission)

Fig. 5

To the best of our knowledge, the USDA, a collection of 29 agencies employing over 100,000 people, has one staff scientific illustrator position. She produced this poster, “Farming and Eating Insects,” to promote a more sustainable alternative to traditional animal protein sources. This poster is used for public educational presentations by USDA staff. (Illustration by Taina Litwak. Image used with permission)

An NGO doing something similar with a talented team of graphics editors is Climate Central (n.d.). Their initiative titled “Picturing Our Future” presents interactive depictions of climate change in which viewers can manipulate photos to see the effects of various temperature increases on cities around the world. It’s extremely well done and not something that could have been accomplished with stock photography.

There are numerous online resources for climate change information and shareable research presentations such as the United Nations’ Say It with Science (n.d.), Yale University’s Program on Climate Change Communication (n.d.), Climate Outreach’s Climate Visuals (n.d.), and the Climate Advocacy Lab (n.d.). Unfortunately, they are not always great resources for visual storytelling. Though they do offer bountiful information, they could all benefit from the addition of high-quality, targeted conceptual illustrations and data visualizations. Several do offer figures sourced from previously published papers, data digested into colored maps and graphs, and wonderful galleries of individual photographs, but many papers and presentations they offer are heavy on dry text, tables, and bar charts. What they are lacking are memorable, accessible visuals, particularly ones that can be picked up and shared easily over social and news media. This is a particularly interesting omission given that there seems to be a general understanding that drawing connections to people’s lives and livelihoods while providing them with positive examples of how we can (and are already) adapting is critical in getting individuals to change (Markowitz et al., 2014).

Mainstream News Coverage of the Climate Crisis

Climate scientists’ level of engagement with mainstream media is high compared with other disciplines (Entradas et al., 2019). So, it is even more important that they use every tool available to communicate with audiences with varying levels of interest and scientific literacy. Encouragingly, news outlets with larger budgets are creating print and online interactive narrative pieces that foster emotional engagement through impressive graphics and powerful storytelling, using tools such as ArcGIS StoryMaps. These are prime examples of what can be accomplished when visual elements are central to our science communication efforts.

The staff of The Washington Post won the “2020 Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory Reporting” for the series 2 °C: Beyond the Limit (WashPostPR, 2020). Based on the authors’ analyses of global data sets and nearly 170 years of temperature records, the 10-article series mapped every place that has already warmed by 2 °C (3.6 °F)—the threshold that international climate negotiators say the earth collectively must never reach. Using photojournalism, interactive illustrations, and intuitive maps, they successfully drive home the point that extreme climate change is already a life-altering reality across 10% of the earth’s surface.

In 2019, the Norwegian Broadcasting Company (NRK) produced an interactive story package called Chasing Climate Change (Norwegian Broadcasting Company, 2020). In a country of just five million people, it drew one million page views and won awards for its digital storytelling. It is optimized for mobile, rich with compelling photographs, and contains minimal text with scientific details tucked into pop-up features for those who are interested in engaging more deeply with the content. They followed it with a second piece titled Velkommen til Oslo i år 2100! (Støstad, 2020). Set in the year 2100, it is a continuously scrolling illustrated work centered around an engaging cartoon woman who accompanies the reader throughout the story. As she uses her yellow umbrella creatively to float, fly, and stay dry through the narrative, the viewer is exposed to how livelihoods in Norway will change toward the end of the century due to climate alterations. The Society for News Design recently awarded the program “2020 Best In Show for Medium-Sized Newsrooms,” and it was featured by the Global Investigative Network in “Climate Storytelling Impact: Lessons from Norway’s Public Broadcaster” by Cherilyn Ireton on July 26, 2021. One of the judges commented, “Bringing disparate datasets of the most daunting and complex topic of our time and presenting it in a relatable, personal, and non-overwhelming fashion is a huge achievement.”

The New York Times (NYT), too, has produced many successful experiments in visual science communication. In April 2021, they published a story titled, Bad Future, Better Future: A Guide for Kids, and Everyone Else, About Climate Change—and What We Can Do About It, by Julia Rosen (Rosen, 2021). Through a richly illustrated, continuously scrolling experience, illustrator Yuliya Parshina-Kottas draws young readers into the story of how we got to this point in history and what we might do about it. Simple but fresh interactive features (e.g., some images unexpectedly advance to the right instead of scrolling down) underscore the experience of being led through a narrative as though on a physical journey with the protagonist, wrist in hand, being pulled here and there as the story unfolds.

Likewise, in July 2021, while much of the population of the United States sat inside due to poor air quality, Nadja Popovich (data and graphics reporter on the NYT’s Climate Desk) and Josh Katz (NYT graphic editor) utilized data from NOAA’s Global System Laboratory to create a riveting online graphic visualizing the hotspots and dilutions of near-surface wildfire smoke, again for The New York Times (Popovich and Katz, 2021). On a darkened map of the United States and southern Canada, bright orange flames leap up in at least seven states and two provinces as winds spread the reddish-purple smoke across the continent. Though we were not able to access metrics on this particular image, we might assume Popovich and Katz’s animated map was at the very least served up to the 5.33 million digital subscribers of The New York Times (Statista, 2022). This is a potent example of how much more visceral, concise, and memorable a well-executed stand-alone image can be than any of the articles that would have accompanied it.

