Learning from Denmark: To drive climate action and solutions, we need a unifying, positive language.

This is a call to rethink and reframe sustainability and climate action efforts in Australia. It is about taking stock, learning from the past, and setting a new course forward – a proactive and positive move towards change.

Welcome to the green transition! Or should we call it the global transition? Or simply the transition? Either way, we need a name for this ‘net-zero-carbon-sustainability-redirection-thing’ – and we need it now.

Recently, I was in Denmark, walking through cities, talking to people I met – friends, family and their neighbours – and reflecting on the enormous differences between Denmark and Australia, especially in response to the climate crisis.

As scientists have been warning the global community since the 1970s, our burning of fossil fuels and our agricultural practices are heating the planet, causing extreme weather events and many other problems. In recent years this has become increasingly obvious. It is a wicked and existential problem which is getting worse every day. In a normal world, everyone would expect that such problems would be a matter for our governments to handle.

This is crucial. As climate scientist Bill Hare puts it: “We have everything we need, but governments are not getting behind it. This is a catastrophic failure. We can’t rely on billionaires. Unless governments start creating the rules and regulations, we are not going to contain this.”

In Denmark over the last five years, this is what has been happening: the government has been stepping up a gear. Today, Denmark has transformed a wide range of systems and technologies, moving towards decarbonising its society, making its economy more circular and protecting nature. By law.

In Australia… not so much. 

So why this difference?

The current situation in Australia
A factor that tends to be overlooked when we talk about the role of government is that our politicians are only ready to change our laws when enough people in the nation want to see it happen.

Australia has lots of fossil fuels in the ground – in particular coal and gas – and the country has a powerful and well-resourced fossil fuel lobby group with a huge vested interest in maintaining the demand for fossil fuels. Strategically, the industry has understood that the most powerful tool to protect ‘business as usual’ is to spread confusion in the general public. Through its campaigns on TV and in social media, along with meeting and socialising with politicians, the Australian fossil fuel industry has been very successful in maintaining its economic position.

Adding to that, Australia has a small minority of reactionaries who will do everything they can to resist change, including mobilising resistance to the clean energy transition and organising aggressive rallies against renewable energy and carbon reduction policies.

As a result, Australian governments have been very careful to not move forward with the necessary transition any faster than they have the people with them. In the meanwhile, apathy and confusion reigns. 

A large proportion of the population feels unsure about whether and how to begin the transition. Many are quietly waiting for more clarity, or direct instructions and regulations from authorities, while climate action at the individual and organisational level has slipped down their lists of priorities. There is a cost of living crisis – more than enough to think about already!

The Danes’ ‘Grønne Omstilling’
Denmark also has fossil fuels in the ground: oil in the North Sea. So how come the average Dane appears to be happily going along with the new trend of cutting carbon, being climate-conscious, and nature-positive? Why are the Danes so surprisingly compliant when their government introduces new legislation to reduce the use of fossil fuels?

While travelling in Denmark, I noticed that one particular expression consistently comes up whenever the Danes talk about their economy and politics, their work, or their daily challenges – ’den grønne omstilling’ , which is normally translated as ‘the green transition’ or ‘the green transformation’.

I started interviewing people I met about this phrase, asking them about my observation and whether my theory could be true – that this widespread expression den grønne omstilling has helped shape the Danish society’s unified approach to stepping into ‘climate emergency mode’ with real and government-regulated climate action.

I quickly realised that this expression has given everyone a shared sense of direction that deeply permeates Danish life. It has become part of the collective mindset in the country. I’d heard this mentioned before, but here was some evidence to that saying that “people make their decisions based on a narrative”.

Rejection of emergency framing
While many English-speaking countries have been very busy talking about the climate emergency (a term which the Oxford Dictionary selected as Word of the Year in 2019), the Danes have firmly declined using that expression.

As a climate campaigner I was advocating between 2016 and 2020 for local government councils in Australia to declare a climate emergency, and I also discussed this with several Danish mayors.

In Great Britain, around 96 per cent of the population live in areas where the local authorities – over 600 councils – have declared a climate emergency. In Canada, every single one of the country’s 653 councils have declared a climate emergency. In Australia, 118 councils have declared a climate emergency, but in Denmark? Not a single council took up the concept or joined the global campaign.

In Denmark instead, it proved to be those particular three words ’den grønne omstilling’ that created a new, unifying language around climate action.

Today, regardless whether one agrees with it or not, den grønne omstilling has become an indisputable reality for the Danes – just like cybersecurity and artificial intelligence have become new realities which we are all having to recognise, and which becoming common points of reference.

