Climate Change Messaging

"The Global Fashion Summit, which is typically dominated by large brands offering up a relentlessly optimistic prognosis on the industry’s climate efforts, was unusually downbeat this year... To be sure, advocates for a greener, kinder fashion industry have quietly acknowledged that the movement was struggling for a while. But they held out hope that moves to toughen up regulation would keep forcing things forward. This year, that has all but evaporated," writes Sarah Kent for The Business of Fashion following last week's event. It would be lying to say this wasn't a really visceral feeling in Copenhagen this year. It was a sombre affair with a lot of talk about regulatory rollbacks, team cuts and Trump's tariffs. There were also a lot of people noticeably absent, which Sarah puts down to "squeezed travel budgets and fear (few executives appeared willing to weigh in on an increasingly politically charged topic where there is little positive to say". Her story is, I feel, a really important read right now. While we clamour on about action over conversation, even the conversation about action is getting tough when the environment in which we're operating is under so much pressure. https://lnkd.in/gr-gBBdU Rather than just a pessimistic post, however, I want to point to another piece in BoF last week by Maxine Bédat, which is so central to addressing all of this. "Dear Fashion CEOs, Stop Undermining Climate Action" she calls for in her Op-Ed. https://lnkd.in/gwNCuj22 "In a period of economic and political uncertainty, businesses are stepping back, greenhushing and deprioritising climate programmes. It is clear change won’t come without political support. Real climate leadership from brands means recognising this, speaking out and calling for regulatory change. Instead, many trade groups — including those that represent brands with publicly progressive climate policies — are actively lobbying to undermine tougher environmental regulations, leaning into the political narrative that stiffer oversight is bad for business," she writes. She calls for the industry to not only navigate the turbulence but show up in the storm and lead. The adoption of the French fast fashion bill this week, even in the face of huge lobbying against it, is a ray of light showing that it CAN be done. #sustainablefashion #policy #advocacy #lobbying #sustainability Pictured: On stage at GFS talking "reimagining product realities" exploring how textile waste can not only be addressed and reduced, but valorised. Huge kudos especially to Yayra Agbofah from THE REVIVAL in Ghana for just massively calling out how our flooding of such second hand markets is a failure of the system we're in, not to mention how many solutions are already in action in the Global South if we are willing to work together on them.

The era of "casual climate language" is over. Terms like "carbon neutral," once a badge of leadership, are now a liability. We're seeing this play out in high-profile lawsuits against companies like Delta Air Lines and EnergyAustralia, who are being challenged for using offsets to market their products as green. Even Apple, with its carefully crafted brand image, recently faced a German court ruling that its "carbon neutral" Apple Watch claim was misleading due to the short-term nature of its offsets. This is a pivotal moment; the credibility of a company’s climate action is no longer just about its targets, but rather about the language it uses to describe them. Take, for example - 🟢 A recent report found that only 53% of the UK public can correctly define “net-zero.” 🟢 Klarna, for example, avoids "carbon neutral" and instead applies an internal "carbon fee" to fund high-integrity climate projects, positioning its efforts as a financial contribution rather than a compensatory claim. 🟢 Microsoft, in outlining its strategy, emphasizes that deep emissions reductions come first, with carbon removals reserved for addressing truly residual emissions. This kind of transparency builds stakeholder trust. 🟢 Brands like Nestlé and easyJet have also dropped “carbon neutral” pledges, acknowledging that the term no longer aligns with consumer expectations. This shift signals a move toward a new lexicon—one that is humble, verifiable, and clear. For those of us in the industry, this is a call to action. We must advocate for and implement precise, **simple**, and honest communication that truly reflects what we're doing. This matters because the risk of getting it wrong can lead to greenhushing— whereby companies go quiet on their sustainability efforts to avoid scrutiny. This is something you've likely heard me call out before. To be clear - I think the ambition towards "carbon neutrality" is awesome, and we should applaud these companies' efforts. Instead, we can't let the fear of not being perfect become the enemy of the good. While consumers care deeply about sustainability, research shows they prioritize tangible actions like more sustainable packaging and reduced waste over complex carbon metrics and accounting. The only way to move forward is with radical transparency and a commitment to speaking a language of action, not just aspiration. Check out this great op ed in ESG Dive - https://lnkd.in/ermaxtuZ #Sustainability #CircularEconomy #Greenwashing #CorporateStrategy #ClimateAction

Discourses of Climate Delay 🌎 Discourses of climate delay subtly undermine urgent climate action by framing it as either unnecessary, too disruptive, or impossible to achieve. These narratives don't deny climate change but instead promote inaction through complex messaging, effectively slowing progress toward meaningful environmental goals. One common approach is to redirect responsibility. This discourse suggests that the burden of action lies primarily with individuals or other entities, rather than addressing the systemic changes required from industries and governments. By focusing on personal responsibility alone, broader, impactful initiatives can be sidelined. Another tactic is to emphasize the downsides of change, portraying climate action as a source of economic hardship or social disruption. This discourages support for essential policies by highlighting potential challenges rather than long-term benefits, impeding collective progress. The push for non-transformative solutions is also prevalent. This narrative often suggests superficial fixes, like minor fossil fuel improvements, as adequate steps. By promoting incremental changes rather than systemic transformation, these approaches can delay necessary shifts in energy and resource management. Finally, surrender narratives frame climate change as an unsolvable problem, encouraging resignation rather than action. This viewpoint implies that adaptation is the only feasible response, discouraging mitigation efforts. Addressing these delay discourses requires a clear focus on accountability, transformative solutions, and sustained commitment. Recognizing these tactics is critical to advancing genuine progress in climate action. #sustainability #sustainable #business #esg #climatechange #climateaction

