Veiko Lukmann: Climate Guilt Is Not the Fertilizer for the Future

Principles Chamber leader Veiko Lukmann comments on Aivar Uski's climate policy analysis, which questions the widespread use of the term "climate crisis" in politics, education, and media. Lukmann acknowledges that climate is changing and human activity plays a role in it, but asks whether climate guilt is the right tool for directing society. The topic is relevant because climate policy is used to justify decisions costing billions of euros.

Principles Chamber leader Veiko Lukmann spoke out following the public release of Aivar Uski's position paper "Climate Policy Reality Check: Situation Assessment, Impacts and Alternatives". The document came to public attention during the summer heat, when the term "climate crisis" had become almost self-evident in the political, educational and media sphere.

Lukmann acknowledges that climate is changing and human activity plays a role in it. He also concedes that societies must adapt to climate change. The question, in his view, is not about the facts themselves, but about what policies are established based on those facts and whether climate guilt is the right tool for directing society.

The term "climate crisis" is widely used today in politics, education, media and corporate communications. It has been used to justify a large number of policies and measures whose costs run into billions of euros. Lukmann questions whether such a guilt-based approach is the most effective way to address climate problems or whether it rather hinders substantive debate over alternatives.