Why Climate Change Progress is Slow Despite Awareness

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

Why has the transition from fossil fuels to renewable energy proceeded so slowly? Some analysts attribute the delay to the intermittent and perceived unreliability of renewable energy sources. Others point to political factors and inconsistent government policies, while still others highlight resistance from fossil fuel companies and incumbent industries. Each of these factors has some validity. But there is another critical factor that is less widely understood or discussed: stagnation in construction productivity growth. The first chart (courtesy of McKinsey & Company) illustrates that between 2000 and 2022, global manufacturing productivity nearly doubled, whereas construction productivity showed minimal progress. This divergence poses significant challenges for renewable energy deployment. While much attention is given to the declining manufacturing costs of renewable technologies (e.g., the widely heralded decrease in the price of solar panels), the costs associated with installing renewable energy projects have remained high due to negligible improvements in construction productivity. This significantly hinders the overall energy transition as manufacturing renewable energy technologies is of no value until projects are built. In the United States, the situation is even worse. As depicted in the second chart, U.S. construction productivity has decreased by 25% over the same period. Conversely, only China has achieved meaningful productivity gains in construction. This productivity advantage helps explain China's remarkable success in renewable energy deployment— in 2024 alone, China installed more solar capacity than the United States has accumulated in its entire history. To effectively address #climate change, improving construction productivity must become a greater focus of political and business leaders, especially in the United States and Europe.

We work on climate change and air pollution because people are already being harmed—by rising heat, worsening floods, and toxic air. This is not an abstract threat. It’s personal, urgent, and unequally felt. Our work spans both top-down and bottom-up approaches. At the top, we contribute to policy design, emissions research, and national climate frameworks. Equally vital, on the ground, we focus on reaching the people most affected—those living in low-income, rural, or marginalized communities—who are too often excluded from climate communication altogether. But it’s also important to ask: Are we truly doing enough? Change takes time, yes. Systems are slow, and impact unfolds gradually. But we must be honest about our effectiveness and equity. Are our materials actually reaching the right people? Are we measuring who understands, who acts, and who remains unaware? The disconnect between the most affected and the best informed is not just a gap—it’s a warning. This exclusion is not theoretical. The numbers speak clearly: More than 4.1 billion people live in low- and lower-middle-income countries, where vulnerability to climate impacts is highest (World Bank, 2024). Among them, an estimated 3.5 billion (~85%) are non-native English speakers, yet most climate and air pollution materials are available only in English or a few UN languages (EF EPI, 2023; Climate Cardinals, 2023). Compounding this, over 2 billion people in these regions lack internet access, with connectivity in low-income countries as low as 27% (ITU, 2023). Despite this digital divide, less than 15% of climate and air quality materials are designed for offline users—such as community radio, printed posters, or visual tools (UNEP, 2022; WRI India, 2023). In total, over 3.3 billion people—those most at risk—remain excluded from essential information. Meanwhile, over 80% of climate communication efforts continue to target urban, internet-connected, English-speaking populations—the segment least exposed to direct harm (IPCC & UNFCCC, 2023; WHO IEC Reviews, 2022). Improving our reach, responsiveness, and relevance must be central to how we define success in climate work. The good news is—we already know what needs to change. Now we must act to ensure the people most affected are finally the most empowered

https://lnkd.in/gdzSw22J This just-published report by the non-profit Tony Blair Institute for Global Change calls for a rethink to tackling the climate paradox, which is that while awareness of the climate crisis is high, meaningful action is in decline. The report highlights several uncomfortable truths. First, while renewables are growing, this has complemented and not replaced the use of fossil fuels, which continues to grow as well. Second, the hard to decarbonize airline industry is projected to double in the next 20 years. Third, urbanization will drive growth in demand for emission-intensive steel and cement. Fourth, the annual COP process is slow and unable to drive action and impact. The Institute recommends a suite of measures to deal with climate change. Three measures stand out. First, recognising the world’s continued reliance on fossil fuels to meet growing energy demand, carbon capture needs to scale quickly. Second, plurilateral solutions amongst high-emitting countries need to sit alongside the multilateral COP framework. Third, philanthropic giving can support frontier energy solutions for faster deployment. While I agree with the paper’s realist stance, I don’t agree with the statements that developed countries’ “impact on global emissions is minimal” and that “in the future the major sources of pollution will come principally from the developing world.” This is because developed countries are mostly net importers of emissions, i.e. production of cars, steel, household goods et al. has been offshored to developing countries. While China is the world’s largest emitter, its consumption-based per capita emissions (7.2 tonnes per pax in 2022) is lower than the US (16.5 tonnes per pax in 2022). Furthermore, China is decarbonizing at a significantly faster rate than the US. The BBC reported that the UK prime minister’s office responded to the Tony Blair report with the following quote: "We will reach net zero in a way that treads lightly on people's lives, not telling them how to live or behave”. I think we need an all hands on deck approach to the climate crisis, which includes nudging individuals to be mindful of their emissions and make prudent consumption decisions. No different from changing one’s diet and eating mindfully to tackle obesity upstream rather than popping pills and invasive surgery when the medical condition becomes severe. #climateparadox #decarbonization #climatechange

𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗼 𝘀𝗹𝗼𝘄𝗹𝘆 𝗼𝗻 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸𝘀? It's not just climate denial, it's human nature. According to the Financial Times Moral Money newsletter, cognitive biases like status quo bias, herding mentality, and optimism bias are slowing corporate action.  • 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘁𝘂𝘀 𝗾𝘂𝗼 𝗯𝗶𝗮𝘀: Sticking with what's familiar.  • 𝗛𝗲𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆: Following the crowd, even when it’s not the best choice.  • 𝗢𝗽𝘁𝗶𝗺𝗶𝘀𝗺 𝗯𝗶𝗮𝘀: Believing the risks won't affect them. However, companies that overcome these biases will have a significant advantage. As JPMorgan’s climate advisory head, Sarah Kapnick, points out, “Companies should view this area as not just a risk management tool, but... also a strategic investment opportunity” that can provide a long-term competitive edge. And while the EU may be slowing down on corporate reporting, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is prioritizing climate adaptation and resilience. She's tasked Commissioner Wopke Hoekstra with creating a major policy package on the subject. #sustainability #climaterisk #climateresilience