We have been telling people the world is ending. And then wondering why they feel paralyzed. A review published in Sustainable Development, by Su, Kaburu, and colleagues across institutions in China, Ireland, Australia, Brazil, and beyond, takes on one of the quieter contradictions in climate action: the communication strategies meant to mobilize people may be actively undermining their capacity to act. The argument is not that climate urgency is overstated. It is that fear, deployed as the default register of climate messaging, produces a paradox. It captures attention, briefly, and then generates the very psychological conditions that make sustained engagement impossible. Eco-anxiety, helplessness, climate doomism, the belief that it is already too late and that responsibility therefore belongs to no one, are not failures of audience character. They are predictable responses to a communication environment that offers apocalypse without agency. The numbers are uncomfortable to sit with. A survey of 10,000 young people across 10 countries found that 59% were very or extremely worried about climate change, and over half reported feeling sad, anxious, angry, powerless, or guilty. These are not people who lack awareness. They are people drowning in it, without a clear sense of what their hands can actually do. The paper proposes a reorientation: toward messaging that is positive, personal, and people-centred. Positive, not in the sense of denial or false reassurance, but in the psychological sense, mobilizing hope, curiosity, and joy as motivational states rather than fear and guilt. Personal, meaning closing the distance between the crisis and the individual, moving away from glaciers and polar bears toward the concrete texture of daily life, health, food, cost of living, the morning coffee. People-centred, meaning grounded in what people can actually do, within their real agency and real constraints. This is precisely where Eco-Affective Health thinking enters. The field has long understood that emotional states are not incidental to environmental behavior. They are the medium through which the relationship between people and their environment is negotiated. Fear activates threat responses, which can produce short bursts of protective action, but sustained engagement with a long-horizon problem like climate change requires something different: a felt sense of efficacy, of connection, of meaning. These are broaden-and-build emotions, as the paper frames it, states that expand the repertoire of possible responses rather than narrowing it to fight or flight. Article link: https://lnkd.in/d98vMNAG Follow our work at ewahlab.com #EWAHLab #EcoAffectiveHealth #ClimateCommunication #ClimateAnxiety #PlanetaryHealth #ClimateMentalHealth #EcoAnxiety #ClimateAction #EnvironmentalPsychology #PublicHealth #GlobalSouth

🌍 Why Nature and the Environment Need to Be on the Political Agenda Yesterday, on World Environment Day, Lord Goldsmith's interview on Newsnight shed light on the urgent issue of Climate change and Nature loss. He emphasised how these crucial topics often take a backseat to immediate concerns like housing and healthcare during election campaigns. However, the environmental crisis remains a pressing issue that demands our immediate attention and action. 📢 'It doesn't matter how many solar panels you put up, how many wind turbines you build. If we lose the Amazon, if we lose the Congo Basin... it's game over.' - Lord Goldsmith While immediate issues dominate election discussions, it's crucial to keep pressuring future governments to prioritise environmental policies. Environmental politics often focus narrowly on carbon emissions, ignoring critical ecosystems like the Congo Basin and the Amazon. Preserving these is vital for global ecological balance. If I were an MP advocating for the protection and restoration of the environment, I would emphasise the direct impact of Climate change and Nature loss on our daily lives in the UK, both now and over the next five years. In 2024, we are already witnessing the consequences: travel delays due to flooding, the alarming fact that you are six times more likely to be flooded than burgled, and rising insurance premiums, which increase by 15% annually. Homes are becoming uninsurable, droughts are reducing food production and driving inflation, and our rivers are becoming more polluted, compromising water quality and ecosystems. These examples highlight the urgent need for robust environmental policies to create a UK worth living in. Do you agree that the environment is important and should be on the next government's agenda? #ClimateChange #EnvironmentalPolicy #UKPolitics #Sustainability #Elections2024 #WorldEnvironmentDay #GenerationRestoration #NatureAction #NaturalCapital #NatureRestoration #EnvironmentalImpact #ProtectOurPlanet #2forNature

New research analysed how companies talk about net-zero. The result? Firms often describe net-zero as a “journey” or “ambition”, signalling aspiration and intent rather than concrete actions. Framing net-zero as a "journey" downplays the scale and urgency of the change that is needed to address the climate crisis. The study shows that the net-zero corporate discourse is made up of weakly-committal language (e.g., talking about "ambitions") that put aspirations, rather than actions and impacts into the centre of communication. Firms' net-zero communication leans heavily on techno-optimism, emphasizing innovations and efficiency gains as the main solutions, rather than addressing systemic change today. The high level of strategic ambiguity in net-zero communication serves different functions (e.g., diverting, downplaying, legitiziming). Not surprising, then, that the oil and gas sector was found to exhibit the highest average frequency of net-zero mentions... === Article (Open Access): https://lnkd.in/d6xKhqvW

