Why we keep making excuses. The short version

We know what needs to be done. We have known for decades. Climate change, biodiversity loss, resource depletion – these crises are not surprises. Scientists have warned us; reports have been written; the data is clear. And yet, the world keeps delaying action. Why?

The reasons go beyond ignorance. They are psychological, economic, political, and sociocultural. These factors shape how we think, act, and justify inaction. They give us excuses that feel logical, even when those excuses are destructive.

This is a short version of the article “Why we keep making excuses. An analytical exploration“.

Psychological barriers

Our minds often struggle with long-term threats, leading to mental barriers that impede action:

• Rationalization: We find ways to justify inaction. Examples include telling ourselves “One person can’t make a big difference” or “Technology will fix it.” These comforting stories ease the tension of cognitive dissonance — the internal conflict between knowing what’s right and doing the opposite.
• Short-term bias: The future feels distant and abstract, so immediate rewards seem more important than preventing long-term disasters.
• Optimism bias: We assume bad things will happen to others, not to us. This leads to a false sense of security and inaction.

Economic barriers

Our economic systems often prioritize short-term gains over long-term sustainability, creating obstacles such as:

• Market failures: Markets do not account for long-term costs. Externalities like pollution and deforestation are often hidden from prices — those who profit aren’t the ones who pay. Shared resources face the tragedy of the commons, where everyone waits for someone else to act first.
• Short-term profit focus: An obsession with immediate profit undermines long-term action. Companies chase quarterly earnings; governments fear economic slowdowns; and investments for future benefit are sacrificed for short-term gains.

Political barriers

Political dynamics can also obstruct change. Key political barriers include:

• Entrenched interests: Powerful industries lobby against change. Fossil fuel companies have spent billions to delay climate action, just as tobacco giants once did to hide the dangers of smoking. This influence often results in policies that favor businesses over the planet.
• Short-termism and polarization: Leaders focus on the next election rather than the next century. Policies requiring sacrifice now for future benefits are unpopular. Ideological polarization turns global challenges into political battlegrounds, and even science can be called into question.

Sociocultural barriers

Social and cultural forces can reinforce inaction. Notable sociocultural barriers include:

• Social inertia: Change is hard when norms stay the same. People tend to follow what others do — if no one acts, neither do we.
• Misinformation: Public understanding is clouded by misinformation. Decades of organized climate denial campaigns have created doubt and confusion about the reality of the crisis.
• Doomism: A growing number of people believe that nothing can be done — so why try? This pessimistic outlook leads to apathy and inaction, becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Worldviews and their influence on action

How we interpret these barriers depends on our worldview. Different schools of thought offer distinct perspectives on why we fail to act:

Ecomodernism

Optimism bias aligns closely with ecomodernism — the belief that technological progress will solve our environmental crises. Ecomodernists acknowledge the Anthropocene (the idea that humanity has become a planetary force) but they see human ingenuity as the way forward.

Eco-Marxism

In contrast, eco-Marxism shifts the blame from humanity as a whole to capitalism as a system. From this perspective, we are not just in the Anthropocene but in the Capitalocene, where the logic of endless profit drives ecological collapse. Optimism bias, in this view, isn’t just naïve — it’s a deliberate illusion that sustains the status quo.

New Materialism

The advent of new materialism challenges both of the above perspectives. Rather than seeing nature and society as separate, new materialists emphasize the entanglement of human and non-human forces. This holistic approach resists simple narratives — rejecting both the technological optimism of ecomodernism and the economic determinism of eco-Marxism. It asks us to rethink what “agency” means and how we coexist within planetary limits.

In this vein, Mads Ejsing’s book Verden er ikke længere den samme explores these shifts in thought. It argues that we must rethink our relationship to the world, not just our actions within it. If we fail to do so, we risk falling into the same patterns of delay and self-justification that have brought us to this point.

Breaking the cycle

Excuses may feel safe, but they prevent action. The first step is to recognize them for what they are: mental shortcuts, not real barriers. Once we understand why we delay change, we can start to resist those impulses.

To act is to reject paralysis. To stand firm despite complexity is an act of courage and clarity.

This is a short version of the article “Why we keep making excuses. An analytical exploration“.