Civil society sounds the climate alarm
A finding that calls for a response
Considered as a "survival guide" for mankind by UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, the IPCC report is also a stark indicator of the inadequacy of climate action by public authorities and economic players. The ecological transition has not yet taken place: global CO2 emissions are reaching record levels every year, and the world's major oil groups continue to plan new hydrocarbon drilling operations, jeopardizing compliance with greenhouse gas emission reduction targets.
Nevertheless, for Patricia Crifo, Professor of Economics at École Polytechnique, and Deputy Director of the Energy4Climate Center, there is still time to act: "We often read that there is a decades-long climate slump, and that efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will be somewhat futile in short-to-medium term," she observes. "While many changes due to past and future greenhouse gas emissions are indeed irreversible (notably on oceans, ice caps and global sea levels), the report points out that if we cut emissions sharply and quickly, this will have visible effects on air quality within a few years, on global surface temperature within about twenty years, and on many other climate impact factors in the longer term. We can therefore act on our climate future, and every action counts."
Sobriety and individual responsibility
As Julie Mayer, Senior Lecturer at the I3-CRG department (IP Paris) points out, "the IPCC places sobriety as one of the levers for action. This notion of sobriety focuses on what individuals can change in different areas of their lifestyles, so as to reduce their daily consumption. Whether it's by limiting the use of electronic devices or transport, or even by changing their diet, by reducing their consumption of meat, or by choosing local products".
Multinationals have long emphasized individual responsibility as a way of avoiding hard law regulations. Embracing the rhetoric of activist movements, some of these companies have called on people to "get involved" and "continue the fight" through eco-responsible actions. In 2004, oil company British Petroleum (BP) launched the promotion of a new concept: the "carbon footprint". By providing a carbon footprint calculator, BP enables individuals to measure the impact their daily actions have on the environment.
Incentives or nudges are envisioned to discreetly influence individual behavior and spur change. Julie Mayer puts this approach into perspective: "The IPCC report underlines two key points: firstly, that sobriety cannot be focused on individual behavior. Indeed, how can we expect individuals to become sober if the system in which they live is not? Secondly, the report points out that efforts to reduce consumption, with a view to a fair and sustainable transition, are unlikely to be the same from one population to another: multiple factors, such as wealth status, need to be taken into account".
But however useful it may be for individuals to commit to a low-carbon lifestyle, it's the whole social and technical system that needs to be radically transformed. This requires collective investment and regulation, which is the responsibility of the State and of companies.
The reaction of civil society
A growing number of citizens have clearly understood that it is dangerously counter-productive to place the sole responsibility for action on individuals, when it is urgent to act on the structural causes of the problem, generated by an economic system based on fossil fuels. The results of the Citizens' Climate Convention were a step in this direction: after nine months' work, an ambitious set of 149 proposals was developed, aimed at proposing a new model to " fundamentally change society" and respond to the climate crisis. This has made it all the more difficult to get back to reality: despite the promises made, the legislation resulting from the proposals shows a crying lack of ambition and realism in the face of the climate emergency.
Faced with the accelerating consequences of climate change, civil society has observed that its methods of action have failed for decades: climate marches, petitions and NGO awareness-raising campaigns are not enough. As a result, new initiatives are springing up on both sides of the legal divide.
The law is thus becoming a tool for forcing governments and polluting companies to take action. Inspired by the conviction of the Netherlands under the Urgenda case, climate litigation is multiplying around the world. In France, the Affaire du Siècle has attracted unprecedented public support, with its petition gathering over 2 million signatures. In October 2021, the courts recognized for the first time that the French government was at fault in failing to meet its greenhouse gas reduction commitments, and ordered France to remedy the consequences of its climate inaction. Local authorities and associations are also taking legal action against TotalEnergies, calling on the multinational to take the necessary measures to drastically reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.
At the same time, a new generation is determined to sound the alarm by multiplying shock actions. Whether activists, students or ordinary citizens, they are alerting the public to the urgency of the situation with a range of methods and a common goal: to influence decision-makers and awaken public opinion. Adept at civil disobedience, activists no longer hesitate to raise their voice through repeated symbolic actions: road or industrial site blockades, eco-sabotage, sit-ins at Defense Zones, or happenings at cultural or sporting events. Long confined to a form of neutrality, the scientific community is now taking part in the movement, as with the "Scientists in Rebellion" collective.
In recent months, road blockades have multiplied in France and abroad. By disrupting the daily lives of their fellow citizens, the stated aim is to draw attention to the climate emergency, focusing for example on a consensual demand such as the thermal renovation of buildings. Given the heightened sense of urgency, the legitimacy of these actions among public opinion is strengthened, all the more so as their target group are the wealthiest, whose lifestyles are considered "above ground": golf course holes plugged with cement, deflated SUV tires or gutted Jacuzzis were among the actions of summer 2022.
Faced with a political and economic system that doesn't seem to grasp the urgency of the situation, some see a shift to more radical modes of action as the ultimate means of exerting pressure, even if it means creating rifts within the environmental movement itself.
The NGO way
As Nicolas Mottis, professor at École Polytechnique, points out, "These are organizations that often have stable convictions and a very long-term horizon, which is not always the case with companies. They sometimes make their voices heard through spectacular, high-profile actions. Intervening in companies' general meetings, conventionally or otherwise, has become an essential lever. A second, lesser-known lever is the dialogue they try to engage in with company directors - without always succeeding. In this case, they try to shift the focus of dialogue from marginal functions such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) or communications, to general, financial or strategic management. While some companies accept this, for others this dialogue remains confined to peripheral functions, which seems to me to be a strategic error. NGOs also engage in a great deal of dialogue with regulators and governments, which ends up promoting a number of major issues."
Consumers, citizens, associations: civil society is eager to play its part in climate action. All that remains is to find effective governance adapted to each culture and context.
This article is part of a series published around the second REFLEXIONS conference organized by Institut Polytechnique de Paris on June 9, 2023.
Discover other articles in the series:
- Climate change: from awareness to governance
- Green finance, the driving force behind the transition?