Have you heard the saying, “the only constant is change?” Whether or not the Greek philosopher Heraclitus actually said this, it’s become a hallmark response to people expressing uncomfortableness with change and uncertainty. When confronted with change, responses can happen along a spectrum; from digging in our heels and flat out denying that change is happening to taking action to usher in the change we want for ourselves and for our communities. At this year’s Summer Institute for Climate Change Education we dove deeply into the idea of change.
As an older millennial, I have found a way to live with the uncertainty of life. I’ll admit, sometimes it’s through apathy or defensiveness, but mostly it’s with acceptance and an eagerness to learn. I’m interested in going beyond merely acknowledging that change is happening, let’s explore the variables that help people find their agency within a changing environment.
So what’s the recipe for meeting change with openness? How can we remain permeable to the uncertainty that we are all faced with?
This year, the overarching theme at the Institute was Changemakers in Action. Originally coined by Ashoka’s founder in 1980 and later put into the public consciousness by Bill Clinton during the 2016 presidential race, the term changemaker has been a name that refers to a person that sees themselves as capable of creating large-scale positive change. Since then the term has taken on many different meanings, all unique to their own contexts.
The key phrase here being “sees themselves as capable”; that’s where agency comes in. Agency, or the sense of control that you feel in your life and the faith you have in your ability to handle a wide range of situations, is crucial for people to find their niche for stewarding the change they want to see. At the Summer Institute, participants engaged in a number of events aimed at increasing their confidence, competence, and agency in teaching climate change and creating opportunities for action within their communities. Read on to learn more about the 5 components of building agency in the climate change movement.
- Accepting the Urgency
We once talked about climate change as something that would harm future generations, but we can no longer ignore that we are all experiencing the impacts right now, while some of us have been for much longer. Climate change affects our day to day lives. Whether its extreme heat or smaller, seemling unnoticeable changes in the relationships between plants and animals. Summer Institute attendees explored the science behind climate change and how Indigenous peoples have been adapting to changes, including climate change, for millennia. When we see examples of other people and living creatures taking action to adapt, we know that we can also take action.
- Feeling the Connection
When asked if they feel personally impacted by climate change, the majority of U.S. Americans say no. This is unfortunate, because we know that climate change affects the food we eat, the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the places that provide us with shelter. Climate change also impacts people’s mental and physical health. At the Summer Institute we explored the connection between these impacts to better understand the deep connection between our lives and the changing environment. Feeling the gravity of climate change’s impacts on our day to day lives can be overwhelming, but it can also create a spark for action. If we can accept that people and other living things that we love are being harmed by climate change, we are more likely to do something about it.
- Building Relationships
It can be challenging to see the direct connection between our lives and climate change, especially when most of us don’t talk about climate on a regular basis and we don’t hear about it in the media. It is even harder when we live in communities that are actively dissuading us from acknowledging the climate crises. Developing relationships with people who know and care about the issue is vital to inspiring climate action. Attendees at the Summer Institute were connected with an international community of like-minded educators seeking to learn more about what they can do to increase their climate literacy and bring it back to their communities. In workshops, the online discussion forum, and in-person events, attendees built connections that will sustain them beyond the Summer Institute.
- Understanding the Levers for Change
The climate crisis is a systemic issue that requires systemic change. Not all solutions to climate change are equally impactful, and not all are available to everyone. At Climate Generation, we believe education is the most important systemic climate solution; it is how we prepare ourselves and our future generations to thrive. At the Summer Institute, we explored this complex topic through a series of workshops from experts across many disciplines, including politics, economics, and education. Educating ourselves and others can better prepare us to actively participate in a green economy, help us understand political decision-making, open our eyes to the disinformation campaigns working against us, and invigorate solutions in our communities. Education is a climate change solution.
- Taking Action
We get it. It’s hard to see the road to a just, sustainable future without a clear path to get there. That’s why we need to work in relationship with one another and build bridges across differences so we can hear stories of success. This year at the Summer Institute, we highlighted five groups who created climate change solutions for their communities. Through thoughtful, exploratory discussion, educators learned of the problem they were hoping to solve and the steps they took to get there. Presenters shared about the nuts and bolts of the projects, including who they worked with, what hurdles they came across, and what types of support made the work successful.
Educators left with a better vision for possibilities in their own local context.
At Climate Generation, we view changemakers as people who understand that they can be agents of change in the world, and work to make a difference through inclusive and collaborative problem solving. From youth advocating to their local policy makers in the capitol to the teachers who helped them coordinate rides to get there, we are all changemakers in our own way. We encourage you to see opportunities to build your own agency for taking climate action this year.
