The Trump administration’s recent executive orders pose a significant threat to climate action progress. These orders, aiming to dismantle much of the Biden administration’s climate agenda, include withdrawing from the Paris Agreement, promoting fossil fuel production, obstructing renewable energy projects, halting electric vehicle funding, and canceling climate-focused programs. While legal challenges are underway, the uncertainty surrounding the orders’ ultimate impact has galvanized climate advocates to strategize their resistance. Given the unlikelihood of swaying President Trump’s firmly held views, the most viable path forward lies in strengthening Congressional support for climate action in the upcoming 119th and 120th Congresses. Achieving this hinges on bolstering public support for climate initiatives, a complex task requiring careful consideration of diverse advocacy tactics.
The climate movement encompasses a wide range of actors employing both “insider” and “outsider” tactics. Insider tactics involve engaging within established political processes, such as lobbying and educating policymakers. Outsider tactics, conversely, utilize public pressure through protests, demonstrations, and direct action targeting specific industries or projects. Recently, more disruptive tactics have emerged, including interference with public transportation, cultural events, and even acts of vandalism. The key question for the climate movement is which tactics are most effective in increasing public support and influencing Congressional representatives, and which may backfire.
While polls indicate a majority of Americans acknowledge climate change and support government action, these issues often take a backseat to other pressing concerns like the economy, immigration, and healthcare. The challenge lies in elevating the salience of climate change in the public consciousness. With the 2026 midterm elections approaching, public opinion becomes a crucial factor for politicians, making protests and demonstrations potentially valuable tools for keeping climate change on the political agenda. However, more disruptive tactics, like blocking traffic or disrupting events, require careful evaluation.
Recent research suggests that these disruptive tactics, while garnering media attention, can alienate the public. Studies have shown a decreased willingness to support organizations employing such tactics, regardless of political affiliation or demographic group. This negative reaction stems from the disruption caused to people’s daily lives and enjoyment of planned activities. The disruption creates resentment and undermines the intended message, potentially outweighing any benefits from increased media coverage. Furthermore, these actions can create opportunities for governments to implement stricter measures against climate activists, hindering their efforts in the long run.
Beyond the potential for public backlash, disruptive actions raise complex questions about their impact on the broader climate movement. While the “radical flank effect” theory suggests that radical actions can increase support for more moderate groups by making their demands seem reasonable, there’s also the risk of “negative reputational spillovers,” where extremist actions damage the reputation of the entire movement. It’s crucial for climate advocates to carefully consider these potential consequences when choosing their strategies.
Given the current political landscape, a strategic approach is essential for advancing climate action. Instead of relying solely on disruptive tactics, climate groups should explore alternative avenues, such as forming alliances with Republicans to protect existing climate legislation, like the Inflation Reduction Act, by emphasizing its economic benefits in Republican districts. Similarly, leveraging the popularity of wind energy in Republican states offers opportunities for collaboration on renewable energy projects, framing them as initiatives for energy abundance and economic development rather than explicitly focusing on climate change. A pragmatic approach that avoids alienating potential allies and focuses on shared interests is more likely to achieve progress in the current political climate. While the decentralized nature of the climate movement makes coordinated strategy challenging, mainstream groups should strive to control the narrative and prioritize flipping the House of Representatives in 2026, a crucial step towards preventing further climate policy rollbacks. By focusing on building broad public support through strategic communication and impactful collaborations, the climate movement can effectively counter the current threats and work towards a more sustainable future.
