2.3.3.1 Earth system destabilisation and radicalisation and polarisation

Radicalisation of certain social groups or whole societies can be a reaction to perceived external threats, including ecological threats. Research suggests that people can respond to climate change and other ecological threats by becoming more authoritarian and derogative against outgroups (Uenal et al., 2021; Russo et al., 2020; Jackson et al., 2019; Taylor, 2019; Fritsche et al.; 2012). This effect can be further exacerbated by the well-documented effect of heat on aggressive behaviours, including online hate speech (Stechemesser et al., 2022).

Though the evidence is not yet conclusive or available for a wide range of countries, the available results suggest that at least at this stage of climate change it is mostly individuals who already show authoritarian or social dominance predispositions that become even more reactionary in response to the threat of climate change. This tendency can produce or sharpen polarisation as conservative and liberal social groups move further apart in their attitudes and outlook (Spaiser et al., forthcoming; Uenal et al., 2021; Hetherington & Weiler, 2009). Polarisation can also be driven by attempts to mitigate climate change, where climate change policies, rather than the Earth system destabilisation itself, are perceived as a threat to, for example, status or identity (Ehret et al., 2022; Dagett, 2018; Dunlap et al., 2016; Hoffarth and Hodson, 2016). Polarisation can be further exacerbated by inequality and general economic decline (Stewart et al., 2020; Winkler, 2019), particularly where perceived growing status insecurity can be exploited by polarising elites (Banda and Cluverius, 2018; Smith and Hanley, 2018). 

However, as climate change progresses and becomes a more concrete existential threat throughout the world, individuals with more social liberal predispositions could develop increasingly authoritarian and reactionary views, prioritising security over liberty and human rights. This trend may be further reinforced by other social processes, which may further increase the sense of threat, such as rising inequality, political instability, etc. Research shows that exposure to existential threats (such as terrorism or natural disasters) can make even socially liberal minded people more authoritarian (Rahman et al., 2022; Russo et al., 2020; Hetherington and Suhay, 2011; Huddy and Feldmann, 2011; Gadarian, 2010). Such a development would decrease polarisation, but authoritarianism could become predominant in the population. 

In another potential path to radicalisation, a violent flank could emerge at the margins of the climate movement. There is some evidence to suggest that, in the face of political  non-response to the climate crisis and climate injustice, climate activists could become increasingly desperate and turn their peaceful campaigning into more violent and even armed means of resistance (Sovacool and Dunlap, 2022; Malm, 2021).