Hubbry Logo
Climate movementClimate movementMain
Open search
Climate movement
Community hub
Climate movement
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Climate movement
Climate movement
Climate movement
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Banner "System change, not climate change" at Ende Gelände 2017 in Germany

The climate movement is a global social movement focused on pressuring governments and industry to take action (also called climate action) addressing the causes and impacts of climate change. Citizens and environmental non-profit organizations have engaged in significant climate activism since the late 1980s and early 1990s, as they sought to influence the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).[1] Climate activism has become increasingly prominent over time, gaining significant momentum during the 2009 Copenhagen Summit and particularly following the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2016.[2]

Climate change march in Washington, D.C., USA on 29 April 2017

Environmental organizations take various actions such as Peoples Climate Marches. A major event was the global climate strike in September 2019 organized by Fridays For Future and Earth Strike.[3] The target was to influence the climate action summit organized by the UN on 23 September.[4] According to the organizers four million people participated in the strike on 20 September.[5] Youth activism and involvement has played an important part in the evolution of the movement after the growth of the Fridays For Future strikes started by Greta Thunberg in 2019.[2][6] In 2019, Extinction Rebellion organized large protests demanding to "reduce carbon emissions to zero by 2025, and create a citizens' assembly to oversee progress", including blocking roads.[7]

History

[edit]

In 1962, Rachel Carson(a marine biologist, writer, and conservationist) wrote Silent Spring, which served as a powerful exposé on the environmental devastation, caused by indiscriminate pesticide use, and the government's failure to protect public health and wildlife.[8] Carson states that more state regulation is required to protect public health and wildlife. The work's critiques of the lack of state provisioning in the American water, and air sector which advanced the global environmental movement.

Since the early 1970s, climate activists have called for more effective political action regarding climate change and other environmental issues. In 1970, Earth Day was the first large-scale environmental movement that called for the protection of all life on earth.[9] The Friends of Earth organization was also founded in 1970.[10]

Activism related to climate change continued in the late 1980s,[11] when major environmental organizations became involved in the discussions about climate, mainly in the UNFCCC framework. Whereas environmental organizations had previously primarily been engaged at the domestic level, they began to increasingly engage in international campaigning.[11]

The largest transnational climate change coalition, Climate Action Network, was founded in 1992.[12] Its major members include Greenpeace, WWF, Oxfam and Friends of the Earth.[12] Climate Justice Now! and Climate Justice Action, two major coalitions, were founded in the lead-up to the 2009 Copenhagen Summit.[12]

Between 2006 and 2009, the Campaign against Climate Change and other British organisations staged a series of demonstrations to encourage governments to make more serious attempts to address climate change.[10]

The 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen was the first UNFCCC summit in which the climate movement started showing its mobilization power at a large scale. According to Jennifer Hadden, the number of new NGOs registered with the UNFCCC surged in 2009 in the lead-up to the Copenhagen summit.[1] Between 40,000 and 100,000 people attended a march in Copenhagen on December 12 calling for a global agreement on climate.[13] Activism went beyond Copenhagen, with more than 5,400 rallies and demonstrations took place around the world simultaneously.[14]

In 2019, activists, most of whom were young people, participated in a global climate strike to criticise the lack of international and political action to address the worsening impacts of climate change.[15][16] Greta Thunberg, a young activist from Sweden, became a figurehead for the School Strike For Climate movement.[15]

Methods

[edit]

Climate activists are sometimes depicted as dangerous radicals, but the truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.

Presenting data and other facts is less effective in motivating people to act to mitigate climate change, than financial incentives and social pressure involved in showing people climate-related actions of other people.[18]
The strongest factors in self-reported changes in opinion about global warming were Republican party identification, seeing others experience impacts of global warming, and learning more about global warming.[19]

These are several approaches that have been used in the past by climate advocates and advocacy campaigns:

  • the provision of information,
  • framing of information about aspects of global climate change, and
  • challenging the terms of political debates.

All three of these methods have been implemented in climate campaigns aimed at the general public.[20] The information about the impacts of global climate change plays a role in forming climatic beliefs, attitudes, and behavior, while the effects of other approaches (e.g. provision of information about solutions to GCC, consensus framing, use of mechanistic information) is yet mostly unknown.[21] The third approach is to create space for discussions that move beyond questions of economic interests that often dominate political debates to emphasize ecological values and grass-roots democracy. This has been argued to be crucial to bringing about more significant structural change.[22] Some politicians, such as Arnold Schwarzenegger with the slogan "terminate pollution", say that activists should generate optimism by focusing on the health co-benefits of climate action.[23]

Climate disobedience

[edit]
See also: Ende Gelände 2016, Ende Gelände 2017, Ende Gelände 2018, Ende Gelände 2019, and Extinction Rebellion

Climate disobedience is a form of civil disobedience, deliberate action intended to critique government climate policy. In 2008, American climate activist Tim DeChristopher posed as a bidder at an auction of US Bureau of Land Management oil and gas leases of public land in Utah, won the auction, reneged on payment, and was imprisoned for 21 months. In September 2015, five climate activists known as the Delta 5 obstructed an oil train in Everett, Washington. At trial, the Delta 5 were allowed the necessity defense, that is, breaking a law in the service of preventing a greater harm. After testimony, the judge determined the grounds for the necessity defense were not met and instructed the jury to disregard testimony admitted under the necessity defense. The Delta 5 were fined for trespassing but were acquitted of more serious charges.[24][25][26][27]

The first example of a judge accepting the climate necessity defense was on March 27, 2018 when Judge Mary Ann Driscoll acquitted all 13 defendants of civil charges from a protest held in 2016 in Boston, Massachusetts.[28]

Declaring emergency state

[edit]
Further information: Climate emergency declaration
Artwork of a distressed polar bear stranded on the tip of an iceberg, morphing into the Earth below the waterline. The Earth submerged in a pot of boiling water above the flames of a gas stove.

Enacting a state of emergency may be composed of two elements: declaring a state of emergency that has formulated real-world i.e. legal effects and the associated enabling or ensuring of rapid complementary large-scale changes in human activity for the articulated purposes. To date, many governments have acknowledged, sometimes in the form of tentative text-form "declarations", that humanity is essentially in a state of climate emergency.

In November 2021 Greta Thunberg with other climate activists begun filing a petition to the United Nation calling it to declare a level 3 global climate emergency. This should lead to the creation of a special team that will coordinate the response to the climate crisis in the international level. The response should be at least as strong as the response to the COVID-19 pandemic.[29]

It has been proposed that the national security sector could play a unique role in the development of a global climate-emergency mobilisation of labour and resources to build a zero-emission economy and enact decarbonization.[30]

Commentators and The Climate Mobilization have suggested mobilisation of resources on the scale of a war economy and other related exceptional or effective measures.[31][32][33][34][35]

Focus on climate justice

[edit]
Global warming—the progression from cooler historical temperatures (blue) to recent warmer temperatures (red)—is being experienced disproportionately by younger generations.[36]
Successive generations are predicted to experience progressively greater unprecedented lifetime exposure (ULE) events such as heat waves.[37] About 111 million children born in 2020 will live with unprecedented heatwave exposure in a world that warms by 3.5 °C, compared with 62 million with only 1.5 °C of warming.[37]
Main article: Climate justice

Shifting away from a focus on impacts on the natural environment, in recent years people have called on decision-makers to move towards equitable mitigation strategies for all people.[38][39] Climate justice acknowledges that some regions and populations are more vulnerable to climate change than others,[40] and that in addressing climate solutions we must consider "existing vulnerabilities, resources and capabilities."[41] A study of 800 websites and documents from Australian environmental groups identified six different dimensions of climate justice including Distributive Justice, Procedural Justice, Recognition Justice, Relational Justice, Intergenerational Justice, and Transformative Justice.[42]

In the United States, organizations such as the Climate Justice Alliance work towards the goal of resilient economies and communities, placing "race, gender and class at the center of the solutions" by working to unite the voices of frontline communities.[43]

[edit]
Main article: Climate change litigation
Zero Hour Climate March in Pittsburgh! In the words of the organizers of this event: "On July 21, youth all over the United States will march for the demands that were delivered to our leaders in Washington D.C. This is a call to our politicians to stand with us and with our future".

In some countries, those affected by climate change may be able to sue major greenhouse gas emitters. Litigation has been attempted by entire countries and peoples, such as Palau[44] and the Inuit,[45] as well as non-governmental organizations such as the Sierra Club.[46] Investor-owned coal, oil, and gas corporations could be legally and morally liable for climate-related human rights violations.[47][48] Litigations are often carried out via collective pooling of effort and resources such as via organizations like Greenpeace,[49] which sued a Polish coal utility[49] and a German car manufacturer.[50]

Proving that some weather events are due specifically to global warming is now possible, and methodologies have been developed to show the increased risk of other events caused by global warming.[51]

For a legal action for negligence (or similar) to succeed,[clarification needed] "Plaintiffs ... must show that, more probably than not, their individual injuries were caused by the risk factor in question, as opposed to any other cause. This has sometimes been translated to a requirement of a relative risk of at least two."[52] Another route (though with little legal bite) is the World Heritage Convention, if it can be shown that climate change is affecting World Heritage Sites like Mount Everest.[53][54]

Of countries' governments

[edit]

Besides countries suing one another, there are also cases where people in a country have taken legal steps against their own government.[55]

In the Netherlands and Belgium, organisations such as the foundation Urgenda and the Klimaatzaak[56] in Belgium have also sued their governments as they believe their governments are not meeting the emission reductions they agreed to. Urgenda have already won their case against the Dutch government.[57]

In 2021, Germany's supreme constitutional court ruled that the government's climate protection measures are insufficient to protect future generations and that the government had until the end of 2022 to improve its Climate Protection Act.[58]

Held v. Montana was the first constitutional law climate lawsuit to go to trial in the United States, on June 12, 2023.[59] The case was filed in March 2020 by sixteen youth residents of Montana, then aged 2 through 18,[60] who argued that the state's support of the fossil fuel industry had worsened the effects of climate change on their lives, thus denying their right to a "clean and healthful environment in Montana for present and future generations"[61]:Art. IX, § 1 as required by the Constitution of Montana.[62] On August 14, 2023, the trial court judge ruled in the youth plaintiffs' favor, though the state indicated it would appeal the decision.[63] Montana's Supreme Court heard oral arguments on July 10, 2024, its seven justices taking the case under advisement.[64] On December 18, 2024, the Montana Supreme Court upheld the county court ruling.[65]

Of companies

[edit]

In May 2021, in Milieudefensie et al v Royal Dutch Shell, the district court of The Hague ordered Royal Dutch Shell to cut its global carbon emissions by 45% by the end of 2030 compared to 2019 levels.[66]

Fossil fuel divestment

[edit]
This section is an excerpt from Fossil fuel divestment.[edit]

Fossil fuel divestment or fossil fuel divestment and investment in climate solutions is an attempt to reduce climate change by exerting social, political, and economic pressure for the institutional divestment of assets including stocks, bonds, and other financial instruments connected to companies involved in extracting fossil fuels.[67]

Fossil fuel divestment campaigns emerged on college and university campuses in the United States in 2011 with students urging their administrations to turn endowment investments in the fossil fuel industry into investments in clean energy and communities most impacted by climate change.[68] In 2012, Unity College in Maine became the first institution of higher learning to divest[69] its endowment from fossil fuels.
Students at Tufts University "marched forth on March 4th" coinciding with dozens of student-led rallies around the United States. The marches had the objective of pressuring universities to reduce and eventually eliminate investments in fossil-fuel related ventures. Organized nationally through WeArePowerShift.org, these rallies included speeches, singing, and chanting of slogans such as "Divestment is a Tactic; Justice is the Goal."
Harvard fossil fuel divestment petition

The divestment movement against fossil fuels has shed a different light on conversations surrounding fossil fuel finance. Banks and investors have been increasingly questioning the viability of the fossil fuel sector in the long-term. This is because this disinvestment movement is stigmatizing fossil fuels and is raising uncertainty around continued use of fossil fuels, thus reducing the financial desirability of fossil fuel assets. Because the extraction, exploration, and mining of fossil fuels are all capital-intensive activities, uncertainty around their financial risks can reduce investment. If there is a reduction in the supply of capital or a rise in the costs of capital, fossil fuel projects will end up being uneconomical. This will make the valuation of fossil fuel companies go down making them to go out of the market.[70]

The main argument behind fossil fuel divestment campaigns is that earning profits from investments in activities associated with fossil fuels is unethical as fossil fuel emissions are the primary drivers responsible for global climate change.[71] Fossil Fuel divestment campaigns such as the Go Fossil Free campaign by 350.org are pleading with the investors to divest by immediately freezing any new investments that they might make in any fossil fuel companies and to divest from any direct ownership and commingled funds, such as fossil fuels public equities together with corporate bonds, in the next five years.[71]

Fossil fuel divestment campaign have three primary aims. One of them is to pressure government across the globe to put legislation in place including carbon tax or banning any further drilling of fossil fuels. The second aim is to pressure fossil fuel companies to enact transformative change in their companies by switching to forms of energy supply that are less carbon-intensive in nature. The third aim is to ensure transparency when it comes to the carbon exposure that is caused by fossil fuel companies and also to put pressure on governments across the globe to play an active role in restricting the extraction of fossil fuels.[71]

Fossil fuel divestment campaigns thus seek to cut everything that would be required for the growth and survival of the fossil fuel industry.[72] These include the social license that this industry requires to operate, the political license that the fossil fuel industry needs to grow and to survive, and the financial investments that support its existence, survival, and growth.[73] These campaigns also seek to pressure governments to play their role in trying to limit emissions. In these campaigns, campaigners demand so see that the public institutions server their ties that they have always had with this fossil fuel industry for the main purpose of tarnishing the reputation of the fossil fuel industry and to challenge the power that the industry has.[74] By doing these, these campaigners thus want to starve fossil fuel companies of the badly needed capital and to remove both the infrastructure and the influence that this industry has.[75]

