We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
View our privacy policy
Zack Polanski has won the Green Party’s leadership race, ushering in a new era for the party. Polanski won the leadership race by an emphatic margin – but will his unique brand of ‘eco populism’ cut through with voters?
Climate Barometer data shows reasonable agreement with the idea that the super rich are the most responsible for climate change. In April this year, we asked the public for views on the following statement: “Together, the richest 1% of people in the world emit twice as much carbon as the poorest 50% combined”. While over a third of Britons said they had not heard this narrative at all (36%) – interestingly, many had heard and agreed with it (39%) and very few disagreed with it overall (4%).
Across political divides, Green backers were the most likely to have heard and agree with the idea that the super rich are to blame (66%), and the narrative resonates with a majority of the Labour base too (56%).
There was even reasonable agreement amongst Reform backers, with a third of this group (30%) saying they had both heard and agree with it – while just a minority had heard and disagree with it (8%). It’s Conservative backers who appear to be more on the margins here, being the least likely to have heard and agree with the statement (28%).
Together this suggests that narratives which pin the blame on the super rich still have more traction to gain – but when the message does get picked up, it tends to land well across a wide political spectrum, perhaps only failing to resonate with Tory backers.
Two major trade unions, GMB and Prospect, have launched a new campaign ‘Climate Jobs UK’, warning that public support for the net zero transition could weaken without faster progress on ‘green’ job creation.
The unions, which represent tens of thousands of energy workers, say people need to see good jobs where they live or risk being drawn to parties that are opposing climate action.
New polling commissioned for the campaign shows that while most people back the energy transition, more than half (55%) want jobs and the economy prioritised over speed (17%). Only 30% believe the transition will improve UK job opportunities and fewer than 1 in 10 say they’ve seen green jobs in their area.
Expectations for positive impacts of net zero policies on job opportunities in local areas are in fact low. As recent Climate Barometer data shows, only 1 in 5 Brits anticipate net zero policies to have a positive impact on the local job market over the next five years, with the most common responses being ‘don’t know’ or net zero policies having ‘no impact’.
As this data shows, the British public doesn’t anticipate net zero policies to impact them negatively, but they also won’t go out of their way to defend something that feels abstract and irrelevant to their everyday lives.
Whilst younger age groups tend to think the impact of net zero policies on jobs will be more positive, these findings underline the importance of climate action being felt to tangibly improve people’s lives. This will require people seeing their neighbours, friends or family in good jobs that can provide some stability for the future — and which are, by default, ‘green’.
The link between climate impacts and net zero isn’t always easy to explain, but it matters. We need to cut emissions to limit the worst effects of climate change. But for many people, the link between net zero and real-world impacts like extreme heat or flooding can feel abstract or distant. So how can we make the link?
As part of his first annual climate statement to Parliament, Miliband warned that the climate crisis cannot be ignored. He called out politicians rejecting net zero as “betraying future generations” and said the shared commitment to tackling climate change “must not disappear by default”.
Climate action as a way of staying true to future generations echoes the public’s view on why tackling climate change matters. As Climate Barometer data shows, when asked what they thought were the most convincing arguments for pursuing net zero, Britons were most likely to select the idea that “We owe it to our children and grandchildren to take action to reduce our emissions now; otherwise it is they who will suffer the most” (35%).
This focus on protecting future generations also aligns with what makes climate change feel most urgent to people. New research shows that presenting climate impacts in binary terms is more effective in making it seem more real and imminent than showing average trend data. As extreme weather events gradually become more frequent and severe due to climate change, people tend to become accustomed to the new normal, also called the ‘boiling frog’ effect, and struggle to identify abnormal weather patterns over time.
Presenting climate change in binary terms helps to overcome that. In the study, people found a graph showing whether a fictional lake froze each winter more impactful than a chart of rising average temperatures in a fictional town. This research highlights how important it is to use clear before-and-after examples when talking about climate impacts.
Alongside message testing which suggests it’s helpful to frame climate impacts as “unnatural disasters” while making clear links to policies, these insights could help make climate communication resonate with the British public’s real and sustained concerns.
As the UK’s third summer heatwave drew to a close, Ed Miliband used his first annual climate statement to Parliament to warn of the growing impacts of climate breakdown in the UK, backed by the Met Office’s latest State of the UK Climate report.
The report shows how extreme weather is now the norm in the UK, with data from hundreds of weather stations revealing that the hottest days are becoming more frequent and severe, and intense rainfall has increased.
The same day the State of the UK Climate report was released, Climate Barometer’s Niall McLoughlin published an opinion piece in Climate Home News, highlighting the urgent need for better communication around extreme heat.
