DEMOCRACY is often celebrated for its core values — public participation, accountability, and respect for civil liberties. However, when it comes to addressing complex and long-term global challenges like climate change, democratic systems can fall short. This is particularly true in developing democracies such as Pakistan, where climate threats continue to intensify despite growing public awareness and mounting international pressure.
While democratic governance is rooted in representation and transparency, these same strengths can become obstacles when a crisis demands swift, science-based, and often politically unpopular decisions. The short-term nature of electoral politics, the influence of vested interests, the appeal of populist narratives, and the institutional conservatism inherent in democracies all combine to hinder the urgent and transformative action needed to combat climate change.
Climate policies that are crucial for long-term sustainability — such as removing fossil fuel subsidies, introducing carbon taxes or restricting water usage — often impose short-term hardships. These measures are politically risky, particularly in countries like Pakistan, where inflation, energy shortages and unemployment already weigh heavily on the population. Faced with the fear of losing voter support, elected officials are reluctant to advance such necessary but unpopular reforms.
This reveals a troubling mismatch: democratic systems, especially in fragile states, are not structurally equipped to handle the scale, urgency and complexity of climate change. The result has been a global rise in populist leadership — both in the Global North and South — that further undermines environmental governance.
Democratic systems in fragile states are not structurally equipped to handle the complexity of climate change.
By contrast, states like China, Singapore, the UAE, Qatar and Vietnam, notwithstanding restrictions on civil liberties, political freedoms and media openness, have made significant strides in policy implementation, economic development, and poverty reduction. These countries, often unhindered by the procedural delays of democratic governance, have demonstrated a greater ability to enact long-term policies, maintain institutional continuity and deliver visible results in areas like health, education, infrastructure development and sustainability.
In democracies, however, meaningful climate action is frequently delayed by the need for consensus, lengthy legislative processes and judicial review. These checks and balances, while crucial for safeguarding freedoms, also slow down the implementation of urgently needed reforms.
One of the deepest challenges in managing climate change within a democratic framework is the electoral cycle itself. Governments are incentivised to focus on short-term, visible projects that can win immediate public approval, rather than investing in climate resilience or renewable energy systems whose benefits may only be realised years later. Long-term climate strategies are often sacrificed at the altar of short-term political gains.
Pakistan, despite contributing less than one per cent to global greenhouse gas emissions, ranks among the countries most vulnerable to climate change. This vulnerability presents both a moral argument for climate justice and a political opportunity for elected leaders to deflect responsibility. Often, inaction is framed as the result of donor neglect or global inequity — narratives that resonate domestically but fail to drive proactive national policy.
Another structural challenge lies in the disproportionate influence of powerful interest groups, particularly in the fossil fuel, agriculture and construction sectors. These groups exert considerable pressure on lawmakers through lobbying, media manipulation and patronage networks. As a result, policies that threaten their economic interests are routinely watered down or delayed. Urban development, for instance, often proceeds unchecked, with housing societies expanding into forested and peri-urban areas despite environmental risks. This highlights how private interests can override public concerns in democratic settings.
Pakistan’s youth-dominated demographic landscape offers both a challenge and an opportunity. With over 60 per cent of the population under 35 and a legal voting age of 18, young people now form the largest electoral bloc. In theory, this could drive more forward-thinking environmental policies. In practice, however, the situation is far more complex. The country has consistently had over 25 million out-of-school children for the past two decades, contributing to widespread educational deficits and low levels of civic and scientific literacy among voters.
A poorly educated electorate is more susceptible to populist rhetoric and misinformation, particularly during times of economic distress. This creates a political climate in which evidence-based environmental discourse is often drowned out by short-term nationalist narratives.
Moreover, the fact that 40pc of children under five suffer from stunting (a condition linked not only to malnutrition but also to long-term cognitive delays and impaired decision-making in adulthood) is worrisome. The long-term implication is diminished capacity for civic engagement, critical thinking and collective decision-making, all of which are essential for democratic governance and sustainable development. Democracy offers a mechanism for public input, but if the quality of that input is compromised, it weakens the electorate’s ability to demand, understand or support the structural reforms needed for sustainable development.
While democracy remains an important mechanism for ensuring public participation, its effectiveness is severely compromised when basic systems of education, health and equity are underdeveloped. Without meaningful investments in human capital, democratic participation becomes wide in scope but shallow in deliberative capacity.
In its current form, Pakistan’s democratic system lacks the resilience and coherence required to respond effectively to the climate crisis. Electoral short-termism, institutional fragility, policy fragmentation and elite capture all limit the country’s ability to implement long-term environmental strategies. Delay in response can result in deepening the crisis.
What is urgently needed is a reimagining of democracy — one that retains its participatory core while building structures capable of delivering sustained policy continuity. This includes independent climate bodies, technocratic planning units insulated from political cycles, and investments in education and civic literacy to strengthen the electorate’s role in shaping a more sustainable future.
The writer is chief executive of the Civil Society Coalition for Climate Change.
aisha@csccc.org.pk
Published in Dawn, August 8th, 2025