i hadn’t heard of this possibility until recently. on my first night of a recent antarctic voyage, expedition leader robert gilmore gave us passengers a unique opportunity: as citizen scientists, we could participate in real, cutting edge research in fields such as marine biology and meteorology.

one of the projects gilmore mentioned specifically caught my attention: fjordphyto, based in the scripps institute of oceanography in san diego. allison lee, the project operations manager, is a second-year ph.d. candidate at scripps. the research team is investigating the impact of climate change-driven glacial melt on the influence of phytoplankton communities. phytoplankton are a key species in the antarctic, lee explains, as they are the main food source of krill, which feed nearly all antarctic megafauna (and  their prey) including whales, seals, and penguins. “globally diatoms are said to produce nearly 20% of earth’s oxygen!” she said with emphasis, implying that changing these communities can have spillover effects in regions beyond the antarctic. i was fascinated that something so microscopic foreshadowed big changes happening in the earth’s oceans.

lee and gilmore both belong to the polar citizen science collective (pcsc). gilmore explains that pcsc members work with polar scientists and tourism companies to create a productive and educational combination of data collection and citizen science participation. he furthers: “the pscs effectively design(s) programs that eliminate collector bias, while also streamlining the process so as not to infringe on the tourism’s regular operations schedule.” polar research is difficult and expensive to conduct, so the pcsc was formed when a group of polar guides, including gilmore, had the idea of helping scientists conducting research in the western antarctic peninsula (wap).

the program, which has been implemented on cruise ships like the one i traveled on, has seen success from both the scientists’ and tourists’ perspectives. “(we’ve shown) scientists that we can contribute directly to their investigations by taking accurate, detailed, and valuable data sets for them” gilmore explains, “(while) creating educated, motivated people that will be returning home with a message for their friends and family.” this is one of the greatest benefits of citizen science, as people re-discover that sense of wonder regarding the natural world that they might have lost over the years.

i asked lee about her fondest memory regarding citizen science, and she recalls a moment after collecting samples in a zodiac where a man came up to her and said: “i’m an entrepreneur and i’ve owned a lot of businesses. i came to antarctica feeling like it was the last place on earth i could search for inspiration in my life. doing this fjordphyto project i felt for the first time in my life that spark of childlike curiosity.”

gilmore has a similar experience as a polar guide, describing that his most impactful memory with the pcsc is seeing the “light-bulb moment” in a passenger: when they begin to become more engaged with a topic or issue, and start to ask more questions.

most of us don’t have enough background information to fully conduct our own experiments in meteorology, zoology, or geology — and that’s ok. what we all can do is do our best to preserve our sense of wonder and curiosity. we can always be open to learning about new experiences and information.

i’ve always been fascinated by the ability of the right presentation and narrative to capture someone’s attention: i’ve learned about phytoplankton in a few science classes, but before boarding this ship, i never thought twice about them. but after my experience learning about the fjordphyto project, i’ve done extensive research — and obviously felt compelled to share the story with others.

i asked gilmore how he manages to engage passengers without extensive background information on marine biology on topics like trophic levels and phytoplankton blooms.

he recommends an educator build their lesson or curriculum around painting a larger picture: “you don’t want to go too deep into the science… convey the information that is most important for them to go home with.” and that way, you focus on your audience understanding, which is the most important thing.

“treat them like you would your own family,” he said.

when we talk to our family members, we want them to understand and care about what we’re doing and why we’re doing it — not just give them a set of facts to memorize. this is where science education goes wrong, i think. we don’t teach to understand, and students don’t learn to understand either.

we can all learn from this experience — both scientists and ordinary citizens. plus, crowdsourcing data collection makes conducting projects easier and more affordable. lee mentions that citizen science is incredibly useful in many areas of data collection, including geographic scope and duration. additionally, involving the general public in projects is great for increasing scientific literacy, and providing more educated and involved populations overall.

for citizens, getting involved in science is as simple as observation. it’s never too late, and it doesn’t have to be boring or difficult.