Formal Learning Environments

Anyone who has jokingly (or seriously) referred to themselves as a “student of life” understands intuitively that we never stop learning. Most of us begin learning, however, in formal environments, defined as structured learning facilitated by a teacher inside a traditional classroom. These are environments where we expect to encounter visuals, and indeed, a robust tradition of visual science communication already exists in K-12, technical, undergraduate, and graduate curricula.

Classroom Textbooks

When the polar bear is the most visible mascot of climate change, it does the rest of us a disservice by making the issue seem remote and distant (Hayhoe, 2017, para 5).

From illustrations to infographics, textbooks remain a lasting and effective communication medium in formal classroom environments, despite new models of publishing. And given that “inoculation”—reaching audiences early and first with accurate climate information—is a better way to combat misinformation than trying to “debunk” retroactively (Lewandowsky, 2021), the staying power of textbooks should be encouraging. However, in a recent survey of image allocation in college biology textbooks over the last 50 years, Jennifer Landin, Teaching Associate Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at North Carolina State University, found that while the use of visuals about climate change has increased over time, the textbooks she surveyed are only featuring two climate change images on average (Fig. 6), a number that seems comically low (Ansari & Landin, 2022). Her research reveals that discussion of the topic usually includes photographs of species facing extinction due to climate change (e.g., polar bears and butterflies) instead of visual interpretations of data or solution-oriented imagery (think renewable energy farms). As such, students could be forgiven for believing that climate change doesn’t affect them—our communication to date has focused on distant species or far-away places that most will never see in real life, rather than direct ways in which climate change will impact their personal lives and communities. Landin also noted that coverage of climate change topics—including infographics describing changes in temperature, CO₂ levels, and species migration—has not increased proportionately in response to the amount of data available.

Fig. 6

Sorted by decade, Jennifer Landin’s survey of historical textbooks reveals the paltry number of visuals dedicated to explaining climate change, despite the enormous amount of supporting data we have amassed over the last 30 years (Ansari & Landin, 2022). (Image used with permission)

How can we do better? Clearly, textbook publishers need to engage visual science communicators and their authors in increased climate science information. However, a major constraint in textbook publishing is the enormous amount of work that goes into each edition, forcing new editions to come out in a punctuated fashion, often with years passing between revisions. As textbooks are increasingly accessed online, this lack of responsiveness should abate. Until then, more responsive modes of teaching will need to pick up the slack in climate science communication.

Lesson Plans Utilizing Visual Science Communication

In addition to her work quantifying the number and type of illustrations included in textbooks, Landin touts the merits of reintroducing art education into science curricula (Landin, 2015). She cites the benefits gained by looking intently at an object for a long period of time—you actually see more the longer you look—and notes that previous generations of scientists were required to know how to draw, precisely so they could “learn to observe” properly. Despite this, drawing has been largely eliminated from science curricula at this point, save for a few efforts like those being led by Landin.

One example of a lesson plan utilizing visual science communication comes from three educators at the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute (MBARI), who hope to bring scientific data directly to educators and their classrooms. In 2016, they created a teaching module titled “What’s the Bigger Picture?” Available online through MBARI’s website (Chierici et al., 2016), the lesson plan leads students through an exercise in creating graphs that visualize global climate change data, while using art to illuminate the context (Chierici et al., 2016). By imitating scientist-artist Jill Pelto’s (n.d.) innovative illustration style, students transform their informative but staid line graphs into dynamic scenes that tell the story behind the data they depict (Fig. 7).

Fig. 7

This student piece is an example of the fruits of the visual science communication exercises in the MBARI lesson plan (Chierici et al., 2016). Here, the student illustrates the effects of climate change that are being seen in coral reefs. The graph that was referenced for this (Upton, 2016) shows that the water temperatures near the Great Barrier Reef have been rising significantly since the beginning of the 1900s. Since corals are only able to withstand limited temperature ranges, even the smallest rise in temperature can cause extreme stress and result in coral bleaching. The left side of the image shows cooler water temperatures and healthier, more colorful coral, whereas the right side of the image shows the death of the coral as the water temperatures get warmer. (Illustration by Caralyn Rexroad. Image used with permission)

Books and journals published by the National Science Teaching Association (NSTA) are another rich source of information and lesson plan inspiration. Their publications address learning for all age groups and settings: Science and Children (elementary school), Science Scope (middle school), The Science Teacher (high school), Journal of College Science Teaching (postsecondary), and Connected Science Learning (informal). The July/August 2021 issue of Science Scope is of special relevance to this chapter, available on the NSTA website. The entire issue is dedicated to visual literacy and offers middle school teachers guidance on how to use graphs better in classrooms; how to integrate cross-cutting concepts from the Next Generation Science Standards; how to apply the “Drawing to Learn” strategy to encourage student understanding; and how to use “Big Data” to learn about the history of earth.