Niall explains that despite improvements to heat warnings, a disjointed landscape of heat communications means that many people feel the UK is poorly prepared for heat risks. Drawing on a range of opinion insights, he calls for improvements such as using social research to tailor communication, focusing more on longer-term heat preparedness, and closing perception gaps which may lead people to underestimate risks.
He points also to locally-led tree planting projects as an example of the kind of long-term, community-based preparation needed. Separate research from Cardiff University shows that such efforts must accelerate significantly to help cities adapt to intensifying heatwaves. Their new findings reveal that urban tree planting can cut city temperatures by up to 5°C, making it one of the most effective tools for cooling overheated streets.
With roughly 360,000 heat pumps currently installed across the UK, the country remains a long way off the government’s target of installing 600,000 heat pumps every year by 2028, as laid out in the Energy Security Bill. But where do people currently stand on their journey toward using heat pumps? What barriers are holding back wider adoption, and how do these challenges vary across society? Most importantly, what can be done to overcome them?
Nesta’s new audience research helps to answer these questions by providing a segmentation of UK households based on demographic data, their housing situation and attitudes towards heat pumps. Ranging from “eco, high-earning Gen x-ers” — of whom 3% say they already have a heat pump — to “social tenants on tight budgets”, the report identifies the biggest heat pump enablers and barriers for each group to help them adopt the new technology.
And help is urgently needed: As Climate Barometer data shows, public knowledge of heat pumps remains limited, with only 37% of Britons knowing what a heat pump looks like, 22% saying they can describe how a heat pump works, and just 17% having heard mostly good things about them. Alongside this, 1 in 5 Britons have heard and agree with the statement that “heating technologies to replace gas boilers are untested and unreliable”, compared to only 1 in 10 who have heard the argument and disagree with it.
But for heat pumps to become a widely adopted source of heating over the next couple of decades in the UK, it will require more than fixing their image problems. Those who would already consider switching to a heat pump need to be supported to do so practically, and those who are currently unable to or hesitant about installing them need safe assurances that heat pumps will actually improve their comfort and help lower their energy bills over time.
More in Common’s new Shattered Britain report details climate opinion in the context of changing views across the nation.
The report shows that despite clear dividing lines in their broad worldviews, 6 out of 7 UK segments are ‘more worried than not’ about climate change – and believe the government is ‘not doing enough’ to tackle the crisis.
Whilst only 21% of the public opposed the 2050 net zero target, views on whether net zero Britain should be achieved by means of a strict target are far more varied, with only Progressive Activists clearly speaking out on its behalf. The piece also finds a decoupling of net zero and climate support across segments.
This echoes Climate Barometer data about government action on climate change, and the growing disconnect between net zero and climate opinion.
A new study of over 14000 Britons looks at how the British public see the UK’s role on climate action on the global stage. The research finds that the public wants:
In light of the results of the 2024 US election, most Britons want to see the UK either maintain (40%) or strengthen (26%) its commitments to climate change, even if President-elect Trump withdraws the USA from the Paris Agreement again.
A new survey has found that two-thirds of people around the globe have not heard of the term ‘climate justice’, and less than 1-in-5 feel they have a good understanding of what it means. But despite a lack of awareness about the terminology, a clear majority (70%) felt that climate change is driven by capitalism and colonisation. The study by Charles Ogunbode and colleagues builds on previous work addressing engagement with climate justice, by suggesting that people are aware of the key issues underpinning climate justice, even if they don’t consciously link these with the concept. People’s beliefs about climate justice-related issues were also found to positively influence their climate actions and support for policies – suggesting there is much value in building greater awareness.
New research has revealed that politicians visibly ‘leading by example’ can substantially increase the willingness of members of the UK public to adopt further low-carbon lifestyle changes.
The study looked at over a thousand people’s responses to the examples of ‘high-profile individuals’ in a nationally representative survey. It found that the vast majority (86%) wanted to see politicians, celebrities and business leaders setting a good example in terms of their climate actions. Citizens were also more willing to adopt low-carbon actions, such as flying less, eating less meat, or driving an electric car if they saw leaders doing the same. At the same time, people’s overall approval of leaders who were setting a strong example improved.
Despite this, further investigation showed that politicians may currently be reluctant to publicise their personal climate-friendly actions due to fear of criticism for virtue signaling, or hypocrisy.
Together the work suggests that rather than pulling off ‘green stunts’, politicians’ consistency of action over time is crucial, and it can also be beneficial if they acknowledge that some changes may be too difficult or costly for everyone to make (such as buying an electric car or installing a heat pump).