Interested in attending the Summer Institute for Climate Change Education? View the full Summer Institute Agenda and keep an eye on our plans for next year. Educators will be engaging with climate change education throughout the year through our online Teach Climate Network. Are you in the network? Check it out and sign up!
Lindsey Kirkland supports on-going climate change education programs for K-12 educators and public audiences. As the Education Manager, she also develops a vision for and provides strategic coordination for programs focusing primarily on professional development for teachers and informal educators. Lindsey is adjunct faculty at Hamline University and supported the development of their Climate Literacy Certificate, a contributing author of NSTA’s Connect Science Learning journal, and an active member of Climate Literacy and the Energy Awareness Network (CLEAN) and the North American Association of Environmental Education (NAAEE) Guidelines for Excellence writing team. Lindsey has served as an environmental educator with the AmeriCorps program the NJ Watershed Ambassadors, worked as a naturalist and education program coordinator for the NJ Audubon Society, and assisted in program development for museums, universities, and new nonprofit organizations in the United States and Australia. Lindsey holds a BS in Environment, Conservation and Fisheries Sciences from the University of Washington in Seattle, WA and a MEd in Science Education from Rutgers University in New Brunswick, NJ. In her spare time, Lindsey enjoys spending time with her husband and her son.
The post Reflections: 2024 Summer Institute for Climate Change Education appeared first on Climate Generation.
Reflections: 2024 Summer Institute for Climate Change Education
SYDNEY, Thursday 30 October 2026 — In response to reports that the Albanese government is set to introduce draft legislation this year that would seek to ban data centres in Australia’s suburbs, Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:
“These reports are a testament to the growing community opposition to these completely inappropriate AI factories that have sprung up across our suburbs, and Big Tech corporations should take heed — the data centre build-out must not happen without the endorsement of the Australian people.
“But the government can’t simply ship this problem out to regional Australia without addressing the fundamental issues with this extractive new industry.
“We’re already seeing a trend of AI data centre proposals moving to the regions, in areas that are more water-scarce, more environmentally sensitive, and next to sources of fracked and coal seam gas to support their massive BYO gas-fired power plans — a pattern we’ve seen play out in the United States.
“From the Beetaloo Basin in the NT to the Western Downs in Qld, we’re seeing a wave of AI data centre proposals that would see new gas fast-tracked to support their massive energy demand, and threaten to completely derail Australia’s energy transition.
“Just as suburban Australians are asking, “what for?”, regional communities like Berry Springs and Dalby do not want dirty data centres setting up shop with absolutely no benefit to their communities. Greenpeace is calling for a moratorium on AI data centre developments until strict and enforceable safeguards are in place to protect our climate and our communities.”
-ENDS-
Media contact
Kate O’Callaghan on +61 406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org
AI data centre ban in suburbs would not address fundamental issues: Greenpeace
In the thick of the COP29 climate summit in Azerbaijan in 2024, the UN climate talks were rattled by what can only be described as a major PR disaster. The BBC, Reuters and The Guardian all carried headlines, attributed to leading climate policy experts, that the COPs were “no longer fit for purpose”.
The articles outlined a series of reforms called for in an open letter signed by 22 eminent scientists and politicians, including a former UN secretary-general and previous UN climate chief, with a further 150 lending their support. The headlines shook confidence in the COP process, just as governments were wrestling over a new climate finance goal.
The Club of Rome – which handled the media relations for the letter – hurried to say that its “constructive, supportive ideas” had been “misinterpreted”. Negotiators kept calm(ish) and carried on, in the end landing the finance goal after some high-stakes drama on the final day.
-
Early speakers’ list suggests few powerful leaders will attend COP31
Just 77 heads of state or government are scheduled to address the COP31 climate summit in Antalya, a third less than the COP28 peak -
Africa wants adaptation finance on COP31 agenda, raising risk of a fight
The African Group wants dedicated space on tripling adaptation finance, the Green Climate Fund and trade, setting up a possible clash
To my surprise, when I went back this week to read the letter again, I could not find the offending line about the COPs not being fit for purpose. The Club of Rome has yet to respond to my query about its disappearance.
Whatever happened to the wording, that sentiment has been widely shared. COPs have ballooned in size while the importance of their outcomes seems to have diminished since the 2015 Paris Agreement (with the exception of the 2023 COP in Dubai where countries agreed to transition away from fossil fuels in energy systems).
The same on the surface
Two years on from those painful headlines in Baku, has anything changed for the better? You might be forgiven for thinking not. Official decisions are still made by consensus rather than the majority voting some have called for to stop blockers.
