Purpose: The purpose of the paper is to analyze how promotional and advisory efforts address climate change mitigation in Norway and to learn how advisers navigate between governmental goals to address the common good and farmers' private needs. Methodology: Empirical data was obtained through semi-structured in-depth interviews with eight agricultural advisers with the mandate of promoting climate-friendly farming, as well as through notes and presentations from a workshop involving advisers and agricultural schoolteachers. Data were analyzed qualitatively on the basis of meaning condensation and meaning categorization. Findings: Only the most enterprising farmers have proactively sought climate advice and attended climate courses -- and primarily for farm-benefiting gains other than climate change mitigation. The advisers see it as essential to highlight the overall gains that derive from climate change mitigation and that benefit farms in the broader sense in order to motivate farmers, while the central communication around climate advice and courses more narrowly solely focuses on the opportunity to reduce emissions. Practical implications and value: It is important to create a suitable framing of climate change mitigation and its benefits both at the macro (policy and programme) and micro (farm-level advice) levels, in order to reach out to as many farmers as possible. Theoretical implications: Advice framing that puts greater emphasis on the private, non-climate-related benefits of climate change mitigation actions seems to stimulate greater support for these actions than a common-good framing focused on addressing climate change only.