Public support for climate policies – from heat pumps, to home insulation, to electric vehicles – has always been about a lot more than just having access to the right facts.
Someone might like the sound of an EV, but not (yet) be able to afford it. Plenty of people have heard scare stories about heat pumps (although the views of people who actually know someone who has had one installed, tend to be more positive).
But a number of recent polls – from ECIU and Climate Barometer’s tracker – shine a light on the importance of building familiarity with EVs, because misconceptions abound.
For example, ECIU polling found that more than 5 in 10 (54%) petrol car drivers think EV drivers run out of charge at least once a year but, in reality, more than 8 in 10 (82%) of EV drivers report never running out of charge.
This is a significant misperception sitting behind the ‘range anxiety’ sometimes cited as a reason not to switch to an EV.
Climate Barometer polling tested a range of ‘anti-net zero’ narratives and soundbites, and found very few of them currently have any cut through with the public. But there was one exception: 40% of people say they don’t think EVs are more environmentally friendly than cars (when in fact they are).
And this wasn’t the only misconception about EVs.
When people were reminded that only new vehicles (not second hand ones) will be phased out after 2030, there was a 9% increase in people saying that the phase out would not affect them at all.
Support for the phasing out of petrol and diesel cars was higher (+5%), and opposition is lower (-6%) when people were reminded that it is only new vehicle sales which must be zero emissions by 2030 (39% support, 38% oppose), compared to support without the prompt about second-hand vehicles (34% support, 44% oppose).
This is a statistically significant difference.
What’s in a name? The question of what the best – most persuasive, or least polarising – term for climate change is, has a long history.
On the one hand, small tweaks to individual words or short phrases are unlikely to be driving big differences in perceptions one way or another. People’s values, worldviews, political ideology and increasingly the perceived fairness of different climate policies, are what drives public engagement.
But whether its the editorial choices made by leading international newspapers, to the framing of campaigns that drive media coverage of climate activism, linguistic choices do carry some weight. Previous research has argued that some terms (e.g. ‘global warming’) are more emotive; campaigners have criticised ‘climate change’ as a term for lacking urgency.
In a new open-access paper, researchers tested a wide range of different terms, including ‘climate change’, ‘global warming’, ‘climate crisis’, climate emergency’ and ‘climate justice’, in a survey of over 5000 US residents and concluded:
Overall, “climate change” and “global warming” were rated as most familiar and most concerning, and “climate justice” the least, with ratings for “climate crisis” and “climate emergency” falling in between.
Moreover, we find no evidence for “climate crisis” or “climate emergency” eliciting more perceived urgency than “climate change” or “global warming.”
We therefore recommend sticking with familiar terms, conclude that changing terminology is likely not the key solution for promoting climate action, and suggest alternative communication strategies.
The ‘alternative communication strategies’ might include identifying tangible ways in which audiences with different moral and political values could benefit from specific climate policies, or ensuring communities impacted by new energy infrastructure, or changes to urban travel systems, feel adequately consulted.
Confirming previous research around the general lack of familiarity with the term ‘climate justice’, the paper also noted that willingness to support climate-friendly policies and eat less red meat were lowest for ‘climate justice’ (which was the least familiar term tested).
This isn’t an argument for downplaying the importance of the issues the term refers to, which are central to both international climate governance and the implementation of specific in-country policies. But it does underscore the lack of recognition of the phrase among many public audiences, a finding which has also been observed in UK research.
The Conservative Party suffered their ‘worst ever’ result at the 2024 General Election. As well as general dissatisfaction with the Conservative government, polls consistently showed that worries about the cost of living, the condition of the NHS (and for some, immigration) were the biggest influences on how people voted.
Climate change – and more broadly environmental problems like air pollution and sewage in rivers – were also cited by voters when asked to select their top three most important issues going into the election. But was climate change a ‘vote winner’ at the election?
Echoing previous research showing an appetite for greater leadership on climate change, a large (20,000 people) survey by Focal Data on behalf of Persuasion and ECIU found that 53% of voters who had switched their vote from Conservatives to Labour (or the Liberal Democrats) believed that Government policy on climate change should be going further and faster that it has been (27% thought it should be going more slowly).
And polling by More in Common on behalf of E3G went even further, showing that Rishi Sunak’s decision (in September 2023) to slow down some of the country’s net zero policy timelines had a negative impact on voters. People were twice as likely to say that delaying net zero targets was one of Sunak’s biggest mistakes, than his biggest achievements.
Whilst the General Election was not fought on climate and net zero grounds (compared with the last General Election in 2019, there were roughly 50% fewer mentions of ‘climate’ in the British media election coverage), these findings suggest that there is currently no political capital to be found in opposing green policies.