Informal Learning Environments

In contrast to formal learning, informal learning accounts for how Americans learn most of their science post-schooling (Falk & Dierking, 2019). Informal learning environments include museums, zoos, botanical gardens, libraries, community centers, and themed events like wildflower festivals and BioBlitz. Informal learning also occurs through the Internet, television, radio, podcasts, and countless other everyday experiences, from childhood well into adulthood. As such, informal learning environments provide critical spaces for the public to learn about new ideas and to engage with these ideas in their own way (National Research Council, 2009). The Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments recommends informal science opportunities be developed through collaborations between community members and educators, because such partnerships lead to inclusive science learning (National Research Council, 2009). Visuals created for science communication can and should be present in all of these scenarios.

In the following sections, we focus on print media aimed at youth audiences, though in many cases they can be appreciated by all ages. Our emphasis is on particularly interesting collaborations that bring science into these informal learning spheres. Then, because we can’t possibly document all the fronts on which visual science communication is currently being incorporated into experiences for the general public, we highlight a few possibilities for informal science-art partnerships in climate communication.

Children’s Literature

A successful arena for science communication where scientists and visual science communicators already work well together is in children’s picture books. Overall, consumer sales of children’s books increased 9% from 2020 to 2021, and this section of the book industry is on track to experience the strongest year of sales it has had since 2014 (Green, 2021). Additionally, book publishers are turning their attention to comic books and graphic novels for emerging readers (ages 4–8) in response to the growing popularity of this same category with middle school students. At the 2021 American Booksellers Association Children’s Institute, it was reported that manga and comic sales were up 17% in 2021. Of great promise for visual science communicators is that publishers see an opportunity to tell many kinds of stories through this genre (Alverson, 2021).

A prime example of researchers using picture books in their outreach programs comes from the NSF’s Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network. Since 1980, 26 LTER sites have been documenting and analyzing environmental change around the world. As part of their outreach efforts, the program has created the Schoolyard Book Series for children, highlighting findings at 15 of the LTER sites (LTER Network, 2020). With an emphasis on beautiful and accurate illustrations, scientifically reviewed content, and a narrative to encourage children to engage with the science featured at each site, this collection is an admirable example of how scientists can directly influence the richness of our education landscape.

One of the books in the LTER series, Sea Secrets: Tiny Clues to a Big Mystery (Fig. 8), is written by Mary Cerullo and Beth Simmons and illustrated by visual science communicator Kirsten Carlson of Fathom It Studios. It uses a visual nonfiction narrative to invite young readers to explore ocean ecosystem shifts among three different species and their food source, krill, from California to Antarctica via the food web.

Fig. 8

The cover of Sea Secrets: Tiny Clues to a Big Mystery, illustrated by Kirsten Carlson (Cerullo & Simmons, 2015). (Image used with permission)

Given that NSF requires an outreach component for all of its grants, we would like to see more successful proposals combining narrative, science illustration, and cutting-edge science in future research projects supported by NSF.

Children’s Magazines

Magazines have a leg up on textbooks and picture books in that they are published more frequently and can theoretically be more current with the frontier of our scientific knowledge. They have the potential to be a critical tool in our dissemination of climate science progress.

The National Wildlife Federation’s Ranger Rick magazine has been enchanting children for over 50 years with spectacular photography showcasing the wonder of the natural world alongside editorial-style illustrations that embellish their stories. But MUSE, a magazine for ages 9–14 published by Cricket Media, combines science and art in a way that more closely resembles the ethos of visual science communicators. In February 2017, MUSE dedicated an entire issue to climate change (Cricket Media, 2017). The following year, they published an issue designed to “teach young readers how to gain an accurate understanding of a visually represented data set, as well as how to detect faulty infographics.” In this important issue, they broached many of the topics we discuss in this chapter with articles such as “Making Facts Plain to See: The Art of Data Visualization” and “Secrets of Visual Storytelling.” In these articles, they seek out and highlight the breadth of forms visual science communication can take, from Jill Pelto’s innovative adornment of graphs mentioned earlier to Florence Nightingales’ famous rose diagram (Thompson, 2016) that gave visual weight to the different causes of mortality in the Crimean War, ultimately revealing that most soldiers didn’t die of combat, but of preventable diseases.

It should be noted that magazines aimed at educators are another frontier for visual science communicators. The popular environmental education magazine Green Teacher boasts an audience of 15,000 readers, 72% of whom are classroom teachers, librarians, and outdoor educators (Green Teacher, 2022). STEM ED Magazine (2021) is another prime example; their objective is “to support and inspire as many educators as possible to enhance STEM learning.” These magazines’ audiences and their reliance on photography would suggest they have an opportunity to collaborate more with professional visual science communicators to incorporate illustrations, infographics, and other visual learning activities that could then be passed on to students.

Outlets with Broad Appeal for All Ages

In the section on lesson plans, we broached the topic of how visual science communication exercises can aid learning in K-12 classrooms. But children are not the only group that can benefit from using drawing as a conduit to understanding and connecting more fully with the world around them.