Divestment campaigns have been used for a variety of social justice issues in the past. For example, divestment campaigns have been launched to end investment in South Africa during apartheid, Israel, and Sudan, and against the tobacco industry. Most recently, divestment campaigns have focused on private prisons and the fossil fuel industry. These divestment calls have received a lot of attention with varying outcomes.[76]

The good news for the fossil fuel divestment campaigns is that their strategy could be effective. This owes to the fact that there has been an increase in the fossil fuel divestment commitments since 2000. These divestment commitments have resulted in reductions in the flow of capital into the gas and oil sector, as experienced in 33 countries across the globe between the years 2000 and 2015. Research has found that increasing gas and oil divestment pledges in various countries has also been influenced by divestment campaigns. More stringent environmental policies have also been enacted by regimes that recognize climate change as a threat to their country.[77]

Fossil fuel divestment has indeed gained remarkable traction over the last few years. It has transformed from being a fringe idea to becoming a movement currently valued at around $14.5 trillion. It has over one thousand endowments, pension plans, and major investors committed. It has made many of today's retail investors and institutional investors channeling their money towards environmentally conscious funds.[70]

Hunger striking

[edit]

Sustained hunger striking, used in several social justice campaigns in the 19th and 20th centuries, has been used a climate tactic since at least 2021, including by the American Sunrise Movement and in Berlin, Germany under the banner "Starve until you are honest".[78][79][80]

Public environmental activism

[edit]
Al Gore Pelosi 2017 -Combatting Climate Change Congresswoman Pelosi meets with former Vice President Al Gore where they discussed the urgent need for action on climate change, and Governor Brown's leadership in continuing California's commitment to the Paris Climate Agreement

This type of citizen activism is important to creating a path to systemic change that will benefit the environment. This change can be assisted through government involvement by way of making more environmentally-conscious policies and all-encompassing changes that will be needed to make substantial environmental change. Different strategies, actions, and systems are used by citizen environmental activists for the purpose of supporting and in some cases demanding these environmental changes. There are however, issues that this type of activism faces. Issues such as potential decline in favorability and participation in environmental movements in BRIC countries, barriers to environmental citizen involvement and mobilization, and divergence in goals between environmental movements.

Creating change

[edit]
Changes in interest in climate change, as measured by use of "climate change" as a Google search term

Individual, voluntary activism is not enough to make a substantial difference in prominent climate change issues, systematic change is.[81] Carol Booth puts forward that the harm in "bystanding to inadequate laws, policies and programs warrant greater moral concern" than individual harm by way of personal emissions and similar negative actions contributing to climate change (pg. 412).[81] In order for emissions reduction, one of many climate change issues, to occur at a scale that has positive environmental effects government action will be needed.[81] Overall, environmental reform is best supported and advanced by activism and movements.[82] Frederick Buttel theorizes that the reasons for this are that environmental activism and movements fight back against countermovement groups and that they ensure responsibility in regards to environmental protection.[82]

Government systems can both shape and constrain what public activists are able to do, particularly systems found in countries like the U.S and European Union.[83] Constraints come from institutional aspects of the government systems that make it difficult to produce legislation and other prominent changes that fight against climate change issues.[83] The progression of mobilization in some cases depends on activists to find ways to move past barriers found in these government systems.[83] The general public has influence over certain outcomes. "...[L]atent civic behavior, attitudes towards society, and historical patterns of expectations for institutional performance can exert surprisingly important influence on political, and even economic outcomes(pg. 33).[84] When looking at Californian policy, it was found that the influence of citizen activism leads to systematic choices that are favorable to the environment from influential and powerful members, like policy and community figureheads.[84]

A 2023 review study published in One Earth stated that opinion polls show that most people perceive climate change as occurring now and close by.[85] The study concluded that seeing climate change as more distant does not necessarily result in less climate action, and reducing psychological distancing does not reliably increase climate action.[85]

Systems and actions in public activism

[edit]

Different strategies, systems, and actions are utilized in public environmental activism. Certain actions may be unavailable to different types of public activists depending on economic standpoint.

Erik Wright's theories of social transformation were used to analyze environmental movements and in part the actions that these movements took in their activism that connected to Wright's "transformational strategies".[86] This includes "interstitial strategies", which are strategies that try to alter or challenge the current system, are seen in citizens actions like buying more efficient appliances and other environmentally-friendly focused consumer actions.[86] "Ruptural strategies" "smash the current system through confrontation".[86] Strategies like these connect to the practice in environmental movement to hold protests and resistance demonstrations.[86] Lastly, "symbiotic strategies" are focused on collaboration through social reformation such as promoting and reforming policy to prioritize the climate's health as opposed to profit.[86] Other types of strategies that citizen activists take are "awareness building, alliance building, and network foundation."[83] "Conservation behavior", the public's willingness to life more environmentally-sustainable lifestyles, has been seen to become increasingly more popular both in developed and "developing democracies."[87] In an examination of the BRIC countries, of which they are still considered developing, it is posited that if work being done by environmentalists in these countries is seen as not enough, citizens may take it upon themselves to "turn their efforts to lifestyle adjustments as an alternative form of contribution."[88]

The United States' "citizen suit provision" is a type of system that is accessible for the use in public environmental activism.[89] These are used in many major U.S environmental laws, are important to environmental enforcement, and deter noncompliance from agencies at fault as well as demonstrate public interest and demand.[89] Another environmental system is "China's environmental complaint system".[89] This system takes in citizen's reports of violations in regards to environmental issues and is used typically for the public to voice "concerns and frustrations with environmental problems and has been successful in promoting environmental awareness and engaging the public"(pg 330).[89] The study suggested that "the role of public participation is greatly dependent on the broader governance [system] within which it is embedded, and that channeling environmental activism into [government] can significantly influence its effectiveness"(pg 326).[89]

Obstacles

[edit]
In this 2022 Pew survey, respondents from almost half the countries ranked climate change as being highest of five threats in the survey.[90]
In a UNDP survey covering 77 countries, most respondents from top fossil fuel-producing countries favored a quick transition away from fossil fuels.[91]

Public activism faces challenges due to differences in economic development as well as differences in government and law. There have been "signs of declining confidence and membership in environmental [organizations]"[88] in the BRIC countries as well as "barriers to public involvement and social [mobilization] due to close monitoring and censorship, notably in China and Russia.[88] Issues facing more long-term environmental discourse are feelings of unconcern and helplessness are cited as obstacles that public activist groups face in trying to promote change.[86] In addition, mainstream environmental movements are "increasingly being challenged by environmental counter-movements"(pg 309).[82] There are also many different goals and gaps between these types of movements, as well as barriers to producing an effective, influential message to inspire other to enact change.[82] This prevents a solid, widespread message and specific goal from all environmental groups being produced.

Targeting of activists

[edit]

The United States government through its domestic intelligence services targeted, as "domestic terrorists," environmental activists and climate change organizations, including by investigating them, questioning them, and placing them on national "watchlists" that makes it more difficult for them to board airplanes and that could instigate local law enforcement monitoring.[92] Unknown actors also secretly hired professional hackers to launch phishing hacking attacks against climate activists who were organizing the #ExxonKnew campaign.[93] On September 16, 2022, over fifty climate protesters were arrested and jailed in the U.K. for blocking roads, with many of them going through court hearings, and some being released on bail. Alice Reid, a spokesperson for the group Rebels in Prison Support, claims that many of these protestors are young adults with no connection to the judicial system before becoming activists.[94] Since the late 2010s individual activists in Australia have been targeted by corporate strategic lawsuits against public participation and most states have increased penalties for business interference or trespassing as well as criminalised the use of specific devices used to attach protesters to infrastructure or equipment. In some situations courts have dismissed cases brought under the new laws or freed prisoners upon appeal.[95]

Activities

[edit]

2014 People's Climate March

[edit]
See also: People's Climate March (2014), Global Climate March, and People's Climate March (2017)
The People's Climate March 2014 brought together hundreds of thousands of people for strong action on climate change.

The climate movement convened its largest single event on 21 September 2014, when it mobilized 400,000 activists in New York during the People's Climate March (plus several thousand more in other cities), organized by the People's Climate Movement, to demand climate action from the global leaders gathered for the 2014 UN Climate Summit.[96][97]

Institutional Climate Activism

[edit]

There have been coalitions of institutional investors that have promulgated climate activism.[98] These initiatives have sometimes included expansive group efforts, such as Climate Action 100+ - a coalition over 300 institutional investors (including some of the largest greenhouse emitters).[99] Institutional activism is not uncommon, despite the common assumption that shareholder interests would be averse to such action.[98] However, industry-wide efforts to mitigate climate risks is often in the interest of heavily diversified firms, as climate change can have a strong effect on the global economy.[98]

Climate Mobilization

[edit]
Main article: The Climate Mobilization

Since 2014, growing portions of the climate movement, especially in the United States have been organizing for an international economic response to climate change on the scale of the mobilization of the American home front during World War II, with the goal of rapidly slashing carbon emissions and transitioning to 100% clean energy faster than the free market is likely to allow. Throughout 2015 and 2016, The Climate Mobilization led grassroots campaigns in the U.S. for this scale of ambition, and in July 2016, activists succeeded in getting text adopted into the Democratic Party's national platform calling for WWII-scale climate mobilization.[100] In August 2015, environmentalist Bill McKibben published an article in the New Republic rallying Americans to "declare war on climate change."[101]

School strikes for climate

[edit]
A school strike for climate in Berlin in 2018
This section is an excerpt from Fridays for Future.[edit]
Children at a Fridays for Future protest in Germany, 2019

Fridays for Future (FFF), also known as the School Strike for Climate (Swedish: Skolstrejk för klimatet [ˈskûːlstrɛjk fœr klɪˈmɑ̌ːtɛt]), is an international movement of school students who skip Friday classes to participate in demonstrations to demand action from political leaders to prevent climate change and for the fossil fuel industry to transition to renewable energy.

Publicity and widespread organising began after Swedish pupil Greta Thunberg staged a protest in August 2018 outside of the Swedish parliament, the Riksdag, holding a sign that read "Skolstrejk för klimatet" ("School strike for the climate").[102][103][104]

A global strike on 15 March 2019 gathered more than one million strikers in 2,200 strikes organised in 125 countries.[105][106][107][108] On 24 May 2019, in the second global strike, 1,600 protests across 150 countries drew hundreds of thousands of strikers. The May protests were timed to coincide with the 2019 European Parliament election.[107][109][110][111]

The 2019 Global Week for Future was a series of 4,500 strikes across over 150 countries, focused around Friday 20 September and Friday 27 September. Likely the largest climate strikes in world history, the 20 September strikes gathered roughly 4 million protesters, many of them schoolchildren, including 1.4 million in Germany.[112] On 27 September, an estimated two million people participated in demonstrations worldwide, including over one million protesters in Italy and several hundred thousand protesters in Canada.[113][114][115]

Youth Climate Movement

[edit]

Since the beginning of Student Activism, the youths voices have often mirrored broader societal concerns, extending beyond the confines of campus-specific issues. Historically, student activists have not only brought critical popular interest concerns like environmental issues into public conversation but have also influenced the development and implementation of significant environmental policies. In the 1970's, millions of U.S. students participated in the world's first Earth Day organizing and hosting 'teach-ins'. This led to the emergence of key student groups like Pennsylvania, SLOP (Student League Opposing Pollution); Schenectady, New York, had YUK (Youth Uncovering Crud); and Cloquet, Minnesota, had SCARE (Students Concerned about a Ravaged Environment) to name a few.[116] These student-led groups in addition to other coalition groups began to apply overwhelming pressure on the federal legislature. In 1970, the U.S. federal government created the Environmental Protection Agency, to develop and enforce laws and regulations; in that same year congress passed the Clean Air Act, aimed at reducing dense visible smog in many of the nation's cities and industrial centers.[117]

Thenceforth, youth all over the world have been striking, advocating, and volunteering for climate solutions. Youth climate action groups such as SustainUS, Fridays for Future, the Sunrise Movement, PIRG, and Climate Cardinals have called on young people to hold leaders accountable, whether through attending conferences,[118] striking from school and pressuring politicians to listen to scientists,[119]  or calling for greater green jobs and consolidating voting power.[120][121]

In 2020 the United Nations Secretary General launched the global Youth Advisory Group on Climate Change, selecting seven members who meet to represent the changes youth are demanding globally.[122][123]

Youth involvement in pro-climate action movements has increased significantly in the 21st century, and has intensified over the past few years.[124] Youth climate activists have used social media platforms as a vehicle to engage and protest with the current environmental issue. After Greta Thunberg started the youth movement "Strikes for Climate" by protesting outside the Swedish Parliament in 2018, she documented her journey on Twitter, where she built a network to promote her cause and call people to action.[125] The youth climate movement starts shifting from the traditional way to the social media platforms and it will continue in the future.

Younger generations are paying more attention to global events, particularly climate change. Research shows that climate change is of greater concern among younger people than older people. Over 70% of Americans aged 18 to 34 worry about global warming compared with 62% of those 35 to 54 and 56% who are 55 or older.[126] Corner claims that across European countries, young people tend to have similar or higher levels of concern than adults and have a higher sense of risk perception.[126] Younger generations are more likely to have learned through general education about climate change in their schooling, and to be aware of the negative effects that climate change has brought to the Earth. In addition, they also see climate change as a more serious global event that is relevant to themselves because they will be more impacted, and thus should take the lead on addressing climate change.