“we all have a responsibility to understand and protect our last remaining wild places,” gilmore said. “and we all have the capability to make a difference.”

editor’s note: part of our stories of alaska series, this piece explores the state through wildlife, plants, and bioindicators, looking at today’s challenges and accomplishments, and signs of what’s to come. click on the photoessay below to see the full story.

we’re on the highest deck of the national geographic sea lion. it’s a beautiful, alaskan summer day — perfect for whale watching. i decided to interview west, a naturalist working for lindblad expeditions, about living and working in a place where people see the consequences of their actions in real time. in a place sensitive to even the littlest of changes, it is easy to see how affecting one variable, like increasing carbon emissions, can have spillover effects in other domains, like glacial melting and ocean acidification.

for an economy that depends so heavily on natural capital, this is bad news. alaska has provided its residents with more than just a beautiful place to live — it’s brimming with resources they use to make a living. understandably, harvesting them often conflicts with protecting the wilderness, not only for nature’s sake, but to preserve these resources for future generations as well. i was curious as to how these tensions manifested in alaska, so i decided to talk to west about past and present conflict and collaboration.

although choices made regarding environmental health affect everyone, only a few people can make these large-scale decisions. furthermore, for most citizens, the environment usually takes a backseat to other concerns. people prioritize physical health, food security, and the economy over environmental health, even though these fields are heavily interrelated. with the way political issues are framed, we are made to think we have to choose one over the other. it doesn’t have to be protecting oceans or job creation, it can be protecting oceans and job creation — but opposing groups often refuse to make concessions to collaborate. this polarizes issues and cements deadlocks, driving opposing sides farther away from common ground.

west mentions that the most successful progress in the field she’s seen resulted from collaboration between diverse groups of alaskans. inviting more and different people to make decisions reveals problems some groups wouldn’t even think to consider. we get a more complete picture of our communal relationship with the wilderness, and with this insight comes more possible solutions.

“i think there’s always small steps we can do to compromise,” west says. “so conversations like that are going to maximize potential gain for everyone.” in the end, we all want the same thing: to make the best decision for our communities and for the future. it’s easy to lose sight of that in the smoke and mirrors of mass media and heavy politicization.

protecting the environment is often seen as a luxury. it’s hard to tell someone chronically stressed about multiple jobs or finding a home to care about nature, which can seem nebulous when daily hardships are all too real. this is one reason why it’s difficult to “sell” people on the idea of environmental protection when it comes to sacrificing daily comforts and conveniences.

we, as individuals, can’t physically feel the effects of long-term, positive impacts. so we stick with the short term, default options that are easiest for us. people like hamburgers but can’t feel the positive impact of giving up meat. hamburgers are easy, cheap, and fast, and it makes rational sense for many people to choose these things over something more environmentally friendly.

people who give up default options — cheap food, plastic bags, driving everywhere — in order to prioritize the environment must have some other reason to make that conscious choice. this often comes from knowledge of long-term impacts and the flexibility to make these decisions. however, the most committed people to protecting nature are often those who feel, not just know, that the earth is something worth saving.

alaska is a wholly sensory experience — majestic, towering mountains, crackling white thunder of calving glaciers, and salty ocean sprays. like the most memorable people in our lives, the most important places tap into our sensations and emotions. the excitement of seeing our first breaching whale, for example, emotionally links us to a time or place. these memories travel back home with us, reinforcing the belief that nature is truly amazing and worth sacrificing for. genuine emotional links to a place like alaska can make you feel like a part of something greater than yourself. as a result, the easy or cheap option becomes less important than the one that’s better for our planet. these sacrifices seldom happen through abstract connections, like looking at pictures of whales or mountains online. they necessitate physical ones. in a world where many people can’t prioritize their relationship with nature, how can we make these connections happen?

one way is to create and encourage opportunities for experience. spending recreational time in nature, especially somewhere remote like alaska, is a luxury available to relatively few young or socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. lindblad expeditions sponsored us college-aged storyfest winners to see the wonders of alaska, but most of our fellow passengers were our parents’ or grandparents’ age. i could count the passengers of color on one hand.

the national parks service has acknowledged this trend, establishing a department of relevancy, diversity, and inclusion. recently, grassroots groups like hiking every available trail (h.e.a.t.) and outdoor afro have spearheaded efforts to encourage more people of color to spend time in nature. as awareness of the problem increases, the next step is to empower people with knowledge and experience to foster healthier, greener communities. although it is easy to feel disconnected from the global community, our daily habits cause big changes all over the world. traveling to new places and feeling small helps us remember that our planet is large, and so is our impact.