🌍 "Reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases may be almost impossible without a green transition—a substantial transformation of consumption and production patterns." This powerful opening from Prof. Timothy Besley and Prof. Torsten Persson’s latest QJE paper sets the stage for a bold, fresh look at climate policy. In "The Political Economics of Green Transitions", they move beyond the usual focus on carbon taxes, exploring how societal values, political cycles, and market forces combine to either support or hinder a greener future. Their model offers actionable insights on why some green policies fall short—and what it takes to overcome those barriers. 🔍 Their policy recommendations? Flexible, adaptive policies that go beyond financial incentives. Public campaigns to nurture green values. Bipartisan commitments to prevent policy reversals. And importantly, reducing lobbying power from high-polluting industries to keep policy aligned with public interest. For a deep dive into how these insights can shape sustainable policymaking, check out the full article 👇 #GreenTransition 🌱 #ClimatePolicy #SustainabilityMatters #PoliticalEconomy

📊 What this means for carbon reduction and industry 🔹 Renewables growth: India aims for ~500+ GW non-fossil capacity by 2030, putting clean energy at the core of power expansion. 🔹 Emissions Intensity Pathway: The Budget funding reinforces India’s commitment to a ~45% reduction in emissions intensity by 2030 (from 2005 baselines) — translating to roughly 2.5–3% annual improvements in energy and carbon productivity. 🔹 Hard-to-Abate Sectors: Steel, cement, chemicals, fertilisers, refineries and power — which together contribute ~60–70% of industrial CO₂ emissions — now have fiscal and policy nudges toward low-carbon tech (CCUS, green hydrogen, electrification). 🔹 Trade & Competitiveness: Goods entering premium export markets — especially the EU and G7 — now face stricter carbon requirements like CBAM compliance. This Budget strengthens the domestic ability to meet those standards. 🧠 Why this Budget matters for sustainability professionals This is not “environment spending” as an afterthought. This is climate risk being priced into national strategy through: ✔ Funding for technologies that reduce absolute emissions ✔ Support for infrastructure that enables green industrialisation ✔ Measurement, reporting, and verification systems for carbon data ✔ Market mechanisms that reward performance, not promises It pushes us from targets and declarations to practice and performance. At Constructivist, we help organisations convert these budgetary and policy signals into actionable strategies: 🔹 Design carbon capture and industrial decarbonisation roadmaps 🔹 Build decision-grade emissions inventories (product + site + supply chain) 🔹 Align operations with compliance landscapes like CBAM and future carbon pricing 🔹 Embed lifecycle thinking and sustainable design into core processes Because budgets shape incentives — but strategy shapes outcomes. Winning in this new era means making climate readiness a business differentiator, not a compliance burden. #UnionBudget2026 #ClimateAction #CarbonMarkets #IndustrialDecarbonisation #SustainableGrowth #Infrastructure #EnergyTransition #Manufacturing #ESG #NetZero #Constructivist

As the Dutch elections on October 29 draw near, the energy transition is losing political spotlight, even though its outcomes will shape the country’s next decade. Energy remains on party agendas, though the focus is shifting to cost of living, housing, and migration, as the gas crisis recedes from memory. Parties’ positions on energy have stayed largely consistent compared to the last elections. Here’s where the top six political parties stand: 🌍 Most parties want to maintain current climate goals. GL/PvdA argues for higher ambition, while PVV and JA21 would disregard them altogether. ⚡ Among the parties supporting the targets, there’s broad consensus on the need for continued support for solar parks and offshore wind energy, and hydrogen to decarbonise the Dutch energy system. 🌬️ On onshore wind, positions are split, as it also faces resistance from the VVD, which successfully pushed a parliamentary motion on distance standards, effectively reducing search areas by 80%. 🏭 CDA and VVD explicitly back Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) for industry as a way to meet emission targets. Others are less vocal (D66, GL/PvdA, JA21) or oppose it (PVV). ☢️ Nuclear power's political momentum continues. Most parties support new nuclear plants and JA21 leads the charge with ambitions for 20 GW in 25 years (reminiscent of earlier 'who has the biggest’ contests in offshore wind). 💶 On additional CO₂ pricing for industry a familiar left–right split remains. GL/PvdA and D66 support keeping the CO₂ levy to accelerate decarbonisation, while others favour abolishing it to protect industrial competitiveness. 🔌 Grid congestion is recognised by all parties as an issue, and most parties now highlight the need for faster grid expansion, smarter planning, and flexibility solutions such as storage and demand management to keep the transition moving. Even if the energy transition has faded slightly from the campaign spotlight, it remains a defining issue for the next Dutch government and society. Based on the commonalities in the largest parties, expect more focus on nuclear power, competitiveness, and grid reliability in the years ahead. If you’re wondering how these shifts might affect your strategy or investments in the Netherlands’ energy market, feel free to reach out to me. #Verkiezingen #EnergyPolicy #EnergyTransition Aurora Energy Research