“No one is too small to make a difference” – Greta Thunberg

The ‘Fridays for Future’ movement undeniably connects citizens across borders, worldwide. The international protest gained public attention when, in August last year, climate activist Greta Thunberg (then 15), staged a protest outside the Swedish parliament, holding a sign reading ‘Skolstrejk för klimatet” (“School strike for the climate”). Infuriated by the lack of political attention given to the impending threat of climate change, and inspired by Parkland, Florida (students had walked out of class to protest gun violence), Thunberg decided to take matters into her own hand. But how successful has the movement been, and will it be only a short-lived phenomenon, or will it spark more lasting change?

So far, the #FridaysForFuture protest has grown into an international youth movement, with tens of thousands of youths from around the world joining Thunberg in her activism. The main goal of the movement is to pressurise politicians to take action to stop global warming  through school strikes and demonstrations. The young founder has also spoken at the UN COP24 in Poland last year, where she called out some of the most powerful governments in the world: “You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.”

At a time of increasingly bleak warnings about the future of our planet, the movement provides some hope. Global temperatures have already exceeded pre-industrial levels, and there is evidence that this has some gloom-ridden implications for human life on earth, threatening agriculture, air quality, and even vital infrastructure for our populations. The goals set by governments in the 2015 Paris Agreement follow on from these concerns. Yet surely if governments have acted already, why should there still be need for a protest for climate action? 

In spite of the apparent progress following on from the Agreement, a UN Environment Programme Report from last month warned that unless global greenhouse gas emissions fall by 7.6% every year for the next decade, governments will be unlikely to meet the 1.5°C temperature target laid out by the Agreement. “We are living in a very interesting time,” Thunberg says. “Change is on the horizon, but to see that change we also have to change ourselves.”

Fridays for Future is far more than a viral phenomenon that will phase out in a few months. The movement has inspired millions of passionate climate activists, insisting that their voices be heard on what many deem to be the defining issue of their generation. Young people are not simply ‘liking’ climate activism posts on Facebook, but rather actively showing presence in the real world, on the streets. Now, every month, students from around the world unite across borders to demand that politicians do more to acknowledge and address the harsh reality that is climate change. The movement has electrified the global discourse about the problem of climate change at a fundamental time.

But how successful has the movement been in terms of moving forward for climate action? 

Undeniably, the Fridays for Future movement offers hope that global leaders can be persuaded to act to reduce carbon emissions. Undoubtedly, the movement has helped to put the climate crisis higher up on the political agenda. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has stated that he understands the anger of the youth and that their voices give him hope for the future. 

Since the protests began, climate emergencies have been declared in the UK, Paris and Canada, along with a number of additional cities around the world. The European Union has been spurred on to dedicate more funds to climate action. 

There is no doubt that Thunberg’s commitment to the cause has been echoed by teens all around the world, who have filed lawsuits against politicians, petitioned for climate legislation, and fought to change the discourse around the future of the planet. 

One such success of the heightening political importance given to climate change can be found in Thunberg’s home country, Sweden. According to the Economist, Sweden, a nation of frequent flyers, has become increasingly ashamed of the environmental impact of flying. The number of passengers taking domestic flights fell by 8% between January and April this year. The country has even coined a word for the phenomenon: “Flygskam” or “flight shame” describes this embarrassment. Thunberg herself has actively promoted the #flightshaming movement, choosing to travel by boat from Europe to New York to attend the UN climate summit. 

However, although the strikes signal a shift in climate activism, the protests have still garnered some criticism. A number of politicians and even scholars have labelled the strikes as disruptive. Youngsters participating in the strikes have been accused of hypocrisy and were asked whether they would take part in such strikes on a Saturday. Yet it is arguable that these remarks seem to miss the mark, seemingly ignoring the urgency of the problem. Perhaps such demonstrations would not garner so much attention if they were held over the weekend.

It has also been suggested that perhaps the issue is not one of awareness and education, as the movement suggests, but rather one of values. Many political leaders have already ‘listened to the science’, and while the movement’s message does seem to have sparked debate around the subject, perhaps a different approach needs to be taken, enabling policymakers to further understand the moral reasons for how and why action needs to be taken.

Yet, for many, Thunberg’s movement has become a beacon of hope. However, this was never her plan. As she told the Davos crowd in January, “I don’t want you to be hopeful. I want you to panic. I want you to feel the fear I feel every day. And then I want you to act.”