When the pandemic hit, most school strikes movements around the world continued to be held, but moved more onto social media platforms (Twitter, Facebook, etc), resulting in lower participation rates. However, participation in youth climate movement on social media continued to rise. Social media provided an outlet for youth to share their concerns, generate knowledge, and be more politically active since they are not yet able to vote and face logistical limitations in face-to-face participation.[127][128]

The research found that activists in their study created a sense of connection to other young people and other climate change activists.[129] They usually post their activist identities on their social media account profile. (For example, @GretaThunberg, a young climate activist #climatechange#climatestrike #youthmovement). What they share in common is that they try to inspire others to do the same in their communities by showcasing themselves as climate activists with a strong voice. The strategy for younger activists is to situate themselves within a specific role to create a relevant identity to others and make connections with other people on the internet. Thus, regardless of which side the activists are going to support, they are utilizing their social media as a medium to communicate with others in a shared way. They are playing an important role focused on engaging a range of supporters worldwide to join in the youth climate movement.

This section is an excerpt from Youth Climate Movement.[edit]
The Youth Climate Movement (YouNGO)[130] or International Youth Climate Movement (IYCM) refers to an international network of youth organisations that collectively aims to inspire, empower and mobilise a generational movement of young people to take positive action on climate change.

YOUNGO is the official children and youth Constituency of the UNFCCC, with members up to 35 years old. One of the main tasks of this group is to draft a Global Youth Position Statement to hand officials at the annual UNFCCC Conference of Parties.[131][132]

2019 Global Climate Strike

[edit]
One of the September 2019 climate strikes
This section is an excerpt from September 2019 climate strikes.[edit]
Protest attendee numbers from 20 to 27 September 2019, by country:
  1,000,000+
  100,000+
  10,000+
  1,000+
  100+
  Small protests, unclear numbers

The September 2019 climate strikes, also known as the Global Week for Future, were a series of international strikes and protests to demand action be taken to address climate change, which took place from 20 to 27 September 2019. The strikes' key dates were 20 September, which was three days before the United Nations Climate Summit, and 27 September.[133][134] The protests took place across 4,500 locations in 150 countries.[135][136] The event stemmed from the Fridays for Future school strike for climate movement, inspired by Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg.[137][138] The Guardian reported that roughly 6 million people participated in the events,[139] whilst 350.org – a group that organised many of the protests – claim that 7.6 million people participated.[140]

The 20 September protests were likely the largest climate strikes in world history.[141][142] Organisers reported that over 4 million people participated in strikes worldwide,[141] including 1.4 million participants in Germany.[143][144] An estimated 300,000 protesters took part in Australian strikes,[145] a further 300,000 people joined UK protests[146] and protesters in New York – where Greta Thunberg delivered a speech – numbered roughly 250,000.[134][142] More than 2,000 scientists in 40 countries pledged to support the strikes.[147]

A second wave of protests took place on 27 September,[148] in which an estimated 2 million people took part in over 2,400 protests.[139][149] There were reported figures of one million protesters in Italy,[150] and 170,000 people in New Zealand.[151] In Montreal, where Greta Thunberg spoke, the Montreal school board cancelled classes for 114,000 of its students.[152][153] An estimated 500,000 protesters, including several federal party leaders, joined the march in Montreal.[154][155]

2023 Climate Protests

[edit]
Further information: 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference

In November 2023 around 70,000 people participated in a climate march in Amsterdam, Netherlands, 10 days before the elections in the country. This was the biggest climate march in the history of the Netherlands.[156]

Many climate protests are scheduled for the 2023 United Nations Climate Change Conference including a climate march in London. The conference has created many protests, as the head of the conference is at the same time the head of the oil company ADNOC which according to one research "is planning the largest expansion of oil and gas production of any company in the world."[157][158]

Summer of Heat on Wall Street (2024)

[edit]

In May 2024, the Summer of Heat on Wall Street began a series of civil disobedience actions in Tribeca, New York City, mainly at the Citibank World Headquarters plaza.[159] This was the first climate protest in history to hold an entire season of weekly civil disobedience protests targeting Wall Street's role in environmental degradation. Targets include bankers and insurers, specifically Citibank and Citigroup.[159][160]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Climate movement

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
The climate movement is a global, decentralized social and political effort involving activists, non-governmental organizations, scientists, and citizens seeking to compel governments, corporations, and individuals to drastically reduce and transition away from fossil fuels in response to observed increases in global temperatures attributed to human activities. Emerging from broader in the and —marked by events like the publication of Rachel Carson's and the first in 1970—the movement gained distinct focus on in the 1980s following the establishment of the (IPCC) in 1988 and early international agreements such as the on ozone-depleting substances in 1987. Key milestones include the 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, which produced the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and subsequent (COP) meetings, alongside grassroots actions like the 1991 International Climate Action Days spanning 70 countries and the 2014 People's Climate March, which drew over 570,000 participants across 161 countries. The 2010s saw a surge in youth-led initiatives, exemplified by Greta Thunberg's 2018 school strike inspiring Fridays for Future, which mobilized millions in global strikes by 2019, and radical groups like employing tactics such as road blockades. Proponents highlight achievements such as contributing to the 2015 , under which nations pledged to limit warming to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, and localized successes like achieving a 99% renewable mix. However, empirical data indicate limited global impact: despite decades of activism and policy commitments, anthropogenic rose 51% from 1990 to 2021, with CO2 emissions from fossil fuels reaching a record 37.8 gigatons in 2024 and showing no sustained peak, driven largely by growth in developing economies. Controversies surround the movement's tactics and efficacy, including public backlash against disruptive protests that prioritize visibility over broad support, internal tensions between radical system-change advocates and those favoring with corporations and governments, and questions over whether alarmist framing has eroded amid unfulfilled predictions of imminent catastrophe. Studies suggest moderate influence on and voting in some contexts, but overall failure to reverse emissions trajectories underscores challenges in countering imperatives in populous nations, where such growth accounts for the bulk of recent increases.

Definition and Scope

Core Objectives and Principles

The climate movement's primary objective is to mitigate anthropogenic contributions to global warming by achieving net-zero in the coming decades, with the aim of limiting temperature rise to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels to avert severe impacts such as sea-level rise, , and ecosystem disruption. This goal draws from assessments by the (IPCC), which indicate that emissions must peak before 2025 and decline 43% by 2030 relative to 2019 levels to meet the 1.5°C threshold. Activists pursue this through advocacy for policies like carbon taxes, subsidies for renewables, and phase-outs, often pressuring governments and corporations via protests and campaigns. Secondary objectives include measures, such as resilient in vulnerable regions, and mobilizing from high-emitting nations to support developing countries' transitions. Underlying principles emphasize a human rights-centered approach, prioritizing protection for those most affected by variability—disproportionately low-income and indigenous communities—while advocating equitable burden-sharing based on historical emissions. The informs demands for immediate action despite uncertainties in long-term projections, asserting that potential irreversible harms justify aggressive over waiting for full consensus on risks. Climate justice, a core tenet, integrates by calling for "just transitions" that safeguard jobs in fossil-dependent sectors through retraining and green investments, rejecting solutions that exacerbate inequality. These principles, while rooted in IPCC findings on human-induced warming, often extend to critiques of and as drivers of emissions, though links outcomes more directly to and policy enforcement than ideological overhauls.

Relation to Climate Science and Environmentalism

The climate movement bases its core premise on findings from climate science indicating that global surface temperatures have increased by approximately 1.1°C since pre-industrial times, with the majority of this warming attributed to human-induced . This scientific foundation, as synthesized in assessments like the IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), posits that continued emissions could lead to further warming, with —defined as the long-term temperature response to doubled atmospheric CO2—estimated as likely between 2.5°C and 4.0°C. However, the movement's emphasis on urgent, transformative societal changes often amplifies projections of catastrophic risks, diverging from the tentative and probabilistic nature of climate models, which exhibit uncertainties in regional patterns and have shown instances of overestimating surface warming trends compared to observations, such as CMIP5 models warming about 16% faster than observed global surface air temperatures since 1970. Distinctions between climate science and activism are critical, as the former relies on empirical observation, falsifiability, and iterative refinement, while the latter prioritizes advocacy for policy interventions like emissions reductions and fossil fuel phase-outs. Blurring these boundaries risks eroding scientific credibility, as noted by researchers cautioning against scientists' direct involvement in activism, which can imply predetermined outcomes over neutral inquiry; for instance, while models have broadly captured global warming trends since the 1970s, discrepancies in sea surface temperatures and extreme event attribution highlight ongoing limitations. The movement frequently frames anthropogenic warming as an existential threat requiring immediate global action, yet climate science underscores natural variability and adaptation alongside mitigation, with no consensus on the precise timing or severity of tipping points. In relation to broader , the climate movement represents a shift from traditional focuses on localized conservation, preservation, and pollution abatement—epitomized by early 20th-century efforts like establishment—to a global, systemic critique centered on carbon emissions and transitions. This evolution has incorporated elements of , emphasizing disproportionate impacts on vulnerable populations, but it has also generated tensions with conventional environmental priorities; for example, opposition to nuclear power—a low-emission source—within some movement factions persists despite its alignment with emissions reduction goals, reflecting ideological commitments over pragmatic environmental outcomes. Traditional environmentalism's emphasis on sustainable contrasts with the movement's advocacy for or rapid decarbonization, which can overlook trade-offs in or in developing nations.

Historical Development

Early Precursors (19th-20th Century)

The foundations of what would later inform the climate movement trace back to 19th-century scientific inquiries into atmospheric physics and heat retention. In 1824, French physicist proposed that Earth's atmosphere functions analogously to a by trapping heat, preventing the planet from cooling to lunar temperatures despite limited solar input. This hypothesis laid the groundwork for understanding , though Fourier did not quantify specific gases' roles. Building on this, American scientist Eunice Foote conducted experiments in 1856, demonstrating that (CO2) exposed to sunlight absorbs and retains heat more effectively than ambient air or oxygen, marking one of the earliest empirical identifications of a greenhouse gas's properties. Irish physicist extended these findings through precise laboratory measurements from 1859 to 1861, confirming that and CO2 selectively absorb infrared radiation, thereby modulating Earth's temperature; he emphasized these gases' variable concentrations as key to climatic variations. By the late , these insights coalesced into quantitative climate modeling. In 1896, Swedish chemist calculated that halving atmospheric CO2 would reduce global temperatures by 4–5°C, while doubling it—potentially from —could raise temperatures by 5–6°C over centuries, framing human industrial activity as a possible climatic influence. Arrhenius viewed such warming as potentially beneficial, countering the onset of a new , and estimated that continued burning could elevate CO2 levels significantly within millennia. These early works prioritized geophysical mechanisms over advocacy, with limited public or policy impact, as industrial emissions were then modest—global CO2 concentrations hovered around 290 parts per million (ppm), compared to pre-industrial levels of approximately 280 ppm. Into the , empirical observations began linking anthropogenic emissions to detectable trends, though organized mobilization remained absent. British engineer , in 1938, analyzed historical temperature records and CO2 measurements, concluding that a 10% rise in atmospheric CO2 since the had contributed to 0.005°C annual warming, attributing it primarily to ; he projected further mild increases as agriculturally advantageous. Callendar's "effect" challenged prevailing views of natural cyclical cooling, but his advocacy was confined to scientific correspondence rather than public campaigns. Post-World War II advancements, such as Charles David Keeling's initiation of precise CO2 monitoring at in 1958, revealed steady annual increments—rising from 315 ppm in 1958 to over 320 ppm by 1965—underscoring the persistence of emissions despite growing awareness. Concurrently, broader environmental conservation efforts, including the U.S. establishment of national parks under (1901–1909) and the Sierra Club's founding in 1892, focused on resource preservation amid industrialization but did not yet address atmospheric CO2 accumulation as a systemic threat. Prior to 1970, these developments constituted scientific precursors rather than a cohesive movement, with concerns often tempered by optimism about warming's effects or overshadowed by immediate issues like air pollution and resource depletion. Early calculations, such as those by Arrhenius and Callendar, did not spur emission reduction demands, reflecting a era when global fossil fuel use was expanding rapidly—coal production tripled from 1900 to 1950—without coordinated opposition. Isolated voices, including oceanographer Roger Revelle's 1957 warning on insufficient oceanic CO2 absorption, highlighted risks of buildup, yet policy responses emphasized adaptation over mitigation until the 1970s. This pre-mobilization phase underscores how foundational climate science evolved amid industrial growth, setting the stage for later activism without precipitating widespread alarm.

Institutionalization (1970s-1990s)

The institutionalization of the movement during the and involved the establishment of dedicated international and national frameworks to coordinate , monitoring, and responses to potential climate variations, driven by growing scientific interest in human influences on patterns and atmospheric composition. In the United States, the National Climate Program Act of 1978 directed the President to create a comprehensive national , including five-year plans for on climate , impacts, and strategies, with the Secretary of tasked to form a National Climate Program Office within 30 days of enactment. This legislation responded to concerns over droughts, , and CO2-induced changes, marking an early governmental commitment to systematic and analysis. Internationally, the First World Climate Conference, convened by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) in Geneva from February 12 to 23, 1979, gathered approximately 350 experts from 53 countries and emphasized climate change as a pressing issue requiring enhanced monitoring and research. The conference's outcomes included the launch of the World Climate Programme (WCP) in 1979, which integrated efforts in climate applications, data management, research, and impact assessment across WMO member states and partner organizations like the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). These initiatives shifted climate concerns from ad hoc environmental advocacy toward structured, intergovernmental scientific coordination, though early assessments reflected uncertainties, including debates over cooling versus warming trends observed in prior decades. The 1980s saw further consolidation through the creation of the (IPCC) in 1988, jointly established by the WMO and UNEP to produce periodic assessments of climate science, its human causes, and policy implications for governments. The IPCC's inaugural report in 1990 synthesized peer-reviewed literature to conclude that human activities, particularly fossil fuel emissions, were likely contributing to global warming, influencing subsequent diplomatic efforts. Concurrently, environmental NGOs expanded their roles, with organizations like and —founded in the late and —beginning to incorporate climate-specific campaigns by the , though their influence on institutionalization remained secondary to state-led bodies. By the early 1990s, institutionalization culminated in the adoption of the Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) at the in Rio de Janeiro on May 9, 1992, ratified by 154 states and entering into force in 1994 to stabilize concentrations and facilitate international cooperation. The UNFCCC built directly on IPCC findings and prior WCP structures, establishing annual (COP) meetings as a forum for negotiation, while emphasizing differentiated responsibilities between developed and developing nations based on historical emissions. This period's developments formalized the climate movement within , prioritizing empirical assessment over alarmist narratives, though critiques have noted the convention's non-binding nature limited immediate enforcement.

