Why climate action fails despite public concern

🌍 Ten Years After Paris: is the Climate Crisis a Disinformation Crisis? In 2015, the world made a historic promise: to keep global warming well below 2°C, and ideally below 1.5°C. We committed to major emission cuts by 2030, and net-zero by 2050. The Paris Agreement marked a new era of global climate cooperation. But ten years on, we're still struggling with cooperation while the World Meteorological Organization tells us that the Earth’s average temperature exceeded 1.5°C over a 12-month period (Feb 2023–Jan 2024) for the first time. Why? 🔍 A groundbreaking new study, led by 14 researchers for the International Panel on the Information Environment, reviewed 300 studies from 2015–2025. The findings are alarming: powerful interests – fossil fuel companies, populist parties, even some governments – are systematically spreading misleading narratives to delay climate action. 🧠 Misinformation isn't just about denying climate change. It’s now about strategic skepticism – minimizing the threat, casting doubt on science-based solutions, and greenwashing unsustainable practices. 📺 This disinformation flows through social media, news outlets, corporate reports, and even policy briefings. It targets all of us – but especially policymakers, where it can shape laws and delay critical decisions. 💡 So what can we do? 1️⃣ Legislate for transparency and integrity in climate communication. 2️⃣ Hold greenwashers accountable through legal action. 3️⃣ Build global coalitions of civil society, science, and public institutions. 4️⃣ Invest in climate and media literacy for both citizens and leaders. 5️⃣ Amplify voices from underrepresented regions – like Africa – where more research is urgently needed. We must protect not only the planet’s climate, but the integrity of climate information. 🔗 Read more on how disinformation is undermining climate progress – and what we can do about it: https://lnkd.in/eDN9hKAJ 🕰️ The window is small. But with truth, science, and collective action, we can still turn the tide.

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

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

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

🌍 The way we are approaching, encouraging, and assessing #NetZero—through NDCs, corporate targets, and carbon accounting—is not just inherently insufficient, it is actively counterproductive. Net zero is an atmospheric imperative. Achieving it requires: • Decarbonizing the world’s energy, industrial, and food systems • Enhancing the absorptive capacity of the world’s carbon sinks Transforming these systems requires: • Clear roadmaps • Technological innovation • Adequate public and private finance • And coordinated action among public and private actors across sectors, borders, and value chains Our dominant frameworks—focused on individual country and corporate target-setting, measurement, and accounting—falsely assume that systemic, regional, and sectoral transitions can be delivered by the sum of individual targets and plans. This flawed logic disincentivizes the coordination needed. Rather than identifying an entity’s leverage to address systemic barriers to decarbonization, both countries and companies, which cannot decarbonize on their own, purchase offsets so they can methodologically “claim” to be net zero while continuing to emit, increasing rather than decreasing atmospheric GHGs. This has also led to a reliance on credits to fund nature-based and technological solutions that need substantially more and reliable financing. We’ve built an entire architecture around the wrong unit of ambition and analysis, and we are now fixing symptoms (to make the accounting more credible), not confronting the underlying structural misalignment. Accelerating climate action requires decisively shifting from individual targets to coordinated, transformative planning and implementation. This means: 🔁 Prioritizing and supporting Long-Term Low-Emission Development Strategies (LT-LEDS), which are inherently more ambitious and pragmatic than NDCs. 🛤 Supporting scenario planning and sectoral roadmaps, not just insisting on more ambitious NDCs and FF phase-outs. In many EMDEs, there aren’t clear technical roadmaps for how FF-based energy can be replaced reliably and financed affordably. 🤝 Facilitating coordination across regions, value chains, and stakeholders, not emphasizing individual action. 💸 ensuring adequate and affordable financing for the necessary transitions. (Note: private capital doesn’t move because of better carbon accounting, risk metrics, or pressure. It moves when transitions become financeable: - Enabled by clear roadmaps and aligned policy and regulations - Structured through investable market design by coordinating demand and supply - Supported by public finance and tailored risk mitigation) As we head into New York Climate Week, I hope we focus less on statements of ambition (NDCs and corporate targets) and more on rigorous, technically grounded transition pathways—and the collaborative, cross-sector engagement required to deliver them. The stakes are too high to keep solving the wrong problem.

5 CRITICAL INSIGHTS FROM CLIMATE WEEK NYC 2025 The structural tensions built into climate action that even the smartest people work around rather than fix. Just returned from Climate Week NYC—beyond the usual critiques of greenwashing and performance, I noticed design features in our climate response that explain why progress remains elusive. These aren't failures of will but systemic patterns baked into how we've organized climate action itself. THE 5 CRITICAL INSIGHTS 1. We've Made Offsets Easier Than Operations 2. The Real Revolution Is Regional 3. The Implementation Gap Kills Good Ideas 4. Voluntary Commitments Are Just Training Wheels 5. The Grocery Store Remains the Final Boss We've built an activity machine when what we need is a results machine. The planet doesn't respond to our conferences, commitments, or good intentions—only to our emissions. https://lnkd.in/g5fnM_aC #ClimateAction #ClimateWeekNYC #FoodSystems #SystemsThinking