Explaining climate inaction
Facts: moral disengagement -> climate inaction š¤·š»āļø | Feelings: Climate excluded š©š§± | Action: Make it easy to say YES! š§šš½
Hi from the train to Paris! Iām on my EuroTour 2023 to Paris, Brussels & Exeter. Get in touch if Iām coming to your city and you want to host a talk or book club!
Before we dive in, a quick practical note on We Can Fix It (the awesome climate advice newsletter from me, climate scientist Kim Nicholas, that youāre reading right now).
Recently, a bunch of readers have told me they want to support my work here, and generously pledged their financial support for We Can Fix It. Thank you!!!
Iāve decided Iām activating the option to accept reader payments. Let me explain why.
Iāve been writing this newsletter for almost 3 years, for free. Itās a labor of love to get actionable, evidence-based climate advice out in the world.
A reader, Daniel, wrote me this week about āthe team at wecanfixit.substack.com,ā but this Substack is 100% made by me! Each issue takes me 10+ hours of work to plan, research, write, edit, fact-check, design, publish, and share. (Shout out to my talented friends Cara and Emma whoāve donated their design skills for the logo and a figure, respectively. <3)
I would love to expand the work Iām doing here, and I have tons of ideas for ways to make it better, but I donāt have the capacity to make it happen as a solo volunteer.
If you find this Substack valuable, and if you are in a position to financially support it, I would be honored if you click the button below to become a paid subscriber. If youāre not, no stress. Thank you!!
Moral disengagement ā climate inaction
Why donāt more people act on climate?
One reason may be moral disengagementātreating climate change like a distant problem for other people to solve, using one of eight mechanisms to reduce oneās own feelings of guilt. Moral disengagement also reduces efficacy (ability to act) and climate actionāin your own lifestyle, and in political engagement. And it can be used to rationalize and uphold climate inaction (like not participating as a climate citizen) and harmful behavior (like continuing luxury emissions).
Thatās my quick summary of a research field dating back to the 1990s. Moral disengagement theory grew out of Banduraās social cognitive theory, which holds that moral standards can shape behavior. Basically, people want to be moral. They use morals to assess their own actions as right or wrong; acting in line with morals increases self-esteem and social acceptance.
Here Iām drawing especially on a classic psychology paper by Bandura and colleagues from 1996, and a recent paper on moral disengagement and climate change by two Australian psychologists, Zoe Leviston and Iain Walker. As they write, understanding how climate change is moralized matters, because:
āPolitical debate about climate change and the need to act remains rooted in moral discourses.ā ā Zoe Leviston and Iain Walker
How moral engagement increases climate action
To consider an action a moral issue, you need intent (you did it on purpose) and awareness of its consequences. You also need to consider the issue personally relevant.
The Australian study found that increased moral engagement increased a sense of efficacy (āI matterā, āIndividuals matter,ā) and responsibility, and increased climate actionā from decreasing driving to joining climate movements. It also increased a sense of guilt, which may play a role in driving these behaviors.

On the other hand, moral disengagement decreases all the good stuff: climate action, a sense of efficacy. But it decreases guilt, which the theoryās founder hypothesized was one of its main purposes. (The original 1996 study found moral disengagement increases harmful actions and aggression. Like the world needs more of thatā¦!)
Now, how do people wiggle out of a moral framing?
8 mechanisms for moral disengagement, with climate examples
1.Ā Ā Ā Ā Justification: āThe ends justify the means.ā āThere was an economic benefit, so the climate harm doesnāt matter.ā
2.Ā Ā Ā Ā Advantageous comparison: āExxon/Elon is worse.ā āItās the lesser of two evils.ā
3.Ā Ā Ā Ā Euphemistic labelling: think āgreen flying,ā ācarbon neutral.ā Basically greenwashing to make things sound less harmful.
4.Ā Ā Ā Ā Minimize, ignore, distort the harm caused: āThis is just a drop in the bucket.ā āClimate change isnāt such a big problem.ā Ā
5.Ā Ā Ā Ā Displace responsibility: Point the finger at others to diminish your own accountability. āLeaders are more responsible than me,ā so I donāt have to do anything.
6.Ā Ā Ā Ā Diffuse responsibility: āChange the system; everyone is responsible,ā so no one feels responsible. Obscure the consequences of your own actions.
7.Ā Ā Ā Ā Dehumanize: āāThose peopleā arenāt like us.ā Create distance from others to diminish their value.
8.Ā Ā Ā Ā Blame the victim: āGreta is just in it for the money.ā Increase the social stigma of the marginalized or most impacted to justify their suffering.
Sound familiar? Watch out for moral disengagement in conversations and mediaā itās supporting climate inaction! Weāll keep building up the personal relevance and moral engagement hereā Iāll write more about how to face these arguments in a future post.
Feelings: Climate excluded
I heard a really interesting reader perspective I want to share with you:
āI started dedicated climate work and volunteering last year, and - I can only speak for myself here - it was not as easy as many people make it sound.
Making connections was harder than I thought, getting support was harder than I thought. Just getting an email back was harder than I thought.
Now, maybe this is not supposed to be easy. And no one owes anyone any connections or support.
But when a movement or a sector says "We need all of you, just get involved" and then makes the "getting involved" part feel very difficult, I think something is off. Expectations are being set that are not met.āāNora Kroeger

