Introduction
The Four Stages of Climate Action Framework is a campaign tool that can be used to quickly analyse if an institution or decision maker is in the Denial, Delay, Diversification or Decarbonisation stage of climate action.
This can help campaigners identify progress that has been made, and what can be done to move institutions and decision makers up to the next stage.
Looking more closely at the shift from Diversification to Decarbonisation reveals that an Ambition loop or positive feedback loop can accelerate this much needed shift much faster than can be achieved with linear change.
The Framework
The Four Stages of Climate Action Framework classifies where institutions (governments, political parties, corporations, unions, industry bodies etc) sit in relation to climate action into one of four stages – denial, delay, diversification and decarbonisation (figure 1). It should be relatively easy to identify which stage an institution sits in as the actions and narratives are fairly consistent the world over.
Figure 1: Four stages of climate action framework (Source: Nicky Ison, 2021)
What is the denial stage?
An institution is actively denying the existence of climate change, or that it is caused by humans. They continue to advance the growth of all fossil fuels, but especially coal power. They actively block the expansion of renewables and other clean technologies. They often weaponise others’ attempts to act on climate change to further their institution’s power (e.g. the Australian Liberal and National Parties led by Tony Abbott running a scare campaign about the newly introduced carbon price policy, to win the Federal Election in 2013).
What is the delay stage?
An institution is no longer able to deny the existence of climate change and be seen as credible. They admit climate change is happening and a problem, but they then try to minimise and diminish the size of the problem, provide endless excuses for inaction, and argue about how, how much, who, and to what extent – in order to delay progress. There is an excellent article by academics at Cambridge University on discourses of climate delay. This stage is typified by talking about long term targets decades into the future (e.g. Net Zero by 2050) and refusing to engage in short-term target setting processes.
In addition, institutions in the delay stage are no longer able to credibly block solutions like renewable energy, but rather work to delay and undermine its progress, while being seen to be supportive. The delay stage is often where we see the most greenwashing and the prosecution of false solutions – institutions need to be seen to be doing something, even if it’s just a fig leaf of action used to greenwash. In the delay stage, we also tend to see a move away from support for coal power, with strong narratives instead supporting the expansion of gas, and “gas as a transition fuel.”
After three decades of serious climate campaigning globally, delay is now the default position for many institutions and decision makers. That is, unless they are compelled to act.
What is the diversification stage?
In the diversification stage, an institution starts to seriously get on board with climate action, working to accelerate solutions quickly and talking publicly about the importance of addressing climate change and how this will lead to benefits for their constituents. However, the historical internal institutional support for fossil fuels and climate delay and the external factors and power means that this stage holds a myriad of contradictions for institutions. This looks like continued support for some fossil fuels and setting climate targets in line with what is deemed to be politically feasible, rather than climate science. For example, in the lead up to 2022 election the Australian Labor Party (ALP) had policies that supported acceleration of climate solutions, while simultaneously retaining policies that supported new fossil fuel extraction.
Indeed, many governments and commercial entities that sit in the Diversification stage have strategically chosen to have a bet each way. They are backing both the continuation of some fossil fuels, seeking to extract rents/maximise the benefit from existing fossil-reliant technologies and projects while also accelerating clean energy. The difference between the Delay and Diversification stage is that those working for climate action and clean energy are now pushing on an open door and have at least as much access or power as those trying to delay action. In addition, for many actors inside institutions, taking the step into diversification is a huge learning and unlearning process.
As the institution progresses through Diversification the power and focus on delay diminishes while decarbonisation options and access increases.
What is the decarbonisation stage?
The decarbonisation stage is where an institution has fully realised the scale, speed and importance of climate action and aligned their institution to a science-based decarbonisation agenda. Substantial resources are dedicated to accelerating climate solutions, science aligned carbon budgets are in place and there is no longer any support for fossil fuels and other causes of climate change and they are actively being phased out. There are few examples of this yet globally, though Greens Parties typically sit in the decarbonisation stage.
Why this framework could be useful
There are four reasons why I have found this framework useful to my work developing high impact climate action strategies that you may also find helpful.
- The framework can be used as an analysis tool to help quickly diagnose or understand the context in which you are operating. It can provide a shorthand for teams to come to a shared understanding of where an institution is at in relation to climate action.
- It can be used to guide strategy. There are a number of observable pre-conditions for shifting an institution from one stage to another (outlined below), these can help focus campaign strategies. Specifically, our challenge is how to get institutions to move to the decarbonisation stage as quickly as possible, while stopping backwards slides into denial. The most likely path will be linear through the stages, but how do we speed up institutions shifting through stages and what are strategies to create leapfrogging?
- The nature of this framework can help climate activists and change agents keep the long-game in perspective, while being able to celebrate wins and track progress along the way. Climate change is a huge, wicked problem. The scale of the problem and the scale of action required to minimise the chance of runaway global heating, even in the face of the warming already locked in are huge. As such, for individuals and institutions working to accelerate climate action, this work is a marathon and not a sprint. However, progress is made along the way. This framework can help us recognise and celebrate the progress, while also acknowledging we have a long way to go.
