Beyond Greta Thunberg: Youth Worldwide Need a More Accessible Way to Engage in Climate Action

​​

1

         

          Hurricane Milton, Helene, and Dorian are just the first of many intense and rapidly developing hurricanes that are spurred by climate change. These storms are not only destructive to the people they affect, but also the environments they destroy. Year after year, our world faces a multitude of natural disasters which threaten entire nations, but more specifically, young people—those left responsible for leading the charge against climate change, even when they don’t want to.

          These disasters affect young people’s lives in many ways, whether it be by hindering their academics, their mental and physical health, and their overall quality of life. After these natural disasters like floods, fires, and hurricanes, children and youth are particularly vulnerable to health risks like malnutrition, waterborne diseases, and respiratory issues (Datar et al., 2011). These issues are especially prevalent in low-income regions, where youth who wish to engage in climate action may not have the resources to do so.

         Not only do these disasters threaten the physical health of the youth affected, but also their mental health. With natural disasters come many losses, whether it be a home, a school, friends or even family members. For this reason, climate change-induced natural disasters have been known to have a correlation with heightened levels of anxiety and depression among youth (Lass-Hennemann et al., 2023). An example that further exemplifies this point can be taken from the young survivors of the Canadian wildfires who are reported to have lasting psychological side effects (Hrabok et al., 2020). These negative psychological effects that these natural disasters can have further discourage youth from wanting to advocate for climate action—especially in the way that activists like Greta Thunberg have.

          Aside from the way that these disasters affect the health of youth, they also impair their academic ability. When disasters strike, schools are often damaged or closed for long periods. In economically disadvantaged regions, such as parts of India and the Caribbean, this disruption has long-term consequences, often forcing young people into the labor force to support their families or permanently derailing their education (Kousky, 2016). This lack of education also greatly affects the ability of youth to meaningfully fight against climate change as they do not have the education necessary to articulate how climate change is affecting their communities.

          All of these impacts as well as the natural disaster diminish the overall quality of life of the youth involved, from deteriorating living conditions to increased economic hardship (Thomas et al., 2020). Greta Thunberg, while she is inspiring, is not what every young person is aiming to become. Many prefer to engage in climate action that fits their own circumstances. Educational programs that promote environmental sustainability and offer hands-on solutions, such as tree planting or school-based nature projects, have shown significant improvements in young people's quality of life and health-related outcomes (Ekenga et al., 2019). Not every young person wants to become a global climate activist, which is why accessible and localized avenues for climate action need to be developed. The impact of climate disasters on young people and their health, education, and overall quality of life conveys the importance of establishing diverse and accessible avenues for sustainable climate action.

​

2

         

          As the load bearers of its effects, youth across the globe are eager to take action against climate change (Klarenbach & Franz, 2024). A poll of Australian adults found that 78% of young adults (aged 18-20) reported climate change as a serious concern compared to 50% of those aged over 60 (Baldwin et al., 2023). This significant gap displays that youth are more aware of climate change than other age groups. The study conducted by Baldwin et al. indicated that 28% of Australian high school students were involved in group climate action and 49% planned to in the future. 

          Climate activist Adriana Bird has been involved in Project Blue NZ which brings to light the effects of plastic pollution on the environment. As a member of the youth, she was driven by her indigenous values and appreciation of nature to take action to protect the environment. In discussion regarding the youth climate action issue she shared how youth are often excluded from spaces where legislative and systemic change occur. These spaces are where real change occurs, in her perspective, and she believes youth should not be kept solely at grassroots action levels. The study by Baldwin et al. also highlights that youth are eager to be involved in climate action but are not currently involved hence barriers must be preventing their involvement. A study on Canadian youth, 17-18 years of age, by Pickering et al. (2024) displayed that there was low confidence that the current education system had prepared youth for climate change; however the youth believed that their actions could help mitigate climate change. Youth, as agents of change, have the ability to change their future and are eager to do so through climate action.

​

3

       

          Global and local climate action projects are often hindered by bureaucratic obstacles and rigid governance structures, resulting in slow implementation compared to the nimble efforts of youth-led movements. The Paris Agreement exemplifies this issue, as it operates within a “bottom-up” framework where countries set their own targets for reducing emissions. While this structure allows flexibility, it also slows overall progress. The reliance on institutions like the UNFCCC and the non-binding nature of national commitments often lead to incremental progress instead of the bold steps needed to combat climate change (Faulkner, 2016). The ratchet-up mechanism, which encourages countries to increase their climate ambitions every five years, highlights the cautious nature of global governance.

         Locally, climate action faces similar delays due to zoning laws, regulatory frameworks, and approval processes, all of which slow down initiatives like renewable energy transitions. Deeply entrenched political systems often prioritize short-term economic interests over long-term sustainability, further complicating efforts to accelerate climate solutions (Ostrom, 2010). These bureaucratic layers make it difficult for local governments to implement climate projects swiftly, as each initiative must navigate a maze of regulations. In contrast, youth-led movements like Fridays for Future are more agile and responsive to the urgency of the climate crisis. Widerberg and Pattberg (2017) highlight the role non-state actors, including youth activists, play in pressuring governments to act, though they still face challenges in overcoming bureaucratic inertia. While these movements have successfully raised public awareness, their influence is often limited by the slow-moving processes that govern climate action. The slow pace of global and local climate governance, combined with political and economic constraints, underscores the need for more dynamic systems. Youth-led initiatives offer an alternative model driven by immediacy and a willingness to bypass institutional barriers, but they must be integrated more effectively into policymaking to achieve meaningful progress. As the climate crisis intensifies, it is clear that more flexible governance frameworks are essential for long-term sustainability.

