Selling our future

Jens Beckert is director at the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies in Cologne, Germany, and his book How We Sold Our Future: The Failure to Fight Climate Change was published in German in 2024, followed by an English translation (Beckert, 2025).

A review on Earth.Org described the book as “a sober, rational assessment of what influences have impacted the world’s failure to address climate change, and what this means for our shared future”. Beckert asks “what are the social, political, and economic drivers and structures that brought us to this point?” and “examines each of the social and political structures responsible for and affected by the situation” (Lee, 2025).

Beckert’s book is of modest length, with nine chapters: Knowledge without change, Capitalist modernity, Big Oil, The hesitant state, Global prosperity, Consumption without limits, Green growth, Planetary boundaries, and What next? The book provides extensive notes and references. The chapter titles give an indication of the content and this post will try to provide a view based primarily on excerpts from the final chapter.

Beckert stresses the need to understand “the forces at work in business and politics, as well as among citizens and consumers, that shape the fight against the climate crisis and prevent adequate responses”. Societies have until now been able to take for granted the continuity of the natural foundations for life, but climate change is creating a ‘new unreliability of nature’. However, the unfolding crisis has not yet triggered appropriate action: “The fight against climate change is failing owing to the power and incentive structures of a social configuration geared towards profit-making, consumption and unlimited growth.” Our social and economic structures are powerful and deeply embedded, and they limit our responses to climate change. We need an ‘emergency stop’ on the pressures for economic growth, which could be provided by “politically agreed and enforced climate protection measures” along with lifestyle changes away from excessive consumption.  No such effective action is taking place, but nevertheless societies have to react. “Anything else would be to accept the collapse of civilisation.”

In Beckert’s view “there is no way round restrictions on economic growth and excessive consumption, especially in highly developed countries” if we are to live within the planetary boundaries, and “such restrictions are not compatible with the existing structures of capitalist modernity.” He seeks “practicable ways of taking pressure off the Earth’s ecological systems” and believes “we simply do not have time to first overturn the existing social order, then build a new one, and then finally tackle the climate problem”. We can only find partial solutions and they will change with developments and experience and “will remain inherently controversial”. Approaches are needed which are politically feasible and will “buy time for societies to adapt to climate change, accelerate the defossilization of energy production, and curtail the growth of resource consumption”. Climate change should be seen as a more-or-less problem, rather than as an either-or issue. Measures which buy time can provide “the opportunity for social and technical developments to emerge that open up new political options”, and minds may also be focussed by the increasing frequency of climate related events such as drought, extreme summer heat, and floods. Social and political structures will “confront intensifying conflicts within and among societies” over issues relating to water, agriculture, raw materials, and unwelcome lifestyle changes.

The necessity for “short-term adaptation and damage repair” will divert financial resources from other tasks including climate mitigation. This will undermine the “ideal of perpetually increasing prosperity” and its promise for the future, and foster polarization and conflict. Beckert quotes Mike Davis who described the possibility of growing turbulence driving elite publics to wall themselves off from the rest of humanity, abandoning global mitigation in favour of ‘selective adaptation for Earth’s first-class passengers’.

In the chapter on capitalist modernity, Beckert wrote that while “the catastrophes of climate change are seen as problems for a distant future or for other people, then there are no material incentives for effective climate protection: not for business, nor for the state, nor for citizens.” In the final chapter he proposes that for climate mitigation and adaptation to have a chance of being implemented, the steps involved must use the rationales “of the various spheres of action and their reciprocal channels of influence.”

In the economy, investment is motivated only by the prospect of profit, and the power to shift or refrain from investment means that companies must be allowed to make ‘acceptable’ profits. The path to profit can however be altered through subsidies for climate-friendly business models, financial sanctions on greenhouse gas emissions, and regulation. The ability to regulate depends on political power, which in turn depends on “maintaining economic prosperity, tax revenues, and the loyalty of the electorate.” The legal system has a role in protecting the rights of future generations and preserving natural resources in the face of political and business interests.