“So who started it?” I asked my interviewees. The answer I got was that no one really knows, though one person who had followed the development closely replied that it was journalists at the Danish Broadcasting Corporation – equivalent to the ABC in Australia – who first began using the expression, which they did diligently and enthusiastically.

A notable instance of its official adoption in the Danish language is found in the 2019 publication ‘Denmark as a frontrunner in the green transition’ by the Danish Ministry of Economic and Business Affairs. This document outlines strategies for Denmark to lead in sustainable development. Danish NGOs also helped popularise the term in public campaigns.

Australia’s muddy stalemate
The inexorable rise of the global temperature chart reminds us that all the public discussion about climate science and distant emissions reduction targets haven’t been enough to catalyse early and effective action. In particular, the political pressure for needed government leadership has been missing in action. The clock is ticking, and while talks continue, carbon emissions and global temperature keep rising.

In contrast, mention of den grønne omstilling implies to any Danish listener that a full-scale societal wave of transformation is already rolling, and that progress is happening. Den grønne omstilling is an expression of a united society’s will to reshape the system and recalibrate structures in a purposeful way.

I find it striking how different this feels to the discourse in Australia. In Denmark, den grønne omstilling signals a society-wide makeover, an initiative that everyone has actively come together around – with little opposition! I am assuming it must be there, but I didn’t see or hear any of this during the four weeks I was in the country. If opposition to den grønne omstilling does exist, it is absolutely invisible in the mainstream.

This observation stands in stark contrast to Australia’s often divisive and politicised discussions about the environment, where policies have become battlegrounds and where the climate debate is often reduced to point-scoring between politicians and their parties..

Australia could use an equivalent to den grønne omstilling. Like Denmark, we need a phrase that encompasses both the urgency and the opportunity of what’s happening in the world – and importantly, what needs to happen in Australia.

“You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete.”
~ Buckminster Fuller, American architect, writer and futurist

Deliberate reorientation
My initial proposal when I returned to Australia from Denmark was that we adopt the term ’the green transition’ as Australia’s own unifying language for addressing the climate crisis. 

However, den grønne omstilling doesn’t simply translate to the green transition. The Danish word ‘omstilling’ implies more than just a gradual, passive shift. An ‘omstilling’ is an active, deliberate reorientation – a transformation of systems, structures, and even thinking.

It would be much more accurate to translate omstilling to words such as redirection, recalibration, restructuring, overhaul, or major adjustment – as well as reorientation, or transformation.

This is crucial, because what we’re facing isn’t something that will naturally evolve without intervention. It requires focus, commitment, and the collective will to change. It requires unification and a feeling of shared direction, or redirection. It requires regulation and rewriting of laws.

So I started trying out lots of different variations over the term the green transition, in search of a better phrase or expression. Some of the top scorers on my first list of suggestions were the green shift, the sustainable shift, and the great renewal. A guest in our Sustainable Hour suggested that redirection would work best. 

Both redirection and transformation better aligns with the meaning of the Danish word Omstilling. However, it is not that easy to say. Shift would flow better. Or, like the news agency Reuters called it: ‘the green push’.

Global players such as the World Economic Forum, the World Bank, and media outlets such as the AFP and the Guardian along with numerous others have already embraced the phrase the green transition. From a global perspective, it is already a done deal: the expression of choice is the green transition.

After discussing the topic with more than 30 Australians from all walks of life, I’ve eventually reached the conclusion that the phrase the green transition would work best. With the green redirection coming in as a strong candidate as well. (More about my month-long phrase-search further below.)

However, the most simple phrase of them all would of course be to simply talk about The Transition. Which can also be a verb: to transition.

Changing the angle
Australia is often caught up in fearful language when it comes to climate discussions. We hear talk of the dangers, the risks, and the threats, which can overwhelm and paralyse people.

We can see the dramatic impacts of our warming climate nightly on our TV screens – the floods, the hurricanes, the droughts, the wildfires, and the waves of refugees. Sadly, however, the news reporters and editors rarely attribute the increasing frequency and severity of these events to their fundamental cause – the burning of fossil fuels and damaging agricultural practices.

By focusing more on solutions that are already working, and less on the doom and gloom, we might just find that needed common ground which is a prerequisite for creating societal-wide changes. 

What the Danish green omstilling looks like
Denmark’s collective agreement around den grønne omstilling shows that words matter. They shape not only how we perceive the future but how we act upon it.

