Issue mapping conducted allowed for analysis into key terms and phrases surrounding climate change. Working collaboratively allowed the circulation of a broader scope of ideas from a variety of participants.
First, the group mapping of terms surrounding the issue brought extensive lists of all phrases and niche key words that could provide direction to the issue. The group discussed which words were reoccurring between each other and which ideas were more individual than others. Seemingly, generic and well recognised terms within climate change, such as global warming, emissions, pollution, were contrasted by more extreme or controversial words like death, skepticism, marine conservation or biodiversity. It was interesting to note these differences.
Next, the initial issue mapping was then altered, with each card, participants listed the antonyms on the flip side of the listed terms. It was interesting to tally the connotations associated with the opposing thoughts during the task. Connotations that were positive, negative, controversial or confusing and then listed during this analysis. This mapping task was difficult, however inferred tones around the general idea of the issue, which lead me to think about ideas that could possibly form a design solution.
Re-arranging the keywords and phrases followed. Selecting a group of 20 specified words and arranging them into positive and negative categories inferred connotations about climate change and global warming. Tackling the issue from these two view points questioned what immersive ideas are associated with the issue? or what destructive ideas are associated? Further, categorisation became in depth moving into, emotive, factual and disruptive groups that broke up the words. Keywords were then broken down strategically to infer distinctive connections and oppositions between the terms, being the most powerful to least powerful. It was interesting to discuss other participants interpretations of these categories and where the words fit into.
Finally, participants chose words that resonated strongly with them and summed up the whole issue of climate change. Words summarised included death, conservation, denial, debate, habitats, rising water temperatures, urgent, new-energy, emissions, biodiversity and fossil fuels. They seemed to intrinsically connect to all aspects of the issue from causes, effect, action, inaction and the results involved in climate change.
The issue mapping task was summed up by stakeholder mapping again and polemic or emotive contrasting. The stakeholder map connected influencers to emotional and factual keywords listed during the issue mapping. Polemic and emotive maps allowed controversial notions about climate change to be contrasted in a poetic way, such as skepticism being linked to anger or denial, or capitalism being linked to destructive, misleading, manipulative or dishonest emotion. The stakeholder mapping was thus linked again contextualising the brainstorms and resulting in a successful dynamic between understanding categorisations of the issue between authorities, organisations and individuals that influence these notions.