Mass Mobilization (2000s-Present)

The mass mobilization of the climate movement intensified in the , building on earlier environmental activism with large-scale protests demanding urgent policy responses to global warming. A pivotal event was the People's Climate March on September 21, 2014, in , which drew an estimated 310,000 to 400,000 participants ahead of the UN Climate Summit, marking the largest single-day climate demonstration up to that point. Organized by a coalition including , the march featured diverse groups advocating for phase-outs and emissions reductions, though attendance figures varied between conservative counts and organizer estimates. Youth-led initiatives propelled further escalation, exemplified by the Fridays for Future strikes initiated by outside the Swedish parliament on August 20, 2018. These school strikes inspired global participation, culminating in the September 20, 2019, Global Climate Strike with approximately 4 million participants across 185 countries, including 1.4 million in alone. A subsequent wave on September 27, 2019, reportedly involved up to 6 million people walking out of schools and workplaces worldwide. These actions emphasized demands for net-zero emissions and , drawing millions of students and amplifying media attention to intergenerational equity concerns. Civil disobedience tactics emerged prominently with groups like Extinction Rebellion, founded in May 2018 in the UK by academics including Gail Bradbrook and Roger Hallam, which issued a "Declaration of Rebellion" in October 2018. XR's major actions included blocking London bridges and roads in April and October 2019, leading to thousands of arrests and widespread disruptions to pressure governments for climate emergency declarations and net-zero by 2025. In Germany, the Ende Gelände movement, starting in 2015, organized mass occupations of coal infrastructure, with actions involving 5,000 to 6,000 participants shutting down lignite mines and power plants in 2017 and 2019. In the United States, the , launched in 2017 by young activists, conducted sit-ins at congressional offices to advocate for a , influencing Democratic policy platforms and mobilizing thousands in protests against expansion. These efforts, often coordinated internationally, have sustained periodic peaks in participation, such as during COP conferences, though empirical assessments of their causal impact on emissions trajectories remain debated among researchers. Despite biases in mainstream reporting favoring alarmist narratives, participation data from organizers and trackers indicate sustained but fluctuating engagement, with youth demographics comprising a significant portion.

Ideological Foundations

Alarmism and Catastrophism

and within the climate movement involve the strategic amplification of dire, apocalyptic outcomes from anthropogenic warming to galvanize public support and policy urgency, often prioritizing high-end emission scenarios over median projections or observed trends. Proponents, including organizations like and figures such as , frame as an verging on , invoking terms like "climate breakdown" and predictions of mass displacement, famine, and on scales rivaling historical cataclysms. This rhetoric draws from IPCC assessments' upper-bound risks, such as potential 4–5°C warming by 2100 under unmitigated emissions, but movement discourse frequently presents these as near-certainties rather than conditional on policy failures. Historical precedents illustrate a pattern of unfulfilled catastrophic forecasts tied to movement advocacy. In 1989, UN environmental official Noel Brown warned that coastal nations could be obliterated by rising seas within a absent drastic action, a echoed in movement calls for emission cuts but contradicted by subsequent data showing global averaging 3.3–3.7 mm annually since 1993, totaling about 10 cm without the projected acceleration to submersion. Similarly, Al Gore's 2006 documentary asserted the could be ice-free in summer by 2013–2014, a claim amplified by activist campaigns; yet, September extent in 2023 remained around 4.3 million km², comparable to mid-2000s lows but far from vanishing. James Hansen's 1988 congressional testimony projected U.S. temperature increases of 0.45–1.1°C per under business-as-usual emissions, but realized warming has tracked lower-end scenarios at approximately 0.18°C per globally since then. Scientific critiques highlight how such diverges from and model ensembles. contends that apocalyptic narratives misallocate resources, as integrated assessments show net economic costs of unmitigated warming at 2–4% of GDP by 2100, manageable through rather than panic-driven yielding marginal benefits at high expense. Peer-reviewed analyses reveal overreliance on "hot" climate models that exaggerate equilibrium , leading to inflated impact projections; for instance, newer CMIP6 models with sensitivities above 4°C overestimate historical warming trends and project excessive future heat. Observed outcomes temper alarm: frequency and intensity have not risen as forecasted, with global declining since 2006 per satellite records, and disaster deaths per capita falling 90% since the due to improved resilience. , a climatologist, argues this suppresses in natural variability and feedbacks, fostering in academia where dissenting risk assessments face marginalization. While alarmism has driven mobilization—evident in mass protests and policy shifts like the —it erodes trust when predictions falter, as public correlates with perceived exaggeration. Movement leaders attribute discrepancies to insufficient action, yet favors viewing them as inherent to probabilistic projections where median outcomes (e.g., 2–3°C warming by 2100 under current trajectories) imply adaptation challenges rather than doomsday. This dynamic underscores tensions between advocacy imperatives and empirical realism, with critics like Roger Pielke Jr. noting that implausible high-emission scenarios (e.g., RCP8.5) underpin much catastrophist framing despite coal's declining share in global energy.

Climate Justice and Equity Claims

Climate justice advocates assert that climate change disproportionately burdens low-income populations and developing nations, which have contributed minimally to historical greenhouse gas emissions, necessitating compensatory mechanisms such as financial transfers and technology sharing from high-emitting developed countries. This framework draws from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) principle of (CBDR), established in , which holds that all nations share obligations to address but that developed countries, due to their greater historical emissions and economic capacity, must lead in mitigation and provide support to others. Under CBDR, equity requires recognizing "respective capabilities," with developed parties committed to enabling in less industrialized states through finance and emission reduction assistance. Cumulative CO2 emissions data underscore the historical responsibility argument central to these claims: from 1750 to 2021, the accounted for approximately 25% of global totals, the about 22%, and around 13%, while many African and contributed less than 1% each. Proponents argue this justifies "polluter pays" reparations, including the Loss and Damage Fund operationalized at COP27 in 2022, aimed at compensating vulnerable nations for irreversible climate harms like sea-level rise and , with pledges totaling $700 million initially but falling short of estimated annual needs exceeding $400 billion. Equity demands extend to differentiated mitigation targets under the , where developing countries seek flexibility to prioritize growth over stringent caps, citing their per capita emissions—often under 2 tons annually versus over 15 tons in the U.S.—as evidence against uniform obligations. Empirical assessments of disproportionate impacts reveal mixed causality, with and failures amplifying vulnerabilities more than variability alone in many cases. While low-income countries emit only about 10% of global CO2, they face higher exposure to events like floods and droughts, yet studies attribute much of the resulting socioeconomic damage to inadequate and economic underdevelopment rather than solely anthropogenic warming. For instance, IPCC II reports indicate that ethnic minorities and rural poor in developing regions bear elevated risks, but measures—such as resilient —yield higher returns than transfers, challenging narratives that frame as the primary driver over systemic factors like or choices. Sources promoting these equity claims, often from advocacy-oriented bodies like the UNDP, emphasize framing but frequently overlook how fossil fuel-driven industrialization has historically reduced global rates from 90% in 1820 to under 10% today, suggesting that restricting energy access in developing nations could perpetuate inequities. Critiques highlight the evolving global emission landscape, where surpassed cumulative U.S. and contributions by 2023 and now emits over 30% of annual CO2, undermining strict historical attributions for ongoing differentiation. Systematic reviews of adaptation equity find conceptual inconsistencies in metrics, with empirical studies showing that unconditional flows risk inefficiency without tying to verifiable outcomes, as seen in unmet $100 billion annual pledges from developed nations since , where only 20-30% has materialized as grants rather than loans. From a causal standpoint, prioritizing equity transfers diverts resources from domestic development that could enhance resilience, as evidenced by nations like and achieving reductions through expansion alongside emissions growth, contrasting with stalled progress in aid-dependent states. These claims, while embedded in UNFCCC texts, reflect advocacy influences that may overstate climate's role relative to first-order determinants of human welfare.

Political and Economic Influences

The climate movement exhibits strong ideological alignment with , frequently incorporating demands for broader socioeconomic transformations that echo socialist principles. Proponents often advocate for "system change" to address perceived root causes of in capitalist production modes, as articulated in movement literature critiquing endless growth and profit-driven extraction. This framing positions industries not merely as polluters but as emblematic of systemic inequities, linking to anti-capitalist reforms such as wealth redistribution and reduced industrial output. Empirical surveys of activists reveal correlations between support for aggressive and left-authoritarian orientations, suggesting political influences prioritization of issues over economic trade-offs. Politically, the movement has intersected with progressive agendas, as seen in initiatives like the , which integrates emissions reductions with expansive government interventions in labor markets and social welfare. In the United States, Democratic Party figures have leveraged rhetoric to mobilize voters, with endorsements from environmental NGOs amplifying calls for regulatory expansions that enhance state control over energy sectors. Critics from conservative policy analyses argue this serves partisan goals, including electoral gains in urban constituencies and justification for fiscal policies favoring spending, which reached $369 billion under the 2022 . Such influences are evident in international forums, where UN-backed frameworks promote equity-based financing from developed to developing nations, often critiqued for enabling geopolitical leverage by actors like in renewable supply chains. Economically, the movement's momentum derives from substantial philanthropic and governmental funding directed toward advocacy and policy influence. Major NGOs receive billions from foundations including the Bezos Earth Fund, which pledged $10 billion starting in 2020 for nature protection and emissions cuts, and , supporting litigation and divestment campaigns. The UN's , capitalized at over $10 billion by 2023 from donor countries, channels resources to projects aligned with movement priorities, such as transitioning to subsidized renewables. These inflows incentivize campaigns targeting , redirecting trillions in assets toward ESG investments that yield returns for fund managers despite mixed performance data. Detractors contend this creates vested interests in policy-induced scarcity, benefiting corporations in solar and sectors—global subsidies for which exceeded $1.3 trillion in 2022—while overlooking adaptation costs estimated at 1-2% of GDP annually in vulnerable economies. Mainstream funding sources, often from left-leaning philanthropists, exhibit toward alarmist narratives, potentially amplifying calls for carbon taxes that redistribute economic power.

Key Actors

Influential Individuals

James Hansen, a climatologist at NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, played a pivotal role in elevating climate change from scientific discourse to public policy debate through his June 23, 1988, testimony before the U.S. Senate, where he stated with 99% confidence that the greenhouse effect was detectable and altering global climate patterns. His work emphasized the causal link between fossil fuel emissions and warming, influencing early legislative efforts like the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments, though subsequent critiques have questioned the precision of his temperature projections relative to observed data. Hansen later engaged in direct activism, including arrests during protests against coal plants, bridging scientific advocacy with movement tactics. Former U.S. Vice President advanced the movement's visibility with his 2006 documentary , which presented climate data through slideshows and analogies, reaching over 30 million viewers worldwide and correlating with a measurable uptick in public concern about global warming, as evidenced by Gallup polls showing U.S. worry levels rising from 35% in 2000 to 57% by 2008. The film, which won an Academy Award and contributed to Gore's shared with the IPCC, spurred voluntary carbon offset purchases but also intensified partisan divides on the issue in the U.S., where Republican skepticism grew alongside Democratic support. Gore's subsequent trained over 20,000 leaders by 2020 to disseminate similar messaging globally. Bill McKibben, an environmental writer, authored The End of Nature in 1989, the first popular book warning of anthropogenic climate disruption via CO2 accumulation, framing it as an existential alteration of natural systems and influencing early NGO strategies. In 2008, he co-founded , targeting atmospheric CO2 levels below 350 ppm—a threshold exceeded since 1987 according to measurements—and organized the largest coordinated global protests, including 2014 actions against the Keystone XL pipeline that mobilized 400,000 participants and pressured policy delays. The group's campaigns, launched in 2012, have led to over $40 trillion in commitments withdrawn by institutions as of 2023, though empirical assessments indicate limited direct impact on energy markets due to redirected investments. Greta Thunberg initiated the modern youth-led phase by beginning a solo school strike on August 20, 2018, outside the Swedish , protesting insufficient adherence to the and using the hashtag #FridaysForFuture to demand emission reductions. Her action catalyzed the global Fridays for Future movement, culminating in strikes involving 1.4 million participants across 128 countries on March 15, 2019, and shifting public discourse toward claims, with surveys showing heightened youth engagement in climate policy advocacy. Thunberg's UN speeches, including her 2019 "How dare you" address, amplified media coverage but drew criticism for oversimplifying complex trade-offs between emission cuts and in developing nations.

