A_07 Ecological Transformation and Anti-Democratic Crisis Mobilization

Work package A_07 examines positions and practices that delay, prevent, or reverse climate protection measures. Of particular interest are settings in which collective practices of “resistance” to transformative measures take shape. Political majorities opposed to climate policy emerge where narratives of rejection become established in public discourse. This work package takes a holistic view of the societal processes and their consequences for democracy and social cohesion.

A Look at Protest Mobilization: The Impact on the Implementation of Socio-Ecological Transformation Processes and Local Political Culture
Anti-democratic positions and anti-democratic, far-right forces are gaining power in the context of the climate crisis and socio-ecological transformation. The restructuring of production, the expansion of renewable energy, and the regulation of lifestyles and consumption patterns are generating resistance. For example, feelings of insecurity and resistance to change may arise. These forces respond to developments—often perceived as crisis-driven—with radical, populist interpretations and policy proposals. These are directed against the socio-ecological transformation and threaten the social negotiation process necessary for effective climate protection. In regions undergoing major structural upheavals, the rise in power is often reflected in successful protest mobilization. Focusing on eastern Germany and Thuringia, A_07 analyzes patterns of argumentation, forms of agitation, and networks of anti-democratic mobilization against climate protection policies and transformation. What consequences do these have for the implementation of measures and for local political culture? As resistance to measures and institutions grows (“voice”), are additional segments of the population drifting away from democratic norms and principles (“exit”)? Is the foundation of democratic cohesion being increasingly eroded?

A Look at Attitudes Relevant to Climate Protection: Rejection of the Socio-Ecological Transformation and the Erosion of Democratic Cohesion
Climate protection policies and societal commitment to a socio-ecological transformation are increasingly losing public acceptance. Awareness of the climate change issue remains high among the general public. Its consequences have been widely discussed in public discourse in recent years. However, disinformative narratives and those that shirk responsibility regarding climate protection have rapidly gained influence in shaping public discourse. The rise of such attitudinal patterns increases the potential for conflict. Examples include notions of a “purely ideological” climate policy or the “impending destruction of our prosperity” due to decarbonization. Such positions reinforce existing barriers. Consequently, shaping policy in this area at the national, regional, and local levels becomes more difficult. Through the RISC surveys of the Regional Panel and the Social Cohesion Panel, this work package conducts quantitative research on public perceptions and expectations. Central to this research is the acceptance or rejection of specific measures in terms of whether they strengthen or jeopardize democratic cohesion.

A Look at Climate Policy and Transformation Measures: The Political Framework and Its Democratic Challenges

Effective climate policy necessarily involves drastic, transformative measures. The narrative that transformation is incompatible with existing expectations of security, prosperity, and justice is gaining traction in politics. It is being spread beyond the far-right spectrum. It is not climate change, but climate policy that allegedly threatens our lifestyles, consumption habits, and cultural traditions. This narrative is becoming increasingly influential at the global, national, and regional levels. It poses a central challenge to the implementation of climate policy measures. Climate policy makers face a fundamental dilemma. They must make unpopular decisions that will only yield positive effects in the medium and long term. Yet they risk being immediately punished by voters. Added to this are economic interests and the enormous influence of the fossil fuel lobby. Taken together, these factors increase the likelihood that climate policy decisions—some of which may be undesirable—will not be affected or will even be thwarted. Competition from populist and anti-democratic forces further increases the pressure on democratic actors to take action. These forces exploit dissatisfaction with government policy and use it to successfully mobilize support. Furthermore, the rise of far-right parties is not limited to conflicts over climate policy. Using discourse and document analyses, this work package examines the positions, arguments, and strategies of current climate policy.