Do low-income groups respond more positively to “climate justice” than to other terms from the public discourse about climate change and sustainability? Evidence from a survey-based wording experiment with a representative Los Angeles County sample

In public communications about climate change, “climate justice” is typically used to emphasize the unequal effects of climate change on low-income populations. However, among Americans in general, the term “climate justice” is much less familiar than “climate change” or “global warming” and therefore elicits less concern, policy support, and willingness to engage in more sustainable individual behavior such as eating less red meat.‌‌ Here, we examined whether responsiveness to “climate justice” might be more favorable relative to other terms among residents of climate-impacted and Democratic-leaning Los Angeles County, especially low-income residents who would stand to benefit the most from climate justice. During June-August 2023, we randomly assigned 1,048 inhabitants of Los Angeles County to answer survey questions about “climate justice,” “climate change,” “global warming,” “climate crisis,” or “climate emergency.” Even among low-income participants, “climate justice” was the least familiar term, and elicited the least concern, perceived urgency, and policy support; the terms did not differ in reported willingness to engage in more sustainable individual behavior. We discuss the importance of using familiar language in public communications about climate change.