a few days after the interview, a group of us sailed in a small inflatable boat completely surrounded by mountains. there is no graceful way to put into words the way we felt, dwarfed by the sheer expanse and beauty of nature. you don’t have to go to alaska to feel it—it’s familiar to anyone who’s been emotionally moved by beauty. it can be the first powdery snowfall in a small midwest town or the brilliant shades of red in east coast autumn trees. maybe it’s not killer whales interrupting your interview but a pair of monarch butterflies stopping by on their way to mexico. it’s around us all the time, and it’s been here all along. but it won’t be here for much longer, unless we decide this feeling — and the world behind it — is worth protecting.

yet scientists, like teachers, have lives outside the four walls of their work domain. media often focuses on the difference between those who practice science and those who don’t, rather than the things we might have in common, like family, sports, and love for pizza.

while this seems trivial, making the humans behind science more relatable is important for getting different kinds of people involved with science. dr. tesla monson, a postdoctoral scholar at the university of california, berkeley, maintains that this idea is key for people to realize that there is a pathway for everyone, especially for those less inclined to view themselves as potential scientists, into the field.  

one goal of monson’s podcast and radio show the graduates is to illustrate the different ways graduate students got involved with science. the show is a platform for these students to explain their research and its importance to radio audiences, all while giving them an opportunity to get to know them on a personal level.

highlighting that scientists don’t get involved with the subject at the same stages in their life is an important part of diversity in the scientific community, explains monson: “the last thing we want is for people to think, ‘i can’t understand biology right now, so i can never be a scientist.’”

monson felt the same way as a high school student and undergraduate: the way she was taught science was rigid and memorization-based rather than a creative and flexible process. framing of science — and scientists — as tough, cold, and disconnected, compounded by the fact that many underrepresented populations can’t view themselves as scientists, discourages participants in the field.

representation of real scientists and their stories can change that. the more we identify with someone, the more we understand where they come from and why they do what they do.

the perception of scientists isn’t the only problem in science communication. currently, many attempts at science communication have failed because of an audience disconnect problem. sara elshafie, a graduate student at uc berkeley, maintains that unsuccessful science communication is due to those disseminating the information failing to recognize how its consumers will perceive it. elshafie is involved with science communication through the creation of a workshop series, “science through story,” geared toward using storytelling strategies in science communication.

“the science itself is important,” she argues, “but the most important thing is making it meaningful to the audience.” information that the audience feels, rather than simply understands, has more of an impact.

it can be hard to make a significant impact when you cast a wide net, so elshafie advises targeting communication for a specific group. targeting communication towards a specific audience can seem paradoxical, but can often have better impacts than just the “general public.” it has a greater chance of making a lasting impact and a well-crafted piece might even have spillover effects into other demographics.

science communication is not only about getting views, it’s about getting people to care about issues enough to do something about them. thus, a better strategy is needed than the one for clickbait. it can be hard to balance thoughtful communication in the era of mass media, when it is hard to resist turning to sensationalism to get readers’ attention.

an effective and honest strategy involves consideration of how your words can be interpreted while critically thinking about how to use these words to better connect with consumers.

“it’s more about the audience than the speaker,” elshafie concludes, “and the ultimate goal is to make it meaningful to the audience.”

monson experienced a similar problem with audience relatability when she taught a class on human variation at berkeley. the biology class, touched on many controversial topics such as clinical obesity, skin pigmentation, and evolution. in a 300-person class, there was a potential for great social, cultural, and political diversity among students.

“i couldn’t be flippant with my language,” monson said. “for example, i couldn’t casually say that creationism shouldn’t be taught in schools — i had to be considerate of how students’  individual backgrounds lead to different interpretations of my words and find a respectful way to convey that.”

whether it’s through writing or through teaching, those with the responsibility of delivering information also have the duty to ensure that it is communicated in an honest, meaningful way.

what about the consumer’s duty? we should, as consumers, demand factually accurate information about the things that matter to us, such as our communities, environmental health, and governmental affairs. if we don’t care about the quality of our information, it means other people can change the way we think and act through how we learn about these issues.

it’s impossible for everyone to have a comprehensive technical background on every subject, so it’s important that we have accurate and high-quality information filters. the biggest thing preventing us from caring about an issue is lack of knowledge about the problem.

in a country where public opinion matters, it is important to have a scientifically literate citizenry that is aware of the problems our nation faces. it is imperative our community members feel empowered to be advocates for real change. many issues are preventative, and it is incredibly important to get people to care about them before it is too late.

