How to win the public battle on climate change

Leo Barasi's writings about public opinion are always worth a close read. He's one of those people who look at why others disagree with his worldview, not with a view to disparaging them but with a view to finding out how to persuade them. (A distinction Liberal Democrats sometimes forget when it comes to Europe; loudly lamenting the claimed stupidity of others rarely secures converts.) He has just published a book about climate change and public opinion.

You could look at the news and think climate disaster is now inevitable. Each of the last three years has been the hottest on record. In the last few months, the US and Caribbean were battered by a record-breaking series of hurricanes, much of Asia was swept by floods and southern Europe was baked in crop-destroying heatwaves. All of this happened with the world only having warmed by a third of what it will this century if emissions don't fall.

But you could also look around and think the world is finally dealing with climate change. For the first time, global emissions have stopped increasing because of efforts to deal with the threat, and nearly every country has committed to limit their emissions

Both views are right. Climate change is now killing people, and the world is dealing with it more seriously than ever. But which path will win out? Will the world eliminate emissions within a generation as it must if it is to prevent dangerous warming? Or will emissions continue at their current rate and the planet respond with increasingly ferocious storms, heatwaves and droughts?

My book, The Climate Majority: Apathy and Action in an Age of Nationalism, looks at the difference that public opinion will make, and why, unless it's tackled, climate apathy will stop the world dealing with the problem.

Progress so far has depended on changes that have imposed little burden on most people. But eventually, the world will exhaust the relatively painless changes. The only remaining emissions cuts will be from activities that directly affect many people in their day-to-day lives, like flying and meat-eating. The world is going to have to radically cut emissions from both - but in the two areas, emissions look set to increase.

Achieving these harder, but essential, emission cuts won't be possible without public support. Yet, at the moment, that support wouldn't be forthcoming. It's not that many people deny climate change: no more than 20% do. The problem is that many people understand climate change is real and a threat, but just don't think about it much and don't understand why they should change their lives to deal with it. Without their support, emission-cutting measures will fail.

My book looks at the people who are apathetic about climate change and why they think what they do. It explores how psychology and the ways climate change is often described have made the problem seem distant, unthreatening, and a special interest of liberals.

And it looks at what can overcome apathy. There's no magic word that will make the world act on climate change, but there are things that can persuade those who are apathetic that it is worth making the effort. It's still possible to tip the balance away from disaster.

You can buy The Climate Majority: Apathy and Action in an Age of Nationalism here.