If we know we need to take action on climate change, why aren’t we doing it? That’s the fundamental question posed by a new UN report which offers a theory of why change is so difficult.
2025’s Interconnected Disaster Risks report from the United Nations University Institute for Environment and Human Security (UNU-EHS) finds that our systems are no longer serving us.
When it comes to climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution and other big environmental crises, its authors say many of today’s solutions are superficial fixes that can even impede real change.
“Society is at a crossroads,” says Professor Shen Xiaomeng, director of UNU-EHS. “For years scientists have warned us about the damage we’re doing to our planet, and how to stop it. But we aren’t taking meaningful actions.”
Despite the consequences of climate change intensifying, fossil fuel emissions are still reaching new heights. Species are going extinct at unprecedented rates, yet humans continue to plunder ecosystems. Though the waste crisis is already apparent, household waste is projected to double by 2050.
“Time and again, we see the danger ahead, yet we keep moving towards it. In many cases, we see the abyss, we know how to turn around, and yet we confidently keep walking towards it. Why?” asks Prof Xiaomeng.
The UN experts take a more holistic view of human behaviour to answer this and propose five areas where deep systemic changes are urgently needed.
What is the theory of deep change?
Having made the links between disasters and highlighted planetary tipping points in previous editions, this year’s report presents a path forward: the theory of deep change (ToDC).
It looks to the root cause of problems, identifying the structures and assumptions in society that allow those problems to persist.
Picture a river clogged with plastic, for example. While our immediate response might be to bemoan the waste management system and lack of recycling, the ToDC points to the mass production systems and proliferation of single-use plastics upstream that lead to so much waste in the first place.
Deeper still, it locates the assumptions that led to the creation of those systems, such as people’s belief that ‘new is better’ or that material production and consumption are signs of progress.
Rotten roots produce rotten fruits, the scientists say. So it’s the roots we need to focus on to really produce better outcomes for the planet.
“Our report shows that many of the actions we take, as well-intentioned as they are, won’t work as long as there is a whole system working against us,” says Caitlyn Eberle, lead author of the report.
New analysis from the World Resources Institute (WRI) bears this out, too. It finds that efforts focused exclusively on changing personal behaviours – and not the overarching systems – only achieve around one-tenth of the emissions-reduction potential that changes for the climate could have. It’s much easier to go carless if your city has a good public transport system, for example.
The UN report sets out five changes we need to make on a deeper level to avoid climate catastrophe and design a better world, looking at some positive examples that are already working around the world.
- Rethink waste: From trash to treasure
Two billion tonnes of household waste is produced globally every year – enough to fill a line of shipping containers wrapped around the equator 25 times.
This plant-squeezing amount is clearly unsustainable, and the report calls for shifting to a circular economy that prioritises durability, repair and reuse.
It praises Kamikatsu in Japan, a town that has achieved a recycling rate four times above the national average by embracing circular strategies such as composting, upcycling and clothing exchanges.
- Realign with nature: From separation to harmony
Centuries of seeing the natural world as something to be exploited have led to deforestation, species extinction and ecosystem collapse, the report states, eroding our own vital resources.
The report gives the example of the Kissimmee River in Florida, US, which was channelised in the 1960s to try and control future floods. This dried out 160 square kilometres of wetlands, led to a massive decline of species, and actually made flooding worse for downstream communities.
Happily, it has now been restored; species have returned, and the wetlands are again serving as a sponge, storing billions of gallons of water to help prevent flooding during storms.
- Reconsider responsibility: From me to we
The Earth is shared by 8.2 billion people, but the use of resources and the burden of climate change are extremely far from being equal. The poorest half of the population suffers 75 per cent of relative income losses due to climate change, despite being responsible for just 12 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions.
This unjust situation is giving rise to ever more contorted ‘solutions’ such as carbon offsetting, according to the report. Rich countries are avoiding ambitious climate goals by neutralising their emissions with tree planting in other parts of the world. Meanwhile, the climate-wrecking emissions continue.
The Montreal Protocol of 1987 – which successfully reduced ozone-depleting substances by 98 per cent – is held up as a model of genuine international cooperation that overlooked national borders.
- Reimagine the future: From seconds to centuries
We know that short-term thinking dominates decision-making and can create long-term problems for future generations.
Nuclear energy, for example, is often considered a clean alternative to fossil fuels, but it produces radioactive waste with a lifespan of over 10,000 years – beyond our current capability to dispose of.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, an example of a positive legacy is the Svalbard Global Seed Vault, which preserves the world’s crop seeds from war, disease and other catastrophes, protecting biodiversity for future generations.
Finland’s Committee for the Future, meanwhile, advises on policies with multi-generational impacts.
- Redefine value: from economic wealth to planetary health
The world is becoming richer in GDP terms, but it’s not equating to increased global prosperity, and material riches are growing at the expense of the environment.
Forests are a prime example. In some places, deforested land is valued up to 7.5 times more than forested land, but this ignores the biodiversity and human health benefits of forests.
An alternative model is Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness Index, which prioritises well-being and ecological balance over economic growth.
In Canada, New Zealand and Japan, “green prescriptions” from doctors advising time in nature recognise the diverse values that nature provides.
