Abstract
AbstractSocial media are increasingly used to obtain and disseminate information about environmental issues. Yet, environmental communication research has focused mainly on social media discussions pertaining to climate change, while overlooking public awareness and discourse regarding the other planetary boundaries (i.e., important and interlinked environmental issues other than climate change). Moreover, while discussions about climate change are often found to be polarising, it remains to be seen if this extends to other environmental issues. We used network analysis and topic modelling to analyse two million environment-related tweets and identified nine ‘green communities’ of users. Climate change was the most popular issue across all communities and other issues like biodiversity loss were discussed infrequently. The discourse was less polarised than previously assumed, was largely pro-environmental, and originated more from the Global North than the Global South. The relevance of our findings for policymakers and researchers in environmental communication is discussed.
Funder
Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Amsterdam School of Communication Research, University of Amsterdam
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference81 articles.
1. Adam S, Reber U, Häussler T, Schmid-Petri H (2020) How climate change skeptics (try to) spread their ideas: Using computational methods to assess the resonance among skeptics’ and legacy media. PLoS One 15(10):e0240089. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0240089
2. Atwoli L, Erhabor GE, Gbakima AA, Haileamlak A, Ntumba J-MK, Kigera J, Laybourn-Langton L, Mash B, Muhia J, Mulaudzi FM, Ofori-Adjei D, Okonofua F, Rashidian A, El-Adawy M, Sidibé S, Snouber A, Tumwine J, Yassien MS, Yonga P et al (2022) COP27 climate change conference: urgent action needed for africa and the world: wealthy nations must step up support for africa and vulnerable countries in addressing past, present and future impacts of climate change. Oxford Open Energy:oiac008. https://doi.org/10.1093/ooenergy/oiac008
3. Barberá P, Rivero G (2015) Understanding the Political Representativeness of Twitter Users. Soc Sci Comput Rev 33(6):712–729. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439314558836
4. Barrie C, Ho JC, Chan C, Rico N, König T, Davidson T (2022) academictwitteR: access the twitter academic research product track v2 api endpoint (0.3.1) [Computer software]. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/academictwitteR/index.html
5. Barrios-O’Neill D (2021) Focus and social contagion of environmental organization advocacy on Twitter. Conserv Biol 35(1):307–315. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13564