Major Organizations and NGOs

The Climate Action Network (CAN), formed in 1989 during preparatory meetings for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), functions as an umbrella organization coordinating advocacy among over 1,900 civil society groups spanning more than 130 countries. It focuses on influencing multilateral climate negotiations, pushing for stringent greenhouse gas emission limits, technology transfers to developing nations, and accountability from governments and corporations. CAN's regional hubs, such as CAN Europe and CAN International, facilitate joint statements and lobbying at annual Conference of the Parties (COP) events, with member organizations including Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth. Its influence stems from aggregating diverse voices, though critics note its emphasis on top-down policy solutions often overlooks adaptation challenges in high-emission developing economies. , established in 1971 in , , initially as an anti-nuclear testing group, broadened into climate advocacy by the 1980s through campaigns against infrastructure and deforestation-linked emissions. The organization has mobilized direct actions, such as occupying oil platforms in 2015 to protest drilling and launching the "Detox" initiative in 2011 targeting emissions. With operations in over 55 countries and annual expenditures exceeding €300 million as of 2022, Greenpeace advocates for phasing out coal and oil by 2030, influencing policies like the European Union's Green Deal through litigation and public pressure. Its non-violent confrontation tactics have secured wins, including the 1982 moratorium on commercial whaling, which indirectly supported ocean preservation, but the group has faced accusations of selective data emphasis in reports favoring rapid decarbonization over nuclear alternatives. , launched in 2008 by author and affiliates following his Eaarth, targets atmospheric CO2 stabilization at 350 parts per million through grassroots mobilization and drives. The group organized the 2014 People's Climate March in , drawing an estimated 400,000 participants ahead of the UN climate summit, and spearheaded pledges totaling over $14 trillion by 2023 from institutions like universities and pension funds. Operating in 188 countries with a focus on campaigns like "Global divestment day" since 2013, 350.org emphasizes people-powered demands for , though its impact metrics rely on self-reported participation numbers rather than independently verified emission reductions. The , founded in 1892 by conservationist , shifted prominently toward climate advocacy in the 2000s, campaigning against coal-fired power plants and hydraulic fracturing. It has endorsed the "Beyond Coal" initiative since 2004, contributing to the retirement or conversion of over 300 U.S. coal units by 2023, and lobbies for carbon pricing and mandates. With a membership exceeding 3.8 million and U.S.-focused litigation securing EPA regulations on vehicle emissions, the Sierra Club's efforts align with broader renewable transitions, yet its opposition to all —evident in lawsuits blocking reactor approvals—has drawn scrutiny for potentially hindering low-carbon alternatives amid empirical data showing nuclear's role in emission-free baseload generation in countries like . Other influential NGOs include Friends of the Earth International, a federation of 75 groups since 1971 advocating for ecosystem-based climate mitigation, and the Union of Concerned Scientists, established in 1969, which produces reports on policy solutions like efficiency standards while critiquing . These entities often collaborate via networks like CAN, amplifying calls for net-zero targets, though their funding from philanthropic sources—such as foundations totaling billions annually across the sector—raises questions about alignment with donor priorities over unfiltered empirical cost-benefit analyses of interventions.

Grassroots and Youth Movements

Grassroots climate movements emphasize local, community-driven initiatives, often intersecting with that highlights concerns. Youth-led efforts gained prominence in the late 2010s, driven by perceptions of disproportionate future risks from borne by younger generations. The Fridays for Future movement, initiated by Swedish teenager on August 24, 2018, with a solo school strike outside the Swedish parliament, exemplifies youth mobilization. Thunberg demanded stronger aligned with scientific recommendations, skipping classes weekly to protest governmental inaction. The action rapidly expanded globally, inspiring student strikes in over 100 countries by early 2019. On September 27, 2019, an estimated 2 million participants joined demonstrations worldwide, including over 1 million in alone. In the United States, the , founded in 2017 by young activists including Varshini Prakash, focused on electoral strategies to advance ambitious climate policies. The group organized sit-ins at congressional offices in November 2018, pressuring politicians to support the resolution introduced by Representative in February 2019. Sunrise claims to have contributed to electing hundreds of pro-climate candidates and securing pledges from thousands of politicians to reject money. Empirical analysis of similar youth protests in , such as those under Fridays for Future, indicates short-term increases in political participation and donations to environmental causes, though long-term policy shifts remain debated. Other youth initiatives include Zero Hour, established in 2017 by , which organized the Youth Climate March on July 21, 2018, in , and other cities to amplify frontline youth voices. Student-led campaigns have pressured universities, with groups like Divest Harvard collecting petitions signed by thousands to end endowments' investments in oil, gas, and coal since 2012. These efforts reflect tactics prioritizing and institutional pressure over top-down policy.

Tactics and Methods

Direct Action and Civil Disobedience

Direct action within the climate movement encompasses non-violent tactics such as infrastructure blockades, occupations, and disruptions intended to impede operations and compel policy shifts through immediate interference rather than appeals to authority. complements these by involving deliberate law-breaking, with participants often courting arrest to leverage court proceedings for publicity and moral suasion. These methods draw from historical precedents like but intensified post-2015 amid perceived governmental inaction on emissions targets. Extinction Rebellion (XR), launched in the United Kingdom in May 2018 by Gail Bradbrook and others, exemplifies organized civil disobedience with its "three demands" for net-zero emissions by 2025, a citizens' assembly, and government truth-telling on climate risks. XR's tactics included gluing to roads, die-ins, and blocking London bridges during its April 2019 "International Rebellion," resulting in over 1,100 arrests across 11 days and temporary shutdowns of transport hubs. The group trained activists for non-violent arrest, viewing it as a pathway to systemic disruption akin to suffragette strategies, though it faced criticism for prioritizing spectacle over policy wins. By January 2023, XR paused mass disruptions after internal review, citing public backlash and inefficacy in sustaining momentum. In Germany, Ende Gelände has conducted annual mass actions since 2015, mobilizing thousands to blockade lignite coal mines and power plants in regions like Lusatia and Rhineland. Participants, often in affinity groups, march en masse to rail lines or diggers, halting operations for hours or days; the 2019 campaign blocked Garzweiler mine tracks, affecting 6,000 participants and delaying coal transport equivalent to emissions from 10,000 households daily. These actions contributed to public discourse on Germany's coal phase-out, accelerated in 2020 to 2038, though causal links remain debated amid broader legal and economic pressures. Ende Gelände persisted into 2024, blockading the Scholven coal plant in April to protest ongoing fossil reliance. Just Stop Oil, formed in the UK in 2022 as an offshoot of XR and Insulate Britain, targeted expansion with high-visibility stunts like throwing tomato soup on Vincent van Gogh's Sunflowers at the in October 2022 and blocking M25 motorways, leading to over 2,000 arrests by 2025. Protesters justified disruptions as necessary to counter media neglect of , such as record heatwaves, but actions drew widespread condemnation; a 2023 poll showed 50% of Britons viewing JSO unfavorably, associating tactics with elite privilege despite diverse participants. The group ceased in April 2025 after three years, claiming media gains but acknowledging repression via laws like the 2023 Public Order Act imposing up to five-year sentences for infrastructure interference. Empirical assessments of these tactics reveal mixed outcomes. A 2024 field experiment during Just Stop Oil protests found no net decline in public support for climate policies, with spillover boosts to mainstream groups like , though direct sympathy for disruptors waned. Conversely, surveys indicate disruptive acts can polarize, eroding moderate support; a 2023 analysis noted peaceful marches outperform in shifting independents' views on emissions cuts. Longitudinal data from 2015-2023 actions suggest heightened awareness but limited legislative causation, as policy advances like EU carbon pricing correlate more with economic modeling than blockades alone. Critics argue over-reliance on disruption risks moral licensing among non-participants, while proponents cite historical parallels where sustained pressure, not popularity, drove change. The climate movement has increasingly utilized strategic litigation to challenge government inaction on , seeking judicial mandates for enforcement. A landmark case was Urgenda Foundation v. State of the in 2015, where the District Court of ruled that the Dutch government violated obligations by failing to sufficiently reduce emissions, ordering a 25% cut from 1990 levels by 2020; this was upheld by higher courts in 2018 and 2019, establishing a precedent for emissions targets grounded in constitutional duties. In the United States, (2007) compelled the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act after the determined that emissions endanger and welfare, paving the way for subsequent vehicle efficiency standards and power plant rules. Globally, such cases have proliferated, with over 2,500 climate-related lawsuits filed by 2024, more than 80% classified as strategic efforts to influence rather than solely seek damages. Policy advocacy by climate groups focuses on lobbying for legislative and regulatory measures, including carbon pricing, subsidies, and international agreements. Organizations like Citizens' Climate Lobby promote bipartisan carbon fee-and-dividend proposals to internalize emissions costs while rebating revenues to households, influencing discussions in Congress since 2007. Advocacy efforts contributed to the Paris Agreement's adoption in 2015, where NGOs pressured for binding review mechanisms, though compliance remains voluntary. In the , groups supported the Green Deal's 2030 emissions target of at least 55% reduction, enacted in 2020, through coalitions pushing for sector-specific regulations like the Emissions Trading System expansions. Assessments of these tactics reveal mixed outcomes on emission reductions. While Urgenda accelerated Dutch policy tightening, national emissions fell only 20-24% by 2020, short of the court-ordered target, partly due to reliance on offsets and economic factors beyond litigation. A 2024 analysis of 1,500 global climate policies found that economy-wide instruments like carbon taxes achieved major cuts in select cases (e.g., British Columbia's 5-15% reduction post-2008 tax), but many advocacy-driven measures, such as subsidies, yielded inconsistent results amid rising global emissions, which increased 1.1% in 2023 despite policy proliferation. Strategic litigation has heightened accountability but often faces enforcement challenges and political reversals, as seen in Juliana v. United States, dismissed multiple times since 2015 for lack of judicial remedy despite initial procedural wins. Overall, these efforts have embedded climate considerations in law but struggled to causally drive deep, sustained decarbonization against countervailing economic growth in developing nations.

Economic Campaigns: Divestment and Boycotts

The campaign within the climate movement seeks to pressure institutions to withdraw investments from companies involved in extracting or distributing , and , aiming to stigmatize the sector and reduce its access to capital. Originating in 2010 with student-led initiatives at universities like and formalized by organizations such as in 2012, the movement draws parallels to earlier efforts against apartheid in . By October 2025, over 1,600 institutions—including universities, pension funds, religious organizations, and philanthropies—have committed to divest, representing approximately $40.76 trillion in . Despite the scale of commitments, empirical analyses indicate limited direct impact on fossil fuel production or global emissions. Capital markets are highly liquid, allowing divested funds to be absorbed by non-committed investors, often without altering corporate financing costs or expansion plans. A study examining oil and gas capital expenditures from 2010 to 2018 found no statistically significant correlation between rising divestment pledges and reduced investment in new projects, as funding sources diversify globally. Similarly, research on firm-level responses suggests divestment may inadvertently reduce shareholder pressure for emissions cuts, potentially leading targeted companies to prioritize short-term profits over long-term decarbonization. Divestment successes include notable institutional shifts, such as Harvard University's partial from s in 2021 after student protests and petitions spanning years. Other examples encompass the Norwegian sovereign wealth fund excluding certain coal producers and major philanthropies like the fully divesting by 2014. However, total divested assets remain a fraction of global investments, estimated in the tens of trillions, with ongoing production financed by state-owned enterprises and non-Western investors less susceptible to activist pressure. Critics, including financial economists, argue the strategy excels in moral signaling and norm-shifting but fails to "starve" the industry of capital due to fungible investment flows. Boycotts complement divestment by targeting consumer and corporate relationships with fossil fuel entities, though they have achieved more symbolic than substantive economic effects. Campaigns have urged avoidance of products from companies like ExxonMobil or banks underwriting fossil projects, with examples including calls post-2018 IPCC reports for consumers to shun fuel from high-emission producers. Activist groups have pressured advertisers to cease promoting oil firms, leading to some agency pullbacks, but global emissions continued rising at 1-2% annually through the 2020s. Boycotts against insurers and financiers, such as those by the Insure Our Future network, have prompted policy reviews at firms like Allianz, yet overall fossil fuel insurance coverage persists due to market demand. Empirical reviews of activism tactics rank boycotts low in efficacy for curbing corporate behavior, as they rarely scale to disrupt revenue streams amid competing economic incentives.

Public Awareness and Media Strategies

The climate movement employs a range of media strategies to elevate public awareness, including large-scale protests, youth-led school strikes, and disruptive tactics designed to generate headlines and amplify messaging. These efforts often leverage visual spectacles, such as blocking infrastructure or attaching to artworks, to draw coverage and shift discourse toward urgency. For instance, the 2014 People's Climate March in mobilized over 300,000 participants, coinciding with UN climate talks and resulting in extensive global media exposure that correlated with temporary spikes in online searches for "." Social media platforms have become central to dissemination, enabling rapid mobilization and narrative framing through viral content, influencer partnerships, and targeted campaigns. Organizations like Fridays for Future have harnessed platforms such as and to coordinate global strikes, reaching millions and fostering youth engagement, with empirical analyses showing these digital strategies enhance issue salience among younger demographics. Communication research emphasizes evidence-based approaches, including gain-framed messages (highlighting benefits of action) over pure loss-framing, and leveraging social networks for peer influence, though meta-analyses indicate variable depending on audience prior beliefs. Public opinion polls reflect fluctuating concern levels despite these initiatives; Gallup data from 1989 to 2024 shows average worry about global warming hovering around 60-70%, with peaks after events like the 2006 release but dips amid economic priorities. Studies on impacts find short-term pro-climate shifts in attitudes and media tone, particularly in liberal-leaning outlets, yet limited translation to policy support, with only 11% of Americans in 2023 viewing as highly effective for legislative change. Mainstream coverage often favors dramatic , but conservative media portrayals frequently criticize tactics as extreme, contributing to polarized perceptions. Critics argue that alarmist framing and disruptive methods risk public backlash, with surveys indicating annoyance among segments viewing protests as inconvenient, potentially eroding broader support. Empirical reviews confirm boosts in sympathetic groups but struggles with skeptics, underscoring the need for substantive policy engagement over spectacle.

