.svg)
Could strong faith in technology be making some scientists less willing to take action on climate change? A new study suggests that scientists who believe technology will largely solve the problems caused by the climate crisis are less likely to take part in civic action or make significant lifestyle changes to address the issue.
The study, carried out by researchers at the London School of Economics, found that scientists who have greater confidence in technological solutions are 23% less likely to sign petitions or participate in protests than those who are more doubtful that technology alone can solve the climate crisis. They are also 18% less likely to make high-impact lifestyle changes, including reducing air travel or adopting a vegan or vegetarian diet.
Fabian Dablander, the study’s lead author, said this belief, known as “techno-optimism”, could result in people relying too heavily on technological solutions that have not yet been proven, while paying less attention to the major socioeconomic changes needed to tackle the climate and nature crisis.
Dablander said technological solutions can be politically appealing because they offer the possibility of addressing climate change without requiring significant changes to the way people live, consume goods or use resources.
He said the study found a similar pattern at an individual level. Scientists who had greater faith in technological solutions were also less involved in climate-related action. However, he stressed that technology alone cannot replace broader changes across society or the large-scale reductions in consumption that may also be required to tackle climate change.
The researchers surveyed more than 9,000 scientists from 115 countries to examine their views and behaviour. Overall, 27% of respondents agreed with the statement that “technology will largely solve the problems caused by climate change”. Meanwhile, 44% disagreed with the statement, while 29% neither agreed nor disagreed.
Scientists who expressed techno-optimistic views reported taking part in fewer forms of civic action. They were less likely to participate in protests, sign petitions or engage in advocacy linked to climate change. They were also less likely to make personal lifestyle changes, such as reducing the number of flights they take, cutting their use of cars or following a mostly vegan or vegetarian diet.
The study, which was published in Environmental Research Letters, also found that techno-optimistic views were more common among scientists with right-leaning political views and among those working in applied and natural sciences.
Professor Kevin Anderson, one of the world’s leading climate scientists at the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of Manchester, was not involved in the research. He said that, based on his own experience, a significant proportion of climate academics with very high incomes, particularly those whose careers also bring prestige, status and major honours, have strongly embraced the idea of future technological solutions.
Anderson argued that this belief can offer a convenient way to avoid difficult questions about personal responsibility. In his view, it can allow people to maintain that they are deeply concerned about the kind of world future generations will inherit while continuing lifestyles that contribute significantly to environmental problems.
He also said that confidence in future technological breakthroughs can provide another way of postponing difficult decisions today, by placing hope in solutions that may become available in the future.
Anderson further argued that the evidence supporting some of these promised technological solutions often falls short of the level of scrutiny scientists would normally demand from research conducted by others. He said this creates a striking contradiction in scientific practice, where the more uncomfortable the evidence becomes, the stronger the enthusiasm can be for believing in a future solution that the available evidence does not yet support.
