Reusable cups, recycling, taking public transport, eating “greener”, cycling to work – we are all familiar with the kinds of actions we can take to reduce our personal environmental impact.
Does this promotion of individual behaviours crowd out or distract from support for large-scale action on climate change? Is it a convenient distraction perpetrated by corporations and governments who should be doing more?
On the other hand, could buying that reusable cup be the gateway to greater engagement in collective action? Will it lead to attending demonstrations, signing petitions or supporting climate policies?
In new research, our team looked at these questions using data from the National Climate Action Survey. Running since 2021, this survey gives detailed insights into what Australians think, feel and do about climate change.
What we did
We followed almost 2,800 Australian over four years (2021–24) and asked them about the kinds of individual pro-environment behaviours they did. We also asked about their engagement in collective actions and support for climate policies such as a net zero emissions target.
We also asked people about their perceptions of the risks climate change posed to themselves and society, how capable of taking action on climate change they felt (“personal efficacy”), and how much obligation they felt to assist in efforts to mitigate climate change (“personal norms”).
We then examined the links between people’s answers. We wanted to see whether individual action was a barrier or a gateway to large-scale climate action.
Not a barrier
We found that people who reported more personal actions also took part in collective activities and supported climate policies.
There was no evidence for the idea that personal action might reduce collective action or support for strong climate policy. This goes against arguments that people may feel they have done enough, overestimate the impact of individual actions, or feel less worried about climate change.
In fact, the positive link between individual and collective action was stronger among people who perceived a greater risk from climate change, believed in their own ability to take action, and felt they had an obligation to act.
We also found younger, more educated and female respondents reported stronger support for climate policy.
But not a gateway either
We found no evidence that increasing (or decreasing) personal climate actions in one year had any effect on collective or political engagement the following year. In other words, personal action doesn’t seem to be a substitute for bigger action or a gateway to it.
This pattern of findings goes against the “individual action is a distraction” argument, or at least the idea that it’s a significant distraction. However, it also shows that small lifestyle changes do not lead people automatically towards activism or system reform.
Overall, the results imply that everyday environmental behaviours are expressions of people’s existing values and concerns. They do not appear to be catalysts – or obstacles – for broader political engagement and climate support.
Decreasing or increasing engagement?
We also found a slight decline over our study period in the overall level of reported collective actions and support for climate policies.
It is unclear what is driving this decline. It is small and so could just be statistical “noise” across the waves of the survey. But it could reflect a genuine change over time.
One possible explanation is the replacement of the climate crisis with other apparently more immediate, tangible concerns, such as the cost-of-living crisis.
Climate and economic stability are inextricably linked, so logically one of these crises should not replace the other in people’s minds.
Nevertheless, when people are under more financial pressure, they may have less time, energy, or willingness to engage in collective action. They may also be less likely to support policies that are perceived to have economic costs.
But whatever the reason, our results suggest the decline is not driven by greater engagement in individual climate action.
Complements, not rivals
Our study suggests that encouraging individual actions is unlikely to crowd out broader climate engagement, provided those actions are not presented as quick and sufficient solutions to climate change on their own.
This is not to dismiss the concern that governments and companies target consumer behaviour to shift their responsibility away from systemic reform.
Rather, it is to reinforce the crucial point that addressing climate change requires coordinated responses at multiple levels. Individual actions must complement systemic ones, rather than replace them.