- The framework reveals how some traditional opponents can be moved from opposition (denial and delay) to decarbonisation. This in turn leads to a conversation about which traditional opponents need to be shifted along this pathway and which need to be made irrelevant. Then for those opponents that do need to be shifted, efforts can be resourced to do this important work, with strategies in place to recognise the progress that these traditional opponents have made, creating space for change, without letting them off the hook for continued opposition. Read this great resource from the Change Agency on the mechanisms of change that identifies different approaches to shifting campaign targets.
Using the Framework to Guide Strategy
In this section, some additional insights and worked examples are shared about how this framework has been and could be used to guide strategy.
Shifting Stages – Denial to Delay
“Delay is the new denial” is a refrain seen often in the climate twitter sphere, a statement often uttered with despair. However, what is critical to remember, is that through the hard work of those working for climate action, the movement has “moved the rock” or shifted the “overton window”, such that it has become untenable for many powerful institutions to be seen to be denying climate change. Indeed shifting stages equates to moving the rock and the overton window on climate.
Fundamentally, the shift to delay marks progress over denial. As outlined above in delay, climate change must be acknowledged as a problem and it is hard to block solutions completely.
To make an institution shift from denial to delay, there seems to be only one main precondition – that the institutions’ key decision makers perceive there to be significant consequences for the institution for remaining in the denial stage.
Shifting Stages – Delay to Diversification
The shift from delay to diversification, is perhaps the biggest for any institution, it is a tipping point. Doing so moves an institution from perpetuating the status quo, into accelerating action (see Figure 2). That is we move from a series of negative feedback loops that maintain the dominance of fossil fuels (and other causes of climate change) to positive feedback loops that accelerate both the uptake of solutions like renewables and the decline of fossil fuels and other causes.
Five preconditions have been identified as necessary to shift an institution from Delay to Diversification. They are:
- The external context (media narrative, stakeholder sentiment) encourages climate action,
- Climate action policies & narrative align with institution values and are believed to work better than an alternative for the decision-makers, their institution and their ‘allies’. This might involve framing the policy around another benefit, such as jobs, exports, or cost-of-living,
- Active climate action champions are in positions of power.
- Perception of consequences if the institution does not take action (aka an imperative to shift), and
- Opponents of climate action within an institution and the false solutions they advocate are sufficiently neutralised.
Figure 2: From linear to exponential progress through the Four Stages (Source: Nicky Ison and Isabel Craven, WWF-Australia, 2022)
Shifting Stages – Diversification to Decarbonisation – Creating an ambition loop
Once an institution is ready to move into the diversification stage, it is possible to establish a series of ambition loops (positive feedback loops) to accelerate action. One example of these ambition loops can be described as a virtuous cycle of growing public support, policy ambition and tangible projects and examples of action (see Figure 3).
A similar version of this ambition loop has been nicknamed the Green Vortex, whereby practice in clean energy technologies drives improvement and greater action and ambition. That is “policy can speed up the pace of technology development. As technologies develop, they get cheaper. As they get cheaper, more companies adopt them. As more companies adopt them, their leaders grow more comfortable with climate policy generally—and more supportive of pro-technology policy in particular. As more corporate leaders support climate policy, coalitions change, governments can pass more aggressive measures, and the cycle expands and begins again” (Meyer, The Atlantic).
Experience shows that movement activity is typically essential to creating ambition loops and driving it forward. However, over time, these loops can become increasingly self-sustaining, reducing the amount of effort required. The amount and duration of campaigning effort required to get an institution to the point that the ambition continues to grow (cogs turn on their own), is highly dependent on a) the amount of friction created (barriers, backlash, blockers) that needs to be removed or addressed and b) the number and quality of the champions in government, business and the community to drive the ambition loop forward.
Solutions based ambition loop strategies need to be complimented by other strategies such as those that diminish the power, influence and growth of the fossil fuel industry. In so doing we can rocket institutions through diversification to the decarbonisation stage.
Figure 3: Renewable Superpower Ambition Loop (Source: Nicky Ison, Hilly Montague and Isabel Craven, WWF-Australia, 2022)
No, this is not a silver bullet!
- This is a framework and like any framework is a useful construct to help organise thoughts and think about the world, it doesn’t mean that it fully describes what is or what could happen.
- This framework isn’t for individuals, but rather institutions like businesses, unions, political parties or governments. Where it could be applied to individuals is in their capacity as a decision maker such as a Minister or CEO. For understanding where individuals sit on climate change, the Climate Compass or Six Americas are much better frameworks.
- Progress in the real world through stages will not always be linear – there will be setbacks – and there is also potential for leapfrogging. Climate action is also not linear, in the stages of diversification and decarbonisation, positive feedback loops can make progress exponential.
- The further progressed along the stages an institution goes, the more the conversation becomes about how the institution acts on climate change rather than whether the institution should. The more the debate become about how, the more scope there is for values to come into play e.g. what other outcomes are important while addressing climate change, not just reducing emissions. For climate justice activists, any climate-only framework will be incomplete without the decolonisation work needed to ensure that progress along the four phases does not entrench systemic injustice prevalent in the existing system.
Acknowledgements
Much of this framework was developed while I was working at World Wildlife Fund for Nature (WWF), leading their Renewables Nation campaign. With particular thanks to Hilly Montague who workshopped the ambition loop concept with me, Isabel Craven for the excellent diagrams and Miriam Lyons and Tony Mohr for acting as a sounding board in the development of the Framework and article respectively.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike CC BY-NC-SA