At day 3 of Building Bridges ’26, a conference organized by HUN-REN, the special lecture ‘A lost decade?’ brought together Stephen Evans, Katalin Solymosi, and Helena Bilandzic, member of the AE Task Force Environment, Climate, and Sustainability for a wide-ranging reflection on climate action since the Paris Agreement. Their message was neither simple optimism nor pure despair: the past decade was not entirely wasted, but the next one cannot follow the same pattern.
Solymosi opened by tracing the origins of the task force that began with a survey at a conference and later a meeting in Cambridge. Its first major output was a 2021 special issue of the European Review on food sustainability, involving ten contributors with diverse expertise. To frame the climate challenge, Solymosi invoked Don’t Look Up, in which a scientist discovers a comet heading toward Earth. The information is available, but efforts to persuade the public fail, and the media barely covers the story. The parallel to climate change feels uncomfortably familiar: we know a great deal, yet action remains far too slow.
Since the 2015 Paris Agreement, the emergency has increasingly been seen as difficult to govern. Solymosi pointed to this summer’s Danube as one example of mounting ecological stress. Are existing strategies enough to prevent global disasters? One in five plant species is at risk of extinction, with consequences for agriculture and planetary health. More than 10 per cent of arable land cannot be farmed, threatening crop production. We are racing against time, and critical tipping points could trigger cascading consequences. Solutions to planetary defence rest heavily on governments, yet ecological deterioration is moving faster than politics. What, then, can be done?
Bilandzic shifted the focus to the social and political dimensions of the transition. Moving to a sustainable society is not merely a scientific question; it is a challenge of implementation. Concern about climate change in the EU is high—climate ranks as the third most pressing issue, and 77 per cent of respondents have considered it a serious problem since 2019. Yet ideological divides and polarization vary across countries and between left and right. People also tend to underestimate others’ willingness to act, which can weaken support for policy.
‘Moving to a sustainable society is not merely a scientific question; it is a challenge of implementation’
The media landscape is similarly divided. Traditional media tends to be supportive, while right-wing outlets often express more scepticism. Social media allows a wide range of activists to join the debate, but it lacks editorial gatekeeping, enabling misinformation and disinformation to follow the logic of attention. Scientific knowledge and misinformation now coexist.
Strategic communication can help improve environmental action. Beyond informing people about negative consequences, communication should promote self-efficacy—the belief that one can act, such as adopting a vegan diet. Self-efficacy is a major factor in translating knowledge into action. Social norms, individual actions, and policy support also matter, as does foregrounding the scientific consensus and positive possibilities. Climate action starts with us. For academics, low-threshold actions include transformative research, transformative teaching, and transformative practices. Beyond campus, role models, opinion leaders, and speaking up on climate change can make a difference. Personal communication, Bilandzic argued, can bridge ideological divides.
Evans described the task force as a three-year experiment bringing members of different scientific disciplines together around the same issue. The first synthesis was the European Review special issue. They thought their job was done, but felt an urge to keep talking—and to write together. The result was an analysis of where we stand ten years after Paris. They had hoped for a smooth ecological transition. Sustainable Development Goals were set, organizations negotiated with nations, and enormous effort followed. Yet the dial hardly moved.
Still, Evans resisted calling it a completely lost decade. Much was learned. The root causes of failure include the difficulty of overcoming capitalism, and the possibility that inaction arises from trying to solve system-level problems by changing only sub-systems. A commitment to modernity can allow—or even enable—continued fossil-fuel dependence. If societies enable that dependence, Evans suggested, they are effectively agreeing to take the poison anyway. The challenge is effectively ungovernable.
A shift is happening now. We have been trying to build systems that poison the planet less. But it is too late for that alone: the planet is already poisoned. It is not enough to stop poisoning it; we also need to heal it. Issues warned about ten years ago are now beginning to happen. The data suggests we should get ready for a bumpy ride.
‘The ecological problem was expected to be governable, but that expectation has been proved wrong’
This is not a failure of knowledge or resources, Evans argued. It is an operational governance gap. People trying to devise solutions often come from policy rather than science, and solutions need to be co-designed with stakeholders from finance, governance, and science. The path forward is different and complex. The future system is uncertain, so we cannot simply write down a plan of 20 things; by the time we reach step six, we may need to pivot. The ecological problem was expected to be governable, but that expectation has been proved wrong. We have to build pathways together.
The lecture left the audience with a difficult but clear charge. The lost decade may not be entirely lost—but its lessons must shape the next one. The transition will require better governance, smarter communication, co-designed solutions, and a commitment not only to reduce harm but also to repair.
Related articles:
The post Not Quite Lost: Climate Communication and Collective Action at Building Bridges ’26 appeared first on Hungarian Conservative.