For instance, in Denmark, the churches are getting deeply involved. Some parishes have decided to convert their land into forests as part of their commitment to the green omstilling. They’re planting trees, installing solar panels, and contributing to the wider societal effort to tackle climate change.

The Danish media is incorporating climate science into everyday conversations. The public broadcasters DR and TV2 now include climate-related information in their weather reports. This has a profound effect on how people understand the issue: it brings climate change into the mainstream in a way that isn’t frightening but empowering. Again, the focus is on what can be done, rather than on what’s going wrong.

Imagine if Australia’s mainstream media did the same. Instead of just delivering daily forecasts and finance segments, imagine if our media outlets also talked on a daily basis about how the climate is changing and what solutions are being implemented to combat it. Australia’s population could then begin to feel more connected to the solutions, rather than being overwhelmed by the problem.

In Denmark, even commercial advertising reflects this collective shift. Companies are using language around sustainability and the green omstilling as part of their campaigns. Banks talk about accountability and responsibility, and car manufacturers promote electric vehicles as part of the grønne omstilling. This isn’t coming from climate activists or environmental groups – it’s coming from mainstream businesses.

Common language
So, what could speaking consciously about the transition mean for Australia’s transition towards a fully decarbonised and circularised economy?

Initially, it could mean moving away from the divisive and often reactionary rhetoric that dominates our climate debates – the so-called ‘Climate Wars’, which are back at every election. The focus instead could be on solutions that work. It could bring the media, politicians, and the public onto the same page, around a phrase that emphasises both the challenge and the opportunity of climate action.

Most importantly, the transition phrase could unite us in the effort to recalibrate our economy, our policies, and our way of thinking, in a way that ensures a genuinely green, clean and sustainable future.

The key lesson from Denmark is that when a society rallies around a common purpose with a language that not only reflects but drives collective action, change begins to happen. And while Australia is not Denmark, there’s no reason why we can’t invent our own version of den grønne omstilling. However this will require a similar catchphrase that will move us forward together. As people, politicians and media interact, we don’t necessarily need to agree about all the details in the roadmap, but we do need to share a common language that sets out the direction – and which makes it feel inevitable.

“ESG and philanthropy alone won’t solve the challenges. Ultimately we need government action. But civil society, business and philanthropy all have critical roles to play – together- in contributing to government ambition and policy to shift markets and structures to scale solutions.” (…) “The reasons why people will focus their energies on driving change are often deeply personal and values based. We want – and need – to be a part of something bigger than ourselves.”
~ Lindsay Hooper, Interim CEO at University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership

Government’s role
A United Nations survey with 1.2 million respondents in 50 countries – the largest survey of public opinion on climate change ever conducted – found that 64 percent of people said that climate change is an emergency. In other words: “Yes, we know we are in trouble – we know it’s bad”.

Now what we need to focus on is the action that is needed from us – the solutions, and a ‘yes-we-can’-attitude. It’s time for governments, businesses and organisations at all levels to espouse positivity, courage, and a ‘let’s get on with it’-culture.

Enter the green transition.

The Danish experience teaches us that we – and with “we” I mean “we the people” – can’t do this on our own. We need our government and media to pick up this batton and run with it.

When climate scientists mention ‘tipping points’, they usually refer to moments when events begin to cascade and accelerate toward an unavoidable disaster. However, some researchers are now proposing a shift in thinking by introducing the idea of ‘positive tipping points’. According to recent models, government regulation is the most powerful mechanism for driving large-scale climate transitions. This study suggests that, by enacting targeted climate policies in crucial sectors, world leaders could trigger a chain reaction of positive tipping points across the globe.

“We cannot create what we can’t imagine.”
~ Lucille Clifton, American poet, writer and educator

We change our world with language
It’s time for politicians and media to unite around a narrative-change in Australia. And we can all play a role in making that happen. Imagine how you could contribute to the transition. What part can you play in your community, at work, or with your local representatives?

Start talking with your peers and in public about what the global transition looks like for you. Contact your local media people, and discuss the topic with them – or simply send them an email with a link to this article.

“It’s hopeless,” you say? That’s also what they told us when a group of five of us started the Climate Emergency Declaration campaign. We proved them wrong – and we can do that again.

---

Mik Aidt is director of Centre for Climate Safety, based in Geelong, and a Danish-Australian journalist who was part of the Australian team that started the global Climate Emergency Declaration movement in 2016.

Examples of the green omstilling in Denmark

Denmark’s ambitious green omstilling – den grønne omstilling – represents a comprehensive transformation towards a climate-neutral society, with widespread changes across multiple sectors.