Scientists’ field and lab notebooks have long been places to record observations, reflections, sketches, diagrams, and data tables. Though they are not generally used for outward communication, they are a critical tool for observation and discovery. Nature journals, a close cousin of scientists’ lab notebooks, provide a way for the general public to engage in this same exercise of careful, deliberate observation. Starting a nature journal does not require any previous art experience, nor does it use fancy or expensive supplies. It is a place to record what Dirnberger et al. (2005) call raw knowledge: newly acquired knowledge that will be processed and refined over time. Journals help individuals become more familiar with their surroundings regardless of age or education and develop positive attitudes toward the natural world. Nature journaling can even be used successfully in urban environments to combat the “extinction of experience” which Lyn Baldwin, Associate Professor at Thompson Rivers University in British Columbia, refers to as the ever-increasing divide between people and nature (Baldwin, 2017). Luckily, teachers and outdoor educators are increasingly familiar with nature journaling thanks to the growing popularity of global events such as John Muir Laws’ Wild Wonder Nature Journaling Conference (Laws, 2017) and International Nature Journaling Week (n.d.).

In addition to the popular science magazines, we mentioned in the section on mainstream media and news, graphic novels are another great frontier for visual science communication. Thanks to publishers’ growing appetite for books in this genre, we are beginning to see titles that expand beyond memoirs and fantasy into serious science communication works. Clifford V. Johnson’s The Dialogues: Conversations About the Nature of the Universe, Maris Wicks’ Primates: The Fearless Science of Jane Goodall, Dian Fossey, and Biruté Galdikas, and Michael Keller and Nicolle Rager Fuller’s adaptation of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species are successful examples of nonfiction graphic novels intended for an adult audience. Likewise, titles like the Max Axiom, Super Scientist! Series, and The Manga Guide series cater to younger readers with similarly serious aims of science education.

PART II: What Makes Effective Visuals

Identifying “good quality” science communication is not just a matter of weeding out or getting rid of the “fake news,” as we often hear (Collver & Bucchi, 2021, p. 23).

Visual science communicators dedicate their careers to thinking about strategies and considerations to take into account when distilling complex ideas into intuitive visuals that people connect with. Whether you are a practitioner or are collaborating with one, it is useful to be aware of and think critically about the elements that contribute to the best communication efforts so that we may always be learning and adapting to the cultural shifts that unfold at an ever-accelerating rate. As Jordan Collver and Massimiano Bucchi rightly point out in their pithy Lifeology course Style in Science Communication, there is no single formula that will produce a winning graphic every time (Collver & Bucchi, 2021). Rather, each communication attempt represents a complex interplay between various considerations, the most important of which we attempt to collect in the sections that follow.

Visual science communication has a language (Fig. 9), in this case comprised of visual elements, some of which are broadly recognized across cultures and others that are more effective with people who have specialized knowledge or training. Knowing which elements to use entails defining a specific goal that can generally be answered by questions like “Who am I trying to reach?” and “How do I want people to react?” Answering these critical questions will go a long way toward narrowing down the myriad options there are in creating an effective visual. Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt’s research indicates that “intuitions come first, strategic reasoning second,” (Haidt, 2012), so it’s important to remember that visual science communication is more than just information transfer. Effective climate visuals must engage people, give them a reason to change their behavior, and leave them feeling empowered to do so.

Fig. 9

A wide array of elements can be used to create visual narratives. The most successful graphics often use several types of visual elements in one piece. Concept visualizations (top) can arrange data in easy-to-digest, visual formats, where relationships become clearer than numbers or words can communicate alone. Similarly, data depictions (middle) simplify and compare complex data sets (e.g., weather patterns), using universal visual elements we can understand at a glance. Illustrations and photographs (bottom) can range in detail from graphic icons to realistic illustrations to photographs. This is just a subset—there are many other visual tools not shown here. (Figure arranged by Taina Litwak and Emily Coren; thumbnail images are copyrighted and included with permission from individual artists/publishers. Image used with permission)

When done well, graphics serve as a universal, accessible language, translating complex scientific concepts into infographics or illustrations that can be understood “at a glance” by anyone and anywhere. They provide a way for abstract or distant concepts to be visible, quantifiable, and relatable. They may employ narrative, emotion, analogies, and even humor to disarm people and open their minds to the possibility of change. In our age of information overload, novel, targeted images cut through the noise, relieving “climate fatigue,” offering solutions, and inspiring citizens to get involved (Houser, 2020). They provide a window into the world of scientists, increasing transparency and building trust with local communities. Ultimately, our best research revelations are fruitless if we do not utilize our full tool kit as we strive to increase climate science literacy and resilience.

Judicious Use of Photography

Imparting urgency and concern is just a matter of showing people how to connect the dots among the issues they already care about, and how those issues are affected by—and in many cases are threatened by—a changing climate (Hayhoe, 2017, para 24).

In Part I, we lament the missed opportunities for meaningful communication presented by poorly chosen stock imagery. However, the practical appeal of stock imagery is real. Faced with limited or nonexistent budgets, the low cost of a licensed image is hard to beat. Additionally, licensing terms and pricing on stock image aggregators are crystal clear, providing time savings and avoiding steep learning curves that can present themselves when working with independent image creators for the first time. If stock imagery is the only feasible option, previously mentioned collections such as ClimateVisuals.org are an excellent resource for images highlighting communities modeling positive climate adaptations. What they avoid, and what anyone perusing stock imagery for climate communications should resist, is the temptation to feature only signature species and faraway places being altered by climate change. These generic images can contribute to “climate fatigue,” causing people to disconnect from the problem and any possible solutions (Markowitz et al., 2014). Better images center communities around the world modeling positive climate adaptations they are making locally (Fig. 10).

