There is clear evidence that technological change will be insufficient to meet UK and global climate goals on its own, leaving a vital role for consumer and business behaviour change.
Indeed, most measures to reach net-zero emissions by mid-century will require at least some behaviour change by the public.
This includes reducing car use, changing diets to eat less red meat and dairy, cutting waste and buying electric vehicles and heat pumps.
The scale of change is profound: limiting warming to 1.5C would mean reducing the average European carbon footprint from 7.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) to 2.8tCO2e per person by 2030.
Behaviour change is also required to adapt to climate risks, such as flooding, drought and heat stress, our research shows.
This includes emergency and long-term behavioural responses, such as evacuation, buying insurance and installing equipment.
However, policies to deliver these behaviour changes are currently lacking in the UK.
In 2023, a House of Lords inquiry concluded that the government’s approach to enabling behaviour change for climate and environmental goals was “seriously inadequate”.
The Skidmore review of net-zero, also published in 2023, similarly concluded that more government action is needed to support behaviour change and advocated a public-engagement strategy to deliver this.
More recently, in a major review for the Climate Change Committee (CCC), my co-authors and I outlined what behavioural science can tell us about how to deliver effective climate policy.
We found that, in general, wider social or practical factors – such as norms, functionality and price – tend to be more influential for encouraging low-carbon behaviours than an individual’s knowledge, values and emotions.
How to change behaviour
There is a sizeable evidence base on how to deliver low-carbon and climate-resilient lifestyles and on changing behaviour in professional contexts.
Using literature searches and a call for evidence, identifying almost 400 sources in total, we examined evidence for what works to change behaviour within eight main areas:
- diet
- consumption
- aviation
- adaptation
- net-zero skills and careers
- business leaders and the transition to sustainability
- land use and farming
- policy acceptability
Numerous behavioural theories and models exist to explain and predict climate mitigation and adaptation actions.
Psychological theories, such as the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) and the value-belief-norm model (VBN) assume action is primarily driven by internal factors, such as attitudes, values and knowledge.
Specifically, the TPB states that behaviour results from intentions, which, in turn, are the outcome of attitudes, perceptions of social norms and ability.
The VBN sees behaviour as the outcome of a sequence of values, which informs beliefs and perceived responsibility for environmental problems, which shapes the moral obligation to act, leading to action.
Since the TPB includes perceived ability, acknowledging external social, physical and economic factors can limit or propel action. Research suggests it does better than the VBN at explaining higher-impact environmental behaviours, such as avoiding driving, than lower-impact behaviours that tend to be more within individuals’ control, such as recycling.
In contrast, sociological theories – such as social practice theory – tend to place more emphasis on the contextual drivers of action, such as physical infrastructure and social conventions.
Social practice theory sees practices – such as showering or cooking – as resulting from the interaction of physical and technological factors, social conventions and skills. These also see action as routine or habitual more often than intentional.
Integrative models also exist that draw on various theories to explain behaviour. One of the most commonly used is the COM-B model, which identifies capabilities, opportunities and motivations as the key drivers of behaviour.
Our review found that, in general, low-carbon and climate-resilient behaviours are driven by both internal and external factors, including:
- Individual knowledge, values and emotions.
- Social factors, such as norms and group identity.
- Practical factors, such as functionality, ease and price.
Of these various drivers, individual factors – such as knowledge – tend to be less influential in changing behaviour than wider social or practical factors.
Consequently, interventions targeting individual decision-making or motivation, such as information provision, tend to be less effective than interventions targeting the context of action. These interventions, such as regulations, incentives and infrastructure changes, typically make behaviour easy, attractive and normal – or even the default.
One review found that informational approaches, such as labelling or in-home displays, were on average only 3% effective. In contrast, “nudges” that adjust choice environments to make sustainable choices easier, but without coercion, were, on average, 25% effective.
These nudges could include locating recycling bins closer than regular waste bins or putting energy consumers on green tariffs (instead of fossil fuel tariffs) by default.
Individual-focused interventions, such as information provision (e.g. campaigns), are known as “downstream” measures, while context-focused interventions, such as nudges, economic measures and regulation, are “upstream” measures.
Despite evidence of its limited efficacy and tendency to exacerbate inequalities, there is a preference amongst policymakers for downstream over upstream interventions.
This is, in part, because the former is more easily experimentally tested and costed, but it is also due to power structures in government, political ideology and skills gaps.
Targeted and timely change
Beyond targeting upstream changes, our review also found that interventions are more effective when they are:
- Targeted – to the specific needs and abilities of different groups.
- Combined – that is, they include downstream and upstream approaches, as well as addressing the multiple behavioural drivers and barriers.