Below are some concrete examples of how this transformation is being implemented through new laws, regulations, and initiatives which drive the Danish society towards a greener and more sustainable future.

The examples showcase how Denmark is translating their green omstilling into practice:

Charging stations for electric vehicles
A Danish law, aligned with an EU directive, requires all public buildings with at least 20 parking spaces to install electric vehicle (EV) charging stations by 1 January 2025. This legislation ensures the necessary infrastructure to support the growing number of EVs, making the transition from fossil-fuel-powered vehicles more feasible. In October 2024, 60 per cent of new cars sold in Denmark were electric.

Green ownership tax for petrol cars
Car owners in Denmark must pay a green ownership tax or weight tax, depending on the car’s age and environmental impact. The tax varies according to fuel consumption, with higher rates for cars that use more fuel. Additional fees are imposed for vehicles lacking particulate filters. These taxes encourage the purchase of more fuel-efficient and eco-friendly cars, supporting Denmark’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions from transport.

Slower traffic for cleaner air
Sixteen Danish cities are currently trialling a 40 km/h speed limit in selected areas over the next three years. This initiative aims to improve urban air quality, reduce noise pollution, and increase pedestrian safety. Preliminary results show positive feedback, with emissions reductions already observed in many of the trial areas.

Petrol car-free zones in city centres
Major cities across Denmark are taking bold steps to reduce air pollution by establishing petrol car-free zones in their Central Business Districts (CBDs). In five cities, these zones have contributed to a 36 per cent reduction in pollution levels. While some residents have found adapting to the new rules challenging, many acknowledge the importance of prioritising public health and cleaner air.

Royal support for the green omstilling
Queen Mary and the Danish King are often highlighted in the media for their commitment to advancing the Green Omstilling. Their advocacy for sustainability has made environmental concerns a signature issue of the Danish monarchy, further raising public awareness and support for Denmark’s green transition.

Churches embrace the green omstilling
Churches in Denmark are also contributing to the Green Omstilling by repurposing their lands for sustainable uses. On the island of Lolland, for example, some churches have planted trees and installed solar panels on parish grounds. In one case, 45,000 trees were planted, transforming former agricultural land into forest. This is part of the Folkekirkens Grønne Omstilling, a nationwide initiative supported by the Danish National Church, which is mobilising its 8,500 hectares of land to promote sustainability.

Circular economy laws
Denmark has introduced several initiatives to reduce waste and promote the recycling of materials as part of its shift towards a circular economy. New laws now mandate higher recycling rates in construction and industry, helping Denmark minimise resource waste, optimise material reuse and promote material efficiency.

Aarhus’ Net Zero goal by 2030
Local governments across Denmark are leading by example, with the two largest cities Copenhagen and Aarhus at the forefront. The Aarhus City Council has set an ambitious target of achieving net-zero carbon emissions by 2030. To meet this goal, the city is investing DKK 3 billion in a Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) project and introducing policies to reduce fossil-fuelled cars in the city centre. By 2030, the number of parking spaces for petrol cars will be reduced to 250, while public transport is being expanded, cycling infrastructure is being improved, and some streets are being converted into parks and pedestrian areas. The council is also expediting the installation of wind turbines and solar panels, and plans to create new forests. Already, half of the households in Aarhus do not own a car, and it is expected that 37 per cent of residents will drive electric vehicles by 2030.

Expansion of renewable energy
Denmark is a global leader in wind energy. As of 2023, over 57 per cent of Denmark’s electricity is generated from wind power. Some days, the amount of renewable energy in the grid exceeds 100 per cent. Offshore wind farms, including those near the island of Bornholm, are part of Denmark’s broader efforts to decarbonise the energy sector and reach 100 per cent renewable energy by 2050. The latest statistics on the contribution of renewable energy to electricity generation in Denmark are very impressive: 87% in 2023.

Sustainable agriculture
In agriculture, Denmark is pushing forward with greener practices, including reducing pesticide use and promoting organic farming. The Danish government aims to cut pesticide use by 50 per cent by 2030 and convert 25 per cent of all farmland to organic agriculture. This not only helps reduce harmful environmental impacts but also supports biodiversity and soil health.

---

In short: Over the last five years, Denmark’s green omstilling has grown to become much more than an aspiration or a future vision. Today it is an ongoing transformation that is reshaping every part of the Danish society – from transport and energy to agriculture and urban planning.

Of course, the Danes still have many internal and political discussions and disagreements about how to best move forward and at what pace. Still, in an Australian perspective, the Danish transformation is impressive. Through comprehensive legislation, regulations, and grassroots initiatives, Denmark is creating a much more solid and collective pathway towards the climate-neutral future than Australia so far has been able to.

