Amid record-high temperatures, devastating disasters, and the resulting climate anxiety that comes with them, it can be easy to give in to despair.
The resounding question of “does this even matter?” likely echoes on a loop, every time you toss an item in the recycling bin, or call your elected officials for the umpteenth time.
But according to research from the University of California San Diego’s School of Global Policy and Strategy, public outcry can indeed lead to significant environmental action — even when public officials are openly hostile to climate-forward policies.
Their paper, titled “Going Viral: Public Attention and Environmental Action in the Amazon,” will soon be published in the Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists. It focuses on the “unprecedented” public scrutiny following forest fires in the Brazilian Amazon in August of 2019.
These fires occurred soon after Jair Bolsonaro became Brazil’s president, after a staunchly anti-environmental campaign.
But after analyzing both media coverage and international pressure towards Brazil’s federal government, the researchers found that the increased public attention resulted in a 22% decrease in fires in the country’s Amazon Rainforest.
This, in turn, translated into the avoidance of an estimated 24.8 million tons of CO2 emissions.
“Our research underscores the significant role that public attention and media coverage can play in influencing local environmental policies and actions,” the study’s coauthor Teevrat Garg, said in a statement.
Garg is an associate professor of economics at the School of Global Policy and Strategy at UC San Diego.
“The 2019 surge in attention led to immediate governmental responses, which contributed to the notable decrease in fires,” he added.
To come to these conclusions, the researchers compared fire activity in Brazil with that in Peru and Bolivia, countries that did not receive the same amount of public pressure, though typically still have the same level of fire activity per square kilometer.
While naturally occurring forest fires do happen in the Amazon, others are often started to clear land for agriculture. Some spread as catastrophic wildfires.
The spike in media attention in August 2019 was also spurred by dramatic visual disturbances, like a “black sky” phenomenon in São Paulo, which led to international criticism of Brazil’s environmental policies.
This surge of attention led the Brazilian government to deploy fire brigades to halt the fires, as well as an increase of Brazilian congresspeople addressing the fires.
From there, the country saw subsequent governmental measures to prevent fires, including temporary fire bans, though Bolsonaro’s stance on climate policy did not entirely change. In 2023, Brazilians ushered in the election of pro-environment President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
“What this tells us is that this kind of international outcry and international pressure does, in fact, have the potential to have tangible, real-world impacts on environmental policy and environmental outcomes,” Garg said.
It’s important to note that the effects of this progress were short-lived. As media attention and public pressure dwindled, fire activity returned to previous levels the following year.
It is for this reason that Garg and his fellow researchers emphasize that, yes, while this level of criticism and attention is effective in enacting policy changes, a prolonged commitment to moving the needle is necessary.
“Our study is a powerful example of how media and public pressure can drive significant environmental action, even in the face of ongoing challenges,” the authors concluded.
“It also illustrates the importance of sustained public engagement to achieve long-term environmental goals.”
Header image courtesy of Ivan Radic (CC BY 2.0)