we consumers should change the way we think of science. instead of something abstract and inaccessible, science should be thought of as a creative process. the only thing blocking someone from science is lack of wonder. science is tinkering and experimentation, with the end goal of truth above all else: pipetting in the lab, traveling to rainforests, and publishing papers are just a means to an end. most consumers won’t have much of a science background beyond their long-forgotten high school chemistry and biology lessons. it can be hard for readers to get past the jargon, to separate fact from opinion, and to see who is genuinely intentioned in communicating the truth. in this situation, maintains elshafie, it’s great to be skeptical. “if (something) doesn’t satisfy your curiosity, keep searching,” she advises. “and if you do that, you’ll find you have a lot in common with scientists.”

he isn’t alone—one in eight californians struggles with food insecurity, estimates the california association of food banks. traditional solutions to food insecurity include food banks and pantries, but these short-term, superficial fixes often don’t address the root causes of educational and resource asymmetry.

developing a longer-term solution entails an understanding of why so many californians — and americans — are food insecure. the reasons vary, from living in a food desert to the expense of fresh and healthy food. it’s important to understand that the history, culture, and circumstance of every community varies, and thus, the solution will too. a genuine understanding of the particular challenges community members face will lead to an effective and empowering solution rather than one that exclusively provides resources.

one bay area nonprofit does just that. fresh approach empowers people to make healthy food choices through active community involvement. the organization aims to build sustainable solutions to food insecurity, from the ground up. fresh approach has three programs: the freshest cargo mobile farmer’s market truck, the collective roots project, and veggie rx. fresh approach has clear, long-term goals for the communities it serves, rather than providing short term aid. i spoke to danielle hamilton, fresh approach’s educational program manager, about the organization.

“i think many people take a limited view on food insecurity,” hamilton says, maintaining that most superficial solutions ignore the interrelated sociocultural factors that lead to and perpetuate the problem. “addressing food insecurity requires providing access to affordable, culturally appropriate foods, and empowering the community with the knowledge and skills needed to prepare and cook with healthy foods.”

fresh approach views the problem as an issue of education rather than exclusively resource access, illustrating the importance of meeting people where they are at in terms of their long-term health goals. framing easy access to healthy foods changes the way people view food as a means to live to a way people can take ownership of their health. this paradigm shift is key to building a demand for healthy food across communities where it is not readily available.

hamilton is one of the educators for the nutrition class series. the lesson starts with discussion of a relevant health topic facilitated by a nutrition educator. the discussion functions as a baseline to hear the ideas and questions of those in the class, so the educator can see how the health issue actually manifests itself in the community. this is followed by a recipe demonstration and taste test.

one of the main problems fresh approach is tackling right now is tracking the long-term effects of its curriculum. they’re starting to see how program participants implement the strategies they learn after the classes have ended.

“we are working on strategies to create and measure behavior change in our shorter-series workshops,” hamilton explains, with the end goal being creating community advocates for healthy, local foods. food advocacy is an incredibly important aspect of food insecurity: fostering a demand for local, fresh produce where it isn’t already available is the first step to actually meeting this goal.

food insecurity involves many environmentally-related fields as well as socioeconomic factors. when addressing a problem this large, such as healthcare or food insecurity, it is important that an organization looks at the bigger picture to create a model that can feasibly be implemented in long term and minimize consequences across the board. it may be a more difficult solution, but a solution that leads to less downstream problems and a greater understanding of the situation. for example, fresh approach focuses on local food and supporting california farmers, a focus that other organizations do not have.

“we take a broader view of food security that acknowledges climate change, and the need for our globalized industrial food system to change to a more sustainable model,” hamilton says. “smaller-scale, biodiverse farming helps preserve the health of the soil and entire ecosystem so the land remains healthy and productive.”

fresh approach operates under a paradigm that those trying to make a difference should all consider: anything we do has spillover effects, and trying to create a long-term impact entails lifelong consequences on both the environment and the people living in it. hamilton hopes that in five years, the organization can both partner with health advocates and develop deeper relationships with the communities it serves to provide more of a holistic approach to food insecurity.

understanding of community and environmental health are key to solutions that move our society forward, for creating initiatives that take root in the communities they are there to serve.

hamilton says the basis for all policy or program development should be in the leaders of the community you are attempting to serve: “learn from the community experiencing barriers to healthy food access, and listen to their suggestions and inputs on what is needed.”

indeed, assistance should come through understanding, and that begins with learning before you teach.

large-scale change involves a big group of like-minded people committed towards taking a step in the right direction. brandon wood, a graduate student at the university of california, berkeley, shares this view. wood is one of the students behind earth action initiative, a conference occurring in april at uc berkeley.