Major Events and Campaigns

Pre-2010 Milestones

The climate movement emerged from broader environmental activism, with the inaugural on April 22, 1970, drawing an estimated 20 million participants across the to demonstrate against , , and ecological threats, including early concerns over atmospheric carbon buildup that foreshadowed climate-specific organizing. This event, coordinated by Senator and inspired by anti-war protests, mobilized diverse groups and spurred the formation of organizations like the , which later incorporated climate advocacy. In the late 1980s, heightened scientific warnings catalyzed targeted climate activism; climatologist James Hansen's June 23, 1988, testimony to the U.S. Senate asserted with 99% confidence that human-induced greenhouse gases were causing global warming, galvanizing NGOs such as to launch dedicated campaigns against expansion and . The same year, the established the (IPCC), providing activists with authoritative assessments to pressure policymakers, though initial reports emphasized over immediate action. The 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro marked a surge in and NGO involvement, with over 2,400 accredited non-governmental organizations advocating for binding emission targets, resulting in the Framework Convention on (UNFCCC) signed by 154 nations; activists, including indigenous groups and environmental coalitions, highlighted inequities in global responsibility for emissions. Five years later, the 1997 negotiations in Japan saw sustained lobbying from alliances like the , which pushed for industrialized nations' legally binding reductions averaging 5% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012, though U.S. Senate opposition via the Byrd-Hagel resolution underscored early diplomatic hurdles for the movement. The mid-2000s witnessed expanded public mobilization. Al Gore's documentary , released in May 2006, reached over 30 million viewers worldwide and served as an educational catalyst, prompting local screenings, school curricula integration, and a spike in activist recruitment despite criticisms of its selective data presentation. That August, the inaugural Camp for Climate Action in the UK drew approximately 600 participants to protest outside —Europe's largest CO2 emitter—employing tactics like workshops and blockades to oppose dependency, establishing a model for decentralized, consensus-based climate camps. In July 2007, the concert series across seven continents featured over 150 artists and reached a global audience of two billion via broadcast, focusing on emission pledges and lifestyle pledges, though its efficacy was debated amid accusations of performative spectacle over substantive policy shifts.

Fridays for Future and School Strikes (2018 Onward)

The Fridays for Future movement originated on August 20, 2018, when 15-year-old Swedish activist initiated a solo school strike outside the in , demanding stronger government action on ahead of Sweden's . She continued the action weekly on Fridays, skipping classes to sit in protest, which gained media attention and inspired similar student-led strikes emphasizing youth involvement in climate advocacy. By late 2018, the initiative spread internationally, with school strikes emerging in countries including , where thousands participated in demonstrations by November. The first coordinated global climate strike occurred on , , involving an estimated 1.6 million students across 125 countries, according to organizers, marking a shift from localized actions to synchronized international events focused on pressuring policymakers for emission reductions and adherence to the . Participation peaked during the Global Week for Future from to 27, 2019, encompassing approximately 4,500 strikes in over 150 countries, with organizers reporting up to several million participants worldwide, though independent verification of exact figures remains limited. These events highlighted demands for systemic changes, such as phasing out fossil fuels, and drew endorsements from figures like UN Secretary-General , who urged youth voices in climate policy. Post-2019, strike frequency and attendance declined even prior to the , attributed to factors including participant fatigue, aging of initial student cohorts, and competing priorities, with online and hybrid actions partially substituting in-person protests during lockdowns. By 2023, the movement persisted in localized forms across dozens of countries, but global mobilization had significantly waned compared to 2019 peaks, as evidenced by reduced demonstration scales and media coverage. As of 2025, Fridays for Future maintains an active network for ongoing advocacy, though empirical data on sustained participation levels indicate a return to smaller, sporadic school-based actions rather than mass global strikes.

2019 Global Climate Strike

The 2019 Global Climate Strike, coordinated by the Fridays for Future movement, took place primarily on September 20, 2019, with additional actions extending through the week and a follow-up strike on September 27. It was timed to precede the Climate Action Summit on September 23, demanding immediate policy responses to reduce in line with the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C target. The strikes built on earlier youth-led school walkouts initiated by in 2018, expanding to include adults, unions, and NGOs under the slogan "Global Climate Strike." Organizers reported over 4,500 events across more than 150 countries, with activist estimates placing global participation at approximately 4 million people on September 20 alone. These figures, derived from self-reported data by local groups, highlighted significant mobilization in Europe and North America; for instance, Germany saw an estimated 1.4 million participants, while Montreal, Canada, drew between 315,000 and 500,000. Independent verification of totals remains limited, as counts relied on organizer tallies rather than uniform methodologies, potentially subject to inflation common in protest reporting. Major protests occurred in urban centers worldwide, including (Australia) with tens of thousands, (over 100,000), and (250,000). In the United States, events spanned 1,000 locations, emphasizing absenteeism from schools to pressure educational institutions and governments. The strikes featured marches, speeches by figures like Thunberg—who addressed crowds in New York—and symbolic actions such as street blockades, though largely non-disruptive compared to later activism. The event amplified public discourse on climate policy, with surveys indicating a modest uptick in concern levels post-strike, averaging 1.2 percentage points in affected regions. Financial markets showed short-term reactions, including negative stock price impacts on carbon-intensive European firms averaging 0.5-1%. However, direct causal links to immediate legislative changes were not empirically established at the global scale, though local governments in some areas reported heightened internal discussions on emissions targets.

Recent Disruptions (2020-2025)

In the early , climate activist groups intensified tactics amid the , shifting from mass gatherings to targeted disruptions like road blockades and facility occupations, though overall protest scale diminished temporarily. (XR) conducted actions such as blocking research sites in the UK in November 2021 and protesting oil reliance through traffic obstructions in April 2022. By 2023, XR announced a pivot away from high-disruption public protests in the UK, citing insufficient impact on policy and growing public fatigue after actions like road and bridge blockades that caused commuter chaos. Just Stop Oil, emerging in February 2022 to demand an end to new extraction, escalated disruptions starting with oil terminal protests in April 2022 and gaining notoriety for motorway blockades, including a November 2022 shutdown of the M25 that halted traffic for hours and led to widespread delays. The group executed high-profile stunts, such as throwing tomato soup at Vincent van Gogh's Sunflowers in London's on October 14, 2022, and spraying cornstarch on in 2023, aiming to provoke media attention but drawing criticism for endangering cultural artifacts and public safety. These tactics resulted in thousands of arrests—over 2,000 by early 2025—and legal crackdowns, including harsher sentencing under laws targeting disruptive protests. In March 2025, Just Stop Oil ceased street-level direct actions after three years, citing strategic reevaluation, with a final non-disruptive march in on April 26, 2025. In continental Europe, Germany's Last Generation group conducted 276 road blockades in 2022 alone, using glue-ins to halt traffic and demand fossil fuel phase-outs. The group extended disruptions to aviation, gluing themselves to runways at Düsseldorf and Hamburg airports on July 13, 2023, delaying dozens of flights and prompting temporary shutdowns. Similar tactics persisted into 2024, with coordinated runway occupations at four German airports (Berlin, Cologne/Bonn, Nuremberg, and others) on August 15, 2024, leading to arrests and flight halts, as part of broader European efforts involving seven groups across six countries in July 2024 to protest fossil fuel infrastructure. By late 2024, Last Generation announced tactical shifts away from road gluing due to backlash and legal pressures, including organized crime charges, though airport incursions continued. These disruptions faced escalating governmental responses, including injunctions against airport trespassing and fines up to €500,000 in for infrastructure interference, reflecting concerns over public inconvenience and minimal policy gains. Empirical tracking from 2022 onward shows over 1,000 global climate protest events, many disruptive, but with limited evidence of direct causal links to emission reductions or legislative changes.

Impacts and Effectiveness

Policy and Legislative Influences

The climate movement has sought to shape policy through sustained , including , public campaigns, and integration with , though empirical assessments indicate moderate rather than transformative influence on legislative outcomes. A of 50 studies on climate activism's impacts identified evidence that protests and related actions increase policymaker attention to climate issues and modestly boost pro-climate voting, such as a German analysis showing 0.5 to 1.5 gains in support for parties following local demonstrations. However, direct causation for enacted laws is often confounded by concurrent factors like international and economic incentives, with domestic and elite negotiations playing primary roles in adoption. In the , the established the world's first legally binding national framework for reductions, targeting at least 80% cuts by 2050 from 1990 baselines, with subsequent amendments raising the goal to net zero by 2050. Environmental NGOs, including and WWF, conducted multi-year campaigns that mobilized public support and influenced parliamentary debates, contributing to its near-unanimous passage despite initial government reservations. Expert interviews attribute the Act's strategic design, including independent carbon budgeting, partly to advocacy pressures that framed climate risks in economic terms. Youth-led initiatives like Fridays for Future have demonstrated localized policy effects, particularly in urban settings. A study of 25 European and North American cities found that sustained strikes prompted procedural shifts, such as dedicated youth consultations in climate planning, and substantive changes like accelerated targets or commitments in municipal legislation. For instance, in , protest waves correlated with coalition agreements incorporating stricter emission caps, though these built on pre-existing platforms rather than originating solely from activism. Broader global efforts, such as those preceding the 2015 , amplified awareness but exerted limited direct sway over its nationally determined contributions, which stemmed primarily from state-level bargaining. Despite these instances, quantitative analyses reveal constraints: activism rarely shifts core legislative content in isolation, with outcomes more pronounced in democracies with strong traditions and less evident in federal systems where subnational vetoes dilute effects. Sustained has occasionally embedded provisions in omnibus laws, like renewable subsidies in the U.S. of 2022, but attribution to movement pressure competes with partisan dynamics and fiscal priorities. Overall, while the movement has normalized mandates in , verifiable legislative wins remain incremental, often requiring alignment with prevailing political winds.

Environmental and Emission Outcomes

Despite extensive activism by the climate movement, including major campaigns from the onward, global fossil CO2 emissions have continued to rise, reaching 37.4 billion tonnes in 2024, an increase of 0.8% from 2023 levels. This follows a pattern of steady growth, with emissions approximately 36.6 billion tonnes in 2018 prior to intensified global strikes, driven primarily by expanding energy demand in developing economies such as and , where and use offset declines elsewhere. Atmospheric CO2 concentrations have similarly accelerated, rising by a record 3.5 parts per million from 2023 to 2024, the largest annual increase since systematic measurements began in 1957. In advanced economies, energy-related CO2 emissions fell by 1.1% (120 million tonnes) in , attributed to reduced use (down 5.7%) and shifts toward renewables and efficiency gains, though emissions grew by 2.5% globally, contributing most to the net increase. Policies like carbon pricing and subsidies for low-carbon technologies, sometimes advocated by movement groups, have correlated with localized reductions; for example, the European Union's system has curbed industrial outputs in member states. However, empirical assessments find limited direct causation from activism to these outcomes, with broader economic factors—such as technological decoupling from fuels and post-COVID recovery—playing dominant roles. Reviews of climate activism's effects, including analyses of over 50 studies, indicate strong influences on and media coverage but weaker evidence for tangible emission cuts or policy-driven environmental improvements. Disruptive protests, such as those by , have occasionally boosted short-term policy discourse but show no robust link to sustained global decarbonization, as emissions trajectories remain upward amid insufficient international compliance and reliance on high-emission development paths. Total global GHG emissions reached 53.2 Gt CO2-equivalent in , up 1.3% from 2023, underscoring that movement efforts have not reversed the overarching trend.

Empirical Studies on Activism Efficacy

Empirical analyses of climate 's efficacy, drawn primarily from peer-reviewed studies, indicate modest effects on and localized processes but scant evidence of substantial reductions in global emissions or alterations in corporate investment decisions. A comprehensive review of 50 studies on impacts, spanning protests, , and , found consistent evidence for heightened media coverage and public concern following events like strikes, yet causal pathways to verifiable emission declines or enactment remain underdeveloped, with many analyses limited by correlational designs and short time horizons. Quasi-experimental evaluations of protest events, such as those during the Fridays for Future (FFF) movement, demonstrate temporary boosts in climate-related concerns; for instance, exposure to strikes correlated with a 1.2 rise in public worry about across surveyed regions, without inducing measurable backlash in support for policies. In , FFF participation was linked to a 0.6 increase in vote shares in the 2019 federal election, mediated by amplification and reverse intergenerational persuasion from youth to adults, though this effect dissipated in subsequent cycles absent sustained mobilization. Similarly, surveys in revealed that 23-30% of respondents attributed heightened personal environmental behaviors—such as reduced meat consumption—to FFF influences, predominantly in private spheres rather than or advocacy. On policy fronts, localized case studies in 25 German municipalities documented FFF-driven shifts toward more ambitious targets, including accelerated municipal emission plans, attributed to youth pressure altering bureaucratic agendas; however, these gains were uneven, succeeding more in left-leaning locales with pre-existing . Broader econometric assessments, including difference-in-differences models around timings, show correlating with elevated policymaker rhetoric on but negligible acceleration in legislative outputs like carbon pricing adoption rates. Disruptive tactics, such as road blockades, yielded moderate corporate responses—like enhanced —but rarely translated to production cuts, as firms adapted via reputational hedging without fundamental operational changes. Fossil fuel divestment campaigns, analyzed through event studies on stock returns and capital flows, exhibit limited financial pressure on targeted firms; a synthesis of portfolio data from 2010-2020 found no statistically significant hikes in divestees' , with volumes (under 1% of market cap for majors) insufficient to constrain expansion, though indirect stigmatization effects appeared in bond yields for smaller producers. Experimental vignettes testing public exposure to narratives revealed minimal uplift in support for stringent policies like carbon taxes, with null effects on higher energy costs. Across domains, emission linkages are particularly elusive: while some models attribute 0.1-0.5% annual CO2 dips in protest-heavy jurisdictions to awareness spillovers, confounding factors like concurrent economic downturns or subsidies dominate, and global aggregates show epochs (e.g., 2018-2022) coinciding with rising rather than falling emissions. These findings, often from outlets with institutional incentives toward affirmative interpretations of , underscore methodological challenges including endogeneity ( surges in high-concern areas) and reliance on self-reports over hard proxies like satellite-derived emission data; robust , via instrumental variables or synthetic controls, consistently tempers claims of transformative efficacy, suggesting excels at but falters in scaling systemic decarbonization.