Fig. 10

Imagery chosen with care and consideration of specific communities can increase communication quality and connection with an intended audience. (Graphic by Emily Coren and Taina Litwak. Image used with permission)

Cultural Connections and Two-Way Engagement

Science is a search for evidence, but science communication must be a search for meaning (ElShafie, 2018, p. 1213).

Diverse audiences—with varying levels of trust in science, let alone scientific literacy—will interpret information in different ways. Making sense of climate concepts, or meaning-making, is subject to cultural norms, group identities, values, and past experiences of each individual or community (Leiserowitz et al., 2021). A shift in scientific communication to recognize this fact is currently underway. Dr. Maja Horst, Professor of Science Communication at University of Copenhagen, suggests reframing science communication as an aspect of culture (Horst & Davies, 2021). The resulting science communication is positioned not just to teach knowledge from the top down (the “deficit model”), but instead to foster “two-way engagement,” coordinating with existing community values and serving community needs. The deficit model assumes that scientific literacy is a knowledge problem and that sharing more information will enable critical thinking and better decision-making. However, simply sharing knowledge is not enough to change behavior.

Katharine Hayhoe’s work embraces this approach. Hayhoe, the Chief Scientist for The Nature Conservancy and a Distinguished Professor and Endowed Chair at Texas Tech University, has made impressive inroads sharing climate science with audiences who would be politically turned off by phrases such as “global warming” and “climate change.” In an article for Foreign Policy titled “Yeah, the Weather Has Been Weird” (Hayhoe, 2017), she shares an anecdote in which she was careful not to say the word “climate” followed by “change” in a routine lecture on climate science to a politically right-leaning audience in the United States. With this tiny alteration, she went on to present the climate science data in a way that was relatable and nonthreatening and received no pushback at all. Afterward, a woman approached her and said, “You know those people who are always talking about global warming? I don’t agree with them at all. But this? This makes sense.” What is her secret? By her own admission, she is dishing out grim news. But she understands the issues that matter to her audiences and follows her stark dose of reality with common sense actions these communities can take immediately: “Make smart water choices, plan ahead, and prepare for a water-scarce future.” Her audiences leave feeling empowered, not defeated, and she is widely praised for her science communication efforts as a result.

What would a similar approach look like in visual communications? Being culturally responsive begins with understanding that people don’t just receive information passively; instead, it is filtered through their own lens of life experiences and communities of trusted peers. To fully achieve this goal, representation matters, among people of color and marginalized groups as well as in conservative and liberal-leaning sections of society. People are more likely to listen to leaders and scientists who look like them, reflecting the demographics of their local community and circle of trust (Houser, 2020; Marsh, 2020; McIntyre, 2021; Zaelzer, 2020). For this reason, we should all be on the lookout for ways to understand and involve the communities we are communicating with. Then, logically, our images should reflect those communities so that people can see themselves in them. They see themselves as part of the solution and know what to do next.

Revealing the Process of Science

Scientists get tempted to pretend that they know something with certainty. You have to be willing to embrace the idea that science is uncertain and why you love it anyway (McIntyre, 2021).

Those of us trained in science understand what a powerful tool it is to help us make sense of our world. We trust the process of inquiry, discovery, and building consensus. We understand that what we think we know today may change as new, better data clarify concepts and processes. We are comfortable with the fact that science is self-correcting—as we gather new information, we form new conclusions (or become more certain of the conclusions we’d previously drawn). But large sectors of the public don’t understand science this way—they don’t see it as a process but rather a set of facts. They mistake scientists’ certainty in the process of science (we know this thing because our best data support it) with a misconception that scientists think they know it all and are never wrong. So when experts talk about “global warming” and citizens are experiencing an arctic blast with record low temperatures in February, it’s no wonder scientists get labeled as out of touch and untrustworthy.

Every science communicator has an opportunity to underscore the process of science with each story they tell, and visual science communicators are no different. Being transparent about the nature of research and unknowns can help build trust. Images showing scientists working in the field and data visualizations including known and unknown variables (e.g., white/gray areas on a map) help keep the communication open, honest, and more complete. Additionally, in framing our narratives, we can look for opportunities to explain why recommendations change when new findings emerge, such as with the CDC’s changes in mask-wearing recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Role of Emotion, Empathy, and Humor

Scientific communication in academic circles often favors professionalism and a high degree of specialization. Experts create utilitarian graphs and tables to explain their findings; these displays fare well enough in academic circles and peer-reviewed journals, but are often unintelligible or uninteresting to the general public. Communication that is emotionally moving, in tune with local communities, and solution-oriented might be more effective—consistent with the two-way engagement model mentioned previously (Markowitz et al., 2014; Zaelzer, 2020).

