Individualism, Structuralism, and Climate Change

TLDR

Climate‑change discourse often contrasts individual actions with structural reforms, framing them as mutually exclusive paths to decarbonization. The study critiques the oppositional framing of individual versus structural climate actions and proposes five integrative approaches to link them. The authors review environmental communication examples, identify problems with oppositional framing, and outline five integrative strategies linking individual and structural reforms.

Abstract

Scholars, journalists, and activists working on climate change often distinguish between "individual" and "structural" approaches to decarbonization. The former concern choices individuals can make to reduce their "personal carbon footprint" (e.g. eating less meat). The latter concern changes to institutions, laws, and other social structures. These two approaches are often framed as oppositional, representing a mutually exclusive forced choice between alternative routes to decarbonization. After presenting representative samples of this oppositional framing of individual and structural approaches in environmental communication, we identify four problems with oppositional thinking and propose five ways to conceive of individual and structural reform as symbiotic and interdependent.