Why We Worry but Don’t Act: A Look at the Climate Intention-Action Gap

Understanding the gap between climate awareness and real-world behaviour 

Author: Srishti Shankar, Analyst, Tarutium Global Consulting 

What explains the great climate disconnect? It’s a question that perplexes policymakers and scientists alike. Polls consistently show widespread—almost universal—awareness of a warming planet and its dangers. Yet our actions, from daily consumption choices to political engagement, tell a very different story. 

Across the world, concern for climate change remains high, but meaningful action lags behind. In wealthy nations such as the US and the UK, around 70% of people express concern about climate change, yet only 40 to 50% feel personally responsible for addressing it. While some European countries, such as Germany and Sweden, report higher levels of personal commitment (60–70%), sustained behavioural changes remain limited. Fewer than 30% consistently reduce meat consumption, shift to public transport, or limit air travel. This persistent gap suggests that moral alignment alone is insufficient to drive lasting behavioural change. 

For developing nations, the data becomes even more nuanced, as the challenge is often compounded by structural barriers. For example, poverty, limited access to alternatives (e.g., renewable energy, clean public transport), and competing developmental priorities complicate the narrative (World Bank). Climate action often competes with more immediate concerns – livelihoods, healthcare, education – and thus, even if concern is high, the capacity to act may remain low (UNDP).  

What makes India unique is the intensity of direct experience. Most Indians (85%) say they have personally felt global warming’s effects – through changing weather patterns (71%), shifting monsoons (76%), and frequent heatwaves (Mishra et al., 2022). In rural areas, over 90% of farming families report disruptions such as unpredictable rains, reduced yields, and hotter summers. They might not always use the term “climate change,” but they are already adapting – modifying sowing cycles, diversifying crops, or using traditional water conservation methods. This grounds India’s climate consciousness in lived reality (Mishra et al., 2022). 

Despite this, India offers a compelling lens into the intention-action gap. A 2022 Yale study found that 91% of Indians worry about global warming, one of the highest rates worldwide. Nearly 6 in 10 Indians are “very worried,” compared to global averages of around 40% (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, 2022). However, only half of Indians (52%) believe humans are the main cause of global warming. Many still attribute climate change to natural cycles. This matters because if people do not recognize their role in causing the problem, they are less likely to view themselves as part of the solution (Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, 2022). 

While India presents a compelling case study of this disconnect, the intention-action gap is a global phenomenon, as recent comprehensive data highlights. The 2024 UN Development Programme (UNDP) survey, “Peoples’ Climate Vote 2024” – a monumental study polling over 73,000 individuals across 77 countries (representing 87% of the world’s population) – revealed a resounding consensus: an overwhelming 80% of people globally demand stronger climate action from their governments (UNDP, 2024). Yet, a subsequent 2025 Ipsos report, “People and Climate Change Report,” indicates a notable decline in the proportion of individuals who feel personally responsible to act (Ipsos, 2025). This isn’t necessarily a sign of diminished empathy for our immediate environment (as research like “Impact of empathy with nature on pro-environmental behaviour” suggests). Instead, it points to a complex interplay of psychological, social, and structural hurdles – ranging from the human tendency towards present bias and the pervasive influence of misinformation to deep-seated feelings of powerlessness (Palmucci & Ferraris, 2023). 

The Psychology of Climate Inaction 

The ‘value-action gap’ – the persistent disconnect between what people say they care about and their actual behaviour – is the central hurdle in the climate crisis. While public support for climate action is at an all-time high, this broad consensus often fails to translate into the personal sacrifices and systemic changes required. This isn’t a problem of poor information, but rather a deeply human challenge rooted in our psychology. 

This disconnect isn’t caused by a lack of empathy or a conscious choice to be apathetic. Instead, it stems from a set of deeply ingrained psychological barriers that quietly sabotage meaningful engagement. These barriers, which have been widely documented in studies on climate inaction, include: 

• Psychological Distance: Climate change often feels abstract – something that will happen in the distant future, in faraway places. This temporal and spatial distancing makes it easier for people to prioritize immediate personal concerns over long-term planetary consequences (Van der Linden, 2021). 

• Social Silence: Individuals consistently underestimate how much others care about climate issues. This creates a false sense of isolation, where people feel alone in their concern, dampening collective momentum. A 2024 study spanning 125 countries uncovered large perception gaps – actual public support for climate action was significantly higher than what individuals believed others felt (Sparkman et al., 2024). 