- Timed – to when habits are malleable, such as household renovation or relocation, or when business leaders or farmers are making key investment decisions. (In psychology, this is termed “habit discontinuity”.)
Public engagement is also important for effective behaviour change interventions to both foster acceptance and address contextual factors or constraints to efficacy, our research suggests.
Interventions to change behaviour that are imposed on people without consultation risk being rejected, as seen with the “Gilets Jaunes” in France and London’s Ultra low emission zone (Ulez) expansion protests. Bringing the public into decision-making from the outset to scope a problem and identify solutions is more likely to lead to fairer and more acceptable outcomes.
Climate assemblies and juries are examples of how this is increasingly being achieved. Engagement can also help communicate the need for and benefits of climate action and therefore promote policy acceptance.
From our research over the years at the Centre for Climate Change and Social Transformations (CAST), we know that different approaches work better depending on the sector.
For example, adaptation behaviour change requires a stronger focus on information provision than mitigation actions, since there is little public awareness of why or how to adapt to climate risks.
For transport, congestion charging and reallocating road space from cars to less polluting modes – such as pedestrianisation and low-traffic neighbourhoods – are amongst the most effective ways of cutting car use. Additionally, frequent flyer levies enjoy public support so may be a fair and effective way of curbing aviation growth.
But, in both cases, there is a need for “carrots” as well as “sticks”. Alternatives to driving and flying must also be convenient, affordable and attractive if people are to switch to these lower-carbon modes, our research found.
For diet change, communicating the various benefits of low-carbon diets and carbon labelling – for health and the environment – has some effect. However, our research suggests lowering the price of vegetarian options and making them more available – including the default option – is far more effective.
In one simple, but effective, study, researchers doubled the proportion of vegetarian meals available in canteens – from one-in-four, to two-in-four options. This led to increases in vegetarian meal sales of up to 79%.
But there are still gaps in the evidence base. Little is known, for example, about how to encourage people to adopt climate-resilient behaviours or to reduce flying. More generally, we found little evaluation of real-world interventions.
Removing barriers
Our review concludes with core recommendations for using behavioural science in climate policy. These include identifying behavioural targets – for example, based on carbon impact and feasibility – engaging with the public and combining, timing and tailoring interventions.
While there are evidence gaps, our research shows that much is already known about how to foster low-carbon, climate-resilient behaviour change.
Moreover, the public wants to play their part in tackling climate change. Public concern about climate change has not been reduced by Covid-19 or the cost-of-living crisis – and most people in the UK and around the world agree that individual behaviour change is needed.
We found that the government now needs to use these insights from behavioural science to remove the barriers to behaviour change. This, in turn, will help accelerate the net-zero transition and adapt to climate risks.
The post Guest post: How human behaviour shapes effective climate policies appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Guest post: How human behaviour shapes effective climate policies
Israel’s bombardment of Gaza during the conflict that broke out in October 2023 has wrecked progress towards adapting the enclave to climate change and left two million Gazans vulnerable to heatwaves, drought and disease, the Palestinian Authority (PA) said in a new climate plan submitted to the United Nations.
Palestine’s third nationally determined contribution (NDC), uploaded to the UN climate body’s website this week, says that while “the aggression on the Gaza Strip did not make the climate worse”, “it removed the housing, water and sanitation systems, health facilities, energy networks, roads and livelihoods through which people absorb a climate they were already struggling with.”
The 91-page document lists the types of infrastructure it says Israel has destroyed and notes how the destruction will worsen the impacts of climate change. It says the bombing of hospitals and rising hunger have make it harder for Gazans to cope with the health impacts of climate-driven heatwaves and waterborne diseases.
The destruction of water tanks, boreholes and desalination plants, meanwhile, have left Gazans struggling with the effects of water shortages and drought, while mass unemployment reduces people’s ability to afford climate-driven price rises. The erasure of most of the Strip’s homes makes it more difficult for people to avoid the sun’s increasing heat, the NDC said.
Many Gazans are now living in the ruins of collapsed buildings or in makeshift shelters and tents that offer little or no protection from high temperatures.
Palestine’s previous goals to cut emissions and adapt to climate change in Gaza, expressed in its last NDC five years ago, were based on a pre-war baseline that “no longer describes anything that exists”, the NDC says. Progress made since 2021 has now been destroyed, it adds.
Green reconstruction of Gaza
Instead of continuing to aim for these adaptation and emissions-reduction goals, the PA is now calling for the green reconstruction of Gaza. It says buildings should be constructed again in an energy-efficient manner with solar panels and served with modern water, waste and transport systems.