Denmark’s green omstilling serves as a blueprint for other nations, including Australia, where it can create similar transformative change across sectors.

---

EVENT
Pioneering the global transition in business

Date: Wednesday 6 November 2024
Time: 6-9pm
Location: Common Ground in Geelong
Tickets: $44 – book here
Hosted by: The Business Revolution & Geelong Media

Contemplations over how to translate ‘the green omstilling’

Would using the word ‘green’ become an obstacle in the Australian setting?

When I ask Australians what they think of the phrase ‘The Green Transition’, I often get the response that, “Green is not a word that can be used in Australia – it is already taken.” In this country – as in about 100 other countries around the world – we have one political party that everyone associates with the word ‘green’ – and it is divisive. The green colour makes some Australians see red, so to say, and many right-wing politicians see ‘green’ as directly synonymous with socialism. When they talk about “the greenies” they don’t mean it as a compliment.

The Danes do not have a political party called something like ‘The Greens’, so they wouldn’t feel that affiliation to something political in the word green. To them, green is synonymous with decarbonisation, circular economy and ecology – areas which the Danes haven’t politisised to the same extent as Australians have.

But hey, that particular party, the Australian Greens, originally chose this colour as their name exactly because they are keen to promote a green transition in our country. That doesn’t mean they own the word – or the movement. They are but one of numerous players who are working on the society-wide green reorientation, or green transition. 

Many Australian businesses, from small enterprises to large corporations, use “green” in a non-political sense to showcase their sustainability efforts. They talk about their “green commitment” and “green credentials.” “Green practices,” and “green certification” are common terms in industries ranging from agriculture to retail, and the Green Building Council is an industry body promoting sustainable construction.

Australians commonly talk about the greentech revolution, and greening the land. The term “greentech” is used around the word, including in Australia, to refer to technological innovations in the renewable energy and sustainability sectors, such as electric vehicle development or battery storage technology. The energy industry uses terms such as green hydrogen and green metals.

“The green grid” and “greening the grid” are emerging terms in the energy sector, referring to Australia’s evolving clean energy infrastructure, particularly in reference to integrating renewables into the electricity grid.

The Australian government talks about the green economy and uses the slogal ‘Go green with Australia’, the Climate Council talks about Australia’s green manufacturing opportunity. And in the United States, MIT publishes an annual ‘Green Future Index’ – a comparative ranking of 76 nations and territories on their ability to develop a sustainable, low-carbon future, measuring “the degree to which their economies are pivoting toward clean energy, industry, agriculture, and society through investment in renewables, innovation, and green policy.”

Australian universities often use “green” in their sustainability and environmental programs, such as “green science” or “green energy degrees”.

The well-known environmental group Greening Australia has been active for decades, and the term “greening” carries connotations of restoring and rehabilitating the land, rather than political divisiveness. And greenwashing is already a commonly accepted term to describe when companies boast to be sustainable when in reality they are not.

In other words, here and there, Australians actually do use the word green in exactly the same understanding as they do in Denmark.

Adding to that, if there’s one colour all Australians do love when they are sitting in traffic, it would be the colour green: in crossings, the green colour of the ‘go ahead, move forward’ signal is one that everyone understands – and appreciates.

“Green” is a word that is deeply ingrained in Australia’s vocabulary around environmentalism and clean energy. And just like we can talk about “giving something the green light”, I believe we would be able to easily reframe the term “green transition” to its Danish meaning of a phrase for the society-wide transformation, decarbonisation, circularisation, and innovation. “Green” remains that forward-moving, positive colour in our everyday lives.

We could also turn the argument the other way around: Since “green” is already used by many countries around the world as part of their sustainability lexicon, aligning Australia with this global discourse would help situate the country within the broader movement towards decarbonisation and the circular economy, linking Australia’s efforts with those of nations like Denmark, the EU, and others who refer to their transition efforts in “green” terms. Our language would be in sync with the international community.

In the United States, (where they also have a Green party), the campaigning term calling for a ‘Green New Deal’ did wonders and created history in American climate policy as it eventually lead to the ‘Inflation Reduction Act’ with billions of dollars now being invested in renewable energy and climate solutions. The green word worked well for the Amercians.

The EU also has introduced legislation they call the ‘Green Deal’, to phase out fuel cars, making room for electric vehicles and healthier air.

“The future will be circular, the future will be green 
– or there will be no future.”
~ Janez Potočnik, Co-Chair, International Resource Panel

So – what should we call it?
We could of course also cut through all the word-babble and keep it simple, calling it exactly what the Danes have named it: ‘Omstilling’. So: The omstilling.

