Activism targeting fossil fuel companies: what works?

Social Change Lab is currently mapping and analysing the available tactical approaches to reduce emissions by targeting fossil fuel companies. This article is a preview of the full analysis which we will publish in the coming months. 

If you think there is something we have missed, or you have insights into successful campaigns which have targeted industry, we would love to hear from you. 

The purpose of the work is to demonstrate the myriad ways it is possible to take action against fossil fuel companies, directly and indirectly. With a combination of disruptive tactics and strategic economic pressure, it is still possible, even in the shadow of unsympathetic governments, to make progress. We hope this work will inform activists, funders and researchers with analyses of successful approaches based on the best available evidence from the past. 

Here’s a preview of our ‘Strategy map’ - you can click on the image to see a larger version (with thanks to the brilliant 'Not that Peter Evans' for the illustration): 

The context

The world is running out of time to transition away from fossil fuels. Current climate policies put us on track for 2.5–2.9°C of warming, far beyond the limits of safety. While renewable energy is scaling up rapidly, it’s still not replacing fossil fuels quickly enough. And while fossil fuel subsidies remain enormous - $7 trillion in 2022 according to the IMF,  governments show no real urgency in phasing them out.

In the current political landscape, especially in the U.S., where the fossil fuel lobby has one hand on the steering wheel, hoping for meaningful policy change from within the system is unrealistic. If “Drill, baby, drill” is the White House’s energy policy, and in the UK the governing Labour Party are U-turning almost daily on climate promises, waiting for lawmakers to act is not an option. 

But all is not lost. As Kevin Young says, “Politicians are subordinate to economic elites”. They often react to economic power shifts rather than act at the vanguard. History shows that radical change requires neither politics to come first, nor even a majority of the public to be active in the cause. The abolition of slavery, the civil rights movement, the move to Clean Air, the fight for women’s suffrage, were all led by committed minorities willing to take targeted, strategic disruptive action. The political system followed their lead only after they made the status quo untenable.

If we accept that political lobbying is too slow and weak to drive urgent change, then the fight must be taken directly to the fossil fuel industry. The industry has tried for decades to shift blame onto consumers; to give just one example, it was the fossil fuel giant BP and the advertising agency Ogilvy and Mather who coined the term ‘carbon footprint’, cynically - and incredibly effectively - shifting blame to individuals for walking too heavily on the planet. Of course, we all have a part to play in reducing emissions - but it is clearly those who are extracting and burning fossil fuels, and making personal and corporate billions in the process, who have the greatest responsibility. 

Hitting fossil fuel companies where it hurts

Climate activism must impose direct and sustained costs on the fossil fuel industry. Activists must go to the heart of the beast. Recent research argues that the most effective strategy is to target the economic power behind fossil fuels - banks, insurers, investors, and corporations that fund and consume fossil fuels. The researchers argue, on the basis of past campaigns, that action must:

1. Impose direct financial and operational costs on fossil fuel elites.

2. Be sustained over time.

3. Use a range of tactics that complement and reinforce each other.

When we embarked on this work, we were aware there were several different approaches available. But in the process of our research, we found so many more tactical approaches being adopted than we had imagined. While these are not always completely separable (and undoubtedly work best in combination), we propose 13 key approaches - 6 direct and 7 direct - which apply pressure in different ways. 

In our full report, the tactics we will profile are:

Direct disruption tactics

• Public shaming of fossil fuel companies, their executives and enablers.

• Litigation against companies for climate damages and misleading the public.

• Worker strikes and pickets in fossil fuel-dependent industries.

• Consumer boycotts of companies heavily invested in fossil fuels.

• Infrastructure disruption, such as blocking construction of new pipelines.

• Direct disruption of daily operations, making extraction and transport more costly.
  

Economic and institutional pressure tactics

• Pressuring insurers to stop underwriting fossil fuel projects.

• Forcing banks to withdraw fossil fuel financing.

• Pushing pension funds and institutions to divest from fossil fuels.

• Targeting regulators to impose stricter industry restrictions.

• Lobbying for subsidy cuts and carbon taxes.

• Media campaigns exposing fossil fuel propaganda and greenwashing.

• Advertising bans on fossil fuel promotion.

For each approach, we will show evidence for its effectiveness, drawing on historical precedents, social movement theory, and evidence from existing climate campaigns. We will talk about the strengths and weaknesses of each approach, assessing which are best suited to different contexts. We will highlight and dive in deeper to what we think are some of the most promising approaches, with case studies targeting the insurance industry and collaborative campaigns. 

We would love to hear from you about this work. What have we overlooked? Where have you encountered impactful campaigns targeting industry? What has worked well, and what’s fallen flat, or even been counter-productive? We’d love your insights to help inform this research. Please do get in touch. 

Image at top credit: Keerti Gopal/Inside Climate News Available here.