While the PA, controlled by the Fatah political party, continues to claim legitimate control of Gaza, the strip was effectively governed by Fatah’s rival Hamas between 2007 and the recent war. Control is now split between Israel and the political wing of Islamist militant group Hamas, after a US-backed ceasefire took effect in October 2025, although a UN-backed committee plans to take over.
-
Germany uses funding to pressure climate groups on Israel-Gaza war
Many Global South climate groups are funded by the German government, a political ally of Israel, and feel unable to criticise Israel’s military action in Gaza -
Loss and damage fund urged to hold crisis meeting on Nepal
The new fund is coming under pressure from developing nations to respond quickly to climate disasters rather than just financing longer-term projects -
More support needed to power Africa’s food systems with renewables, experts say
Renewable energy could help African food businesses boost productivity and competitiveness, but the upfront cost, fragmented markets and limited financing stand in the way
The United Nations, European Union and World Bank have jointly estimated that Gaza needs $71.4 billion of investment in the next two years to recover and build back. This process should be Palestinian-led, they said in April.
But US President Donald Trump has said the US should “take over” and “own” Gaza and redevelop it as the “Riviera of the Middle East”. Israel’s right-wing prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said that Israel should control the territory with civil administration managed by Palestinians favourable to Israel.
With occupation, targets conditional
In the other part of Palestine, the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority carries out some government functions, but ultimate control rests with Israel, which has occupied the West Bank since 1967.
Because Israel controls planning in most of the West Bank, the NDC argues that the PA cannot pursue all the climate projects it wants. In addition, Israel restricts the movement of PA officials, making data collection difficult, and controls the West Bank’s electricity supply meaning that the PA cannot control whether it comes from dirty or clean sources of energy.
Given this situation, the NDC says that all of Palestine’s new climate targets are conditional but it will aim to reduce emissions 12.8% below a business-as-usual baseline by 2035 and 17.1% by 2040. If the Israeli occupation ends and Palestine regains full sovereignty over its land and resources, it will aim for reductions of 15.1% and 19.1% by 2035 and 2040 respectively under an “independence pathway”.
That could allow, for example, for greater electrification and reducing emissions per unit of growth, the document said.
To achieve the 2035 emissions-reduction target and adapt to the impacts of climate change, the PA says it needs $8.6 billion in total. This funding would be spent on measures like encouraging solar farms and rooftop solar and scaling up solar water heating to cover four-fifths of households. To complement the planned increase in solar power, the authority wants to modernise the electricity grid and install battery storage.
In the transport sector, it aims to promote the uptake of electric vehicles, develop bus rapid transit corridors and scrap old polluting trucks and buses. In Gaza in particular, it wants to deploy 66 electric buses when the conflict ends.
To adapt to climate-driven drought, the NDC includes initiatives to reuse wastewater through treatment plants, build desalination plants in Gaza to remove salt from seawater, and promote irrigation for farmers.
The new climate plan was prepared by Palestine’s Environment Quality Authority, with support from the United Nations Development Programme and the governments of Britain and Spain.
The United Nations recognised Palestine’s statehood in 2012 and it joined the UN’s climate convention and signed the Paris climate agreement – which requires countries to submit more ambitious NDCs every five years – in 2016.
The Israeli foreign ministry did not respond to a request for comment. But in late 2024, then Israeli climate envoy Gideon Behar told Climate Home News that the war and the resulting environmental destruction in Gaza was the fault of Hamas.
The post Palestine: Israel’s bombing has left Gaza vulnerable to climate change appeared first on Climate Home News.
Palestine: Israel’s bombing has left Gaza vulnerable to climate change
Solar power generation in the UK reached a new record over the summer of 2026, as temperatures across the nation soared, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief.
Collectively over June, July and August, solar farms and rooftops generated 8.8 terawatt-hours (TWh) of electricity in the UK*, as shown in the chart below.
Speaking to Carbon Brief, Chris Hewett, chief executive of trade association Solar Energy UK welcomed the new record, adding that it was driven by “clear skies and continued growth in deployment”.
This surge in generation took place amid the hottest summer on record in the UK, with five heatwaves between May and August.
Summer 2026 was the sixth sunniest on record, with more than 620 hours of sunshine, according to the Met Office. England and Wales – which experienced the most extreme heat – saw their second-sunniest summers on record.
June 2026 was the hottest June in England since records began in 1884, according to Met Office data, while Wales and the UK as a whole experienced their second-warmest June.
It was the driest July for England and Wales since records began in 1836, with some parts of London seeing no rain at all in the month, while Wisley in Surrey had no rain for 62 days.
In England, temperatures peaked at 38.1C at Kew Gardens in London on 13 August.
