���������¼�

The researchers also ran a survey on whether the number of times someone encountered climate information on individual solutions in their daily life was associated with less support for government-led initiatives. 

These daily life interactions did not detract from overall support for big picture solutions among Iranian and Australian participants.

“Even more interestingly, Australian students tended to actually show stronger support for systemic change if they were exposed to more individual climate actions,” Dr Ghasemi says. 

“The general Australian population, on average, rated personal pro climate actions as moderate substitutes for systemic change, which suggests they believe that individual solutions 'somewhat' reduce the need for systemic solutions.

“However, they still showed strong support for systemic solutions regardless of their belief about whether their individual actions complement or contradict their support for more big picture climate policies.”

A complementary couple, not a crowd

Dr Ghasemi says the findings challenge the long-standing “crowding-out” hypothesis—the idea that personal climate efforts can reduce enthusiasm for systemic reform.

“Past studies have been mixed, possibly because of differences in how the experiments were designed,” Dr Ghasemi explains. 

“Our results suggest that rather than competing, individual and systemic actions might complement each other.”

The research, he says, highlights how individual behaviours can act as social signals, creating “bottom-up” pressure for governments and institutions to act. 

However, climate communicators should be careful against overstating the power of personal choices.

“It’s critical to communicate the true scale of individual actions,” he says. “If they’re framed as a substitute for systemic policies, that could risk reducing public support for bigger reforms.”

Towards integrated climate action

But, Dr Ghasemi argues, drawing a hard line between personal responsibility and systemic change is counterproductive.

“The success of systemic policies often depends on individual behaviour,” he says.

“Our evidence points to a synergistic relationship.

"For policymakers, this means adopting a more integrated approach—one that values both big picture reforms and the role of small, everyday actions.

"Australia’s gambling reform is a great example of how combining individual-level tools—like monthly activity statements with system-wide policies such as banning gambling providers from offering credit—can have a big impact. 

“Behavioural scientists, like Professor Ben Newell, played a key role in designing these complementary interventions.

“Also, since people often assume others aren’t as interested in climate action, when they change their habits, like recycling more or cutting down on energy use, it sends a message. 

“It shows us that caring is more common than we thought, which can help build momentum for bigger, system-wide changes.

“There’s no need to pit the individual against the system, when we know from research that climate campaigns can be most effective when they both work hand in hand.”