Conference Agenda

Political mobilisation has become an integral component of global envi­ronmental politics and earth system governance. This panel zooms in on climate movements, as critical agents of societal change. After a big wave of mobilisation in 2018/19, climate move­ments are currently diversifying their repertoire of protest. Increasingly, this entails disrup­tive and confrontational tactics. Emerging debates about the legitimacy of such climate pro­tests unveil the deep conflict lines between agents of transformation and forces of inertia.

The basic premise of this panel is that more knowledge about the impacts of protest activities is urgently needed for transformational governance. While researchers have started to inves­tigate some of these impacts, our understanding is still very limited. To make inroads, this panel starts with a conceptual contribution, systematically identifying the blind spots of research on climate movements and their consequences, thereby advancing an inter­disciplinary research agenda on collective action. Next, three empirical research projects con­front some of the gaps identified in the first contribution. Attending to the socio-political con­sequences of protest, Ozden & Ostarek document how disruptive protest by the Just Stop Oil campaign has increased support for ‘moderate’ parts of the movement, but also entails the threat of increasing societal polarisation. Combining experimental and observational longitu­dinal approaches, [citation removed to annonymize abstract] shed light on the understudied contingent dynamics of the movement’s public resonance. Studying the impact of XR protests, they show that main­stream media reports are less effective than activists’ direct communication. Finally, in a com­parative experimental study, [citation removed to annonymize abstract] systematically examine the impacts of differ­ent forms of protest on citizens’ support for the agenda and tactics of the movement.

In a concluding roundtable discussion, we invite two stakeholders to critically discuss the contributions from the perspective of a lawyer and a climate activist, fostering a transdiscipli­nary debate.

Climate movements are central actors in advancing social transformations required to tackle climate change and reach deep decarbonization. Currently, climate movements in the Global North undergo remarkable changes, shifting from foregrounding generalized claims and mass mobilizations to more disruptive and confrontational protest practices and a return to climate justice as an overall guiding frame. While research on the causes and developments of ongoing transformations in Global North climate activism has already produced important insights, it is unclear what the implications are in terms of social-political consequences. Furthermore, the crucial role of Global South movements remains largely understudied. To what extent are disruptive, confrontational, and climate justice-oriented practices a driving or a restraining factor for decarbonization? What are current analytical and empirical limitations regarding Global South movements? This paper seeks to shed light on the scholarship’s blind spots: the nexus of deep decarbonization, climate justice and Global South movements by, first, reviewing dominant theories in social movement studies concerned with movements’ impact on social and political dynamics, namely political process theory and political opportunity structures, collective action framing, as well as prefigurative politics. In a second step, we discuss how these existing approaches are currently used to explain the potential impacts of climate justice activism on societal transformation towards deep decarbonization, and reflect on limitations of these approaches. Finally, we call for a more distinctive and critical reflection on the soundness of the dominant movement theories with regards to the contingent dynamics of the climate justice movement. We argue that in order to advance research and subsequent theory-building on climate justice movements, studies have to thoroughly take into account the ubiquity of climate change as a multi-scalar challenge that stands out in contrast to other political and cultural problems that have been in the center of past mobilizations. A critical examination of existing research on Global South climate protest, and the lack thereof, will not only highlight this challenge but also help to outline the methodological Eurocentrism of many approaches.

Social movements have the power to enable large-scale social change. Movements are often composed of several factions that can differ substantially in their approaches. Recently, groups that use disruptive and provocative tactics have emerged in several countries. By blockading motorways, throwing soup at paintings, and gluing themselves to airport runways, they have attracted mass media attention. It is hotly debated what the consequences of such radical tactics are for the wider movement: Do they make people more or less supportive of more moderate groups? Do they make people support progressive policy change more or less?

