You know that summers are getting hotter, that natural catastrophes are multiplying, and that the IPCC is probably right. But deep down, there is a small voice telling you that it might already be too late, or that there is no point in recycling one’s garbage.
But, what if that small voice did not come from you but rather from the new face of environmental disinformation?
by Marc Vivien
- Climate Skepticism
From the late 1980s onwards, in the USA, some think tanks that were close to the conservative movement collaborated with oil lobbies in order to discredit studies showing that global warming was caused by human action.
At that time, a climate skeptic was simply an individual who did not believe that global warming existed, or who believed humans played no role in it. That is still the definition in many dictionaries, such as in the French dictionary Le Larousse.
The sociologist Riley Dunlap explains that skepticism and denial are not fixed categories, since some individuals are only partially skeptical while others are completely in denial. Stefan Rahmstorf divided climate skepticism into three categories: doubts about the existence of global warming itself, doubts about its attribution (whether humans caused it or the natural cycles of the Earth), and doubts about its effective impact (we have all heard “it is not that deep”, “not that urgent”). Another study added a fourth important form of skepticism: doubts that our actions can make a real difference.
In 2020, a scientific article titled “Discourses of climate delay” was published, and identifies something essential: climate skepticism and denial are now associated with new strategies in order to redirect responsibility (“It’s not our fault, they should act first”), promote non-transformative changes, emphasize on the issues of climate policies, and surrender (“It’s too late anyway”). This represents a kind of shift from denial to deflection, delay and doom.
It is therefore easy to understand that climate change and global warming are not only a physical environmental phenomenon. They are also political, social and cultural. Nowadays, it is increasingly a matter of communication, as more and more studies showcase the connection between environmentalism, sociology, political communication and theories of influence and disinformation.
“It’s too late” is not just a disinformation strategy: it is also something many of us genuinely feel. Researchers describe the broader distress about the environmental situation as “eco-anxiety” which can ultimately lead to the belief that nothing can be done anymore: this is doomism.
- Eco-anxiety
Eco-anxiety is an established field of research for scientists. It can be measured and has been studied on large scale. In “The Lancet Planetary Health”, 10 000 young people between 16 and 25 years old across 10 countries (Australia, Brazil, Finland, France, India, Nigeria, Philippines, Portugal, the UK, and the USA; 1000 participants per country) were surveyed. The results are striking: 59% of respondents said they were very or extremely worried about climate change. 45% said these feelings affect their daily lives. In general, many respondents reported negative emotions; feeling afraid, sad, anxious, angry, powerless, helpless, and guilty were each reported by more than 50% of respondents.
Eco-anxiety is not imaginary and it is not irrational. It affects a specific and important part of our generation and resonates with the discourses explained above (delay, deflection, doom…). The risk is not that we worry too much, but rather that our worry turns into resignation, a resignation that those who benefit from inaction have every interest in maintaining.
In my opinion, these previous concepts and studies help understand certain important ideas. They show that the many efforts from scientists and environmental activists have helped to raise awareness and to bring environmental issues to the forefront of public debate. However, there is still a lot to be done and it is our turn, as the new generation, to step up. Doubt has taken a new form: we do not doubt that climate change is real, but we doubt that we can do anything about it. And that is when disinformation comes into play.
Can disinformation be true?
Statements such as “China pollutes more than we do”, or “My individual efforts won’t change anything” are not entirely false, unlike “the climate is not changing”. Strictly speaking, they are not part of disinformation as they do contain some truth, but they all lead to the same conclusion: do NOTHING.
Misleading people is not just about spreading false information, but also about presenting the truth in a way that can discourage action. Therefore, we should ask ourselves: who is benefiting from such spread of information? Certain strategies have been documented. For example, the concept of “individual carbon footprint” has often been promoted by oil lobbies. It is a clever way to shift responsibility onto each one of us. Greenwashing works in the same way: certain products are “carbon neutral” or “100% sustainable”, making us believe that the issue is being solved or that there is no emergency.
The same goes for doomism. It is not necessarily created by an actor but it clearly serves a purpose for those who have an interest in inaction. They do not need to deny it: they can just let discouragement do the work. Climate disinformation is therefore not gone, but it is more diffuse, and the separation between manipulated discourse and legitimate worry is getting thinner.
Scientifically, “too late” does not exist. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) states that each small increase in global temperature creates bigger risks. Certain losses are irreversible but there is no limit beyond which action becomes pointless. Every fraction of a degree we avoid helps to shape the future we will live in. And action is not only good for the planet. Collective action, through an association, a project or a demonstration helps to suffer less from eco-anxiety. Worrying is not the issue, it is a normal feeling when facing a threat. The problem begins the moment these worries turn into resignation.
Next time the little voice tells you that it is useless to make any effort, ask yourself: who benefits from your giving in?
References
Capstick, S. B., & Pidgeon, N. F. (2014). What is climate change scepticism? Examination of the concept using a mixed methods study of the UK public. Global Environmental Change, 24, 389–401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.08.012
Dunlap, R. E. (2013). Climate Change Skepticism and Denial: An Introduction: An Introduction. American Behavioral Scientist, 57(6), 691-698. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213477097
Dunlap, R. E., & Brulle, R. J. (2020). Sources and amplifiers of climate change denial. Research handbook on communicating climate change, 49-61.
Dunlap, R. E., & McCright, A. M. (2011). Organized climate change denial. In J. S. Dryzek, R. B. Norgaard, & D. Schlosberg (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society (pp. 144–160). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199566600.003.0010
Hickman, C., Marks, E., Pihkala, P., Clayton, S., Lewandowski, R. E., Mayall, E. E., Wray, B., Mellor, C., & van Susteren, L. (2021). Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: A global survey. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(12), e863–e873. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00278-3
Hornsey, M. J., & Lewandowsky, S. (2022). A toolkit for understanding and addressing climate scepticism. Nature human behaviour, 6(11), 1454-1464.
Jehel, L., & Guidère, M. (2024). Les jeunes générations atteintes d’éco-anxiété : que faire ? Médecine de Catastrophe – Urgences Collectives, 8(2), 149–156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pxur.2024.03.001
Lamb, W. F., Mattioli, G., Levi, S., Roberts, J. T., Capstick, S., Creutzig, F., Minx, J. C., Müller-Hansen, F., Culhane, T., & Steinberger, J. K. (2020). Discourses of climate delay. Global Sustainability, 3, e17. https://doi.org/10.1017/sus.2020.13
Schiffman, R. (2021, January 13). Climate deniers shift tactics to “inactivism”. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-deniers-shift-tactics-to-inactivism/