Criticisms and Counterperspectives

Tactical Failures and Backlash

Disruptive tactics employed by climate activist groups, such as road blockades, of artworks, and , have frequently provoked public backlash and diminished support for the organizations involved. A 2022 University of Pennsylvania survey found that 46% of respondents reported decreased support for action after witnessing disruptive protests, with only 13% indicating increased support and 40% unaffected. Similarly, a 2023 University of Bristol poll revealed that 68% of Britons disapproved of Just Stop Oil's actions, including spraying paint on public monuments and disrupting traffic, despite broader concern over . These tactics, intended to highlight urgency, often alienate moderate supporters by prioritizing confrontation over persuasion, as evidenced by widespread media coverage framing activists as nuisances rather than authorities. Just Stop Oil's 2022-2023 campaigns exemplified this failure, with actions like throwing soup at Vincent van Gogh's Sunflowers in London's on October 14, 2022, drawing condemnation from 79% of respondents in a subsequent poll who viewed the group unfavorably. The protests, which included daily slow marches blocking major roads, led to over 2,000 arrests by mid-2023 and contributed to a measurable dip in public sympathy for anti-fossil fuel demands, with net approval for such groups falling below 20% in multiple surveys. Critics, including some environmental , argue that these methods conflate symbolic disruption with substantive policy influence, eroding trust in the broader movement by associating it with perceived and everyday inconveniences like delayed ambulances during blockades. Extinction Rebellion's 2019 London occupations, which shut down central areas for 11 days starting April 15, incurred £7.5 million in policing costs and resulted in over 1,100 arrests, but failed to sustain public momentum, with subsequent polls showing declining favorability as fatigue set in. The group's shift away from mass disruption in 2023, announced after internal reviews acknowledged alienation risks, underscores tactical shortcomings, as prolonged actions disproportionately burdened working-class commuters while elite participants faced minimal personal costs. Empirical analyses indicate that such rarely shifts policy without elite buy-in and often invites repressive countermeasures, including the UK's 2023 Public Order Act, which expanded police powers to preempt "serious disruption," leading to preemptive injunctions against groups like JSO. This backlash has manifested in rising legal penalties and societal pushback, with global trends toward criminalizing environmental protests intensifying since 2020, as seen in France's 2021 anti-vandalism laws fining climate glue-ins up to €45,000 and Germany's 2022 restrictions on blocking . In the , states like and enacted laws by 2024 classifying certain protest tactics as felonies, prompted by and disruptions. While proponents claim indirect awareness gains, direct causal from panel studies links high-disruption events to polarized opinions, where opposition hardens faster than support grows, particularly among non-activist demographics. Overall, these tactics have fostered a of the climate movement as intolerant, contributing to electoral setbacks for green parties in , such as the German Greens' stalled progress in 2025 regional votes amid voter frustration with associated .

Economic and Social Costs

The climate movement's advocacy for rapid decarbonization has contributed to policies imposing substantial economic burdens, including elevated energy prices and transition investments. In , the policy, accelerated by environmental since the 2011 nuclear phase-out, has resulted in household electricity prices reaching €0.40 per kWh in 2022, more than double the average, exacerbating industrial competitiveness issues and contributing to factory closures in energy-intensive sectors. Across , the shift to renewables is projected to require $5.3 in investments by 2050, with wholesale electricity prices surging over 200% in 2021 due to intermittency and subsidy dependencies, straining public finances and consumer budgets. In the UK, achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 under policies influenced by climate campaigns is estimated to demand £1.4 in upfront investments, equivalent to annual costs of around £50 billion by mid-century, diverting resources from other public needs. These policies have also led to job displacements in fossil fuel-dependent regions. Globally, the energy transition is forecasted to eliminate up to 6 million positions in carbon-intensive industries by 2030, with the US alone anticipating 1.7 million losses in , and gas sectors as subsidies favor renewables over reliable baseload sources. Direct activism exacerbates costs through disruptions; Just Stop Oil's UK protests from 2022 onward incurred over £20 million in expenditures by late 2023, including £1.1 million for a single blockade that caused £765,000 in economic damages from delayed commuters and logistics. Such actions, including road occupations and infrastructure vandalism, have imposed uncompensated losses on businesses and individuals, with one six-week period in 2023 alone costing £4.5 million in policing. Socially, these economic pressures manifest as , disproportionately affecting low-income households. Policies driving up costs—such as renewable subsidies and carbon pricing—have increased financial stress, with families in affected regions facing higher bills that consume a larger share, leading to reduced access to heating and contributing to health issues like respiratory problems from inadequate warmth. In the , , , and Native American households allocate significantly more of their budgets to , amplifying inequities from green mandates that prioritize emission reductions over affordability. Disruptive protests have fueled public alienation, with tactics like blockades eroding sympathy for goals; surveys indicate such alienates moderate supporters, fostering backlash that polarizes communities and undermines broader consensus on pragmatic environmental measures. This division is evident in rising opposition to radical activism, as repeated inconveniences—such as delays during blockades—erode public tolerance and invite repressive legal responses, further straining social cohesion.

Scientific Overreach and Alarmism Debunking

Critics contend that the climate movement engages in scientific overreach by amplifying uncertainties into dire certainties and selectively emphasizing high-end projections from climate models that perform poorly against observations. A notable subset of models in the Phase 6 (CMIP6) exhibit high equilibrium , projecting warming rates that exceed observed global temperatures over 63% of Earth's surface area since 1979. These "hot models" fail to accurately reproduce historical temperature patterns, leading to exaggerated impact forecasts; for example, indiscriminate averaging of model ensembles can inflate projected end-of-century warming by up to 0.7°C compared to more constrained estimates. Such reliance on outlier simulations, rather than weighting by historical fidelity, underpins alarmist claims of imminent tipping points, despite IPCC reports acknowledging wide uncertainty ranges in sensitivity (1.5–4.5°C per CO2 doubling). Prominent predictions endorsed or popularized by movement figures have often diverged markedly from empirical outcomes, eroding credibility. In 2006, Al Gore's implied an ice-free summer by as early as 2014 based on extrapolations from thinning trends, a timeline not realized as minimum extents remained above 4 million square kilometers through 2025. Similarly, James Hansen's 1988 U.S. testimony outlined scenarios predicting 0.3–0.45°C per decade warming under business-as-usual emissions, yet observed decadal rates since then averaged approximately 0.18–0.20°C, closer to lower-emission pathways and necessitating post-hoc adjustments. projections have followed suit: early alarmist extrapolations of rapid acceleration to decimeters per decade have not materialized, with global rates stabilizing around 3.3–3.7 mm/year from 1993–2023 satellite altimetry, below some model-derived highs. Former Obama administration science advisor Steven Koonin, in Unsettled (2021), attributes much alarmism to the distillation of nuanced IPCC working group assessments into policy summaries that prioritize extremes while downplaying observational discrepancies and adaptive capacities. Koonin documents instances where media-amplified claims, such as inevitable mass extinctions or unlivable heat, outstrip evidence from underlying chapters, which note, for example, no clear trend in hurricane intensity despite warmer seas. This pattern reflects institutional pressures, including funding biases toward catastrophic framing in academia and media—predominantly left-leaning outlets that underreport model shortcomings—fostering a cycle where dissent is marginalized despite peer-reviewed validations of lower sensitivity estimates. Empirical realism demands scrutiny of such overreach, as unfulfilled doomsday timelines historically parallel earlier environmental panics, underscoring the need for policy grounded in verifiable trends rather than probabilistic tails.

Rise of Opposition Movements

Opposition to expansive policies has manifested in organized counter-movements, particularly since the late 2010s, as implementation costs and regulatory burdens became more apparent. A study cataloging global counter-climate organizations—groups advocating against stringent emission controls or alarmist narratives—identified 548 such entities across 51 countries by 2022, with over 60% (350) based . These organizations proliferated in nations with robust environmental institutions, suggesting a reactive dynamic to pressures rather than isolated economic interests like dependence. Grassroots opposition surged in amid the rollout of net-zero aligned regulations, exemplified by farmer protests triggered by agricultural emission curbs. In the , demonstrations erupted in 2019 against government plans to reduce numbers by up to 50% to comply with nitrogen oxide limits, which intersect with broader climate goals under the Green Deal. Protests intensified in 2022, involving tractor blockades and clashes with police, culminating in the rise of the (BBB) party, which capitalized on discontent to win 7 seats in March 2023 provincial elections and influence national policy shifts, including cabinet collapses. By 2023–2024, these actions spread across the , with farmers in , , , and blockading ports, roads, and borders to subsidy cuts, bans, and fallow land mandates tied to emission reductions. In , over 10,000 tractors converged on in January 2024, demanding exemptions from fertilizer restrictions and highlighting energy cost hikes post-Ukraine invasion. The scale prompted concessions, including a February 2024 proposal to exempt from a 30% reduction target by 2030 and delay rules, signaling policy retreats amid fears of electoral backlash from rural voters. This backlash has intertwined with populist rhetoric framing net-zero as an elite imposition exacerbating affordability crises, evidenced by anti-net-zero campaigns in the UK since 2021 and growing anti-ESG (environmental, social, governance) sentiments globally, which gained traction amid inflation and supply chain strains. While not uniformly rejecting climate science, these movements emphasize causal trade-offs, such as food security risks from rapid decarbonization, and have correlated with policy dilutions without evidence of reduced warming consensus among opponents.

