As 2024 came to an end, a number of alarming articles have been published in various global and national media on 2024 being the hottest year on record, the disastrous impact of extreme events due to climate change, the need to enhance climate action in the face of contentious climate negotiations in Azerbaijan and an American election that does not bode well for the climate agenda, among others.
All these concerns are valid and need immediate attention. However, several other articles highlighted positive developments related to the ground being laid for a potential transition away from fossil fuels, notably the explosion of affordable and accessible renewable energy, the rapid growth of electric vehicles, the falling costs of battery storage, big moves away from coal, etc. But these articles provide little solace.
The sense of foreboding around climate change is palpable primarily because of the contrast between widely published real-time data and the highly visible impact of extreme events across the world and the perceptibly slow evolution of a sub-set of solutions that may take years to reach a take-off point.
Also read: Climate Change and the New Green Economy: The big questions for 2025
That the human mind is predisposed to a negativity bias—a cognitive bias that recognizes and responds to negative events with greater sensitivity than when positive or neutral things of equal intensity occur—has been well established for at least half a century.
This bias is abundantly visible in discussions on climate change and its impacts, fed by the same dread visible in some news reportage and on social media. This bias, however, must be positively harnessed. What evolved among our ancestors as an adaptive survival mechanism, one that often evokes similar responses today, could be put to good use in solving the climate crisis.
Unfortunately, the world is dealing with two highly complex, intertwined and integrated systems: the planetary system of which climate is a part and the socioeconomic system in which we are embedded. The former, over which the human species has great influence, seems to be unravelling in an uncontrollable fashion.
The year 2024 experienced a full year of temperatures 1.5° Celsius above the long-term average, although just five years ago, science had projected this to happen in 11 years. The latter needs a timely transformation in response, but we still do not have a proper grip on the levers of this process, with political and economic interests dragging their feet against the concerted action needed.
In the face of these systemic changes and collective action required, however, our adaptive survival mechanism tends to shift individual responsibility to first responders, in this case governments and/or businesses.
This became obvious in the People’s Climate Vote 2024 conducted by the UNDP. While 84% of this survey’s respondents were equally or more worried about climate change this year compared to the last, 80% felt that their countries should strengthen their commitment to climate action and 43% felt that governments have the greatest influence and responsibility to act (big business garnered a mere 14% of the vote).
Also read: Climate action must rise above politics before time runs out
In India, surprisingly, only about 75% of the respondents were more worried about climate change, although 82% of them said they were worried about the impact of climate change on the next generation.
Even so, 77% felt that we need to strengthen our commitment and 46% affirmed a belief in governments being the key actors. This clearly indicates high levels of vulnerability to accelerating climate change felt in India and highlights the need for greater adaptive and resilience-building actions.
Science, the experience of climate change, its increasingly evident impact and popular opinion across the world all urgently call for much greater ambition on climate action in 2025.
While governments need to provide the right regulatory framework and a level-playing field for businesses to respond, the negativity bias must be positively harnessed.
This adaptive survival mechanism intrinsic to humanity could address the demand side of the equation by encouraging individuals to make climate-friendly choices; a lack of such demand remains lamented by industry as a key barrier to transforming businesses.
To achieve this, much greater attention also needs to be paid to the framing of actions and their costs/benefits. The communication and media industry should treat climate messaging as a special challenge, as compared to routine information coverage.
Media vehicles should also re-evaluate their presentation of the crisis and track the impact it has on their target audiences in a deliberative manner.
The year 2024 closed on a depressing note, with the 29th Conference of the Parties (CoP) on Climate Change being labelled the “worst CoP” and “heart-breaking,” giving voice to increasing despair in front-line geographies and resonating particularly with younger generations the world over.
Also read: India eyes seaweed to cut methane-filled bovine burps in climate change fight
However, imperfect as it was, CoP-29 did set a new climate-finance goal, concluded rules on carbon trading and saw progress on raising the world’s ambition to cut emissions. Governments too are finding ways to accelerate climate transitions in a palatable manner, nudging markets to show their magic.
And businesses are cognizant of the reality that, sooner rather than later, they will have to conform with societal expectations of climate responsibility. Let’s hope 2025 provides a turning point on climate action and associated perceptions.
The author is an independent expert on climate change and clean energy.