According to the Met Office, this summer’s record mean temperature was made 130 times more likely by climate change.
Amid these hot and sunny months, solar power generation increased 23% from the same period in 2025. This is double the level of solar generation over the summer of 2021, according to Carbon Brief analysis.
While solar panels can be affected by periods of extreme heat, the longer hours of daylight and higher levels of irradiation over the summer more than offset any efficiency losses.
June, July and August all saw solar set new monthly records for solar generation – July saw the highest solar generation in a calendar month ever, with 3.3TWh meeting 15% of overall electricity demand for the month.
As of the end of August, the total UK solar generation in 2026 stood at 17TWh – 13% higher than the same point in 2025.
The number of solar farms and rooftop installations has grown substantially in recent years, helping to boost generation. Domestic rooftop solar accounts for around 29% of total capacity.
In 2025, the UK’s solar capacity reached 21 gigawatts (GW) by the third quarter of the year, according to UK government figures. This is a jump of 3GW, or 18%, year-on-year, as Carbon Brief reported in January.
(Capacity is the maximum output possible from an electricity generation, whereas generation is what was produced over a certain time period, such as a day, month or year.)
According to the University of Sheffield, the installed solar capacity is now nearly 24GW.
This includes nearly 172,000 solar installations that have been fitted across the UK since the start of 2026, according to recent government figures. In July alone, more than 19,800 rooftop solar panels were installed – the equivalent of one installation every two minutes.
In total, nearly 1.7m households in the UK now have solar panels installed.
Over 26 heatwave days this summer – periods of at least three days when temperatures exceed the Met Office’s county-level heatwave temperature threshold – UK households with rooftop solar panels avoided an estimated £86.7m in electricity costs, according to analysis by Utility Bidder.
Talking about the surge in solar generation this summer, Hewett says:
“[It] not only kept bills down for people with solar and batteries in their homes, but helped keep overall power prices much lower than they would have been if Britain had been relying on more gas generation during the day”.
Despite the record generation, no new half-hourly solar power output record was set in the summer of 2026. This still stands at 15.2 megawatts (MW) on 23 April 2026.
* This article refers to the UK throughout, but strictly relates to the island of Great Britain, made up of England, Scotland and Wales. Northern Ireland is part of the separate, all-Ireland electricity system.
related
Factcheck: 10 flaws in the Conservative report on ‘cheap power’
Q&A: What is ‘long-duration energy storage’ – and why does the UK need it?
Q&A: What does China’s 15th ‘five-year plan’ for renewables mean for climate change?
Analysis: Wind and solar power overtake fossil fuels in Germany for first time ever
The post Analysis: UK solar power hits record high over summer 2026 appeared first on Carbon Brief.
Farmers around Europe are dealing with the aftermath of a summer of extreme heat, drought and wildfires that were exacerbated by climate change.
Human-caused climate change is increasing the severity and likelihood of many extreme weather events around the world, which is increasing volatility for food producers.
This summer resulted in, for example, shrunken potatoes in the Netherlands, reduced carrot harvests in France, dried-up rice fields in Italy and scorched olive groves in parts of the Mediterranean region.
Global food prices are currently at their highest level since early 2023 due to “heatwaves and energy price dynamics”, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization.
Other factors such as blocked fertiliser supplies in the Strait of Hormuz and high fuel costs have also played a role in this year’s agricultural outputs.
In the six charts below, Carbon Brief provides a snapshot of the impact this summer’s extremes are considered to have had on crop production and yields across Europe.
1. Most EU countries expect to see declines in cereal production this year
2. Most countries are recording reduced crop yields
3. Around €2bn worth of cereal losses after June heatwave
4. UK yields of wheat, barley and oats are all due to drop in 2026
5. Maize production in France is due to hit a four-decade low
1. Most EU countries expect to see declines in cereal production this year
France, in particular, will see heavy losses in the amount of cereals – such as wheat, barley and oats – it produces this year, according to European Commission data.
French cereal production is expected to drop by almost 8 megatonnes (Mt) in 2026, compared to 2025.
The chart above shows that most European countries, aside from Bulgaria, will also see production losses this year.
Germany is due to see the second-largest losses in production, dropping by almost 4Mt compared to 2025.
Prof Til Feike, a cropping systems expert at the Julius Kühn-Institut, says many areas in Germany and Austria, as with other parts of Europe, have been “hit hard by a long-lasting dry period in combination with record-high heatwaves”.
This has resulted in dry grassland for animals and lower yields of maize, which is a “key fodder crop” for livestock. He tells Carbon Brief:
“In the long run, farming must adapt better to more extreme weather conditions, not only heat and drought, but also prolonged wet periods. So, there is no one-fits-all solution for climate change adaptation.”
