why most political parties aren’t talking about the climate crisis

After months of wrangling over public debt and spending decisions, the German government collapsed in November 2024^[1]. Among the many disagreements between the parties which made up the governing coalition was how to pay for measures to combat climate change.

Seeking to take advantage of disillusioned voters (who in recent years showed record support^[2] for the Greens), populist parties have since cast doubt on the idea of tackling environmental issues at all.

Alternative für Deutschland (AfD), for example, the rightwing party which denies the existence^[3] of man-made climate change, has raised concerns about energy security and the economic cost^[4] of green alternatives.

If the AfD’s broader aim was to take green issues off the political agenda, the plan appears to be working. In the run-up to the general election^[5] on February 23 2025, migration and the economy are the most important issues^[6] for voters (each on 34%), with climate change lagging far behind (13%).

Nor has the environment been a priority in the parties’ election campaigns. In the first TV debate between the chancellor, the social democrat Olaf Scholz, and his most likely successor, the conservative Friedrich Merz, the topic was ignored almost entirely^[7]. A lack of political will and fear of losing voters appear to have relegated environmental policies to the sidelines.

Others want it back at the top of the agenda. Germany’s foreign intelligence service, for example, describes the climate crisis as one of the major risks^[8] facing the country, alongside terrorism and war.

Business associations have urged^[9] the next government to address climate change mitigation for the sake of German jobs. The Federation of German Industries has demanded^[10] an increase in public spending on climate change of as much as €70 billion (£58 billion). Younger voters have called for a nationwide protest^[11] to bring the subject back into politicians’ minds.

So have German voters really become sceptical about dealing with climate change? In a recent study^[12], we found that people who planned to vote for the AfD and the leftwing populist BSW party are indeed sceptical of the need for far-reaching climate policies.

Among voters of these two parties, only 23% (AfD) and 41% (BSW) think that an energy transition is necessary to achieve national climate goals. For Green party voters that figure is 93%, and for SDP supporters it’s 83%.

Voters across the political spectrum have different priorities when it comes to energy supply. For populist party supporters, energy costs trump everything, with only 12% of AfD and 20% of BSW voters considering low emissions important.

These voters are also less likely to assume the energy transition would have positive effects on jobs, and are more likely to fear rising energy costs and security of supply. In short, they are afraid of the social and economic consequences of the energy transition. It is this fear that the far right appears to have been able to mobilise.

Our results are backed up by other research^[13] which shows that poorer voters are concerned about the potential costs associated with net zero ambitions.

There is also uncertainty^[14] about the possible effects on employment. Many people in Germany believe there will be job losses in their local community as a result of the transition to green energy, and 25% worry they will lose their job.

While these results may seem gloomy, we also found majority support – even among AfD voters – for climate change policies where communities benefit financially from local renewable energy projects, and where citizens feel they have more of a voice in how the energy transition comes into effect.

People want to be heard and participate in a potential transformation. Previous research in psychology^[16] has shown that participating in processes and a perception of fairness can increase acceptance.

Research also shows that people fear the effects of climate policies on their personal finances^[17], and that these perceived costs^[18] inhibit environmentally friendly behaviour.

But the climate crisis won’t go away, no matter who governs Germany in the coming years. More “once-in-a-century” floods^[19] and droughts will hit the nation and bring the climate crisis back to the top of the political agenda.

When this happens, politicians need to ensure they have a positive and credible vision of the future ready to present to voters – where the costs are shared fairly. This will make it harder for populist parties to play on economic worries, and easier to persuade German voters to prioritise the climate crisis.

References

1. ^{^} collapsed in November 2024 (theconversation.com)
2. ^{^} record support (theconversation.com)
3. ^{^} the existence (www.tagesschau.de)
4. ^{^} economic cost (dserver.bundestag.de)
5. ^{^} general election (theconversation.com)
6. ^{^} important issues (www.tagesschau.de)
7. ^{^} almost entirely (www.yahoo.com)
8. ^{^} major risks (www.zdf.de)
9. ^{^} have urged (www.zukunftswirtschaft.org)
10. ^{^} demanded (bdi.eu)
11. ^{^} a nationwide protest (fridaysforfuture.de)
12. ^{^} recent study (www.boeckler.de)
13. ^{^} research (link.springer.com)
14. ^{^} uncertainty (www.boeckler.de)
15. ^{^} D Busquets/Shutterstock (www.shutterstock.com)
16. ^{^} research in psychology (psycnet.apa.org)
17. ^{^} personal finances (www.journals.uchicago.edu)
18. ^{^} perceived costs (www.sciencedirect.com)
19. ^{^} “once-in-a-century” floods (agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com)