If we are able to say ombudsman and hygge – which are original Danish words – and kindergarten – which is a German word – surely we would also be able to learn to say omstilling?

Or… what do you think? (Comments field is open for two weeks at the bottom of this page)

As of now, my own recommendation would be to simply talk about The Transition. A phrase such as ‘The Transition’ is not new in an Australian context. I already hear people, media and politicians talk about the transition often, only they don’t seem to perceive it themselves as a specific phrase.

We could leave it open whether or not to add an extra word in front of transition. Then wait and see what gets picked up and becomes used most frequently.

For instance, we could be talking about the global transition in some cases while at other times be talking about the local transition. Some might be talking about the green transition, or the ecological transition, or the sustainability transition – depending on what feels most relevant to them.

‘The Transition’ could be the phrase that holds it all together and creates that ‘unifying effect’ the Danes have experienced.

Currently, there are zero hits on the hashtag #theglobaltransition on several social media platforms. That is what we need in Australia now: a clean hashtag – and a rethorical renewal in the debate about how and how fast we take action on the escalating climate breakdown.

Phrases such as the transtition towards sustainability, or the sustainable transition, or the just transition could of course also work. It all depends on the context.

Transition Towns and Transition Streets is a global green movement that has been around for more than a decade, where Transition Australia is a central organisation for this movement in our part of the world – “inspiring and supporting local communities as they build a sustainable future,” as they write on their home page.

Having considered through all of these suggestions, I still end up thinking the green transition could be the winning – the most impactful and widely shared – phrase to use.

In this post on Linkedin.com, I dig deeper into my contemplations over how to translate the Danish phrase Den grønne omstilling:

Hashtags

Hashtag usage numbers can indicate whether the use of a phrase is widespread and common – or not:

Usage on Facebook:
#Transition: 3.4 million posts
#EnergyTransition: 297,000 posts
#GreenTransition: 26,000 posts
#TheTransition: 14,000 posts
#GlobalTransition: fewer than 1,000 posts

According to the tracking tool TalkWalker, there is less negative sentiments around ‘the green transition’ than there is around ‘the energy shift’ or ‘the energy transition’.

---

Who uses that ‘green transition’-phrase anyway?

Recently, quite a few! – including the World Bank, World Economic Forum, the United Nations, the European Union, Reuters, AFP, the Guardian, the Washington Post, Financial Times, Newsweek, Nature Geoscience and numerous academics and scholars:

“The need for a green transition has never been more pressing.“
~ World Economic Forum, 14 November 2024

→ Reuters – 22 November 2024:
Container shippers hedging green transition with dual-fuel vessel orders
“Container shipping firms are at the vanguard of the green push.”

→ AFP | France24 – 22 November 2024:
Greece pushes green transition on its fragile islands
“Greece this week signed a clean energy deal with the EU in a bid to fast-track the green transition on its fragile islands threatened by overtourism and climate change.”

→ World Economic Forum – 22 November 2024:
How ‘green education’ could speed up the net-zero transition
“A much-talked-about barrier to meeting that challenge is the potential shortage of specific skills tied to the green transition.”

→ Washington Times – 25 November 2024:
No green transition without economic growth
“Green transition (wind, solar) and economic growth illustration by Linas Garsys, The Washington Times”

→ The Guardian – 13 November 2024:
The Guardian view on Cop29: 1.5C has been passed – so speed up the green transition
Editorial

→ World Bank – 12 November 2024:
Unlocking Financing for the Green Transition in Emerging and Developing Economies | COP29

→ The Guardian – 11 November 2024:
Developing world needs private finance for green transition, says Cop president

→ Newsweek – November 2024:
Pillars of the Green Transition – COP29

→ Nature Geoscience – 7 November 2024:
Minerals power the green transition

→ EU – 6 November 2024:
Green Transition

→ Building and Wood Workers’ International – 1 November 2024:
Migration, climate, and construction: BWI calls for “worker justice” in the green transition

Academic papers

→ WIREs Climate Change – 5 September 2024:
Who are the green transition experts?

→ Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Volume 17 Issue 2, July 2024:
The green transition and its potential territorial discontents

→ Science Direct | Energy Policy, Volume 147, December 2020:
Crafting an effective narrative on the green transition
“This paper reviews literature from behavioural and environmental economics, cognitive sciences, (social) psychology, health policy, and marketing to condense key insights on how to make communication on the green transition more effective in terms of citizens’ engagement.”

