Does protesting about climate change achieve anything? I ask because, after half a year of virtual climate strikes due to the pandemic, the Fridays for Future movement and Greta Thunberg last month resumed protests in person. And on 1 September, Extinction Rebellion (XR) marked the end of months of virtual events by returning to the streets of London.
XR’s protests went ahead despite restrictions at the time on people gathering in groups of more than 30, and have seen police make about 600 arrests. But, arguably, the biggest splash came on Saturday when the group blockaded newspaper printworks, delaying the distribution of The Times, The Daily Telegraph and other titles – and igniting a furious backlash from Boris Johnson, journalists and more.
That is why this week’s Fix the Planet isn’t about ways to make farming greener or decarbonise our cars, but about social science and whether environmental protesting offers an effective Fix.
|
|
|
|
Extinction Rebellion protestors outside Shell's office in London on 8 September. Photo: Mike Kemp/In Pictures via Getty Images
|
|
What does history tell us about the effectiveness of environmental protest?
Environmental protests often focus on planned infrastructure at a specific site, such as an oil and gas well. They often lose individual fights but still have a wider impact, says Graeme Hayes at Aston University in Birmingham, UK. The anti-roads movement of the 1990s in the UK is a classic example, he says. Campaigners suffered defeat after defeat on bypass after bypass. “And yet it fundamentally changed the government’s attitude towards road-building. What very often happens is it affects the wider political context for decision-making and brings in a different set of parameters that have to be taken into account,” says Hayes.
What impact have XR and Fridays for the Future had so far?
“What stood out for me was the public attitudes polling – a significant jump in April, and remaining high,” says Robin Webster at social science group Climate Outreach, referring to the environment rising to be seen as the third most important issue facing the country last year. The record high followed XR’s protests in Easter 2019, Thunberg’s speech to the UK parliament and a flagship climate TV show with David Attenborough. Levels of concern stayed high but have fallen since covid-19, with health, the economy, Brexit and immigration all rising. That could be down to the “finite pool of worry” – the idea people can only worry about so many things at once – says Webster. She adds the shift is unsurprising given the pandemic, and doesn’t show that people are no longer concerned about climate change (government polling in June suggests she is right).
Another impact she cites is people being willing to say they agree with a climate emergency – many local and national governments declared one last year. The protests have also given people the “social consent” to start conversations about climate change with people who wouldn’t talk about it normally (“your auntie at the BBQ”), she says.
On the other hand, none of XR’s three demands have been met, which include an earlier target for reaching net-zero emissions. Andrea Brock at the University of Sussex, UK, is critical of the group’s focus on calling on government to do things. Historically, she says, social movements have been more effective when they take action to stop things. “More inspiring is people stopping illegal hunting, shutting down coal mines, people who stopped fracking, she says.
She is more enthusiastic about Fridays for Future, which she says has had a huge impact, partly by making other groups ashamed for not speaking up (there are now Grandparents for Future and Scientists for Future movements to name just two).
|
|
|
|
The pandemic has pushed the environment (the dark green line) down the top issues concerning the public in the UK. Respondents to this YouGov survey are only able to pick three issues.
|
|
Is all publicity good publicity?
XR claimed that last weekend’s blockade of newspaper printing presses was justified because: “The papers we have targeted are not reflecting the scale and urgency of what is happening to our planet.” Most of the reaction, from the newspapers affected, politicians and academics, condemned the move as an ill-judged attack on the free press. There are echoes of the angry response to the divisive protest by XR activists disrupting early morning commuters in London last October.
Webster says: “It’s very easy with climate campaigning to get into the state of mind that’s like ‘all publicity is good publicity’. What the history of climate campaigning is showing us is that’s emphatically not true.” She says the protest was one of the few things that has broken through in media coverage on climate change lately, but is undecided on its wisdom. Having “big fights” about other issues – such as freedom of the press – could be a distraction from debate about sufficient action on climate change, she adds.
Personally, I think XR was in the wrong here. It should engage rather than try to block media titles whose climate change coverage it doesn’t like.
What happens now?
XR is protesting until the end of this week, and Fridays for the Future are still striking weekly. In coming months, a big challenge will be that finite pool of worry. Hayes points to the difficulty of climate protests setting the agenda when coming months are likely to see a second wave of covid-19 cases, job losses amid the economic turbulence and the fallout from the UK possibly leaving the EU without a trade deal.
Hayes says things have to change for XR, because not enough people are turning out and interest is diminishing. “The mobilisation strategy around the rebellions was a failure last week,” he says. That is partly due to covid-19, a changed political context and doing the same thing over and over and expecting the same response, he says. Hayes thinks the key will be building alliances with other groups and parts of society, and building momentum around next year’s COP26 climate talks. “I think it’s about the long slow process of movement-building, he says.
Webster agrees. “What we are seeing now is if you use the same models and actions there are decreasing returns,” she says. Protesters will have to become ever more creative, rather than more extreme, to have influence, she adds. “I suspect they may well, and should, evolve.”
|
|
1.
Taxes on flights that increase when people fly further and more often should be introduced to help cut carbon emissions, the UK’s first citizens’ assembly on climate change has recommended.
2.
Latin America is expected to see some of the strongest growth in renewables globally in the next five years, analysts think. Buoyed by government auctions, renewables capacity could jump from 49 gigawatts today to 123GW by 2025, much of it in Brazil and Mexico, Rystad Energy suggests.
3.
The UK could reap a £320 billion boon from developing a green hydrogen industry ( read this to see what that means), according to a report by a UK government-backed body this week. I’m currently reporting on the new hype around hydrogen for a New Scientist feature, so contact me if you’d like to talk.
4.
A bid to build an opencast coal mine in north-east England, near Druridge Bay, was refused planning permission on Tuesday ( it’s not the first time).
|
|
|
Next week, I’m going to look at how solar power is returning from the dead in the UK. Got an idea for what you’d like to read after that? Please tell me.
Email me on the address below, tweet me or send a message on Facebook.
|
|
|
|
