Climate policy beyond ideological trenches

Abstract

The climate crisis demands urgent and effective policy interventions, yet the discourse remains mired in ideological polarization. On one side, some argue that reducing consumption is the primary solution to the climate crisis, while others emphasize that technological innovation is the only viable option. We argue that a convergence of perspectives is needed and propose using the ecological footprint metric as a framework for evaluating the environmental impacts of different policies. The metric, expressed as a fraction with consumption in the numerator and efficiency in resource use in the denominator, allows for an equitable evaluation of the outcomes of policies that focus on either reducing consumption or improving efficiency. Through simulations, we analyze the ecological footprint outcomes of various scenarios—Business-As-Usual, Tech World, Consumption Reduction, and Smart Sustainability. We show that trade-offs between consumption and efficiency are hardly avoidable, and policies that address both aspects—such as those outlined in the Smart Sustainability scenario—are more likely to reverse the growing trend of global ecological footprints. While sharp and unexpected disruptions—such as major epidemics causing abrupt declines in consumption or breakthrough innovations dramatically improving efficiency—could in theory shift these dynamics, bridging ideological divides remains the most prudent approach for crafting policies that can effectively address the climate crisis and ensure a sustainable future.