A Case For Cross-Generational Climate Action
Hope for a better future is not solely on the young; here’s why and how to include older generations in the climate fight.
Papers shuffle inside a drafty meeting room in the quiet village of Vlahi, in rural Bulgaria. A dozen leaders of all ages mumble and whisper to each other until someone says, “Let’s begin.” There is no set hierarchy; members jump in and debate as equals. Even when things become heated, laughter often echoes through the building. The autumn meeting of the Save Kresna Coalition is underway.
Since 1997, activists from all over Bulgaria have worked together to block the construction of a superhighway that would bulldoze through Kresna Gorge. The Gorge is an 18-km long stretch of land that is home to more than 3,500 species of flora and fauna, and is a Natura 2000 site. The highway is the last unbuilt section of a superhighway meant to connect Germany and Greece, and funded by the EU Commission. When local activists heard of the planned highway through the gorge, Save Kresna was formed. Today the highway’s construction remains at an impasse, largely due to their efforts. The Bulgarian government is begrudgingly exploring another route that would not disrupt the habitats of the gorge.
The Save Kresna coalition is a fascinating experiment in cross-generational climate action. Much of today’s media coverage on the climate is fixated on youth movements, but handing over the reins to untrained and untested youth risks wasting the progress and learnings painfully built over decades. Youth activists and old-hands need to find a way to build intergenerational movements that integrate the skills and passions of both groups.
This will be a challenge, given the generational gap in attitudes about climate change. A Gallup analysis published in 2018 reveals that “70% of adults aged 18 to 34 say they worry about global warming compared to 56% of those aged 55 or older.” Despite this gap, campaigns that involve activists of several generations hold an advantage in fighting for a solution. According to Petko Kovachev, a member of Save Kresna and the Green Policy Institute, most people think environmental campaigns are “kick and kill,” i.e. solve the problem, attain results. Kick and kill looks like public protests to stop development, or community action to change a consumer habit. But as the coalition’s 23-year long campaign proves, in reality winning an environmental campaign can take years. Over those years, the size of the Save Kresna coalition has fluctuated. The founders of the coalition are now in their fifties, but they count members of all ages. Petko believes that this is essential:
“Continuity is good news for local people and the general public. [It says] the fighters are still here, they won’t give up after all these years. This is a mobilizing message.”
Andrey Ralev, a younger coalition member and founder of the global activist network Perangua cites some of the benefits of cooperation between generations:
“Multiple generations [in a campaign] are stronger: you have experience mixed with better social media skills. You have biological knowledge of the area mixed with a better understanding of international actors.”
From a lifestyle point of view, Andrew points out that having a cross-generation team on a campaign helps ease the stresses of the project for members with demanding personal or professional lives:
“Having more generations means hav[ing] more time for the campaign. Younger people can afford to work longer in the field, voluntarily, whilst middle aged folks need time to be with their family. Once the children are more independent they can have more time again.”
In the mid-2000s, the coalition had a rush of new members who are now in their late twenties and thirties. Both Andrew and Petko lament the difficulty in recent years to recruit new members. NGOs have received a lot of negative publicity from the Bulgarian government and media. Nevertheless they are optimistic; they know that activism, like life, has highs and lows.
Multiple generations on a campaign bring in a variety of viewpoints and skills, but can quickly dissolve into chaos and misunderstanding, more so than in a group with similar background and life experience. Even if the group shares a clear common goal, success rides on cooperation. As explained by Pablo Servigne and Gauthier Chapelle in their book, Cooperation, the other law of the jungle,* this cooperation is formed with three principal ingredients:
Trust between members of the group, built upon a common membrane: the rules of the group, the purpose of the group and its identity,
Equality and fairness, which eliminates feelings of injustice in group decisions,
Confidence in one’s role in the group, which is born of the two prior elements, and permits each individual to give his best to the group.
Servigne and Chapelle say, “If the three feelings are present and the occasion permits the group to move forward in its objectives, the group becomes (at least temporarily) an entirely different living organism, a particularly efficient super organism.”
