Did the Environmental Movement Fail?

Insights from David Suzuki

At a time when the consequences of environmental decline are clearer than ever, we’re still struggling to turn knowledge into action. Climate disasters are increasing, biodiversity is disappearing, and our political systems remain preoccupied with short-term gains.

So it’s fair to ask—did the environmental movement fail?

Despite decades of activism, education, and advocacy, the gap between awareness and change feels larger than ever. We have better science, better tools, and more coverage of environmental issues than at any point in history. Yet our behaviours, systems, and policies still drive us toward ecological collapse.

The Awareness Trap

The early environmental movement was successful in one major way: it got people’s attention. We learned about acid rain, deforestation, melting ice caps, and vanishing species. But what followed wasn’t systemic change—it was mostly individual actions and corporate greenwashing.

Many governments adopted surface-level reforms while continuing to subsidize fossil fuels and allow unchecked industrial development. The environmental movement told us what was wrong, but we struggled to build the political will or cultural shift to address it.

We didn’t lack science—we lacked transformation.

Indigenous Knowledge Was Always the Blueprint

What has too often been ignored is the depth of knowledge that existed long before Western environmentalism. Indigenous peoples have lived in balance with the land for generations, guided by teachings rooted in respect, restraint, and responsibility.

In speaking about the Sts’ailes Reconciliation Agreement, I shared a teaching that reflects this relationship:

“In the beginning, the world was covered with water. Over time, beings took different forms—some became the four-legged, some the ones that swim, and some became the humans. Humans were the weakest and needed help. All our relations took pity on us and agreed to give themselves to us for food, clothing, medicine—on one condition: that we only take what we need, and always give thanks.”

This isn’t just a story. It’s a worldview—a sustainable agreement between humans and the natural world.

It teaches us that our role is not dominion over nature, but stewardship. That we are the last to arrive, not the first to own. These principles are not outdated—they are urgently needed. Yet for too long, Indigenous knowledge systems have been ignored, undermined, or excluded from environmental decision-making.

A Movement Without Power

One of the reasons the environmental movement struggled is because it never truly held power. While activists marched and scientists warned, industries and governments invested in expansion and extraction. Economic growth was prioritized above ecological survival. Even today, proposals for degrowth or stricter environmental regulation are often dismissed as “unrealistic.”

We have created systems that treat the Earth as an endless resource, not a living system with limits. And we have allowed ourselves to believe that technology alone will save us. But no amount of innovation can replace a culture of respect.

So, Did It Fail?

In many ways, yes. If the goal was to change the course of ecological decline, we haven’t done enough. But that doesn’t mean we’re without hope—or direction.

We need to revisit the knowledge that existed before colonization and capitalism redefined our relationship with the Earth. We need to listen—truly listen—to Indigenous voices and land-based wisdom. And we need to act—not as individuals trying to recycle more, but as societies ready to confront the systems that brought us here.

The environmental movement didn’t fail because the science was wrong. It failed because we never accepted what the science required of us: humility, sacrifice, and collective change.

But it’s not too late to get it right.