Do people need to change their behaviour if we are to meet our carbon targets? Apparently not, according to UK Prime Minister, Sir Keir Starmer, in his recent Times interview at COP29. But is it realistic to think we can achieve these targets without causing disruption to people’s lives? Is disruption even a bad thing? Our Green Watch team investigated:
In his interview, conducted during his visit to the COP29 summit in Baku, Starmer was asked:
“Is it really realistic to think you can hit your new carbon target without any change to how people live their everyday lives?”
He responded with the following:
“Yes, of course it is. And the target is my target, and the plan is my plan. I’m not borrowing from somebody else’s plan. I don’t think that as we tackle this really important issue, the way to do it is to tell people how to run their lives and instruct them how to behave. I’m not going to do that. I made a commitment before the election and shortly after the election that we’d be a government that trod lightly on people’s lives and I’m not going to now go around telling people how to live their lives. I do think that the single most important milestone in hitting the target we’ve set out today is clean power 2030 which I know is tough … I’m absolutely sure we can do it.”
This response highlights the nervousness being felt amongst many political leaders. They must accept that people may need to alter their behaviours in order to meet the scale and urgency of the change required. Governments, whether they like it or not, are best placed to articulate that need.
The Prime Minister’s purpose in visiting COP was to announce an update on the UKs NDCs. He is, now committing the country to reach 81% reduction on 1995 levels by 2035. Is it naïve to say that we can achieve this change without impacting people’s lives as Starmer claims?
Previous CCC reports have suggested that behaviour change is key to transition to a lower carbon economy. It also stated that Government has a pivotal role in communicating and adopting these choices.
Their 2024 policy recommendations includes the following;
Improve public engagement on low-carbon choices. Empower people to make low-carbon choices by communicating the most impactful ways to reduce emissions, such as changing car travel, home energy use and dietary behaviours and reducing air travel, and support people to make these choices including through regulation and incentives. The Government should lead by example by visibly adopting these low-carbon choices.
The current Government appears to be putting a lot of its faith in the decarbonisation of the power grid. But even the ambitious rollout of renewables will impact people’s lives and may not be welcomed.
Research has repeatedly shown that British people recognise the need for climate action. They generally accept change when presented with a case for it. Research also shows that treating energy policies simply in terms of cost benefit analysis may be a misstep. People are much more open to change when it is expressed in terms of the co-benefits of transition. Models such as the “Wellbeing Economy” start to quantify the reasons for change as wider societal benefits. This gives greater ownership to the communities involved.
The City of Doncaster’s excellent Climate Change Team surveyed local people. They sought opinions on what the top actions should be. There were 972 responses to the survey. The top four categories identified were:
Reducing Material Consumption – 775 votes Reducing Energy Consumption, including through interventions like insulation, but also behaviour change – 753 votes Changing Travel Habits – 508 votes (Top of this selection was ‘fly less‘ – a topic our Green Watch team also covered) Altering Food and Diet – 348 votes
None of these are passive options. They all, in some way, recognise the need to change behaviours, habits, choices or how we live.
The survey also asked people what the barriers to action were. The top answers were finance and being unsure of what would be most impactful. There is clearly a role for someone to step in and provide education and advice. This could be seen as telling people how to live their lives. But, if they are actively seeking advice, isn’t it simply meeting the needs of the public?
We are even seeing a campaign to bring back public information films to help educate the public on the climate crisis.
Time will tell if the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, himself a Doncaster MP, and the Prime Minister can pivot into the leadership roles we as a country and the planet need. In the wake of the US Presidential Election there is a vacuum on the international stage that could be filled by leaders who are willing to make the case for change as good, for disruption as a positive and for urgent action.