We conducted nationally representative surveys, before and after a week-long disruptive campaign by Just Stop Oil to block London’s M25 motorway. 1415 members of the public were asked about their support for and identification with a moderate climate organization (Friends of the Earth) and about their support for climate policies. The results showed that people with overall higher awareness of Just Stop Oil tended to identify with and support Friends of the Earth more. Crucially, changes in people’s awareness of Just Stop Oil after vs. before the M25 protests predicted changes in their identification with and support for Friends of the Earth. Thus, we observed evidence for a positive radical flank effect, whereby the activities of a radical flank increase support for the more moderate faction of the movement. Regarding support for climate policies, Just Stop Oil’s protests appear to have polarized: Those who were the least supportive of progressive climate policies and groups to begin with were negatively affected by Just Stop Oil’s protests, whereas those who were more favorable to begin with showed a slight positive effect or no change.

Overall, we propose that Just Stop Oil’s radical tactics likely have a net positive effect because the substantial media attention, increased public debate, increased exposure to information about climate change, and positive attitudinal effects on moderate factions outweigh the limited and selective backfire effects that our and previous data point at.

The 2019 London Extinction Rebellion was the first attempt by environmental protesters to create prolonged large-scale disruption in a Western capital city. The effects on public opinion were difficult to predict because protests seen as extreme can reduce support, but protests seen as justified can increase support. Until now, the effects of this unprecedented action on U.K. public opinion were not clear. Available longitudinal opinion polls have not been tailored to examine the effects, although national opinion polls and a study opportunistically using the Understanding Society U.K. Household Longitudinal Study (UKHLS) (Kountouris & Williams, in press) suggest increases in pro-environmental attitudes. Most importantly, experimental evidence has been absent. We studied longitudinal opinion changes in a nationally representative U.K. sample (n = 832) before, during, and after the rebellion, in conjunction with experimental analysis of the causal effects of media reports (n = 1441). The pairing of the two approaches allows opinion changes in the national population to be linked to causal properties of media reports. The rebellion was longitudinally associated with national increases in environmental concern, and activist media increased dissatisfaction with current government action. There was no increase in polarisation in concern or dissatisfaction. Reports from an activist, the BBC, and the Daily Mail caused activism intentions and support to move in different directions, contributing to longitudinally increased polarisation in attitudes to activism. Only a few minutes’ exposure to direct activist messaging increased dissatisfaction with government action, which underlines the effectiveness of environmental activists reaching audiences directly, unfiltered by mainstream media, as this experimental effect was not observed for the BBC or the Mail. The rebellion had minimal effects on belief in whether ordinary people can produce relevant change (based on collective efficacy and support for a Citizens’ Assembly). Increased polarisation was thus observed primarily in activism-related attitudes and not with regard to general environmental attitudes. The rebellion therefore succeeded in some aims and did not show evidence of any important backlash.

In the last decades, the climate movement has gained much visibility in its fight for climate justice and in enforcing government accountability. Beyond the increased attention however, the socio-political consequences of the manifold activities of the climate movement are far from clear. While some research suggests that protest actions entail an ‘activist’s dilemma’ in that they undermine popular support for social movements, other studies document that climate protest can actually increase societal support for the climate movement. To better understand the manifold and potentially countervailing impacts of climate protests on the potential for transformational change, we designed an experiment that accounts for (1) multiple forms of protest, (2) broader societal impacts, and (3) the mediating role of communicators. Our study hence draws from three streams of literature anchored in social movement research, social psychology, and political communication. (1) We utilise social movement research to conceptualise and capture effects of a broad array of activities – from artistic forms of protest to blocking streets, and from peaceful gatherings to practices that include violence. (2) We build on recent advances in social psychology to mobilise a broad conceptualisation of the impacts of climate movements, encompassing not only citizens’ support for (and identification with) the agendas and tactics of the climate movement, but also their perceptions about social norms and the transformative potential of protest activities. (3) We integrate knowledge from political communication to examine how the communication of collective action by societal elites conditions these impacts.

Empirically, our study is based on two large, representative samples (each n = 4,000) of adults in two countries (Germany and the United Kingdom), fielded in early 2023. By attending to a broad range of effects and disentangling why certain social movement tactics are more effective than others, our study contributes to a more empirically oriented and holistic picture of social mobilization. Based thereupon, we develop recommendations for climate activists and offer conclusions for earth system governance more broadly.