• David Attenborough is a natural historian and broadcaster most known for his production and narration of nature documentaries over the past 70 years. 
• In the months leading up to the COP24 conference, he collaborated with the UN to launch the People’s Seat campaign, aimed at inviting individuals across the internet to engage with climate issues. 
• Despite the campaign’s successful reception by over a billion individuals, its efforts did not lead to concrete changes in climate policy or long-term behavior.

Why are David Attenborough’s efforts MILD? 

Answer: Despite widespread public attention, the People’s Seat did not generate long-term individual behavioral change or formal policy commitments at COP24.

The People’s Seat was a UNFCCC campaign launched ahead of COP24 in 2018, led by David Attenborough. Its purpose was to give ordinary citizens a direct voice in global climate negotiations while also promoting individual climate action. To connect the public with world leaders, the campaign invited people worldwide to share their thoughts and concerns about climate change using the hashtag #TakeYourSeat. These messages were then compiled into “The People’s Address,”  a speech delivered by David Attenborough during COP24.

Alongside this, the campaign launched the ActNow chatbot, a digital tool designed to help people reduce their carbon footprint. To achieve that, the chatbot provided personalized advice and real-time feedback on users’ climate-related behaviors, encouraging concrete lifestyle changes.

Overall, the campaign aimed to achieve two goals. The primary goal was to drive global climate policy change by involving the public and reducing their sense of alienation from decision-making. The second goal was to encourage individual behavior change through personalized advice from the ActNow chatbot. Although the campaign reached over 1.3 billion people worldwide, its impact was mostly symbolic, with little effect on policy decisions and limited evidence of sustained changes in individual behavior.

The preliminary stages of the Peoples seat are widely recognized as successful. It won a Cannes Lions PR Award for the communication aspect of the campaign, namely the online advocacy and hashtag as methods to engage the public. It was also reported to have one of the highest levels of public trust recorded by The Institute of Practitioners in Advertising. The ActNow chatbot, integrated with users’ Facebook accounts, recorded over 25 million actions promoting small-scale behavioral changes, such as reducing plastic use or conserving energy. 

However, while the campaign demonstrated significant short-term digital engagement, there is limited empirical evidence to suggest that these actions translated into long-term behavioral shifts or measurable environmental impact.

Moreover, the campaign fundamentally failed to achieve its goal of bridging the gap between the public and high-level policymaking circles. There is no clear evidence linking the campaign or his speech directly to the formation of the Kastowise climate pact. Furthermore, wider structural problems of the COP24 could not be overcome by the people’s initiative. Major polluters across the world, the US, Saudi Arabia and Russia were absent from this conference and thus the People’s Address was unheard by these actors. 

What is changing David Attenborough’s heat level? 

Answer: David Attenborough’s “The People’s Seat” campaign failed to have a lasting impact due to its reliance on absent political will and its one-off nature.

The campaign’s symbolic power was undermined by the procedural constraints and power imbalances within UN climate negotiations. United Nations decision-making relies on political will from influential countries, many of which are major polluters. Since stronger climate policies conflict with their short-term interests, citizens’ demands were heard but not implemented. Key players like the United States and Saudi Arabia resisted stronger climate commitments, and some major polluters did not attend the summit. Without absent political will and binding agreements, the campaign’s goals remained unmet. Therefore, Attenborough’s call, though grounded in citizens’ voices, remained aspirational rather than actionable.

Moreover, the People’s Seat was tied to a singular event with no sustained follow-up. While innovative, the accompanying ActNow.bot suffered from short-term engagement and failed to translate digital enthusiasm into long-term behavioral change. Even if the bot was still functional after the campaign, the lack of follow-up support stagnated its use. The campaign’s design offered no mechanism to maintain public pressure or convert symbolic recognition into institutional reform. As a result, despite Attenborough’s trusted voice and the campaign’s emotional appeal, the lack of structural reinforcement caused this momentum to cool.

Taken together, these factors explain why Attenborough is rated as MILD. While he successfully captured public attention and elevated civic voices, the campaign failed to overcome political resistance and therefore did not deliver meaningful policy outcomes. Without follow-up by policymakers, integration into official COP24 outcomes, or adoption into national climate strategies, his influence remained largely symbolic. The campaign was respected for its moral weight but lacked the political uptake needed to drive real change.

What is driving David Attenborough?

Answer: David Attenborough is committed to transforming public sentiment into collective action, rooted in his deep belief in civic engagement.

Attenborough was driven to lead the People’s Seat campaign by two convictions: the urgent need to address the climate crisis and a strong belief that ordinary citizens must have a voice in climate decision-making.

For much of his early career, Attenborough focused on showcasing the beauty and complexity of the natural world without overt political messages. However, in 2004, after attending a lecture by climate scientist Ralph Cicerone, he was confronted with evidence of human-driven environmental decline. That moment became the catalyst for his shift toward advocacy, marking the beginning of his public climate activism. From that onward, Attenborough transformed his platform from storytelling to mobilizing, making public engagement a central tool in his climate messaging. The People’s Seat campaign was a direct outcome of this shift. 

Alongside his belief in the need to act against climate change, Attenborough developed a strong conviction that ordinary citizens must have a voice in climate decisions. Therefore, his involvement in the People’s Seat was rooted not just in the desire to protect nature but also to bridge the gap between those who witness environmental destruction and those with the power to prevent it. The campaign, backed by the UN, allowed him to deliver messages from people around the world directly to leaders at COP24, supporting his goal of democratizing climate policy-making. 

Attenborough’s decision to lead the People’s Seat campaign therefore, reflected both conviction and opportunity. The campaign was backed by the United Nations, offering a chance to speak directly to global leaders. At the same time, it aligned with his goal of acting on the climate crisis and his belief that public voices should be part of climate decision-making. After years of warning about environmental decline, he saw the campaign as a way to connect citizen concern with political action.

What does this mean for you? 

Answer: David Attenborough’s advocacy shows that even with strong public support, lasting change is unlikely without the backing of institutional power.

Through the People’s Seat, David Attenborough demonstrated that credibility can be a form of power. Without ever holding office, he earned trust across generations and used it to elevate public voices to the global stage. His symbolic leadership gave space to younger activists and ordinary citizens, serving as a reminder of the credence of policy motivation through advocacy. 

Simultaneously, his experience reveals the limits of influence within rigid frameworks. Despite widespread public engagement and powerful messaging, the campaign did not translate into concrete policy outcomes. Political deadlock and the absence of sustained follow-up support prevented the initiative from achieving lasting impact. Nevertheless, Attenborough continued to act within these constraints. His work illustrates that effective advocacy requires a balance between aspirational goals and a pragmatic understanding of political realities. Ultimately, influence depends not only on public pressure but also on the willingness of decision makers to respond.

IExRAIA Summer Research Program:

This article is a part from a report on David Attenborough produced as part of an RAIA research program on climate leaders. For a full picture of Ruto’s climate leadership, including the sources, read the full report. This project was fully financed by IE University’s IE School of Politics, Economics and Global Affairs.

Author: Giulio Guiducci & Jayveer Gautam

Editor: Réka Baranyai

Project Leads: Roxane de Bergevin & Stefani Obradovic