“the goal is to focus on actions, what we can do, and our central philosophy is that we want to reduce the barrier for people to take action,” wood said.

funding action through mini-grants

there is strength in numbers, and earth action initiative is a place where like-minded people are given the resources and support to work together towards a common goal.  

in addition to workshops on topics ranging from responsible consumerism to the role of narrative in science communication, the conference “matchmakes” students to external organizations. according to wood, there is a large number of students working on sustainability initiatives and solutions to environmental problems, and they should not have to reinvent the wheel.

wood worked on a conference last year called “fired up” that featured a similar matchmaking process.

“last year’s event filled an activism niche that had been missed by other organizations and events on campus,” he said. “i hope to incorporate that into earth action initiative.” this year’s conference will couple the matchmaking with mini-grants, another way to facilitate a tangible outcome. mini-grants can be as simple as funding a student group who wants to bring in a speaker for 500 dollars.

“we see [the mini-grants] as a way to keep our focus on action,” according to wood.

while most workshops are marketed towards students, the evening portion of the conference features a climate art experience. the website describes this event as as the usage of “art and food to convey climate science in an intimate and tangible way.”

“there’s these sort of ivory towers,” wood explained. “you have science on one side, you have humanities, you have different ones that don’t interact much. i think a lot of people [from different disciplines] care about climate, so it’s nice to have an event where groups can exchange ideas.”

art as a medium of communication 

additionally, art and food are ways people can connect to climate change and environmental health in a less abstract way. when we hear about problems that affect us globally, it is easy to feel removed from the situation. this part of the conference attempts to change that.

“a lot of times people have a negative response when they’re confronted with the enormity of these issues,” wood explained. “you have this knee-jerk reaction, and you want to put your head into the sand.”

the art show is a different way people can relate to and connect with these issues. “rather than looking at an atmospheric plot of carbon dioxide, art is something people can understand and be inspired by,” he said.

creating the resources for collaboration 

most of the time, one person trying to make a difference isn’t enough. while individual inspiration and motivation are important, collaboration is a necessity.

“we’re sort of inclined to break the problem down into smaller, solvable problems, but i think [that won’t work with] an interconnected, global issue,” wood said. instead, large-scale initiatives are needed. he cites the paris accords as a step in the right direction, and that small initiatives working separately won’t make the impact they want to.

the paris accords was an agreement between governments, which are riddled with bureaucracy, inefficiency, and many other issues that can make unilateral action difficult. organizations committed to improving environmental conditions can avoid some of these problems. the biggest issue is that most of them are too small and disconnected to act together. projects like earth action initiative can connect people and resources, so we can all work towards a better tomorrow.

a project like this would work best in a setting where young people, full of drive and resources, are in their intellectual and motivational prime.

“one thing we are thinking about is [scaling] this to other college campuses,” wood explained. college is where many people find what they want to do for the rest of their lives. if this is even tangentially related to sustainability or environmental health, a conference like earth action initiative can connect them with the right resources and organizations. from the opposite end, sponsors, whether local, national or international, could be interested in finding talent to further their goals. connecting organizations with students whose personal and career objectives align well with their mission statements is a win-win situation. wood hopes to maximize these connections so both actors have a greater chance of collective action and ultimately making a difference.

“i feel like climate is one of those things that can get you down pretty easily, because it’s not hard to get pessimistic,” wood confessed. “i want everyone coming away from this feeling inspired, with the realization that there’s a community at berkeley who cares”

margaret mead is thought to have said that a group of thoughtful, committed citizens is the only thing that has changed the world. i believe this is the key to restoring environmental health. all that’s left is for us to come together. 

