System change and individual behavior change are often conceptualized as mutually exclusive strategies for climate change mitigation – but what if this duality is misguided? Denise de Ridder and Sander Thomaes map four pathways illustrating that system change is effective when it promotes behavior change and, vice versa, behavior change contributes to the critical mass required for system change.
Individual behavior change is an essential element of climate change mitigation. Still, systemic change – broadly conceptualized as changes in the system of rules, norms, and institutions – is typically considered the more powerful, direct, or urgent route towards climate action. The concern is that individual behavior change is hard to achieve, not impactful enough, and sometimes even comes at the cost of system change.
Pessimism about the impact of behavior change originates from an overly narrow view on pro-environmental behavior as the personal choices that individuals make to reduce their carbon footprint, such as saving household energy or reducing meat consumption.
We posit that behavior also comprises the role of individuals as members of communities and as citizens who have power to influence the broader social and cultural structures they are part of. A greater emphasis on behavior change as an indispensable factor of system change may not only encourage individuals’ pro-environmental commitments and actions, but also spur system changes that, in turn, accommodate individuals to change their lifestyles. We make our case by distinguishing four pathways that explain how individual behavior change and system change can reinforce each other.
Pathway 1: Climate Activism
Activism may have direct effects on greenhouse gas emissions by, for example, initiating car-sharing plans or encouraging groups of individuals to avoid fast fashion. Activism also may galvanize change at the level of government. Across the world, climate advocacy groups have started legal procedures to demand from governments that they adhere to climate responsibilities. Another route for activism is by targeting industries, such as by pressuring investors to abandon their holdings of stocks in polluting businesses.
Arguably the most visible form of climate activism is public protest that may set in motion a reciprocal process of influence. Fridays For Future (FFF), for example, started bottom-up: a few committed adolescents sparked an influential movement supported by masses of young people. As such, FFF not only heightened public attention for the climate crisis but also raised political urgency. Although it is hard to prove causal effects of social movements, various industries have begun to adopt sustainability initiatives over the past few years. Fast fashion companies, for instance, have made efforts to improve the sustainability of their supply chain management. Climate activism thus can set off chains of events that let sustainable change spiral through society.
Figure 1: Climate activism impacts system changes
Source: de Ridder and Thomaes (2025). Credit: Liselotte van de Sande
Pathway 2: Sustainable consumption
Another way for individuals to influence system change lies in their consumption behavior, such as the energy they use or the ways in which they commute. Some experts are skeptical of the potential for consumer behavior to contribute to climate action, arguing that behavior is notoriously hard to change. This may be because people are drawn to routine behaviors that provide comfort, or are reluctant to forego personal benefits for the sake of the common good. Moreover, skeptics argue, advocacy for individual contributions to climate mitigation may shift attention away from systemic change.
Still, even behaviors that have negligible environmental impact (such as using straws made of paper instead of plastic) can be meaningful because they strengthen individuals’ beliefs that they are able to adopt a sustainable lifestyle. To the extent that pro-environmental consumption takes place in social contexts, these behaviors have the potential to spread, such as when a teenager chooses plant-based alternatives for animal products in her school canteen and inspires peers to do the same. Importantly, consumer behaviors also may set off systemic change. Laws of commerce imply that when consumption patterns shift within the population, then industry will follow suit.
Figure 2: Changes in consumer behavior impacts system changes
Source: de Ridder and Thomaes (2025). Credit: Liselotte van de Sande
Pathway 3: Engaging people as a community
The third pathway emphasizes that engaging people as a community, rather than as isolated individuals, may increase their commitment to climate change mitigation. People who consider themselves individual actors are at risk of experiencing helplessness. Promoting ‘we-thinking’ by communicating what others do, or think should be done, may significantly boost their motivation for behavior change. Similarly, articulating a trending social norm can encourage pro-environmental behavior change as can explicit discussion in social interactions of what is appropriate behavior to take away ignorance about other people’s pro-environmental views. Another route to promote ‘we-thinking’ lies in supporting individuals to participate in collectives. When people’s feelings of connectedness to others increase, this may lead them to view climate change mitigation as a collaborative challenge.
Unlocking the power of the community may be achieved by conveying what people can do together for the sake of communal benefit – with the sense of community being twofold, referring both to the process (people acting together) and the outcome (benefit for all). Importantly, realizing that other people acknowledge the problem of climate change and act accordingly creates a tipping point that may inspire others who were originally less inclined to change their behavior.
Figure 3: Facilitating groups to get together impacts system changes
Source: de Ridder and Thomaes (2025). Credit: Liselotte van de Sande
Pathway 4: Supportive policy arrangements
People getting together in collective action arrangements is an important pathway for bridging the gap between behavioral change and system change. However, only highly committed individuals may arrive at doing so without the help of supportive policy arrangements. Collectives are often initiated by minorities of people who are able and willing to organize themselves and challenge the status quo. Policy support can offer a larger, diverse group of people (including non-frontrunners) the opportunity to become involved by promoting self-organization across communities – and spur widespread contributions to sustainability transitions that are critical to unleash system change.
Capitalizing on the promise of citizen collectives in governing climate action benefits from improved understanding of how and when people collaborate successfully on shared goals. Abundant experience with citizen collectives show that involving people as a group may not only accelerate system change but is, in fact, crucial to achieve system change in the first place.
Figure 4: Creating policy arrangements supports (groups of) individuals.
Source: de Ridder and Thomaes (2025). Credit: Liselotte van de Sande
The promise of a behavioral perspective
These four pathways illustrate how individual behavior and system change are fundamentally co-dependent drivers of climate change mitigation. As such, they offer excellent opportunities to move away from the discourse that has viewed behavior and system change as separate and that has prioritized one of both drivers as more central to sustainability transitions.
As behavioral scientists, we both acknowledge the power of behavior change of individuals and recognize its limitations. Indeed, individual behaviors can have major climate impacts if large groups of people would change their lifestyles.
At the same time, individuals cannot be held accountable for systemic failures, such as governments failing to invest in better public transport or the food industry being slow to develop plant-based alternatives for meat. Individuals who are committed to pro-environmental behavior change should be accommodated by supporting policies from responsible parties.
People are not just passive followers waiting for governments and industries to take action – they themselves can stimulate policy changes as voters and consumers. Individuals matter to the extent that their acceptance of policies is required for their effectiveness. While implementing climate policies is part of complex political processes, it is critical to better understand at what point governments are able and willing to work together with citizens on climate mitigation, rather than initiating policies without active citizen contributions.
Behavioural scientists are well aware that behaviour change is not a panacea to complex problems posed by climate change and its mitigation. Nevertheless, a behavioral perspective is an indispensable element of climate change mitigation as it can accelerate system change as much as it depends on it.
Read the full article here.
Denise de Ridder is professor of psychology at Utrecht University. Her research interests lie in how policy makers can engage communities with societal challenges. Denise is coordinator of Utrecht University’s multidisciplinary platform Behavior & Institutions
Sander Thomaes is professor of psychology at Utrecht University. He explores how young people are impacted by and can help address societal challenges such as climate change. Sander is vice-dean for research and impact at Utrecht University’s Faculty of Social Sciences.