• Cognitive Overload: The abundance of fragmented and technical information overwhelms people, obscuring simple climate-friendly actions under layers of complexity. A World Economic Forum survey found that many misjudge the most impactful behaviours – overvaluing symbolic actions like recycling, while underestimating powerful shifts such as reducing meat consumption or flying less. 

• Learned Helplessness: Repeated exposure to messages about the scale and urgency of the climate crisis without clear paths to agency has led to emotional fatigue. Many begin to believe their individual actions are inconsequential, especially when governments and large corporations appear to delay systemic change. 

Together, these barriers explain why even well-intentioned awareness campaigns often fail to catalyze behavior change. Tackling climate inaction requires moving beyond simply informing people to actively design for human behaviour. This calls for a deeper investment in behavioural design tools that make climate action intuitive, social, and rewarding (Carbon Brief, 2025; UNEP, 2019). 

While research has increasingly focused on the psychological roots of inaction, the real bottleneck lies in the limited availability of context-specific, localized behavioural interventions. A lack of granular, community-level data, insufficient funding for local pilot studies, and the absence of intersectoral collaboration have all contributed to a gap between insight and implementation (Singh, 2023; Kosolapova, 2024). Additionally, behavioural approaches are often siloed in academic or elite policy circles, rarely embedded into the everyday operational frameworks of municipal bodies or civil society organizations. Bridging this divide requires decentralized experimentation, co-creation with communities, and capacity-building across sectors to translate behavioral insights into accessible, inclusive, and scalable interventions. 

Nudging the Planet: A Behavioral Revolution 

Traditional climate policies – such as mandates, subsidies, and regulations – remain essential, but on their own, they often fall short. They tend to overlook the psychological and social barriers that shape human behavior. Behavioral science, by contrast, provides a powerful lens to bridge this gap, offering low-cost, high-impact strategies that align with how people actually think and make decisions. Through tools like “nudges,” climate-friendly choices can be made easier, more appealing, and socially reinforced. This approach acknowledges that decision-making is rarely rational; it is intuitive, emotional, and shaped by context (Carbon Brief, 2025; Roberts, 2023; UNEP, 2019). 

Mission LiFE (Lifestyle for Environment), launched by India, stands out as a promising model for integrating behavioural insights into national climate strategy. Rather than framing climate action as an individual sacrifice, Mission LiFE reframes it as a shared cultural ethos. It leverages social comparison to activate peer influence, strategic framing to emphasize co-benefits such as better health and cost savings, and timely cues that prompt change during key life events—like moving homes, festivals, or seasonal transitions. It is not just about awareness, but creating new behavioural defaults (Policy Circle, 2025). 

A growing body of evidence shows that interventions rooted in behavioural science outperform conventional education-based campaigns. A meta-analysis of 430 global climate interventions revealed that social norm nudges and default options (e.g., auto-enrolling households in green energy plans) are among the most effective levers for change (Nisa et al., 2019; Yoeli et al., 2017). In contrast, information-only approaches, while important for awareness, often fall flat when it comes to sustained action. To normalize sustainable behaviours, we must make them the path of least resistance – automatic, convenient, and aligned with personal and collective identity. 

Communication matters just as much as policy. Alarmist “doomsday” narratives can overwhelm or alienate people, leading to denial or apathy unless paired with clear solutions. Behavioural research consistently finds that hopeful messaging, trusted messengers, and locally grounded narratives inspire deeper engagement. Oral storytelling – especially when delivered by community leaders or relatable peers – can build emotional connection and motivate action in ways that abstract data or global statistics cannot (Carbon Brief, 2025; UNEP, 2019). 

At its core, the climate crisis is a challenge of human behaviour. Policies that fail to account for how people actually behave – not how we expect them to – risk repeating the past: high ambition, low compliance. Behavioural science offers the crucial bridge between intention and impact. By systematically addressing psychological barriers, framing choices effectively, and embedding social norms into everyday life, we can shift sustainable behaviour from exception to expectation (Kretz, 2012; Roberts, 2023). 

