Has the Climate Emergency Backfired?

What kind of mood has the climate emergency created, since it was declared in the UK Parliament on May 1st 2019? Has sounding the alarm done more harm than good, or was loud shock factor essential to cut through? Is the emergency narrative helping or hindering our efforts to tackle the crisis?

It was great to be in the room as two teams passionately pitched “For” and “Against” the motion “The Climate Emergency Has Backfired” at Nature & Climate House during SXSW London 2025.

The lineup included Louis VI (rapper-zoologist), Chris Kenna (CEO & diversity advocate), Matt Golding (creative strategist), Will Attenborough (actor and campaigner), Kresse Wesling (circular economy pioneer), Phoebe Tickell (scientist & systems thinker), Mark Maslin (academic), Robin Millington (business leader) Pooja Tilvawala (founder and youth campaigner) and Greg de Temmerman (CEO & scientist).

The Case for Emergency Language

Will Attenborough made a firm case that the emergency framing has been essential: “We needed to name the emergency for what it was, to unleash the creative… naming the emergency is the power.” His point actually chimed across both teams, whether for or against, were all focused. The climate movement galvanised a first audience and has triggered what we need next – artists, activists, and creatives in unprecedented ways.

Chris Kenna was emphatic on mobilisation: “The emergency has galvanised so many people to make a change.”  Kresse Wesling too cited her own journey and that of many others. There are so many who have “responded to the emergency with action, energy. Just because I’m not in the news doesn’t mean this isn’t happening. We aren’t covering the people who are solving the problem.”

Beyond the Echo Chamber

On what’s not reported, the debate also surfaced crucial questions about representation and messaging. Pooja called out the media and the attendees for their focus on the stories of those who still need to wake up to the crisis, as opposed to those who are already living it. Louis also called out the movement: “If it’s reached this room, it’s failed because this room is not the global majority.”

Phoebe Tickell’s perspective was particularly sharp on why we’ve failed to reach so many: 95% of decisions are based on emotion and we justify it afterwards with logic… the far right tap into emotions—’you’re fed up’ you want belonging, pride, community. “[We’ve been] outsmarted by populists while hiding in our echo chamber.

And I loved Greg de Temmerman’s take on the stories we do or don’t hear: “The people controlling the dying world don’t want it to die.”

The Emotional Toll

But the debate revealed a crucial tension in the stories and tone the climate emergency has pushed to the fore. Phoebe Tickell warned that we may have “accidentally hit the snooze button” by overwhelming people with fear-based messaging. “We forgot how humans think, feel and change their minds… Guilt, fear, despair that facts trigger—they don’t take action, they’re afraid.”

Louis VI put it even more starkly: “when was the last time screaming in someone’s face got them to do something.” Despite 89% of people wanting climate action, they feel like they’re in the minority—a devastating communication failure.

The Vision Gap

Matt Golding highlighted what’s missing from our current approach: “People are already scared… We need to look at where the really exciting stories are. Joyous futures people actually want to live in with affordable good food and housing.” The problem isn’t just the emergency framing—it’s the absence of a compelling alternative vision. He added: “Keep talking about climate we’re cloth eared to all the other issues people are facing.”

This echoed themes from Kresse Wesling, who noted that while the emergency messaging has done “a great job of making people aware,” we now need to “evolve our storytelling and speak in different ways.”

My Take: Emergency Plus Vision

Having attended both this debate and a recent Demos event on engaging the public with net zero—with similar themes of hope and connection—my take aligns with team against failure. The climate emergency framing worked as a mobilizing device and continues to be necessary. But what we urgently need now is a new narrative packed with hope and an inspiring, creative vision.

People are facing multiple crises—cost of living, housing, health—and can’t engage with more fear and figures. They need promise and possibility. This chimes perfectly with a brilliant Wild Minds podcast episode I listened to with Transition Towns’ Rob Hopkins recently, on “falling in love with the future” and the need to create a sense of longing rather than dread.

The emergency was the alarm bell. Now we need the roadmap to somewhere people actually want to go. As Louis VI concluded: “Let’s move in love not fear.”

—

The debate was a truly fun format called Debateable hosted by Kite Insights Founder Sophie Lambin and journalist Maeve Campbell at Canva’s Bersey Warehouse.

Read more:

Unleashing the Power of Imagination with Rob Hopkins

Climate Insights: ‘Involving the public in achieving net zero’