The power of visual storytelling to engage the reader or viewer on an emotional, “gut” level is well documented. Numerous studies and academic papers have weighed in on the impact of visual narratives on fostering emotional engagement (Bracken et al., 2014; Zak, 2015). Art ranging from fine art to editorial art, realistic representations, and data visualizations has the power to convey subtle emotions that connect to human experiences through the deliberate application of color, tone, rendering style, and composition (Hassenzahl et al., 2013). Our evolutionary instincts lead us to gravitate toward the esthetic, the unusual, and the compelling (Dutton, 2009), no matter how our cultures or subcultures define them. The skillful visual science communicator learns about the community they are attempting to communicate with and takes care to catch attention, arouse curiosity, and heighten learning by picking up on and establishing meaningful connecting points.

W. Sean Chamberlin, writer and oceanography professor at Fullerton College, knows that creating emotional connections can heighten engagement and retention. With 25 years of experience teaching, he saw a need for editorial figures students could relate to on an emotional level that would help them connect better with the terminology describing the earth’s seven spheres. In June 2021, he hired visual science communicator Fiona Martin of Visualizing Science® LLC to create oceanography e-textbook figures with novel perspectives, geared toward young college students in urban Los Angeles (Fig. 11). Her resulting figure is colorful and dynamic and takes care to relate the seven biospheres to humans by placing the “anthrosphere” centrally, suggesting it has a disproportionate impact on the other six natural domains. There is no text in the figure itself, inviting students to interpret the figure on their own. This is significantly different from the approach taken by traditional illustrations of this concept that center on equally weighted geospatial views of the earth. Importantly, this framing is justified by evidence that suggests images are more memorable, and consequently better understood, when they include people and familiar objects or symbols (Borkin, 2014).

Fig. 11

A novel perspective of the earth’s seven spheres. Clockwise from top left: heliosphere, atmosphere, cryosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere, and geosphere. Center: The anthrosphere, representing humans, has had a disproportionate impact on the rest of the earth’s systems. (Illustration by Fiona Martin (Chamberlin, 2022). Image used with permission)

Lastly, a little humor goes a long way in an age of information overload and existential crises. Fear, distrust, or skepticism about climate science can evaporate when we have a shared appreciation for hilarious cartoons, memes, or deadpan humor. Science comics such as the wildly popular xkcd and the YouTube channels MinutePhysics and MinuteEarth have been leading the way for over a decade in this realm and have amassed millions of followers each. Another website and Facebook page, I Fucking Love Science, boasts 23 million followers, sharing science images with a dose of humor and encouraging social interaction and a sense of community (Horst & Davies, 2021; Marsh, 2020). Beyond these examples, successful science comic strips such as Karen Romano Young’s Antarctic Log abound and are an excellent example of how visual science communicators can seek out individual communities and highlight climate actions being taken today (Fig. 12).

Fig. 12

Antarctic Log is a science comic written by Karen Romano Young. It is aimed at middle-school-aged kids and features actionable messages, often with a climate change focus. (Illustration by Karen Romano Young (Romano Young, 2015). Image used with permission)

Visual Analogies and Metaphors

In the charged atmosphere of climate politics, analogy enlivens deadening data (Houser, 2020).

Using metaphors and comparisons to everyday objects makes science relatable and interesting, especially for abstract concepts we can’t see with our own eyes such as public health threats or carbon emissions. Visual science communicators regularly use metaphors from everyday life to help get a point across. For example, the Swiss cheese diagram, originally devised by James T. Reason in his book Human Error (1990), explains how an accumulation of errors can lead to adverse events. It has since been used widely by safety analysts in industry. Virologist Ian Mackay revived it recently to explain how single interventions against the spread of COVID-19 are not as effective as combining several layers of protection (Fig. 13). Each intervention (layer) is imperfect and has holes. But by combining personal and shared responsibilities, there is a better chance of success. Incidentally, the mouse represents the potential for misinformation, which can erode protections (Mackay, 2021; Roberts, 2020). The figure is simple enough that it could be understood by children and adults and is a brilliant example of the power of metaphor in communicating complex ideas.

Fig. 13

Swiss Cheese Respiratory Virus Pandemic Defense (version 4.3). (Illustration by Ian M. Mackay (Mackay, 2021). Image used with permission)

“Carbon Emissions in New York” by Real World Visuals cited at the beginning of this chapter is another powerful example of the “concretization” of an abstract concept. “The problem is that some people are very cut off from quantitative information. You put numbers and graphs in front of people and they bounce straight off,” said Real World Visuals’ creative director, Adam Nieman. “Our [goal] is to make the cause of climate change visible because very few other people are approaching it like that” (Hahn, 2022, para 11). Interestingly, their approach centers around assessing whether intended audiences fall into the categories of “push” or “pull” audiences. Whereas “pull” audiences come already interested in the topic and are able to navigate more complex graphics because of their own intrinsic motivation to learn more, “push” audiences need more coaxing. By creating graphics that use analogies to “draw on our wider experience of the world,” they are able to appeal to the coveted “push” audiences.