References

  1. https://mondointernazionale.org/focus-allegati/climate-activism-driving-change-amid-controversy
  2. https://www.folkrorelser.org/bjork-history-climate-movement.pdf
  3. https://www.wri.org/insights/4-charts-explain-greenhouse-gas-emissions-countries-and-sectors
  4. https://www.iea.org/reports/global-energy-review-2025/co2-emissions
  5. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions
  6. https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/the-impacts-of-climate-activism/
  7. https://clcouncil.org/blog/emissions-growth-in-the-developing-world/
  8. https://unfccc.int/most-requested/key-aspects-of-the-paris-agreement
  9. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/
  10. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM.pdf
  11. https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/climate-change/
  12. https://www.mrfcj.org/principles-of-climate-justice/
  13. https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/ethical-principles-climate-change-0
  14. https://centerclimatejustice.universityofcalifornia.edu/what-is-climate-justice/
  15. https://www.ipcc.ch/about/
  16. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/figures/chapter-1/figure-1-16/
  17. https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-well-have-climate-models-projected-global-warming/
  18. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44168-024-00126-0
  19. https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2019GL085378
  20. https://thereader.mitpress.mit.edu/how-american-environmentalism-failed/
  21. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/understanding-the-growing-radical-flank-of-the-climate-movement-as-the-world-burns/
  22. https://sustainability.d.umn.edu/environmentalism-vs-environmental-justice
  23. https://www.ibm.com/think/topics/climate-change-history
  24. https://theconversation.com/scientists-understood-physics-of-climate-change-in-the-1800s-thanks-to-a-woman-named-eunice-foote-164687
  25. https://history.aip.org/climate/co2.htm
  26. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/03/ar4-wg1-chapter1.pdf
  27. https://www.discover.ukri.org/a-brief-history-of-climate-change-discoveries/index.html
  28. https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcc.78
  29. https://michiganintheworld.history.lsa.umich.edu/environmentalism/exhibits/show/main_exhibit/origins
  30. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/STATUTE-92/pdf/STATUTE-92-Pg601.pdf
  31. https://www.congress.gov/bill/95th-congress/house-bill/6669
  32. https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9780295741406-022/html
  33. https://wmo.int/media/magazine-article/history-of-climate-activities
  34. https://unfccc.int/cop3/fccc/climate/fact17.htm
  35. https://history.aip.org/exhibits/climate-change-in-the-70s/index.html
  36. https://www.ipcc.ch/about/history/
  37. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2018.1536293
  38. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/united-nations-framework-convention-on-climate-change
  39. https://unfccc.int/process/the-convention/history-of-the-convention
  40. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-rio-conventions
  41. https://climatenetwork.org/2014/09/21/conservative-crowd-count-310000-join-peoples-climate-march-in-new-york-city/
  42. https://www.sierraclub.org/planet/2014/09/peoples-climate-march-draws-over-400000
  43. https://www.vox.com/energy-and-environment/2019/9/20/20876143/climate-strike-2019-september-20-crowd-estimate
  44. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/sep/27/climate-crisis-6-million-people-join-latest-wave-of-worldwide-protests
  45. https://extinctionrebellion.uk/the-truth/faqs/
  46. https://rebellion.global/about-us/
  47. https://wagingnonviolence.org/2017/08/civil-disobedience-climate-coal-ende-gelande/
  48. https://www.ende-gelaende.org/en/news/big-success-and-small-defeat/
  49. https://www.sunrisemovement.org/about/
  50. https://carnegieendowment.org/features/climate-protest-tracker
  51. https://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/research/docs/Lomborg_ClimateChange_web_240903.pdf
  52. https://cei.org/blog/wrong-again-50-years-of-failed-eco-pocalyptic-predictions/
  53. https://www.science.org/content/article/use-too-hot-climate-models-exaggerates-impacts-global-warming
  54. https://issues.org/climate-change-scenarios-lost-touch-reality-pielke-ritchie/
  55. https://www.epw.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/4/a/4a86454f-4287-4d1c-ae5f-85a01b8c78b8/7E90482A76C15A7B2D2473E6EDC911C0.refuting-12-claims-made-by-climate-alarmists.pdf
  56. https://climatepromise.undp.org/news-and-stories/climate-change-matter-justice-heres-why
  57. http://unfccc.int/resource/ccsites/zimbab/conven/text/art03.htm
  58. https://unfccc.int/news/the-explainer-the-paris-agreement
  59. https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-which-countries-are-historically-responsible-for-climate-change/
  60. https://unu.edu/article/climate-justice-litigation-good-way-forward
  61. https://www.carbonbrief.org/experts-why-does-climate-justice-matter/
  62. https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/chapter/chapter-8/
  63. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/01/climate-crisis-poor-davos2023/
  64. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cumulative-co-emissions
  65. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ac0663
  66. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844024111656
  67. https://dgap.org/en/research/glossary/climate-foreign-policy/common-differentiated-responsibilities-cbdr
  68. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2022.2156179
  69. https://marxistleftreview.org/articles/new-movement-new-debates-the-contested-politics-of-climate-change/
  70. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886925003496
  71. https://digitalcommons.conncoll.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1065&context=govhp
  72. https://www.heritage.org/china/report/chinese-handcuffs-how-china-exploits-americas-climate-agenda
  73. https://www.bezosearthfund.org/
  74. https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/find-a-grant/fundraising-for-climate-change
  75. https://www.greenclimate.fund/
  76. https://www2.fundsforngos.org/articles/top-20-organizations-funding-climate-change-initiatives/
  77. https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/the-state-climate-science-no-justification-extreme-policies
  78. https://www.cato.org/regulation/summer-2019/climate-change-doomsday-trap
  79. https://www.zinnedproject.org/news/tdih/james-hansen-testified-senate-climate-change/
  80. https://www.science.org/content/article/climate-activism-grows-and-hansens-demand
  81. https://monthlyreview.org/articles/james-hansen-and-the-climate-change-exit-strategy/
  82. https://theconversation.com/ten-years-on-how-al-gores-an-inconvenient-truth-made-its-mark-59387
  83. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0095069610001014
  84. https://goldenglobes.com/articles/climate-crisis-still-inconvenient-truth/
  85. https://billmckibben.com/
  86. https://350.org/bill/
  87. https://rightlivelihood.org/the-change-makers/find-a-laureate/bill-mckibben-350-org/
  88. https://fridaysforfuture.org/what-we-do/who-we-are/
  89. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17524032.2024.2314028
  90. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/sep/04/greta-thunberg-school-strike-movement
  91. https://climatenetwork.org/overview/
  92. https://climatenetwork.org/overview/governance/
  93. https://climatenetwork.org/
  94. https://www.greenpeace.org/international/about/history/
  95. https://www.greenpeace.org/usa/past-campaigns/
  96. https://350.org/our-history/
  97. https://350.org/our-impact/
  98. https://www.sierraclub.org/issues/climate
  99. https://www.sierraclub.org/issues
  100. https://fridaysforfuture.org/
  101. https://www.earthday.org/change-is-coming-whether-they-like-it-or-not-youth-climate-strikes-break-records-worldwide/
  102. https://www.ifo.de/DocDL/cesifo1_wp9742.pdf
  103. https://thisiszerohour.org/youth-climate-march/
  104. https://www.teenvogue.com/story/5-youth-led-climate-justice-groups-to-save-the-environment
  105. https://commonslibrary.org/civil-resistance-against-climate-change-what-when-who-and-how-effective/
  106. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/08/world/europe/extinction-rebellion-london-greta.html
  107. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/extinction-rebellion-s-activists-leverage-disruption-arrests-climate-action-n1075601
  108. https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/07/europe/extinction-rebellion-quits-disruptive-protests-climate-intl
  109. https://leadersinenergy.org/ende-gelande-when-laws-fail-it-is-time-for-blockades/
  110. https://www.ende-gelaende.org/en/news/ende-gelaende-blocks-the-scholven-coal-fired-power-plant-in-gelsenkirchen-in-germany-stop-bloody-coal-phase-out-coal-now/
  111. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/oct/19/climate-justice-is-bigger-than-public-opinion-are-just-stop-oils-tactics-right
  112. https://www.socialchangelab.org/tooharshortoolenient
  113. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/apr/05/what-next-climate-activism-just-stop-oil-hanging-up-hi-vis-protests-arrests
  114. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-024-03431-0
  115. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230421-earth-day-the-science-of-climate-change-protest
  116. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-023-02507-y
  117. https://academic.oup.com/jel/article/35/2/167/6724178
  118. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/climate-litigation-advances-key-tool-enforcing-emission-cuts
  119. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1997251/
  120. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/publication/global-trends-in-climate-change-litigation-2025-snapshot/
  121. https://blog.ucs.org/delta-merner/climate-lawsuits-are-rising-as-political-pushback-intensifies/
  122. https://citizensclimatelobby.org/about-ccl/
  123. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-climate-change-lobbying/
  124. https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2024-08-23-effectiveness-1500-global-climate-policies-ranked-first-time
  125. https://research.utwente.nl/files/331103441/1-Farah_Ibrahim.pdf
  126. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818824000334
  127. https://divestmentdatabase.org/
  128. https://ifmsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Fossil-Fuel-Divestment.pdf
  129. https://academic.oup.com/joeg/article/21/1/141/6042790
  130. https://www.pionline.com/industry-voices/commentary-engagement-better-divestment-fossil-fuel-companies/
  131. https://www.earthday.org/divesting-from-the-past-investing-in-tomorrow/
  132. https://hbr.org/2022/11/how-fossil-fuel-divestment-falls-short
  133. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/723237
  134. https://www.un.org/en/academic-impact/reactions-un-climate-report-call-boycott-fossil-fuel-companies
  135. https://caad.info/analysis/reports/the-f-list-2025-shining-a-light-on-fossil-fuel-ties-in-the-ad-industry/
  136. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2352154625000178
  137. https://commonslibrary.org/how-disruptive-climate-campaigners-use-mainstream-media/
  138. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-024-02688-0
  139. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12127360/
  140. https://ccaps.umn.edu/story/power-social-media-climate-justice-advocacy
  141. https://multilateralism.sipa.columbia.edu/news/digital-technology-new-challenges-and-opportunities-climate-activists
  142. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9274986/
  143. https://newprairiepress.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2189&context=jac
  144. https://news.gallup.com/poll/355427/americans-concerned-global-warming.aspx
  145. https://commonslibrary.org/the-impacts-of-climate-activism/
  146. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2023/10/25/climate-activism/
  147. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-growing-divide-in-media-coverage-of-climate-change/
  148. https://www.greeneuropeanjournal.eu/enemies-of-society-how-the-media-portray-climate-activists/
  149. https://www.nature.com/articles/s44168-023-00096-9
  150. https://www.earthday.org/history/
  151. https://education.cfr.org/learn/timeline/history-climate-action
  152. https://history.aip.org/climate/timeline.htm
  153. https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/milestones/unced
  154. https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-kyoto-protocol
  155. https://www.developmenteducationreview.com/issue/issue-6/inconvenient-truth
  156. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17583004.2014.995407
  157. https://www.bbc.co.uk/liveearth/
  158. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-49918719
  159. https://globaldialogue.isa-sociology.org/articles/fridays-for-future-a-social-movements-perspective
  160. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959378020307639
  161. https://www.theendlesssea.com/journal-de-bord/case-history-10-fridays-for-future/
  162. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-48392551
  163. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10345819/
  164. https://www.mdpi.com/2076-0760/12/12/676
  165. https://www.reuters.com/article/world/how-greta-thunbergs-climate-strikes-became-a-global-movement-in-a-year-idUSKCN1VA00I/
  166. https://www.socialeurope.eu/five-years-of-fridays-for-future-what-future-now
  167. https://www.politico.eu/article/climate-kids-students-global-strike-marches-fridays-for-the-future/
  168. https://theloop.ecpr.eu/five-years-of-fridays-for-future-but-what-future-is-there-now-for-the-movement/
  169. https://350.org/press-release/over-4-million-people-strike-for-climate-action/
  170. https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/09/20/millions-youth-around-world-are-striking-friday-climate-action/
  171. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/live/2019/sep/20/climate-strike-global-change-protest-sydney-melbourne-london-new-york-nyc-school-student-protest-greta-thunberg-rally-live-news-latest-updates
  172. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10995135/
  173. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119921001395
  174. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/1523908X.2025.2466821
  175. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48607989
  176. https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-63543307
  177. https://time.com/6334072/just-stop-oil-climate-change-activist-group/
  178. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/mar/27/just-stop-oil-hangs-up-the-hi-vis-after-three-years-of-climate-action
  179. https://earth.org/just-stop-oil-to-hang-up-the-hi-vis-final-protest-in-april/
  180. https://earth.org/last-generation-activists/
  181. https://apnews.com/article/germany-airports-climate-protest-duesseldorf-hamburg-02055d0f9e6c3daf3271bf69d644c80b
  182. https://www.euronews.com/green/2024/08/15/berlin-cologne-bonn-nuremberg-last-generation-climate-activists-halt-flights-at-german-air
  183. https://traveltomorrow.com/climate-activists-block-airports-across-europe-in-coordinated-anti-fossil-fuel-action/
  184. https://apnews.com/article/germany-climate-protests-last-generation-8c0781adb359f9f66cad194139eafbba
  185. https://www.yahoo.com/news/germanys-last-generation-climate-activist-171221656.html
  186. https://www.euronews.com/green/2024/07/24/just-the-start-airports-crack-down-on-climate-protesters-as-summer-of-disruption-begins
  187. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Wp156-Domestic-dynamics-and-international-influence-what-explains-the-passage-of-climate-change-legislation.pdf
  188. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-the-2008-climate-change-act/
  189. https://friendsoftheearth.uk/climate/how-climate-change-act-helped-us-hold-government-account
  190. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14693062.2021.1996536
  191. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2020.611139/full
  192. https://www.nrdc.org/stories/paris-climate-agreement-everything-you-need-know
  193. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8853238/
  194. https://www.wzb.eu/en/news/do-climate-protests-matter
  195. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.241001
  196. https://globalcarbonbudget.org/fossil-fuel-co2-emissions-increase-again-in-2024/
  197. https://ourworldindata.org/co2-emissions
  198. https://wmo.int/news/media-centre/carbon-dioxide-levels-increase-record-amount-new-highs-2024
  199. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adl6547
  200. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/2025/05/the-effects-of-climate-policies-on-emissions_e8c0a91b.html
  201. https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2025
  202. https://osf.io/a7umt/download/
  203. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-46477-4
  204. https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/260872/1/cesifo1_wp9742.pdf
  205. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11625-023-01348-7
  206. https://leibniz-irs.de/fileadmin/user_upload/Regionalgespraech/Regional_58/Handouts/IRS_Assessing_the_impact_of_Fridays_for_Future_on_climate_policy_and_policymaking_in_German_cities.pdf
  207. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1062940818300858
  208. https://www.bordertocoast.org.uk/news-insights/report-divestment-and-engagement-in-the-context-of-climate-change/
  209. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09644016.2023.2178351
  210. https://grist.org/protest/climate-protests-effects-hands-off-trump/
  211. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2022.940876/full
  212. https://web.sas.upenn.edu/pcssm/commentary/public-disapproval-of-disruptive-climate-change-protests/
  213. https://www.bristol.ac.uk/news/2023/july/public-opinion-on-climate-change-and-protesters.html
  214. https://www.dw.com/en/disruptive-climate-protests-do-they-help-or-hinder/a-61379793
  215. https://atmos.earth/art-and-culture/extinction-rebellion-climage-change-protest-civil-disobedience-disruption/
  216. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2025/08/climate-activism-criminalization-environmental-protest?lang=en
  217. https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/2025/08/the-backlash-paradox-of-radical-climate-protests/
  218. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/activism-influence-change/2025/05/29/can-disruptive-protests-shift-political-preferences/
  219. https://www.cleanenergywire.org/dossiers/energiewende-effects-power-prices-costs-and-industry
  220. https://hir.harvard.edu/germanys-energy-crisis-europes-leading-economy-is-falling-behind/
  221. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2022/04/bnef-european-energy-transition-2022/
  222. https://ercst.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/20211125-Electricity-prices-note-final.pdf
  223. https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/costs-of-net-zero-by-2050/
  224. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/news/costs-and-benefits-of-the-uk-reaching-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-the-evidence/
  225. https://www.csis.org/analysis/global-workforce-ready-energy-transition
  226. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2023/10/right-now-energy-job-transition
  227. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jun/12/met-police-just-stop-oil-protests-cost-millions-pounds
  228. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214629622002936
  229. https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/GST/2023-04/KAPSARC%2520GST%2520Submission%2520April%25209.pdf
  230. https://www.aei.org/op-eds/green-efforts-that-raise-energy-costs-disproportionately-hurt-black-people-and-poor-people/
  231. https://earth.org/are-climate-activists-reaching-too-far/
  232. https://www.theclimatebrink.com/p/are-climate-models-predicting-too
  233. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-01192-2
  234. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/02/WG1AR5_Chapter09_FINAL.pdf
  235. https://www.agweb.com/opinion/doomsday-addiction-celebrating-50-years-failed-climate-predictions
  236. https://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/climate-change/climate-alarm-failed-prognostications/
  237. https://www.heritage.org/environment/report/global-warming-observations-vs-climate-models
  238. https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matters/dp/1950665798
  239. https://energyregulationquarterly.ca/en/book-reviews/review-of-steven-koonins-unsettled1
  240. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11076737/
  241. https://www.cato.org/policy-report/may/june-2011/exposing-global-warming-alarmisms-grasp
  242. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0315012
  243. https://www.clingendael.org/publication/how-dutch-farmers-protests-evolved-political-mobilisation
  244. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/16/nitrogen-wars-the-dutch-farmers-revolt-that-turned-a-nation-upside-down
  245. https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-how-do-the-eu-farmer-protests-relate-to-climate-change/
  246. https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/24146466/europe-farmer-protests-eu-climate-environmental-policy-subsidies-livestock
  247. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13876988.2023.2242799
  248. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-epicentre-growing-anti-esg-101559744.html
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.