Ideological groups

Think-Tanks

Think-tanks can be described as ideological incubators that serve as a bridge between academic research and public policy. They are analytical organizations that, ideally, should “translate” available research findings into accessible language and enable policymakers and the public to make informed decisions. Their independence from their founders or sponsors (political parties, interest groups, companies) is always limited to some extent, as they are expected to promote the interests and ideas of those actors.

Although left-leaning think-tanks also exist, the primary disseminators of climate-denialist narratives—especially in the United States—have been conservative and libertarian think-tanks. These organizations form the organizational backbone of the conservative movement and are usually not “single-issue” institutions, as climate change typically represents only one part of their broader agenda. Through conferences and their own media outlets, they seek to challenge the scientific consensus on climate change. Examples include the American Enterprise Institute and the Cato Institute (USA), or the Centre for Economics and Politics and the Václav Klaus Institute (Czech Republic).

Political Parties

Certain political parties also play a significant role in spreading climate disinformation, historically particularly those with right-wing or populist orientations. In the U.S. context, the Republican Party held a central position; despite its initially more moderate stance, it contributed to the polarization of society on climate issues and to the rejection of the Kyoto Protocol. Right-wing and populist parties differ in the intensity of their anti-environmentalism, the degree to which they reject climate targets, and the strategies they employ (emphasizing adaptation, delaying solutions, or actively attacking environmentalists).

In Europe, the radicalization of populist parties on climate issues was significantly influenced by the mobilization of the Fridays for Future movement (2019). In the Czech Republic, examples include SPD or Motorists for Themselves (Motoristé Sobě).

Climate Denialists among Academics

There is a small group of academics—mostly without expertise in climatology—who publicly oppose the scientific consensus in climate science. In the Czech context, these have often been economists, geologists, historians, and similar specialists. Through the lens of their respective disciplines, they most frequently question the human contribution to global climate change. Their motivations are typically ideological or personal, and they are frequently invited as speakers at think-tank events because they represent an alleged “heretical” voice within science. Many of them could more accurately be described as bloggers.

Media

Conservative media act as amplifiers of climate denialism in the public sphere: they give disproportionate space to science deniers, question the scientific consensus, and frame climate measures as a threat to freedom or the economy. In the United States, this typically includes Fox News; in the Czech Republic, examples include Info.cz, Echo24, or Deník.To.

A distinct category consists of explicitly disinformation-oriented media outlets that frame climate measures in terms of a global elite conspiracy (e.g. Aeronet, Protiproud). However, even mainstream media can contribute to the spread of disinformation, typically in an attempt to give space to “both sides of the conflict.” This balance is usually illusory, as the invited speakers do not have equal credibility (e.g. a climatologist versus a climate change-denying blogger).

Conservative Foundations

The fossil fuel industry often does not sponsor ideologically aligned think-tanks or research directly, as this would undermine their legitimacy in the eyes of the public. Instead, funding flows through conservative foundations, which then redistribute the resources. In the United States, examples include Donors Trust and Donors Capital Fund, the Koch Foundation, and the Bradley Foundation. Funding through foundations is less transparent and allows donors to remain anonymous.

Other Actors: Universities, PR and Advertising Agencies, Lobbyists, Social Media

Other actors also contribute to the spread of climate disinformation. These may include selected schools and university programs sponsored by the fossil fuel industry, PR and advertising agencies, and lobbyists. Social media platforms are not the original sources of climate-denying narratives, but they act as amplifiers of climate disinformation: their algorithms favor emotionally charged content, often regardless of its accuracy. They thus represent an environment in which disinformation can spread efficiently.

Sources Used

Dunlap, R. E.; McCright, A. M. Climate change denial: Sources, actors and strategies. In: Lever-Tracy, C. (ed.). Routledge Handbook of Climate Change and Society. London: Routledge, 2010, pp. 240–259.
Beder, S. Global Spin: The Corporate Assault on Environmentalism. Devon: Green Books, 1997.
Brulle, R. J.; Roberts, J. T.; Spencer, M. C. (eds.). Climate Obstruction across Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024.
McCright, A. M.; Dunlap, R. E. Defeating Kyoto: The Conservative Movement’s Impact on U.S. Climate Change Policy. Social Problems, 2003, 50(3), 348–373.
Dunlap, R. E.; Brulle, R. J. Sources and Amplifiers of Climate Change Denial. In: Holmes, D. C.; Richardson, L. M. (eds.). Research Handbook on Communicating Climate Change. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2020, pp. 49–61.
Vidomus, P. Oteplí se a bude líp.
Prague: SLON, 2018.