Addressing Information Overload

To a nonscientific audience and students, the sheer amount of climate information received from the news and other media can be overwhelming. Too much confusing, negative, seemingly conflicting evidence of climate change can leave people in a state of paralysis or defeat, not knowing what to do (Houser, 2020). In a Climate Outreach study (Corner et al., 2015), researchers found that participants were more likely to respond to emotional images of climate impacts, especially local events, and clearly, this has been the strategy of environmental activists for decades. However, we also know intense emotion can lead to disillusionment and feelings of being overwhelmed; ultimately, this is a recipe for inaction. To combat feelings of despondency, Climate Outreach suggests following images of climate impacts with images of climate solutions, giving viewers actions they can take to prevent or mitigate disasters (Corner et al., 2015; Markowitz et al., 2014). At least on the topic of climate change, it would seem hope is a better motivator than fear.

In October of 2001, Scientific American published the print article “Drowning in New Orleans” by Mark Fischetti (Fischetti, 2008), which turned out to be eerily prophetic of the disastrous consequences that followed Hurricanes Katrina in 2005 and Ida in 2021. The article begins with an ominous warning in large blue text, “A major hurricane could swamp New Orleans under 20 feet of water, killing thousands. Human activities along the Mississippi River have dramatically increased the risk, and now only massive reengineering of southeastern Louisiana can save the city.” Then a paragraph into the text, “New Orleans is a disaster waiting to happen.” It is not hard to see how such a dire prediction could be overwhelming enough to shut people down. The opening figure describes the rate of land loss due to human-made levees that restrict the flow of sediments into the marshlands. An inset cutaway of New Orleans shows the city sits in a “bowl” below sea level, ringed with levees. Solutions are offered, but only in text sections of text below each impact. And the price tag on the suite of infrastructure improvements that might mitigate the risk is stated as a whopping $14 billion. To residents of a city with a median income of $27,133 in 2000, this number must have seemed impossibly large. And the cool, academic, and distant visual depictions of their city may have done little to connect with how the people of New Orleans experience their city.

In the case of this article, it’s worth considering whether it might have been more effective to visualize what a climate-resilient New Orleans would look like on a human scale in addition to the warnings about impacts and the call for large-scale structural changes. A hopeful depiction of what an actively adapting city could be—with manageable action items that policymakers and ordinary citizens could take—may have done more to nudge residents toward action.

Naturally, we are not suggesting that altering the approach of one article could have stopped the disasters that unfolded with Katrina and Ida. But when applied across all the media we have to communicate climate resilience, this sensibility may help communities “see” solutions and see themselves in them, ultimately getting people to make them happen (Corner et al., 2015). In short, climate solutions—including smart infrastructure, green technology, sustainable food production, and positive public health measures—should outnumber disaster imagery. And importantly, though there is room to dream about a future of resilient cities, we must remember to follow the examples set by skilled communicators like Katharine Hayhoe and provide common sense steps that people can start with today: conserve, prepare, and adapt.

Measuring Impact

The great irony here is that we spend a lot of time talking about science and empiricism, yet our ability to reflect on our own effectiveness has been stunted by reduced job opportunities and limited funding. Currently, our best way to measure the impact of visual science communication is through proxy: the number of page views an article gets, the number of shares and likes, whether people stay on a given page, and how long they linger. These metrics are regularly used as estimates of an online article’s success and, in turn, are assumed to extend to any graphics that accompany it (J. Christiansen, personal communication, December 8, 2021; A. Montañez, personal communication, January 3, 2022).

Another way to gauge a particular graphic’s success is when it gets picked up by policymakers or mainstream media outlets. A graphic by Amanda Montañez called The Costs of Climate Change was printed in a Scientific American article titled “Here’s How Much Climate Change Could Cost the US” in 2018 (Thompson). Shortly after, it was used by Congressman Jimmy Panetta (CA) in a presentation on the costs of climate change, earning it a coveted spot in the success column. Additionally, the frequency with which an image is requested for reuse can be a direct indication of success (J. Christiansen, personal communication, December 8, 2021), but it still provides no perspective on how large numbers of people understand or respond to it; at best, it tells us another person or small group of people think it is informative enough to use it in their own publication.

Beyond these measures, there are few metrics being systematically collected that give us direct, measurable feedback on how our visualizations are performing. Visual science communicators rely on accepted design principles, powerful visual narratives (Zak, 2015), and human-recognizable objects and colors (Borkin, 2014), for example, to help make images clear and memorable and inspire the cooperative, adaptive behaviors we seek to spark. There is evidence that certain types of imagery evoke feelings of salience (climate change is important) and others evoke self-efficacy (I can do something about this), but rarely do images accomplish both (O’Neill et al., 2013). Aside from infrequent insights such as these, rarely do we get direct confirmation that our use of these tools successfully hits our intended mark.

Visual science communicators whose work is produced for museums and other institutions that regularly poll visitors to look for signs of learning (Diamond et al., 2009) may be one exception to this rule. Prior to digital publishing, Jen Christiansen, Senior Graphics Editor at Scientific American, regularly held focus groups that allowed her to get feedback and connect with people she was creating graphics for. However, she has not held one in years and cites this as a lost opportunity to understand how people are receiving the graphics we pump out (Schwabish, 2021). We have no way to close the learning loop for the rest of us working in visual science communication. By and large, visual science communicators are left to their own devices to intuit what works and what does not with indirect or incomplete metrics to guide us.

