Climate inaction has traditionally been attributed to skepticism and denial. However, strategies obstructing climate action have become more nuanced, shifting from direct denial to complex forms of delay. This study presents a typology of discursive strategies of climate obstruction that expands the existing literature while comprehensively classifying tactics that hinder climate action. We argue that climate obstruction better encapsulates the broad strategies used to delay climate action than climate skepticism. Our typology comprises three categories, each distinguished by the target of obstruction. First, Phenomenon Obstruction (Target 1) includes discourses to obstruct the fact that climate change is occurring and human-caused as well as the severity of its impacts. Second, Climate Action Obstruction (Target 2) encompasses discourses targeting solutions to tackle climate change, such as promoting unproven solutions or greenwashing, shifting responsibility, casting doubt on climate policy productivity, looking for policy perfectness, and appealing to cultural and partisan identity to oppose climate action. Last, Source Credibility Obstruction (Target 3) undermines the credibility of climate actors or climate research, pertaining to its method and data as opposed to questioning the existence of the phenomenon itself (Target 1), and casting such actors as conspirators. Based on a review of 138 scholarly publications, this framework equips scholars to analyze how these strategies manifest across political discourse, news media, and social media.
Fortin et al. (2025) studied this question.