The only party standing on an anti-net zero ticket were Reform UK – but the same More in Common polling found that immigration was overwhelmingly the reason that people voted for this party. Only 4% selected Reform’s environmental policies as a reason for voting for them.
Surveys are clear that the British public supports the country’s net zero targets.
When surveys focus on specific policies (like low traffic neighbourhoods, for example), then a range of wider considerations come into play, and unsurprisingly, support for individual policies like this tends to be lower than support for net zero overall. Although, as Climate Barometer tracker data underscores, even this policy (presented as divisive in media commentary) has more support than opposition.
And this trend – of most net zero policies having greater support than opposition – is reflected in a new Ipsos survey.
In nationally representative polling from April 2024, just before the General Election was called, Ipsos reported that:
Support is highest for giving people more assistance to increase the energy efficiency of their homes (76%); frequent flyer levies (62%); and changing product pricing to reflect how environmentally friendly products are (56%).
The least popular policy tested (an exception to the rule of support outweighing opposition) was electric vehicle subsidies (39% support, 41% oppose).
However, while most net zero policies continue to enjoy majority support among Britons, Ipsos report that this support has fallen over the past two years:
Support for ensuring access to sustainable pension funds and increasing vegetarian/vegan options in food provisioning have both fallen by 8 points since 2022, support for creating low traffic neighbourhoods is down 7 points, and support for higher taxes on red meat and dairy products and electric vehicle subsidies are both down 6 ppts.
Labour and Lib Dem 2019 voters support all policies, while past Conservative voters only support a few: frequent flyer levies, changing product pricing, ensuring access to sustainable pensions, and enabling people to make energy efficiency improvements to their home.
The polling also suggested a softening of the intensity with which people report feeling worried about climate change (likely a reflection of the difficulty of maintaining a strong sense of worry about an issue that can’t be resolved in the short term), although Ipsos reported that overall levels of concern remained very high,
A new study has illustrated a clear demand from citizens around the world for governments to strengthen their climate commitments ahead of COP29. The UN-funded ‘People’s Climate Vote’ – reportedly the world’s largest standalone public opinion survey on climate change, covering 77 countries – has found that four in five people (80%) globally are calling for their country to strengthen its commitments to climate action.
A clear desire was also expressed for greater climate collaboration between countries, alongside help for poorer nations. A very large majority (86%) believed that countries should put their disagreements aside and work together on addressing climate change (In the UK this was even higher at 90%), while over three-quarters globally (79%) called for richer countries to give more help to poorer countries to address climate change.
The evidence strengthens calls for international agreements to make urgent progress on climate change. However, it should be noted that given the large number of countries surveyed, questions in this survey are high-level and general, rather than tailored to each country. This means they may not capture the complexities of climate debates within nations, and further context is needed to interpret the findings at the country-level.
Polling in the weeks leading up the 2024 General Election by the consultancy True North was reported as showing 75% of people supporting North Sea oil & gas – this is a much higher number than would be expected from wider polling. But the wording of the questions asked people to choose between imported oil and domestic oil (not oil vs renewable energy, which is consistently preferred as the best way to reduce the country’s reliance on importing foreign oil and gas).
Polling by Uplift, carried out at a similar time, found that North Sea oil and gas companies are widely considered by most respondents (70%) to benefit more from extraction in the basin than Scotland itself does currently.
Uplift found that SNP voters were the most concerned about climate change, and that 45% of SNP voters thought the UK Government should stop issuing new oil and gas drilling licences in the North Sea, compared with 31% in favour of new licensing.
Previous research with SNP voters also found higher support than opposition for ending licenses to drill in the North sea, and at a British level there’s much more support for renewables than oil and gas. But there isn’t yet a clear majority in favour of ending oil and gas exploration altogether – in Scotland or in Britain.
Polling by Opinium for the Conservative Environment Network (CEN), conducted just before the 2024 General Election was announced, suggests that playing into Reform UK’s anti-net zero stance will not be a vote winner for the Conservative party.
One important finding is that although Reform UK is (uniquely among the other mainstream parties) campaigning on an anti-net zero ticket, climate change is not currently a salient issue for Reform voters. The CEN polling found that only 2% of Reform voters listed climate change/net zero/environment as their primary concern (the majority chose immigration as their primary concern).
This mirrors polling carried out across multiple European countries, ahead of the EU election which saw significant gains for far-right parties. In Europe, as in the UK, the rise in support for right wing parties does not appear to be driven by these parties’ policies on climate change (even if they tend to hold anti-net zero positions).