For over a decade, the UK was regarded as a climate leader. The Climate Change Act created a durable cross‑party mandate, and emissions fell to less than half their 1990 levels - largely through cleaning up the power sector, a shift that required little from the public directly as we shifted away from coal and built-up renewable power generation. The investment in offshore wind has placed the UK as a global leader behind China, with just under 16GW of installed capacity in 2025, a further 8.4 GW allocated in the 2026 Contract for Difference round and policy ambitions of 50GW installed capacity by 2030.
There has been a lot of work and success over the past decade in decarbonising the grid. While this work is far from over, there is another major challenge that is facing the transition, and one that is deeply embedded in social dynamics and behaviours. A large proportion of the remaining emissions are embedded in and deeply entrenched in lifestyle factors, that is, in how people heat their homes and businesses, how they travel and what they buy and eat. Without broad public consent and engagement, this next phase of decarbonisation will falter just as climate impacts intensify at home and abroad.
There are two linked problems underpinning this second phase of the Net Zero journey: net zero has not yet enriched most people’s lives, and it has not empowered them in shaping its direction.
A fragile mandate
The once-rare political consensus around climate action is now fractured. Senior politicians have openly revisited commitments that once felt settled, even as 2025 marked the UK’s warmest year on record.
At the same time, public support for action on climate - while still a majority - is softening. The proportion of people unconcerned about climate change has risen since 2021 and the environment has slipped down the list of public priorities amid the cost-of-living crisis.
Few people deny climate science; rather, they are impacted by daily pressures such as increasing energy bills and soaring costs of food. Disinformation is rising rapidly. For many communities, they are unsure how net zero helps them in a pragmatic sense in the near term.
The evidence is clear: millions are struggling with essentials, yet many see net zero primarily as a new cost. The 2026 Joseph Rowntree Foundation report highlights that poverty is deepening across the UK. In their words they describe it as “Nothing’s changed? Everything’s changed. It’s worse”. While the low‑carbon economy is rapidly expanding, green jobs often appear in places different from those losing high‑carbon roles, benefiting higher‑skilled workers first. Community benefit funds from renewables are inconsistent and patchy - a postcode lottery and often fail to address underlying concerns. And the public sees energy companies posting major profits while their own bills remain high.
It is little wonder some communities feel they are paying the costs of the transition without sharing in its gains.
A public that feels acted upon, not involved
Support is also weakening because people feel powerless. Only small minorities believe they can influence local decisions or national climate policy.
The UK remains one of the most centralised democracies in the developed world and climate engagement is often late, perfunctory or symbolic. This fuels distrust, slows projects and creates opportunities for misinformation. Yet polling consistently finds that people want a meaningful say in how net zero is delivered. They simply don’t believe that what they say will matter.
This is particularly dangerous. By 2040, over a third of emissions reductions depend on household choices - from heat pumps to transport decisions. These choices require trust, clarity and agency. Without them, they will not be made.
A governance upgrade for the transition we face
If we continue to govern net zero as a centralised, top‑down programme, we will undermine the public mandate required to deliver it. Instead, we need a governance system that distributes both the benefits and the power of the transition far more widely.
The JUST‑Systems research programme provides a path forward: mapping how net‑zero governance currently works, analysing place‑based case studies, and developing recommendations based off practical interventions that enable more just, locally driven delivery.
We believe a reform agenda for policy makers should:
1. Bring benefits forward. Tie retrofit support to guaranteed short‑term bill reductions and shift remaining legacy policy costs from energy bills to progressive taxation.
2. Match jobs to places. Align training, investment, and local economic planning so that new green industries appear where high‑carbon jobs are at risk.
3. Make community benefits an entitlement. Standardise and ring‑fence local benefit allocations, with participatory budgeting to direct these funds and align them with local and regional priorities.
4. Devolve decisions - and the capacity - to act. Give local authorities real powers over heat, transport and local energy, with multi‑year funding and strong participatory processes.
5. Broaden ownership. Expand community and municipal energy ownership so that financial gains circulate locally.
We can stick with a model that served the first half of the journey but is ill‑suited to the second. Or we can twist - shifting to a just, locally empowered transition that people can see, feel, and influence. Only the latter will secure the durable public mandate needed to finish what the Climate Change Act began.
For our full report see: Stick or twist? Why the UK's net-zero strategy is faltering and may need to change.
The authors are Professor Matt Hannon, Dr Iain Cairns, Dr Jen Roberts, University of Strathclyde, Strathclyde Institute for Sustainable Communities; and Professor Tavis Potts, University of Aberdeen, Just Transition Lab.