For ages, climate people have been working hard to expand the circle of āpeople who potentially careā to āpeople who care + are doing useful work.ā A lot of folks have gotten the message, āHey we need you! Please join in, show up, roll up your sleeves!ā And theyāre heeding that call, and trying to jump in, which is SO great!
But it can be tough to get started. How do you find the right group for you? (Refresher: āFind your Climate Peepsā from Sept 2021!) How do you align your skills to contribute once you find them?
Itās super concerning to hear people have not felt welcomed, found it difficult to break in to a climate group, or even not heard back at all after several attempts. This is a lot of lost energy, creativity, and capacity that the climate movement desperately needs.
This experience Nora brought up inspired this monthās climate action, which isā¦
Action: Make it easy to say YES!
Here are two things that are sometimes at odds with each other in climate action:
We need to help each other, ask for help when we need it, draw on each othersā strengths, learn from each other, share the loadā¦
YES, AND we need to support a sustainable working culture, not glorify overwork, respect othersā boundaries and not set unreasonable demands on their time.
SO, how can the new folks who want to learn, contribute, and find their place (yay!!) get the support they needā¦
WITHOUT burning out the too-few people already neck-deep in the climate work theyāre desperately trying to get done? It takes a lot of time and energy to welcome and guide new folks and bring them up to speed. Often that process can be super rewarding and fun. But sometimes, it can be a one-way drain to try to bounce between too many demands that donāt end up going anywhere.
Noraās post made me think about the requests I get for my time. I do not have capacity to say yes to them all. What makes it easy for me to respond immediately and to say YES? What does not make it easy for me to respond ā and therefore maybe ends up unanswered in my Inbox 4,784 that horrifies my Inbox Zero friends?? Iām doing my best, but I definitely drop some balls, which I feel bad about.
With that in mind, hereās this monthās action:
How to get people you donāt already know to answer your emails!
Especially when youāre asking them for something. I think this skill could come in super handy in building climate community and new connectionā and if done well, save us all a lot of time and stress.
Something I didn't realize until it happened to me: even if youāre reaching out to someone with a lovely offer, like āCan I help you?ā, it requires substantial work for the receiver to figure out if you can help, and how.
The easier you make it for someone to know how to answer you right away, and to give you an answer with a response they can write in 2 minutes, the more likely they are to respond.
Here are things that make it easy to say YES!
Explain why youāre contacting them in particular. What is it about their work that resonated for you?
This means you should first do a bit of homework! Read their latest book/article/Substack/social media feed, and mention something specific you saw that led you to contact this human being. No one replies to a generic mass email.
Ask yourself, āWhat does this person want to achieve in the world? How could my ask help them do what is important to them?ā
Itās easy to write an email that only contains āIā as a subject: I am so-and-so, I live here, I work here, I want this thing, [long descriptions/explanations of any of the above].
Itās worth thinking about the human being who will receive your request. What's in it for them? How can you make them the subject? [People love being the subject.]Ā How can you align your ask with their goals? Win-win!
Itās fine to ask for a favor! People like helping others when they can. If youāre doing this, in my experience, it works best to state, āIām writing to ask for your help/ a favor.ā
Make a clear, specific ask.
Basically, make sure your message covers the classics: who, what, when, where, why. But Iād suggest this order: why [youāre contacting them in particular], who [you are/how you know them], what [youāre asking for, specifically], when/where [so they can check their calendars right then].
If itās an event youāre asking them to join, send relevant info like other people on the program, audience background and intended learning outcome, how many are expected, online or in person, etc.
Out of the blue, āIām interested in climate too! Letās jump on a call to discussā is not a clear, specific ask, tech bros from LinkedIn! :)
Keep it short!
The shorter the email, the more likely it is to get a response.
Use line breaks frequently. Make it easy to skim. Imagine theyāre reading the email on their phone while waiting in line for the bus. Make it easy for them!
What have you found works for you to connect with new people? What makes it easy for you to say yes? Let me and your fellow readers know in the comments!
See You On the Internet & IRL!
Listen: I think this was the deepest dive yet into our study on what works to reduce driving in cities. Thanks, Kea Wilson at Streetsblog!
Come see me in Brussels!
Iāll be at Full Circle next Wednesday, October 3. Come say hi! Get your tickets here.

Book Recommendation: Scattered All Over the Earth, by Yoko Tawada. Just read this for my climate fiction book club and was delighted to suspend my disbelief from page 1. Beautifully observed and written, where climate change colors the charactersā lives but isnāt over-explained. I laughed out loud at some of the descriptions of Scandinavian culture.
xo,
Kim


Hi there, interesting reading. Thanks. However, I would like to propose another angle to reflection. When reading this type of approach (those who've got it right do the right thing, those doing it wrongly have a smaller/wrong understanding - I know you did not write it, but that's what the graph suggests) I get the feeling that it tends to create division more than unity, among those who are aware and a 'legion of those who ignore, or aren't capable of understanding'.
I know this has been extracted from a known paper, but a lot has happened in the almost 30 (!!) years since this paper has been published, and climate debate is far different from what it was. So I'd be a bit careful when stating, in 2023, the reasons appointed by one paper, in 1996, as the factors/causes of something.
Ultimately, a perception I think is left outside of it (it wasn't that big topic 30y ago), that is reinforced by the confrontation sought by the "8 mechanisms (...)" is the social/economic gap. These mechanisms suggest that people start from similar base points but choose to disengage, and it ignores how inequalities affect people's perceptions of realities and their priorities. An again, this approach of pointing out the misbehaviors as the only source of knowledge sounds a bit like a confrontational arrogance. The reflection I propose for us all to make is on how to engage people that are still struggling to make ends meet and to have a decent life. Putting it simply, those excluded from the benefits of globalization (and they are still majority of the world) will choose their basic (and maybe their secondary) necessities before engaging in climate acts.
Just coming across this newsletter - I absolutely love digging into the psychology and motivations behind climate change and what we can do to change them for the better, fantastic read. Youāve got a new subscriber in me!