Policy-makers have the task of working with the electorate to address problems. This involves “increasing understanding of measures that entail costs and significant disruption”. Climate adaptation measures are more likely to be seen as beneficial by voters, and gain their approval, than climate mitigation measures. Local flood protection schemes, for example, are seen as a collective good. Such adaptation measures can increase awareness and “gradually create a social climate that strengthens a readiness to act”. Attitudes to climate policy differ between social groups, and policy may have greater success if it takes a multi-layered approach that recognises differing interests. A similar argument applies to the distribution of financial burdens: the cost of “carbon taxes, heat pumps or electric vehicles” may be easy for the wealthy to bear, but can “overtax household budgets all the way up the ladder to the upper middle class”. The higher the cost of climate policies, the greater is the danger of divisions in society that will fuel authoritarian populism and thus block effective action. Avoiding a tone of moral superiority, targeted structural policy, cushioning financial burdens, compensation to individuals and assistance to individual regions can all help to gain widespread political support for climate policy. The issue of support for the global South is particularly difficult as it is “almost impossible to convince an electorate that scarce tax money should be spent outside one’s own country”. Here it may be helpful to make clear the interconnection between the global South and North, and between climate and migration policies, as may already be seen at the Mexican-American border.

The key political message of the book, according to its author, relates to the shift in the relationship between state and economy in most countries over the last forty years towards steering social development through market forces. This has led to “worsening social inequalities within countries” and a “crisis in public infrastructures”. The demands facing public services as a result of climate change show how misguided the pro-market policies have been. The state’s fiscal headroom needs to be expanded through “higher public debt earmarked for climate policy, differentiated interest rates, and an increase in overall tax revenue.” Tax increases for the wealthiest will be necessary, and will meet with political resistance.

Climate protection policy also needs support through individual behaviour, but this will only change significantly if public infrastructures are changed in the right way, for example by providing reliable user-friendly public transport. The market cannot be expected to provide these things. Not only prudent behaviour, but virtuous behaviour is needed from citizens, as illustrated by the problem of collective goods in economic theory. However “economic theory promotes a narrow view of human behaviour, as people often act altruistically”.  However, in business and in politics, “this kind of altruistic behaviour is too often blocked by systemic restraints”. Unselfish behaviour can flourish not only among family and friends, but also in civil society, where examples are provided by the various national and international climate movements.

Effective policy to address the global problem of climate change may not emerge from international conferences, but rather from democratic civil society, where ethical behaviour is promoted through social networks in the community, family and friends, and civil engagement. Thus local politics is important even though climate change is global, and social projects can help to shape cultural attitudes towards environmentally friendly behaviour which business and political leaders cannot completely ignore. “A widespread readiness to support measures against the overexploitation of natural resources can only be engendered, if at all, with the involvement of civil society: that is, from the bottom up, not from the top down.”

Visions of future society, perhaps in a post-growth economy, can build support for change “and put beneficial civil pressure on business and politics.” Government policy and corporate behaviour “will only accommodate the protection of natural resources if and when it’s compatible with the principles of profit and of holding on to power” but the actions of citizens may have some effect in cushioning the effects of climate change and helping societies to adapt to new conditions.

Even the “faint hope of delaying and further mitigating climate change makes active engagement in the pursuit of this goal a rational step, and also a moral duty. The extent to which we actually succeed will determine how our children and grandchildren live, and how they judge us.”

References

Beckert, J. (2025) How We Sold Our Future: The Failure to Fight Climate Change. Translated from the German by R. Cunningham. Cambridge, Polity Press.

Lee, J., 2025, ‘How We Sold Our Future: The Failure to Fight Climate Change’, Jan Lee, Feb 2025, Earth.Org, online, accessed 24 February 2025

https://earth.org/book-reviews/review-how-we-sold-our-future-the-failure-to-fight-climate-change-by-jens-beckert/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Carbon Capture, Utilization and Storage

Climate fiction and climate action

HoSEM project