2. Most countries are recording reduced crop yields
Heat and a lack of water have “substantially worsened” crop expectations this summer in western and most of central Europe, according to a recent bulletin from the EU Joint Research Centre.
Yields are expected to be “significantly reduced”, with local crop failures “likely” in areas such as France, southern Germany, northern and central Italy, and Hungary, it added.
The chart below shows that yields of cereal grains – which, here, refers to the tonnes of a grain grown per hectare of land – are expected to fall in most EU countries in 2026.
Slovakia, Austria and Hungary are expected to see the largest declines in cereal yields, reducing by more than one tonne per hectare in 2026 compared to 2025.
The recent EU bulletin noted that irrigated crops performed well in Portugal this summer – the country with the largest yield increases. Other crops relying on rainfall showed growing signs of heat stress, it added.
3. Around €2bn worth of cereal losses after June heatwave
The record heatwave that hit many parts of Europe in June contributed to an estimated €2-2.3bn in cumulative grain production losses, as shown in the chart below.
The intense June heat in western Europe would have been “virtually impossible” just 50 years ago, according to a rapid climate attribution study. It was the region’s hottest June on record.
The Energy & Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU) thinktank analysed June and July 2026 grain forecasts from Coceral, a European grain traders association.
ECIU estimated lost supply by multiplying the change in tonnes of grains between these two months by prices for harvest delivery in 28 European countries.
Major grain producers France, Germany, Hungary and Spain accounted for 86% of the lost revenue, according to the ECIU.
Extreme heat is also expected to have a wider economic impact across the continent. Analysis from Triodos Bank found that this summer’s extreme weather could reduce the EU’s gross domestic product (GDP) by around 1% this year, or around €180bn.
4. UK yields of wheat, barley and oats are all due to drop in 2026
If current trends continue, the average yields for cereals and oilseeds will result in the UK’s worst harvest since detailed records began in 1984, according to ECIU.
Barley yields could fall by 15%, oats by 14% and wheat yields by 6% year-on-year, according to 2026 harvest surveys from the Agriculture and Horticulture Development Board, a non-departmental public body that provides agricultural data to the UK government.
ECIU said that, even if the situation improves, this year is still expected to be one of the five worst harvests on record. This means that four of the five worst harvests in the UK have occurred in the past decade.
Consumers will likely see higher prices and/or smaller vegetables in supermarkets as a result, Tim O’Malley, chairman of UK company Nationwide Produce, told BBC News in August.
Other crops, such as berries, have grown successfully in the extreme heat. But the Guardian noted fears this could dip later this year “as plants become exhausted from heavy cropping during the heatwave”.
5. Maize production in France is due to hit a four-decade low
France has been acutely affected by this summer’s extreme weather, with more than 7,300 excess deaths during heatwaves and a record number of weather stations recording temperatures of above 40C.
The country is the EU’s largest agricultural producer, but heat, drought and wildfires have affected many crops.
The chart below shows that maize production is set to drop by more than one-third (35%) year-on-year.
This could result in France’s lowest maize production since 1980, according to data from Agreste, the country’s agriculture ministry’s statistics service.
Due to the heat, “record-early” grape harvests have also been recorded in various parts of the nation since mid-July, reported Le Monde. In some cases, this means “smaller, less juicy grapes, which will yield less wine”, explained the newspaper.
6. Declines in EU grains since 2025
Overall in the EU, data and projections indicate declines in the output of cereal grains this year.
Cereal production is set to fall by 9% compared to 2025, according to the European Commission.
Just one year in the past decade – 2024 – recorded lower production levels.
Maize production is set to be particularly affected, with projections indicating a 13% drop, to 52Mt – the lowest level in the EU since 2007.
The post How this summer’s heat and drought impacted crops in Europe – in six charts appeared first on Carbon Brief.
How this summer’s heat and drought impacted crops in Europe – in six charts
-
Climate Change1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Greenhouse Gases2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
Guest post: Why China is still building new coal – and when it might stop
-
Climate Change2 years ago嘉宾来稿：满足中国增长的用电需求 光伏加储能“比新建煤电更实惠”
-
Renewable Energy11 months agoSending Progressive Philanthropist George Soros to Prison?
-
Climate Change2 years ago
Bill Discounting Climate Change in Florida’s Energy Policy Awaits DeSantis’ Approval
-
Greenhouse Gases1 year ago
嘉宾来稿：探究火山喷发如何影响气候预测
-
Carbon Footprint2 years agoUS SEC’s Climate Disclosure Rules Spur Renewed Interest in Carbon Credits