Why Silence on Climate Action Matters

𝐖𝐢𝐭𝐡𝐨𝐮𝐭 𝐬𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨 𝐬𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲. A newly published study shows something that feels intuitive: people who prioritize environmental protection over economic growth are significantly more likely to support Green parties. 👉 https://lnkd.in/eU7QEkZz But the real insight lies deeper. The study finds that this political translation of environmental values weakens where economic insecurity is high, particularly among those with lower incomes, lower education levels, or living in rural areas. In other words, support for climate action isn’t just about values; it’s about the conditions that allow people to act on those values. Solidarity, economic, social, political, is the enabling environment for sustainability. And yet, solidarity itself is under strain. A striking example: while 89% of people globally support stronger government climate action, and many would willingly contribute 1% of their income to that end, most underestimate how many others feel the same. 👉 https://lnkd.in/eDt8Xnuz This “spiral of silence”, where we assume we’re alone in our concern, can suppress momentum, even when consensus is already there. Sustainability requires more than technology or policy, it demands shared confidence, collective security, and visible alignment of values. Green politics will remain vulnerable until the conditions of economic and social inclusion are structurally addressed. And we won’t get far if people must choose between climate and livelihood. What we need is a politics, and an economics, that doesn’t just reflect values, but protects the capacity to act on them. No sustainability without solidarity. No solidarity without inclusive freedom.

89% of people want their governments to do more to address the climate crisis 🌎 New global research featured in The Guardian reveals a critical disconnect between public opinion and perceived social norms regarding climate action. A comprehensive survey across 125 countries representing 96% of global emissions shows that 89% of respondents believe their governments should take stronger measures to address the climate crisis. However, most people significantly underestimate how many others share this view—creating a perception gap that contributes to widespread inaction. This phenomenon aligns with what social scientists refer to as the “spiral of silence.” When individuals assume they are in the minority, they become less likely to express their views or support policy initiatives. Over time, this misperception becomes self-reinforcing, suppressing visible momentum for climate solutions. Experimental evidence cited by The Guardian supports the importance of correcting these misperceptions. In behavioral studies, participants who were informed that most people support climate action contributed significantly more to climate-related causes. This demonstrates how perceived norms directly influence individual behavior. The findings also reveal that willingness to act is global and cross-cutting. In China, 97% of respondents support stronger government intervention. In the United States, the figure stands at three-quarters. Even in high-emission petrostates such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, a majority expressed willingness to allocate a portion of their income to climate efforts. Policy-making has not kept pace with public sentiment. In the United Kingdom, while 72% of the public supports onshore wind developments, only 19% of Members of Parliament correctly perceive this level of support. This misalignment between political judgment and actual public opinion delays or derails climate-related policy decisions. Communicating accurate data on public support for climate action may represent one of the most efficient, scalable interventions available. Social norm correction strategies are low-cost, evidence-based, and capable of catalyzing large-scale behavioral change across demographics and regions. As The Guardian concludes, making the silent majority visible is essential. Strategic communication that reinforces true public sentiment can help unlock social tipping points, strengthen climate policy, and accelerate the transition toward a low-carbon, resilient future. Source: The Guardian #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange

Remember those bold corporate climate commitments? Yeah… about that Lately, I’ve noticed a worrying trend—companies quietly walking away from their climate pledges, hoping no one will notice. In New Zealand, several firms have dropped out of the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) without a word. No announcements. No explanations. Just… gone. And they’re not alone. Globally, over 200 major companies—including Microsoft, Unilever, and Walmart—were recently delisted from SBTi for failing to follow through. Meanwhile, financial giants like Citigroup and Bank of America have exited the Net-Zero Banking Alliance. So, what’s going on? And why should we care? Why are companies backing out? Many signed up for climate commitments when the pressure was high—investors, customers, and employees were demanding action. But now, with economic challenges, changing regulations, and less scrutiny, some are quietly retreating. Decarbonization isn’t easy. It takes investment, structural changes, and real effort. But instead of being transparent about their struggles, companies are just… disappearing from these initiatives. Why does this matter? When companies break their climate promises, it’s not just disappointing—it’s dangerous. 1️⃣ It erodes trust – If companies can make big sustainability claims and walk away without consequences, how do we know who’s serious? 2️⃣ It slows down progress – If major corporations backtrack, it signals to others that climate action is optional. 3️⃣ It risks greenwashing – These commitments often drive PR and goodwill. But if there’s no accountability, it becomes all talk, no action. What should companies do instead? Backing out isn’t the problem—silence is. If companies are struggling to meet targets, they should: ✔️ Be transparent about the challenges ✔️ Adjust their strategy, rather than abandon it ✔️ Engage with stakeholders to find real solutions What can we do? As consumers, employees, and investors, we have power. We can: 💡 Ask companies tough questions about their progress 💡 Support businesses that are serious about sustainability 💡 Push for policies that make climate commitments enforceable #sustainability #greenhushing #esg

An important study investigating the global evidence on the actual and perceived support for climate action. While the study finds widespread support for climate action, the researchers: “document that the world is in a state of pluralistic ignorance, wherein individuals around the globe systematically underestimate the willingness of their fellow citizens to act. This perception gap, combined with individuals showing conditionally cooperative behaviour, poses challenges to further climate action. Therefore, raising awareness about the broad global support for climate action becomes critically important in promoting a unified response to climate change…. The prevailing pessimism regarding others’ support for climate action can deter individuals from engaging in climate action, thereby confirming the negative beliefs held by others. Therefore, our results suggest a potentially powerful intervention, that is, a concerted political and communicative effort to correct these misperceptions.” The ability for individuals to take action needs to be created by our leaders, but we also need to help more folks see the desire for climate action among their peers, to norm positive climate behaviour across all parts of society, and remove the taboo of talking about being supportive of ambitious climate action. Media and creatives have such a huge, yet as yet untapped, opportunity to help share these stories. But all of us can help. Talk about climate action. With your family, friends, peers, work teams, sports teams….In your communities, colleges, corporates…. Join climate groups and networks. Create ones where they don’t exist. Share your support, there’s likely others needing to hear it. https://lnkd.in/ewYNNQ2R

A recent study highlighted by Pilita Clark in the Financial Times sheds light on a striking disconnect: while 69% of people globally are willing to contribute 1% of their household income to fight climate change, the majority believe they are in the minority, thinking only 43% would do the same. I believe that this significant perception gap is partly due to the overwhelming spread of anti-climate action messages that overshadow the essential, yet underrepresented, facts provided by climate scientists. The conversation around climate action is being skewed by negativity and misinformation, preventing a realistic understanding of people's willingness to take action. Furthermore, we face another crucial gap: the disconnect between individual recognition of global warming and a collective consciousness about the issue. Many of us acknowledge the threat and are even prepared to contribute financially towards its mitigation. However, this awareness does not always translate into collective action. This could be because individuals feel - or were made to feel - that their contributions are too small to make a difference or they perceive a general indifference from the broader public. Bridging this gap between individual and collective awareness is vital for mobilizing concerted action against climate change. Addressing these perception gaps could indeed revolutionize the debate around climate policy as well. It shows that, contrary to the divisive rhetoric often seen in the media (especially right-wing media), there is broad support for meaningful climate action. This collective willingness challenges the narrative pushed by extreme right-wing groups that downplay the urgency of climate issues, revealing their views as not representative of the general populace. In the context of climate policy, this understanding could be a game-changer. Policies that might have seemed politically unviable due to a perceived lack of public support could receive the backing they (desperately) need. Governments and policymakers could be emboldened to propose and implement ambitious climate strategies, knowing there's a silent majority ready to support them. This shift could lead to more aggressive action against global warming, aligning policy more closely with the scientific consensus on what needs to be done to mitigate climate risks. PS: I urge you to also read the comments under the FT article to see the level of organized scepticism about climate change. It underscores the importance of our challenge but also highlights the silent majority's potential power to influence climate policy positively. #ClimateAction #Sustainability #EnvironmentalPolicy #GlobalWarming #ClimateCrisis

