People in the most climate-vulnerable communities aren’t lacking concern. A study finds they’re lacking the conversation
A new study finds that Americans living in frontline communities are no more worried about rising temperatures overall than the rest of the country. But those neighborhoods facing the greatest exposure to pollution, extreme heat, flooding and other climate-related hazards are notably more concerned about specific impacts, like extreme heat and power outages.
The research is titled “Vulnerability outpaces climate worry in U.S. frontline communities” and was published in the journal One Earth by Jennifer Carman and colleagues at Yale and George Mason universities. It combined six years of national survey data with federal mapping data covering more than 6,000 respondents. About a third of the U.S. population lives in a community classified as a frontline area, and experiences climate impacts first and worst.
It’s about the people
For Carman, research specialist and director of survey strategy at the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, climate research isn’t just about data points. It’s about understanding how the people most affected by increasing heat, flooding and extreme weather experience and talk about those impacts in their daily lives.
“There wasn’t one single spark that led me to pursue the research,” she says. “It’s something I’ve been thinking about for a long time. My research interest is how people prepare for and respond to climate impacts in their lives.”
They had geographic data on where people live and how exposed they are to climate risks. “So, my collaborators and I asked: Can we identify people in the most affected areas, and see how their opinions differ from general audiences?”
Figures talk
The key findings of the study show that:
- 65% of people in both frontline and non-frontline communities are worried about rising global temperatures. There is no meaningful gap between them.
- But 52% of frontline residents worry about extreme heat (versus 42% elsewhere), and 48% worry about power outages (versus 36% elsewhere). Specific outcomes raise more concern in communities impacted by them.
- Frontline residents are less likely to hear about a changing climate in the media or know that scientists broadly agree it’s happening.
- Worry levels vary sharply by region, tending to be higher in Southwest border communities, and lower in Appalachia and the Ozarks, despite similar vulnerability levels.
The reason behind the figures
Carman first heard this insight articulated from a speaker at a conference. As she explained, when you live with the stress of street violence, paying bills, potentially losing your house, plus the stress that comes with pollution exposure and related health problems, climate disruption becomes just another thing.
“It’s not that people in these communities don’t care,” summarizes Carman. “It’s that climate crisis is competing with so many other stressors that it doesn’t rise to the top.”
As a researcher, her takeaway is about questioning assumptions. “There’s a tendency to assume people in frontline communities are either unaware and uncaring or entirely made up of activists fluent in terminology. Both groups exist. But there are also many people experiencing all sorts of things in their lives, where climate is just one part of that.”
That reinforced something for Carman: “Despite different circumstances, people process and experience climate impacts in very human ways,” she concludes.
Researchers also found that this isn’t a caring gap, it’s a communication gap. People in frontline communities are living with climate impacts, but those experiences often aren’t being explicitly connected to a concept.
The study recommendation proposes to lead with concrete, local consequences and trusted community messengers rather than abstract climate messaging, and to clearly tie any investment or funding to direct community benefit, rather than assuming people will make that connection themselves.
Who can benefit from this knowledge?
Carman foresees different groups advancing their climate action goals by basing their strategy on the outcomes of the study.
- For researchers, this points to a need for deeper engagement with frontline communities: not just aggregate data, but direct conversations about specific needs.
- For governments, this data should be a starting point, not a substitute for real engagement. It can help identify community concerns and guide investment in housing, air quality, heat protection and other priorities.
- For organizers, it can highlight areas with elevated concern but little on-the-ground presence that are ripe for outreach.
- And for nonprofits, it’s a tool for advocacy and fundraising: concrete numbers to bring to grant-makers and elected officials to make the case for investment. Some partners are already using it this way.