Stanford sociologist explains lack of grassroots climate change activism in U.S

SAN FRANCISCO, June 25 (Xinhua) -- Stanford University sociology Professor Doug McAdam argues that while there is significant support from Americans for action on climate change, the issue is still not seen as an immediate threat by many.

His argument in a recent article appearing in the Annual Review of Political Science is based on a review of 40 years of research and theory on social movements in an attempt to determine why a sustained grassroots movement on climate change has not developed in the United States.

Numerous public opinion polls show that Americans believe climate change is a major problem that needs to be dealt with. However, there is a relative lack of grassroots climate change activism in the country. U.S. President Donald Trump decided in early June to withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change.

McAdam blames a host of factors that help to account for the lack of grassroots activism, notably the relentless denial of the reality of climate change by anti-climate change forces; the increasing gridlock in U.S. Congress, making bipartisan action on any issue difficult; and the lack of "ownership" of the issue by any significant segment of the American public.

In addition, in McAdam's words, the mistaken extended "time horizon" associated with the issue reassures many Americans that the impact of climate change is still off in the nebulous future.

In explaining the lack of "ownership," he elaborates that the issue of police violence against African Americans is "owned" by the African American community. That is, the great majority of African Americans are deeply concerned about the issue. The same is true for the threat of deportation among Hispanic Americans. In short, grassroots action is much more likely if a specific population segment identifies with and is committed to action on a given issue.

In contrast, no clear segment of the U.S. population currently "owns" the climate change issue. Therefore, the issue does not elicit the powerful responses necessary for Americans to mobilize.

Although there are more than 400 formal climate change organizations in the United States, they generally eschew forms of non-institutionalized, or otherwise disruptive, action in favor of the more conventional tactics of lobbying and public education, according to the researcher. And relative to the far more numerous and much better-funded climate change denier organizations, "the top-down climate change organizations have had virtually no impact on environmental policy at the federal level."

"The organizations that arose to address the issue were ill suited to the kind of grassroots mobilization characteristic of successful movements," he writes in the abstract of the article, titled "Social Movement Theory and the Prospects for Climate Change Activism in the United States."