This gives the group a competitive advantage, and especially so when the perspectives and skills brought by members and experiences are varied. If the energy of the youth movements were harnessed and combined with the campaigning skills and connections of the lifelong activists, what would happen? It might be fumbled up by the inexperience of young people. Or it could be held back by fixed opinions of “how things are done.” It could result in power struggles, in arguments, and good plans falling on deaf ears. But isn’t that any organization, not just an intergenerational one?
The Save Kresna Coalition shows that through cross-generational cooperation, it is possible to form a protective front against those forces who continue to menace our environment. Their work shows the benefits of bringing together different generations, with different priorities and backgrounds to protect an environmental cause. But the Save Kresna Coalition is a difficult case to replicate, because it’s older members are those who have been loyal to the cause for decades, not new recruits.
How can a movement increase the involvement of older generations that are skeptical of the climate crisis? Though the Boomers and the Silent Generation did not grow up sensitized to climate change in the same way as Millennials or Gen Xers, there is room to win them over.
Helping older generations to see their own political flexibility is the first step into inducting them into the climate fight. Here are few simple ways to start:
Make a connection; a face to face conversation is more meaningful than a Facebook debate. It could happen at a family gathering, in line at the store, in the break room, at the gym, or a weekend activity. Whether you’re talking to a friend or family member or a close stranger, you don’t want to sound scripted; it should be a conversation, with respect and understanding.
Listen instead of lecturing to understand why a person does not believe the climate is in a state of crisis. Maybe they believe that the climate of the earth has always fluctuated; listen, but don’t correct them straight out of the gate. You may ask them to explain why they believe environmentalists would want to trick people into believing there is a climate crisis caused by humans.
Find a real life example in their daily routine, instead of spouting facts about acres of forests burned or species en route for extinction. Researchers have shown that feeling physically safe increases conservatives progressive attitudes, at least socially, so avoid threatening the apocalypse at this point in the conversation. Air pollution, traffic, or deforestation in their county or region are all inroads that might open them to the conversation.
Reign in expectations about changing their viewpoint in one conversation. This may be frustrating for enthusiastic Millennial activists who have internalized the climate crisis more than older generations. Ask them what kind of lifestyle changes they’ve heard are good for the environment. As they list them, ask if these changes would be difficult to make for them. What would be the downsides of making these changes? And the upsides?
On a deeper level, leaders should read Climate Outreach’s Climate Talking Handbook, and study their REALTALK guidelines, which are based on fifteen years of research and case studies. The handbook helps leaders to develop a conversation strategy adapted to the audience. For example, when speaking to older generations, who might feel ‘blamed and shamed’ when discussing climate change, the handbook suggests focusing on making them feel respected and valued, to help build a sense of trust and security in your conversation. This trust is doubly important when speaking to someone who holds strong opinions against climate change; because of their opinion, they will not trust you as a messenger, and therefore are unlikely to take anything you say to heart, nor to make any changes. In this case, it is better to work on building trust and working towards small changes or compromises of opinion.
It should be a real objective for climate leaders to create a sphere of cooperation and trust between generations. To do so, leaders must to seek out older recruits, and use techniques adapted to their audience to make their case. Once implicated in the movement, leaders should incorporate Servigne and Chapelle’s principles for instilling trust, equality, and confidence in the group so that older members can find a place in the group and a reason to fight for the climate that harmonizes with the motivations of younger members.
A Boomer’s reason to fight may not be the same as a Millennial’s, nor the way they participate. That is the beauty of an age-inclusive climate movement: it includes our combined strengths and it speaks for all impacted. Over the years and between generations, things have not always been rosy between members of the Save Kresna Coalition: egos clash, patience wears thin, and people disagree. But the shared vision to protect this land in peril keeps folks focused and the trust built over years of cooperation has strengthened their bond. The Save Kresna Coalition has shown a fight for the climate, big or small, can go on for generations. We’d do well to learn how to cooperate across generations, sooner rather than later.
Ashley Parsons is an independent journalist, reporting on grassroots movements, artisanal wonders, and her (sometimes foolhardy) escapades. She can be found at www.enselle.voyage
Guess what didn’t fund this article…advertisements! Big corporations! Billionaires! What did fund this article? Just donations from our readers and the odd grant. You could be one of those people funding new essays on the most important issue of our time. And if you already are, thank you!