Abdullahi Lukman
A new study by the University of Sydney has called into question the growing narrative that individual actions, such as installing solar panels or buying electric cars, are key to solving the climate crisis.
The research argues that the “net zero hero” myth unfairly places the responsibility for climate action on individuals while minimizing the crucial roles of energy companies and policymakers in driving systemic change.
Associate Professor Tom van Laer, who co-authored the study, highlights how the energy industry has shaped this narrative to avoid its own accountability in reducing emissions.
He draws comparisons to similar tactics used in the past, notably by the beverage industry, which promoted consumer recycling in the 1970s as a way to shift the burden of waste management away from corporations.
In the current climate debate, van Laer argues, energy companies have used a similar strategy by encouraging individual behaviors—such as turning off unnecessary appliances or upgrading to energy-efficient devices—as crucial contributions to broader emission reduction goals.
The study points out that electricity generation is responsible for nearly half of Australia’s total emissions, with transportation and industrial sectors also being significant contributors.
Despite these facts, van Laer argues that focusing on the role of individual consumers, rather than addressing the broader, structural changes needed at the industry and policy levels, can lead to misguided expectations.
When people are encouraged to take action without any corresponding efforts from corporations and governments, it risks creating feelings of powerlessness and disengagement.
Related Posts
Van Laer cites the example of Chile’s plastic bag ban, which placed the burden of waste reduction entirely on consumers while overlooking the need for market-wide reforms that would make a more substantial difference.
While van Laer acknowledges that individual climate warriors can play a motivational role and have helped drive important grassroots movements, he warns that elevating these personal efforts without substantial policy or corporate change can ultimately hinder progress.
The narrative of the “net zero hero” can unintentionally create a false sense of responsibility that ultimately does little to address the root causes of climate change. “Consumers are becoming increasingly skeptical of these messages,” said van Laer, “especially when they don’t see meaningful action from the industries that are the biggest contributors to emissions.”
Van Laer advocates for a shift in the way climate action is framed, suggesting that the focus should be on collective responsibility rather than putting the onus solely on consumers.
He proposes an approach that recognizes the contributions of both individuals and institutions in tackling the climate crisis.
In this view, the energy industry and policymakers must play an active and visible role in decarbonizing the economy, alongside the actions of individuals.
This, he argues, would provide a more realistic and empowering framework for addressing the climate crisis, where all sectors of society—government, business, and individuals—work together toward a common goal of reducing emissions.
By reframing the conversation around climate action, van Laer believes that individuals will feel more supported and empowered to contribute in meaningful ways.
Rather than viewing their actions as isolated efforts, people would understand that their efforts are part of a larger movement that includes systemic changes across industries and governments.
Ultimately, he argues, only a collaborative, multi-level approach will bring the kind of transformation needed to meet global climate targets.
