A sad truth about our Inconvenient Species is that fear by itself typically DOES NOT generate behaviour change.
This reality - known by most public health educators - but for some reason ignored by way too many sustainability advocates is:
"What's the persuasive alchemy that allows a communicator to trouble recipients deeply about the negative outcome of their bad habits without pushing them to deny the problem in an attempt to control their now-heightened fears?
The communicator has only to add to the chilling message clear information about legitimate, available steps the recipients can take to change their health-threatening habits."
Robert Cialdini, PRE-SUASION (2016)
It's why anti-smoking educators put QUIT links on their "terrible future" messaging.
But how often do you see this simple thing done on a climate disaster message? Or a species loss message?
And if it is there, how often is it anything more than "lobby politicians and consume less" - and does that actually qualify as "clear information about "clear information about legitimate, available steps the recipients can take"?
Anyone who's looked in a supermarket rubbish skip, or observed their national government's progress on environmental policy in 2026 has GOT to question the legitimacy of those "steps".
And with 30 years of solutions development, commercialisation and scaling, there are hundreds of great options.
So if you want more systems change, faster from our change-avoidant human systems, then see what you can do to add solutions links to disaster porn you come across. (And find a practical, systems-level action you can contribute to today.)
