Soft Climate Scepticism on the Rise: A Call for Immediate Action
Public awareness of the climate crisis remains high across Europe, yet commitment to ambitious climate action is weakening. This report, based on representative survey data from Germany, France, Italy, Poland, and Sweden, reveals a troubling shift: while outright climate denialism remains marginal, softer forms of climate scepticism—doubts about the extent of human responsibility and the necessity for transformative action—are on the rise. These trends have not emerged in isolation but reflect how far-right and populist actors have successfully advanced these narratives of scepticism, undermining the urgency for comprehensive action.
Across the five countries studied, there has been a decline in support for far-reaching measures to stop climate change. Instead, more people now prioritize adaptation over mitigation, reflecting a reduced perception of urgency for action and rising impact scepticism. At the same time, there has been a notable increase in attribution scepticism, with fewer people correctly identifying human activity as the primary driver of climate change. These shifts, while not outright climate denialism, weaken public commitment to transformative, ambitious climate policies.
While economic concerns might seem an intuitive explanation for these shifting attitudes, the data suggest otherwise. Personal financial situations and outlooks are not strongly related to climate scepticism. Instead, ideological factors—especially far-right attitudes—play a more central role. People who support far-right parties or hold far-right attitudes are more likely to exhibit both impact and attribution scepticism. This pattern is particularly evident in Germany and Sweden, where soft climate scepticism is linked to broader sense of political disaffection, distrust in public institutions and media, and scepticism towards state intervention. These findings suggest that far-right actors have successfully integrated climate scepticism into their wider ideological framework, embedding it within broader critiques of political and media institutions.
As a result, countering these narratives requires more than simply presenting scientific facts or emphasizing economic benefits of climate action. To address this challenge, democratic political actors must resist the temptation to accommodate or echo sceptical narratives and far-right talking points. Instead, they should reinforce clear, proactive messaging about the need for climate action, ensuring that it aligns with broader democratic and economic policies. Strengthening public engagement in climate debates must go beyond countering misinformation—it must foster genuine political participation and rebuild trust in democratic institutions.