4

       

          Imagine being punished for a crime you didn’t commit, with people offering help in ways that feel more controlling than supportive. This isn't hypothetical—it's the reality we face with the climate crisis today. While both the scientific communities and non-academic stakeholders agree that climate change is accelerating at an unprecedented rate, the situation continues to worsen, and the locals who suffer the most are often being sidelined in the decision-making process. Various state and non-state actors have proposed action plans and policies, such as the Paris Agreement, but to no avail. 

          Part of this failure is due to the adoption of a top-down approach, which often neglects the local socio-economic and local-nature interaction considerations in an adequate amount. Proponents of a top-down climate action argue that legally binding global architecture is essential for holding nations accountable (Hare et al., 2010). Additionally, proponents contend that large-scale climate initiatives, like clean energy development, require specialized expertise, making this approach more suitable. Moreover, localizing sustainability often meets resistance due to competing priorities among stakeholders at various levels (Moallemi et al., 2020). The case of Local Agenda in Vienna illustrates how these differences give rise to political dynamics and power/resource imbalances locally (Feichtinger & Pregernig, 2005). The failure of the Kyoto Protocol was a major setback of the top-down approach (Keohane & Victor,2015). The Paris Agreement introduced flexibility through Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), but still remains a predominantly top-down structure, limiting its ability to integrate local priorities and socio-economic realities.

       Proponents often overlook that prioritizing legal bindings over local needs leads to a disconnect between policy and the realities of affected communities. This disconnect is often represented when developed nations view sustenance activities by locals as threats to conservation. Conversely, the 21st century's technological evolution, particularly in clean energy, offers a leap forward for addressing climate issues. However, the success of these innovations depends on fostering community ownership, as seen in the Samsø Island project in Denmark, which is key to achieving sustainable development and a resilient economy (Papazu, 2016). Local communities are the primary stakeholders in the conservation of their landscapes and biodiversity, having integrated conservation practices into their management systems for centuries (Sodhi et al., 2011).  Incorporating local knowledge leads to 1) better service quality, 2) stronger trust and relationships, and 3) greater local ownership and sustainability of outcomes (USAID, 2022). Additionally, research highlights the need for linking individual and collective change in sustainability, calling for greater attention to the inner dimensions of community participation (Wamsler et al., 2020). 

​

5

       

          In spite of many climate action initiatives taken by young people, many of them fall short of creating a lasting impact, particularly in the local communities where the effects of climate change are most acutely felt (Gutterman, 2024; Oakland, 2007). What’s missing is a realistic, practical, and community-centered framework that empowers young people to engage in climate action (Cobb, 2024). Current and already tried approaches often fail to resonate with local realities, making them ineffective in achieving sustainable outcomes (Oakland, 2007). A more flexible framework, designed specifically for young people, would address this gap by focusing on local engagement, collaboration with community leaders, and generating solutions, taking in consideration the local background, its needs and help for the youth to decide the best approaches (Scartascini, 2009).

       Our team proposes a framework, specifically designed to be youth-driven, flexible for different communities, and accessible. This five-part framework are: Community Context, Interaction Strategies, Outreach Channels, Outreach Models, and Chronology. By examining the community context, it is ensured that any climate action taken in the local environment is deeply understood before taking any action and is made based on its social, and cultural realities (Robert, 2002). Young people will be encouraged to assess their community’s specific climate-related challenges, resources, and needs.

        Having a well thought interaction strategy is crucial for success. This part of the framework equips young leaders with strategies to collaborate with local governments, community leaders, and environmental organizations (Macedo, 2020). By creating strong relationships with important bodies from the community, young people can align their goals with existing community efforts, maximize the impact of their initiatives, and benefit from the support of those who have influence in the community. In order to have more meaningful support and broaden its message, youth will utilize multiple outreach channels, like social media platforms, which are highly influential and can reach millions of people worldwide, to local media outlets (Vinerean, 2017). It ensures that climate initiatives are visible and attract participation from diverse groups within the community. Once the right outreach model is chosen, it offers flexibility, allowing young people to adapt their efforts based on the resources available and the scope of their initiative.

       Finally, the importance of creating a specific, but realistic timeline, starting with the planning phase, to implementation and closing up with writing a report, can determine how fast and qualitative the actions will be. This ensures that initiatives are well-organized, allowing sufficient time for execution and continuous evaluation of progress. By providing young people with the right tools and support to lead climate initiatives in their communities, we can establish a model for climate action initiatives that not only motivates this generation, but will also inspire the ones to come (Tapissier, 2018). Empowering the youth to take charge locally ensures that climate action is meaningful, impactful, and sustainable in the long term. The young activists can become role models for their peers and motivate others to try and make a change for themselves for the better.