Understanding Climate Change Disagreement

By Trevor Getz

You’ve likely heard people disagree about the causes and effects of climate change. But if there’s so much evidence behind it, why is there still disagreement? This article will dig into this important question.

A crowd of tourists observe an iceberg in a lagoon during an autumn day in Iceland.

Introduction

Ninety-seven percent of scientists believe that climate change is happening and that it’s caused by human activities. The majority of scientific organizations and governments around the world agree. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is an international organization that assesses the science of climate change. It says that “scientific evidence for the warming of the climate system is unequivocal,”¹ meaning that it is very conclusive.

Well, that settles that debate, right? Not so fast. While there’s a powerful scientific agreement that greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels are warming our planet, to truly understand the problem of climate change, we must look beyond the science. Climate change is as much a political, social, and economic problem as it is a problem of science. Climate change has profound impacts on human systems, and people are affected by and view these impacts in different ways. There is no simple definition for climate change. Yes, the phrase describes the measurable, observed effects on physical systems, but it also affects human systems in ways that are complex, debatable, and highly individual.

Maybe it’s not all that surprising that there’s disagreement about climate change. After all, a wide range of values, beliefs, and attitudes exist worldwide. However, this disagreement slows real progress on finding solutions for climate change. Let’s look at how political, economic, and social issues influence disagreement on climate change so we can better understand how to find common ground.

The political problem

A group of lawmakers on a stage raise hands and cheer for the passing of a climate deal in Paris in 2015. — *Climate change deal struck at Paris Summit. © Getty Images.*

Despite the abundance of scientific evidence, there are small but vocal groups that remain unconvinced that climate change is a real and urgent issue. These groups often have significant political power and influence, making it seem like there’s more debate around the science of climate change than there actually is. As a result, climate change has become a very politically divided issue. Some people adopt positions solely because they are the beliefs of the political party they associate with. Another political divide is reflected on the international level. Countries often find it hard to act together, especially when it means taking on new costs. Some countries prioritize domestic interests over international ones. Others believe that the countries most responsible for carbon emissions should take on more of the responsibility for fixing the problem. No country wants to be the first to act unless it’s clear that everyone else will, too. What’s more, many international climate agreements are voluntary, so nothing happens if a country fails to meet its goals.

The economic problem

A chart with two columns comparing the higher relative cost of one ton of cement after carbon capture versus conventionally produced cement. — * New price after carbon capture ranges from $219 to $300

This graph shows the cost of a normal ton of cement versus the cost of low-carbon cement, using carbon capture technology to capture CO2 emissions. As you can see, clean cement costs significantly more than the conventional option. Courtesy of Breakthrough Energy.

Solving the problem of climate change will be expensive. Trillions of dollars every year will be needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the effects of a warming world. Not solving the problem of climate change will also be expensive. Economies will shrink, health problems will increase, and extreme weather will cause damage. Some people don’t think it’s worth spending huge amounts of money right now to try to stop climate change. They think we should instead invest in health care or education, which will have a bigger, immediate effect on human lives. Others believe that we should be spending money to combat climate change but disagree on where to invest our limited resources. Some organizations work to influence public opinion and policy by spreading messages of doubt about climate change. There are also businesses, individuals, and communities that are dependent on current fossil-fuel-based systems to make money.

The social problem

Many people believe that climate change is happening, but they don’t think it’s a big problem. One reason is that people don’t like to hear bad news. We try to protect ourselves from problems by denying them or pretending they aren’t that bad. Plus, people are good at identifying immediate threats. Run into a bear while you’re hiking, and it’ll get all your attention. Something that might happen in a decade or more just doesn’t command the same attention, even if you really need to start acting now to avoid the big problems you’ll be facing down the road.

The culture of our social systems sometimes makes it easy to ignore evidence and hard to act on issues like climate change. Some studies of Americans show that they tend to distrust experts such as scientists and the media.²

Chart showing the significant decline of trust in major U.S. institutions from around 50 percent in 1979 to 27 percent in 2022. — *Americans’ trust in our national institutions, as measured by this annual Gallup poll, has fallen steadily since 1979. Graph courtesy of Gallup.*

Misinformation and disinformation also play a role in the disagreement surrounding climate change. Misinformation is false or inaccurate information—getting the facts wrong. Disinformation is deliberately misleading or biased information. This can take the form of flat-out denial from politicians or leaders. Organizations might also share information in a way that underplays the seriousness of climate change or exaggerates certain risks. Another risk is greenwashing. Greenwashing is the term used to describe what happens when a company falsely claims its products or services to be less damaging to the environment than they actually are. Other times, misinformation and disinformation is spread by individuals or groups via social media. This has made it difficult for people to know what to believe on the internet, and it can be a barrier to meaningful climate action.

Bringing it together

There are lots of understandable reasons why disagreement happens when it comes to climate change. However, we see that individuals and groups start to change their opinions as they begin to experience its effect firsthand. The public also becomes more supportive of an action when it’s clear that the economic opportunities outweigh the costs. We need to make climate action open to everyone from every community so that we can work together to address this pressing issue.

1 NASA. “How Do We Know Climate Change is Real?” https://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/
2 Giancarlo Pasquini, Alison Spencer, Alec Tyson, and Cary Funk. “Why Some Americans Do Not See Urgency in Climate Change.” Aug. 9, 2023. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2023/08/09/why-some-americans-do-not-see-urgency-on-climate-change/

Trevor Getz

Trevor Getz is a content editor for the Climate Project and a Professor of African and World History and affiliated with the Education program at San Francisco State University. His work centers on history and social studies as a vehicle for helping students understand contemporary issues such as climate change.

Credit: “Understanding Climate Change Disagreement”, Trevor Getz / OER Project, https://www.oerproject.com/

Image credits

Creative Commons This work is licensed under CC BY 4.0 except for the following:

Cover image: Tourists observing the iceberg in the Jokusarloon glacier lagoon during an autumn day, Iceland, Europe. © carlo alberto conti / Moment / Getty Images.

This graph shows the cost of a normal ton of cement versus the cost of low-carbon cement (using carbon capture technology to capture CO2 emissions). As you can see, clean cement costs significantly more than the conventional option. Courtesy of Breakthrough Energy. https://breakthroughenergy.org/our-approach/the-green-premium/

Americans’ trust in our national institutions, as measured by this annual Gallup poll, has fallen steadily since 1979. Graph courtesy of Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/poll/394283/confidence-institutions-down-average-new-low.aspx

Articles leveled by Newsela have been adjusted along several dimensions of text complexity including sentence structure, vocabulary and organization. The number followed by L indicates the Lexile measure of the article. For more information on Lexile measures and how they correspond to grade levels: www.lexile.com/educators/understanding-lexile-measures/

To learn more about Newsela, visit www.newsela.com/about.

The Lexile^® Framework for Reading evaluates reading ability and text complexity on the same developmental scale. Unlike other measurement systems, the Lexile Framework determines reading ability based on actual assessments, rather than generalized age or grade levels. Recognized as the standard for matching readers with texts, tens of millions of students worldwide receive a Lexile measure that helps them find targeted readings from the more than 100 million articles, books and websites that have been measured. Lexile measures connect learners of all ages with resources at the right level of challenge and monitors their progress toward state and national proficiency standards. More information about the Lexile® Framework can be found at www.Lexile.com.