“A question still exists about why and how Americans, especially farmers refrain from engaging in discussions about climate change even in their close circles.” Agriculture and climate are inextricably linked. With the growing impact of climate change on farming and farming on climate change, it is important to understand how farmers do or do not communicate about such changes. In their recently published article in Environmental Communication, Hong Tien Vu, Nhung Nguyen, Nazra Izhar, and Vaibhav Diwanji investigate how midwestern farmers experience the spiral of silence when deciding whether or not to voice their thoughts about climate change. “Drawing from the concept of spiral of silence (Noelle-Neumann, 1974), this study analyzes 22 in-depth interviews with farmers and ranchers in Kansas and Missouri on their engagement (or not) in climate change conversations with those around them and their perceptions of the information environment regarding the topic. The selection of these two Midwestern states, where conservative ideology is popular (Lauck & Stock, 2020), provides a meaningful backdrop to understanding how the effect of the spiral of silence regarding climate change happens among farmers. Focusing on climate change, a politically divided topic, contributes to the theory by extending its applications to a new domain. Specifically, this study offers insights into how different conceptual elements associated with spiral of silence, such as fear of isolation, cue-taking, and environment-sensing manifest in the context of climate communication,” -Vu, Nguyen, Izhar & Diwanji. Read “Climate Change is Real, but I Don't Wanna Talk About It”: Unraveling Spiral of Silence Effects Regarding Climate Change Among Midwestern American Farmers at https://lnkd.in/gi5qcG7U Image is licensed under Creative Commons, source, https://lnkd.in/gACYkbm3

🌎 Most Christian religious leaders in the U.S. are quietly concerned about climate change... yet rarely speak about it publicly. In a recent study published in PNAS, Stylianos Syropoulos and Gregg Sparkman surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,600 religious leaders and nearly 1000 congregants. They found that almost 90% of Christian religious leaders believe climate change is real and driven by human activity, but nearly half have never mentioned this to their congregations. ✨ The good news? In a follow-up experiment, Christian congregants who were provided accurate information about their leaders' climate beliefs significantly changed their views. They became more comfortable discussing climate change within their congregations and recognized that voting for politicians opposed to climate action contradicted their church's beliefs. 💡 Broader lesson: We often stay silent on important issues because we mistakenly believe others, especially authority figures, disagree or don’t care. Recognizing this can empower us to have crucial conversations and inspire meaningful change. Link to full paper in comments.

In this issue of #ClimateVoices, I’m pleased to be talking with Genevieve Guenther, PhD, a former Renaissance scholar who turned to climate activism after having a child and becoming increasingly alarmed about the world her son could inherit after she died. She is guided by the conviction that our language for the climate crisis is largely inaccurate and misleading, and that fixing this problem requires us not just to reframe talking points, but to recognize how our speech itself – what we say and what we don’t say about climate change – upholds a dangerous status quo. In 2018, Dr. Guenther founded End Climate Silence, a volunteer organization that pushes the news media to start talking about the climate crisis with the urgency it deserves. She directs strategy and outreach, helping journalists explain the links between global warming and extreme weather, headline the urgent findings of climate science, and foreground the role of climate breakdown in news about politics, energy, business and finance, immigration, real estate, health, travel, food, and even the arts. Dr. Guenther’s activism and writing has been profiled in The New Yorker, and End Climate Silence has been cited in The New York Times Magazine as helping to set climate politics “on fire.” Her book, 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘓𝘢𝘯𝘨𝘶𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘊𝘭𝘪𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘗𝘰𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘤𝘴: 𝘍𝘰𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘭-𝘍𝘶𝘦𝘭 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘱𝘢𝘨𝘢𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘵𝘰 𝘍𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘐𝘵, has been called a “revelatory study” by Publishers Weekly and “a gift to the world” by Bill McKibben.