→ Science Direct | Resources Policy, Volume 81, March 2023:
What motivates the ‘green’ transition: Russian and European perspectives

→ More academic papers about the green transition listed on Google Scholar

“Transition and action is inevitable – the climate isn’t waiting for the United States to sort itself out. There is no need for Australia to wait either.”
~ Amy Remeikis, Communications Specialist at the Australia Institute, in a newsletter on 13 November 2024

COP29 ministerial language: not so green

In his national statement at the United Nations climate summit CoP29, Australian climate minister Chris Bowen talked about “the energy transition” and the “global net zero economy”, “the global transformation”, “the global net zero transformation”.

The British Prime Minister talked about the “global green power alliance”, “green finance” and “green energy transitions”. The Danish Minister for climate talked about “a just transition”.

Related podcast episode

Denmark’s change-driving narrative: The Green Omstilling

This post is based on a report from Denmark which I delivered in The Sustainable Hour no. 517 in August 2024.

When I visited Denmark in 2022, I was similarly impressed about the country’s speed of transition – so I produced this little ‘video-postcard’ about it, based on a report I delivered for The Sustainable Hour no. 426.

“We have everything we need, but governments are not getting behind it. This is a catastrophic failure. We can’t rely on billionaires. Unless governments start creating the rules and regulations, we are not going to contain this.”
~ Bill Hare, climate scientist

WHAT NEXT?

I propose we turn our attention to the people who run our public broadcasters.

“It is weird how things that have been known to scientists for many decades, basic facts, are not understood by the public. Instead, all kinds of pseudo-debates about whether global warming is actually caused by CO2 and all this stuff has been going on for decades in the media, because interested parties are pushing that, and the media are not doing their job properly.”
~ Stefan Rahmstorf, climate scientist

CALLING OUR PUBLIC BROADCASTERS:

Find your role in the global transition

In comparison to Denmark’s public broadcasters, the coverage of the global transition on Australia’s two main public television channels, ABC and SBS, remains disappointingly shallow and lacks a firm commitment to addressing the realities and opportunities of the climate crisis.

SBS, in particular, seems to have dropped the ball entirely, opting instead to prioritise light-hearted entertainment such as ‘laugh-out-loud adventures’ and ‘haunting crime dramas’ – content that adds little to the public discourse on climate action.

Meanwhile, ABC’s reporting on the green transition remains sporadic and inconsistent, rarely conveying the urgency needed to address the carbon emissions crisis. Despite the increasing frequency of climate-related disasters, the tone of ABC’s coverage lacks the weight and seriousness the situation demands.

Green transition overshadowed

Climate issues are routinely overshadowed by political and economic news, rather than being treated as an ongoing, critical crisis warranting sustained attention. Both public broadcasters have failed in their responsibility to expose the influence of the fossil fuel industry or highlight efforts in transitioning to sustainable energy.

ABC, in particular, can be criticised for not fulfilling its journalistic duty to serve the Australian public’s interest by probing deeper into the pervasive role of the fossil fuel lobby in shaping national politics and public policy. Although environmental issues are covered, the depth and frequency of investigative reporting into the political and economic power of fossil fuel companies remain inadequate.

Green transition: a priority

By contrast, Denmark’s DR – the Danish Broadcasting Corporation – takes a more proactive approach, framing the climate crisis as the defining issue of our time. DR consistently makes the green transition a top priority in its coverage, spotlighting how Danish businesses and citizens are pioneering renewable energy initiatives and enhancing climate resilience.

When climate-related disasters, such as floods or bushfires, strike, the ABC often focuses on the immediate local impact. However, it fails to connect the dots for viewers, neglecting to explain how these disasters are linked to the broader climate crisis or to explore the solutions needed to prevent similar future catastrophes.

Australians are rarely informed about global best practices or success stories in renewable energy adoption and emissions reduction, leaving a significant gap in public awareness of potential solutions.

Rather than simply reporting on disasters, ABC could shift towards more solutions-based journalism, highlighting positive efforts within Australia and internationally to combat climate change.

Reliance on top-down narratives

ABC’s climate narratives often appear shaped by politicians and government agencies, rather than showcasing the insights of scientific experts or grassroots environmental groups. This approach results in a narrow, often politicised perspective on climate solutions, reinforcing government policies rather than challenging them.

Incorporating more stories from grassroots activists and smaller community-led initiatives driving sustainable change would provide a broader range of perspectives, rather than relying on top-down political narratives.

In contrast, DR engages with a wide array of voices – including activists, scientists, and independent researchers – resulting in more balanced and thorough coverage of climate and green transition issues.