Evidence shows that change is not easy, but it is possible. It demands interdisciplinary collaboration, thoughtful design, and persistent nudges that meet people where they are. Without integrating behavioural insights, climate policies may remain aspirational but ineffectual. But with them, we can mobilize the collective power of billions, making small, daily, climate-conscious decisions – making meaningful changes not just a possibility, but an inevitability. 

References: 

1. Carbon Brief. (2025). Guest post: How human behaviour shapes effective climate policies. Retrieved from https://www.carbonbrief.org/guest-post-how-human-behaviour-shapes-effective-climate-policies/ 
2. Climate Action Tracker. (2023). India – Policies & action. Retrieved from https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/india/policies-action/ 
3. Flynn, R., Bellaby, P., & Ricci, M. (2009). The ‘value-action gap’ in public attitudes toward sustainable energy: The case of hydrogen energy. The Sociological Review, 57(2), 159-180. 
4. Kesternich, I., Kesternich, M., & Kesternich, R. (2022). The Intention-Behavior Gap in Climate Change Adaptation. ResearchGate. 
5. Kretz, L. (2012). Climate Change: Bridging the Theory-Action Gap. Ethics and the Environment, 17(2), 9-27. 
6. Mishra, M. M., et al. (2022). Perceptions Regarding Climate Change and its Health Impact: Reflections from a Community-Based Study in India. Journal of Communicable Diseases, 54(2). 
7. Nisa, C. F., et al. (2019). The effectiveness of nudging in promoting sustainable behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 
8. Policy Circle. (2025). Nudging India to net zero: Behaviour as a climate tool. Retrieved from https://www.policycircle.org/opinion/india-net-zero-transition/ 
9. Rana, P., et al. (2023). The role of emotion in bridging the intention–behaviour gap. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 
10. UNEP. (2019). Five ways behavioural science can transform climate change action. Retrieved from https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/five-ways-behavioural-science-can-transform-climate-change-action 
11. Yale Program on Climate Change Communication. (2022). Variations in climate opinions across India. Retrieved from https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/publications/climate-awareness-india/ 
12. Yoeli, J., et al. (2017). Social norms and energy conservation: A field experiment. Nature Climate Change, 7(6), 421-425. 
13. van der Linden, S., & Weber, E. U. (2021). Editorial overview: Can behavioral science solve the climate crisis? In Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, iii–viii. Retrieved from https://elkeuweber.com/media/193_2021_behavioralsciences_van_der_linden.pdf ScienceDirect+7elke-u-weber.com+7Princeton University+7 
14. [Author(s) not specified] (2021). Climate risk management. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences, 49(1), 95–116. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurevearth080320055847 annualreviews.org+2sciencegate.app+2 
15. Wieland, T., & Thiel, F. (2025). Increasing individuallevel climate mitigation action: The role of behavioral dimensions and inequality perceptions. Humanities & Social Sciences Communications, 12(1), 382. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599025047123 kops.uni-konstanz.de+2Nature+2 
16. Thompson, A. (2023, March 21). What makes people act on climate change, according to behavioral science. Scientific American. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-makes-people-act-on-climate-change-according-to-behavioral-science/ kops.uni-konstanz.de+11thelivinglib.org+11whowhatwhy.org+11 
17. Bhandari, A., & Haldea, P. (2023, May 31). Behaviour change and climate action. IDR Climate Emergency. Retrieved from https://idronline.org/article/climate-emergency/behaviour-change-and-climate-action/idronline.org+6idronline.org+6idronline.org+6 
18. Sinclair, A. H., et al. (2025). Behavioural interventions motivate action to address climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2426768122 pnas.org+1 
19. World Resources Institute. (2025). Behaviour change science and climate adaptation. Retrieved from https://www.wri.org/insights/behavior-change-science-climate-adaptation?utm_campaign=socialmedia&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=worldresources wri.org 
20. [Author not specified]. (2024). Can behavioural science help scale climate change adaptation solutions? Impakter. Retrieved from https://impakter.com/can-behavioural-science-help-scale-climate-change-adaptation-solutions/ 
21. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022). Climate change 2022: Impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, M. Tignor, et al., Eds.). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009325844 
22. World Bank. (2020). Poverty and shared prosperity 2020: Reversals of fortune. World Bank. https://doi.org/10.1596/978-1-4648-1602-4 
23. United Nations Development Programme. (2020). Human development report 2020: The next frontier—Human development and the Anthropocene. UNDP. http://hdr.undp.org/en/2020-report