“the exhibits i remember most as a kid were at the exploratorium,” he explained. “when i got to really interact with something, it stayed with me.” his goal is similar experiences- wonder and engagement- through installations that are “simple, playful, and interactive.”as an interactive artist, he wants to create exhibits with a universal appeal so that that everyone young, old, rich poor, can understand and interact with his work. phanichphant views design as a tool to help people solve problems. with this outlook, he decided to apply his design thinking to his artistic endeavors and see what problems he could tackle.

one of the issues he felt was drastically under-covered in the 2016 presidential election was climate change. armed with a robust education in both human-computer interaction and product design, as well as his “superpower” for making abstract things tangible, phanichphant decided he was going to tackle the issue of climate change.

stories are better than logic

that december, he had an exhibition in matsudo, japan called too slow to see. he realized that the best way to make your work accessible is to know your audience. before he started thinking about what to build, he thought about the best way to get to know the audience he was trying to connect with. he began talking to as many people as possible to get an insight on the matsudo culture, synthesizing that into information he could use for his projects.

he brainstormed with post-its plastered on the walls, connecting personal stories with larger ideas, dialogue with inspiration, thoughts and feelings with broader social patterns and norms. phanichphant saw patterns between micro and macroscopic perspectives, gaining a deeper insight to what would really get through, not to just the citizens of matsudo, but to people everywhere.

“the first idea i had was that stories and feelings have a greater impact than logic,” he explained, an idea that exemplifies not only this series of works on climate change but in his current approach to education as well. phanichphant uses a “user-centric” approach when he teaches marketing at the jacobs institute for design innovation at uc berkeley. this perspective contrasts with the often-used product-centered approach, where students will often try to sell something by extolling its features and benefits. phanichphant instead wants students to use a narrative approach to describe how the product can improve lives and and solve problems. he explained that storytelling was a crucial skill to have and it allows the artist to better connect with the people that view their work. people can read information in words and numbers, but stories are what stick with them. this insight was the foundation for the in three emojis exhibit, in which visitors shared thoughts on climate change with emojis rather than words, like in the example below. ​

local is better than global

“the second thing i realized was that local is more important than global,” meaning that what people see around them is what they will care about. it’s immediate. it’s present. it’s what affects our friends and our families. he needed to find a way to make climate change less of a “global” problem and more of an issue people felt connected to.

thus, he designed feel the warming, an exhibit in which a museum-goer stuck his or her head in the middle of a model of matsudo, and a heat lamp would stimulate the warming effects carbon emissions have on his or her hometown.

action is better than talking

the third insight was that action was more effective than talking. he created together we start, or what he refers to as “a piece of art in exchange for a promise.” each person who interacts with the piece takes a small cartoon drawn by the artist with a pledge on the back, to do something small like eat less meat or bring a reusable bag grocery shopping. over time, as more and more people take the drawings off the wall, a message is revealed: together we start. just talking about climate change won’t do much to lessen our impacts. taking the first steps to reducing one’s carbon footprint while we see how we are a part of a larger effort to reduce our carbon footprint gives us some perspective on how our individual pledges combine to a greater promise to save the planet.

many is better than one

the final thing phanichphant wanted to emphasize was that many was greater than one. this inspired his piece connect our efforts, the piece that catalyzed the enthusiastic participation of the young boy in the gallery. this piece illustrates the hopelessness of tackling the challenge of climate change alone and the possibility of real impact when we work together.

the importance of collaboration is the thesis behind the next project he was a part of: air miners. while giving a presentation on his interactive exhibits in matsudo, phanichphant was approached to join the team as a designer. “instead of thinking of carbon as a burden, air miners frames it as something we can mine, an opportunity,” he explained, comparing it to gold.

the website itself is an index of all the companies working to reduce carbon emissions, bringing people that care about the issue together. “it’s another way to make the abstract tangible. before this website, a lot of these companies didn’t know anything about each other,” he said.

even though this is a niche organization, he hopes this idea of bringing people together based on a demonstrated need and a desire to help the planet trickles down and creates jobs and awareness in other places.

the echo chamber

it may seem like phanichphant has reached all his goals, but he has one big problem: he’s trapped in the echo chamber. “in the context of art and design and even academia… the majority is on the liberal side of things, and it made me think of how my art wasn’t really changing the minds of people who don’t care.”

hence the echo chamber, where we bounce our ideas in a space of like-minded people while people who have other priorities, whether that’s people who are struggling to survive or people who prioritize getting rich over everything else, are outside our bubble. his next step is using a design process to answer his own question: “what’s the most effective way to change minds in the age of changing climate?”