Tens of thousands of officials, activists and business execs still scurry around the halls to an ever-growing list of side events, roundtables and dialogues, while deals still come down to rows, all-nighters and jargon-filled texts adopted to rounds of applause.
But it would not be true to say that COPs have completely failed to respond to the very real need to translate the words of the Paris Agreement into action in the outside world.
Global warming is projected to be around 1.3C lower this century than it would have been if the world had not committed to tackle the climate crisis under that accord. Developing countries have a valued space at COPs in which their voices have equal weight in decision-making, unlike in many other international fora. And most importantly, perhaps, there has been a subtle shift, tipping the balance away from negotiating towards doing.
Brazil branded last year’s summit in Belém as the “COP of Implementation”, corralling the sprawling Action Agenda into six axes. This was a bid to impose some structure on the mushrooming efforts between governments, UN agencies, cities, businesses and civil society to set targets and spur faster results on their pet issues, from methane emissions to health and adaptation in conflict zones. COP30 alone saw the launch of 120 “plans to accelerate solutions”.
COP30 roadmaps off the cuff
Meanwhile, as the formal negotiations drew to a close, it was clear that consensus decision-making was evolving into something a little more improvised.
With only around half of all countries on board with the idea of a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago announced his team would put one together over the coming year, along with another on how to meet a global goal to halt deforestation by 2030. Those roadmaps will be launched next week, presented and discussed at COP31, though it’s still unclear whether or how they’ll be incorporated into the formal negotiating agenda.
Some leading policy-makers don’t think that matters too much. Speaking to journalists before the Antalya summit, COP30 CEO Ana Toni and Dutch climate minister Stientje van Veldhoven said “coalitions of the willing” can move ahead without needing consensus from the COPs. This, they said, was evident this year at the first global conference on TAFF, co-chaired by van Veldhoven and attended by 60 countries.
“Consensus or no-consensus in the general COP doesn’t make a difference for the choices I have to make in my country to get my country to phase out fossil fuels,” said the Dutch minister. The Netherlands recently became one of the first to publish a national TAFF plan.
COP31 banks on flagship voluntary initiatives
This thinking has permeated the management and expected outcomes of this year’s COP too. Earlier this year, Türkiye, supported by international energy agencies, floated the idea of a voluntary goal to boost electrification to 35% of the world’s final energy consumption by 2035 – and this is now being touted as one of the main results to be expected from Antalya.
Türkiye is also championing a pledge on AI and climate, while co-host Australia is pushing to ease access to climate finance for least developed countries and small island states.
COP31 presidency announces AI pledge as UN climate chief says Big Tech ‘on thin ice’
None of these needs consensus. But with a political cover decision already in the works, as trailed by the COP presidents, they – and perhaps the fossil fuel roadmap – may find a home in the official text if language acceptable to most can be found, giving them them additional weight.
UNFCCC reform process in the shadows
Formal reform is underway too, if quietly. UN climate chief Simon Stiell is leading a review informed by ongoing consultations with a group of 15 well-respected climate policy experts, three of whom signed the open letter in 2024.
Among them is leading Swedish climate and sustainability scientist Johan Rockström who has strong ideas about how to make COPs function better, including a switch to majority voting. He told the same press briefing nothing stands in the way of this, because the rules of procedure for making decisions at COPs have never been formally agreed.
Still, to get away from the default setting of consensus would require agreement on a new system that may be impossible to achieve given the rise in bullying tactics by fossil fuel heavyweights.
Comment: The UN climate process was built for negotiation – now it must support implementation
The deliberations with the high-level policy gurus, as reflected in a summary of June’s session in Bonn, largely echo what’s already happening organically, calling for stronger partnerships and accountability both in and between the Action Agenda and negotiations. It doesn’t mention voting.
A general overview of the reform exercise says that “improving and optimizing the [UN climate] process over the medium to long term… will be critical to fostering trust, enhancing collaboration, and catalyzing increased ambition”.
In the short term, don’t hold your breath for anything concrete on reform at COP31 but watch for signs in what ends up dominating the headlines from Türkiye.
The post Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines appeared first on Climate Home News.
Editor’s Desk: COP reform is happening quietly, behind the headlines
With the COP31 climate summit in Turkey looming, all eyes are on China to see what the country will push for in the negotiations.
At COP30 last year, China helped to secure a “dialogue” on climate-related “unilateral trade measures”, as well as a two-year “work programme” concerning climate finance.
The nation also championed south-south cooperation throughout the conference and co-led a summit on methane, alongside Brazil and the UK.
In a recent press conference, China’s environment vice-minister Li Gao noted the need to “uphold multilateralism” and send a “clear political signal” that the global community is united around climate action.