Holding power to account

According to its foundational principles, the ABC exists to hold the government to account, particularly on policies that affect the entire nation. This should certainly include emissions regulations and the green energy transition. Yet, while the ABC does cover political discussions on climate, it often sidesteps asking the tough questions. It fails to rigorously investigate and challenge the government’s shortcomings in meeting climate targets.

Moreover, the ABC does not sufficiently address the unequal impact of climate change on Australia’s Indigenous and marginalised communities. The voices of those disproportionately affected by environmental degradation should be at the forefront of its reporting, yet they are too often sidelined.

Serve public interest

The ABC and SBS, as public broadcasters, must realign their green transition coverage with their responsibility to the Australian public. This means holding power to account and delivering reporting on the climate crisis with the necessary depth, urgency, and focus. Doing so will not only serve the public interest but also strengthen Australia’s contribution to the global transition.

. . .

Weather presenters highlight solutions

As just one recent example, this story from Germany about how half a million balconies got covered with solar panels was part of a weather report on the news of the Danish public broadcaster DR in August 2024:

→ Canary Media – 27 September 2024
How Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels
“The country’s residents installed 200MW of balcony solar during the first half of 2024. It’s becoming an increasingly popular way to take climate action in Germany.”

→ Grist – 26 September 2024:
How Germany outfitted half a million balconies with solar panels
“Meet balkonkraftwerk, the simple technology putting solar power in the hands of renters.”

We analyzed more than 100 breaking news stories about recent record-breaking heat and rainfall in the U.S. Less than half mentioned climate change. Only 11 percent mentioned fossil fuels, or other pollution sources.

[image or embed]

— Emily Atkin (@emorwee.bsky.social) June 28, 2024 at 7:36 AM

Open source poster

→ You can download this poster-template, which is created in PowerPoint, and then replace the weblink at the bottom with your own website-address. Here it is as a PDF for up to A1-size print.

The poster was produced by the Climate Rescue Accord working group.

Related articles, material and posts

“What we aspire to, as a species, is shaped by culture and the stories we tell ourselves and each other.”
~ Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, American author of the new book ‘What If We Get It Right?’

→ Atmos – 17 September 2024:
A Glimpse At The Future If We Get Climate Action Right
“In her new book What If We Get It Right?, author Ayana Elizabeth Johnson urges us to imagine the endless possibilities in a future where climate solutions win.”

Consensus: people are on board

80 per cent of 77,000 people surveyed in 77 different countries say: ‘We want our governments to do more on climate’.

Around the world, awareness of the urgency of the threat posed by climate change is growing, as are calls for climate action. This year, the UN Development Programme surveyed 73,000 people in 77 different countries, one of the largest surveys of its kind.

They found that 80 per cent of respondents want their governments to do more to act on climate change. 72 per cent said they want a swift transition away from fossil fuels. And 56 per cent of those surveyed said they think about climate change “daily or weekly.”  

“The survey results – unprecedented in their coverage – reveal a level of consensus that is truly astonishing. We urge leaders and policymakers to take note. This is an issue that almost everyone, everywhere, can agree on,” said UNDP Administrator Achim Steiner. 

In Australia, 74 per cent of respondents thought Australia should strengthen its commitments to address climate change. 68 per cent thought Australian schools should do more to teach about climate change. 69 per cent thought Australia should quickly replace coal, oil, and gas with renewable energy, such as power from the wind or sun.

Denmark was not included in the survey. In Germany, 67 per cent of respondents thought Germany should strengthen its commitments to address climate change. 63 per cent thought German schools should do more to teach about climate change. 76 per cent thought Germany should quickly replace coal, oil, and gas with renewable energy, such as power from the wind or sun.

→ To see your country’s results, click here.

Simon Clark: Fixing climate change is about to accelerate

→ Climate Outreach – 11 October 2024:
The best climate stories motivate and move people
“Effective climate communications give people hope and agency – and steer clear of ‘passive positivity’.”

What is the problem – and how we solve it

The whole world is transitioning away from coal, oil and gas. We need a nonpartisan approach to energy that does what’s right for our kids. Join us and help make it happen at https://t.co/ssAfXylrJ2 #BecauseWeLoveOurChildren#RenewablesNow#RenewAustralia pic.twitter.com/JuXAw643mw

— Parents for Climate (@climate_parents) October 16, 2024

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by MUSIC DECLARES EMERGENCY UK (@musicdeclares)

→ You can help spread the word about this article by sharing Mik’s posts on Linkedin and Facebook

→ The green transition website in the making