The concept of A/B testing, in which two versions of an article are published online and served randomly to viewers to see which performs better, is well within our technological capability. In fact, it is regularly employed for headlines. Yet publications such as Scientific American that have a vested interest in this type of insight do not currently have the capability to apply this testing to their images (J. Christiansen, personal communication, December 8, 2021). Essentially, they are at the whim of the platforms they use to manage their publishing, and the add-on services that try to fill in the feature gaps. One would imagine that if enough users requested this type of functionality, publishing platforms might respond accordingly.

Ultimately, understanding and refining our own effectiveness is an exciting opportunity for all of us with a vested interest in visual science communication. We have a suite of creative tools at our fingertips and ideas galore—we only need partners willing to iterate, test, and track performance with the communities we serve.

Adopting a Collaborative Mindset

Rather than keeping disciplines and tasks divided, artists and scientists should collaborate in a more organic fashion. In some cases, the artist’s role is to break down conventional methods so that science can make leaps. They can also help scientists make information more compelling so that it generates awareness, cultivates support and helps the general population feel that they are a part of scientific progress (Sabraw, 2021, p. 8).

Scientists have a long track record of collaborating with peers on research projects. Encouragingly, many are also interested in distributing their work in nontraditional ways, by collaborating with professionals in fields outside academia (Allen et al., 2018). Successful collaborations of this sort have resulted in animations and two-dimensional art, social media content, multimedia, storytelling, and programming at national parks too numerous to name (Allen et al., 2018; Cheng et al., 2018; ElShafie, 2018; Harrower et al., 2018).

From 2011 to 2016, The Scientific American Blog Network hosted Symbiartic, a blog written by Glendon Mellow, Kalliopi Monoyios, and Katie McKissick that documented this growing field of “Science-art,” or “SciArt.” They documented hundreds of scientists and artists using art as a medium to spark conversations and educate ever more general audiences on various aspects of science—and that was just the tip of the iceberg. As these science-art collaborations showed, the possibilities for partnerships between scientists and informal science educators are exciting and near endless.

Science communicators looking to expand their reach can share their work in existing public programs or they can become involved in detailed projects such as the design of exhibits, museums, and nature centers (Alpert, 2018). Potential partners may also be found at gardens, zoos, aquariums, and through independent professionals working in related and sometimes entirely different fields. When looking for these collaborations, we encourage communication teams to be open to working with content developers, cultural interpreters, artistic directors (Rudenko, 2018), environmental educators, authors (Armstrong et al., 2018), game designers (Kipnis, 2018), advocates (Inches, 2021), food system experts (Kiss the Ground, n.d.), natural resource specialists, consultants, and visual science communicators. In addition, people can look to organizations such as SciArt Initiative (n.d.) that are creating formal ways for scientists and artists to collaborate through innovative residencies like The Bridge.

The search for new partners takes time, but we have much to gain from this investment of energy. Those who develop these cross-disciplinary partnerships have the opportunity to change public perceptions about who scientists are, increase interest and trust in STEM disciplines, and reframe what an individual thinks about a particular topic (Merson et al., 2018). All of this has the potential to influence policy decisions and enact change.

Inspiring Action

Adoption of climate solutions will happen faster if our climate science communication inspires citizens worldwide to act. Activism takes many forms and may mean writing letters and calling on government representatives to vote a certain way. It can mean organizing postcard campaigns to other voters, signing and delivering petitions, organizing and/or showing up for rallies, volunteering for local conservation groups’ physical efforts, or making small personal changes in daily choices such as eating less meat, taking public transportation, or buying an electric car. In the book Empowering Climate Action (Bowman & Morrison, 2021), numerous authors repeatedly stress the need for massive climate change education and “bottom-up” public engagement/activism. Katharine Hayhoe points out that even the most vocally opposed politicians understand the gravity of climate change but won’t act until their constituency demands it (Hayhoe, 2021). If visual science communicators are consistently included in science communication teams, our stories will move people and inspire them to take action. We trust decision-makers to take it from there.

Conclusion

Effective communication of climate change solutions will require a suite of adaptations. Science communication efforts need to take into account accessibility, cultural sensitivity, representation, emotional engagement, and relevance. We must also find ways to overcome information overload and “climate fatigue,” maintain transparency in climate research, and demystify the scientific method. This will involve building trust with local communities, building bridges between academics and the public, and convincing decision-makers that funding is needed to support climate mitigation. Visuals serve as a powerful universal language that can interpret science, transcend barriers, invoke empathy, and inspire citizens to implement practical solutions. Our communication efforts can improve by systematically incorporating well-designed, compelling diagrams, illustrations, infographics, data visualizations, graphic novels, and more into climate science outreach at every level. To do so, researchers, publishers, news outlets, and communications teams need to recognize the importance of collaborating with professionally trained visual science communicators and create space in their budgets to support them. This small shift in priorities and funding allocations will dramatically improve the reach and rate of climate mitigation and adaptation efforts.