Crisis communication: Climate action requires preparedness, not just response

‘85 seconds to midnight’: The Doomsday Clock and crisis communication

Compelled by the consequences of the Hiroshima-Nagasaki bombings, a group of scientists, who helped build the world’s first atomic bombs, established the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. The motto was clear: people had a right to know about the dangers emerging in the world around them. Two years later, the group adopted the Doomsday Clock as a symbol of the risks humanity must collectively address to survive and thrive.

What began as a response to nuclear threats today covers some of the most pressing issues of our time: climate change, global instability, and other technological disruptions. In January this year, the Doomsday Clock was set to 85 seconds to midnight. That’s the closest it has been in 79 years. One might interpret that as a constant reminder of impending disaster. But the clock is designed to provoke dialogue and action, to bridge preparedness with response. The hands move not because the risks grow. They move based on whether we are, or are not, doing enough.

This is what makes the clock relevant to communicating ongoing and dynamic crises such as climate change. It is not enough to simply make people aware of the problem or to communicate only during or after disruptions. Crisis communications must also help societies stay engaged with the challenge, understand what is at stake, and prepare for what lies ahead.

Audience vs. participants: Communicating for preparedness

The climate crisis is one of the most data-rich emergencies in human history. However, even when the science is unambiguous and the evidence is visible in everyday life, public confidence seems to be wavering. As climate impacts and geopolitical instabilities intensify, so do anxieties around who bears the costs and who benefits. These anxieties often surface as questions of affordability, reliability, employment, and resilience.

The challenge is inconsistency. Too often, crisis communication remains dormant until disasters or extreme events occur. While these moments deserve our attention, the dialogue must continue even in their absence. The climate crisis demands our conscious, collective, and continuous efforts. Hence, communication must also extend beyond moments of disruption to help people understand what change means for them, how decisions are made, and what role they can play in shaping outcomes.

This is particularly important for emerging economies like Asia,[1]  where the transition is accelerating at an extraordinary speed. But it is also home to some of the most climate-vulnerable communities. Yet, the narratives and decisions shaping climate action are often set elsewhere, by institutions and perspectives far removed from their realities, in a language not designed for them. If preparedness is the goal, this imbalance has to change. The regions most exposed to climate disruptions should have the greatest stake in shaping how these challenges are understood and addressed. For communicators and philanthropies, this means ensuring greater representation of these voices from emerging economies in decisions and narratives that shape our collective future. At the Global Energy Alliance for People and Planet, we see communication as an enabler of long-term change.  Technology and funding matter, but trust, participation, and local ownership are what make the energy transition truly work. Whether we are expanding clean energy access, modernizing grids, or deploying renewables, we are committed to ensuring that communities are not just beneficiaries of this transition but the driving force behind it.

When communication is not consistent and inclusive, people lose the ability to make sense of change as it unfolds. Misinformation replaces facts. Uncertainty turns into skepticism. Even well-planned policies can fail if they arrive without context and clarity. This is why crisis communication cannot be treated as an afterthought; it needs to be made part of the process itself.

Lessons from the Doomsday Clock for crisis comms

For nearly eight decades, the Doomsday Clock has translated complex global risks into a public conversation. That offers several lessons for climate communicators today:

1. Being honest and consistent: Trust is built through steady, transparent communication over time.
2. Being transparent about uncertainty: We are living in volatile times. Credibility no longer comes from false certainty. It comes from honest acknowledgement of complexity.
3. Preparedness before response: Effective crisis communications should not only explain risks after they materialize. It should help people anticipate change, understand its implications, and prepare for what lies ahead.
4. Storytelling can make complexity tangible: The Doomsday Clock took an abstract global threat and turned it into something people can easily understand. Facts may inform people, but stories help them see their own experiences, concerns, and aspirations reflected in the bigger picture.
5. Encouraging participation: Communication must happen before decisions are finalized, not after.

In a defining decade for climate ambition, preparedness may prove to be one of the most crucial forms of infrastructure we build. Because climate action can only move when people trust, understand, and see themselves in it.