Facts, Fictions and Sustainable Futures
Despite the urgency of contemporary environmental crises, environmental action continues to encounter persistent and, in some contexts, intensifying resistance. Recent years have seen a growing wave of policy reversal and backlash, including growing opposition to the European Green Deal and (other) climate initiatives and the dismantling of environmental policies and institutions in the United States and elsewhere (e.g. Patterson 2023; van der Sluis 2023; Fiorino 2025). Yet, these dynamics do not unfold in the context of total erosion of trust or concern. In many societies, public awareness of environmental problems remains high and trust in institutions persists, albeit unevenly (Fairbrother et al., 2019; Franzen & Bahr, 2024). This blend of environmental concern and contestation of action points to the need for closer examination of how environmental knowledge is produced, circulated, mobilised and challenged in contemporary societies.
The YHYS Fall Colloquium 2026 brings together perspectives from environmental social sciences to examine the roles of facts and fictions in shaping sustainable futures. We understand facts not as neutral or uncontested, but as embedded in social, political and epistemic processes (e.g. Hajer 1995, Jasanoff & Kim 2019), and fictions not only as falsehoods, but also as narratives, imaginaries and strategic constructions that influence how environmental problems and solutions are understood (e.g. Celermajer et al. 2024; Lyytimäki 2023; Sokolova 2023). The interplay between facts and fictions is central to processes such as climate obstruction, environmental policy backsliding and the proliferation of climate denial and disinformation, as well as to the strategic use of environmental arguments as scapegoats or political resources (Toivanen & Lähde 2024; Krange et al. 2021; Lamb et al. 2020; Korppoo, Tynkkynen & Hønneland 2015).
Attention should also be directed to the power relations that shape whose knowledge counts, which voices are heard, and how expertise, uncertainty and ignorance are mobilized in environmental decision-making. These dynamics raise critical questions about the role of environmental knowledge in political contexts marked by competing priorities, entrenched interests and uneven capacities for action. They also invite reflection on how knowledge can be translated into compelling narratives capable of mobilizing action and countering resistance (Oreskes & Convey 2010; Arnal, Hilson & McKinnon 2019), as fictions are not only obstacles to environmental action but can also play a generative role (Milkoreit 2017). Narratives, imaginaries and speculative visions can help make future possibilities tangible, cultivate hope fostering collective engagement, and challenge dominant framings that sustain the status quo (McKinnon 2014). The entanglement of facts and fictions thus shapes not only how environmental crises are understood, but also how possible futures are envisioned and pursued.
YHYS Fall Colloquium 2026 invites contributions that explore these dynamics and their implications for sustainability governance and action. How can environmental social sciences illuminate and intervene in these processes in order to support pathways towards more sustainable futures?
References
Arnall, A., Hilson, C., & McKinnon, C. (2019). Climate displacement and resettlement: the importance of claims-making ‘from below’. Climate Policy, 19(6), 665-671.
Celermajer, D., Cardoso, M., Gowers, J… Wright, G. (2024). Climate imaginaries as praxis. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 7(3), 1015-1033.
Fairbrother, M., Johansson Sevä, I., & Kulin, J. (2019). Political trust and the relationship between climate change beliefs and support for fossil fuel taxes: Evidence from a survey of 23 European countries. Global Environmental Change, 59.
Fiorino, D. J. (2025). What Does a Second Trump Term Mean for US Environmental Policy? Policy Quarterly, 21(1), 46-49.
Franzen, A., & Bahr, S. (2024). The development of global environmental concern during the last three decades. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 8(June), 100260.
Hajer, M. (1995). The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernization and the Policy Process. Oxford University Press.
Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S. H. (Eds.). (2019). Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power. University of Chicago Press.
Korppoo, A., Tynkkynen, N. & Hønneland, G. (2015). Russia and the politics of international environmental regimes: Environmental encounters or foreign policy? Edward Elgar Publishing.
Krange, O., Kaltenborn, B. P. & Hultman, M. (2021). “Don’t confuse me with facts”—how right wing populism affects trust in agencies advocating anthropogenic climate change as a reality. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 8(1).
Lamb W.F., Mattioli G., Levi, S. et al. (2020). Discourses of climate delay. Global Sustainability 3, e17, 1–5.
Lyytimäki, J. (2023). Storylines nailing or failing sustainability: Energy, mining and mobility as narrative arenas for societal transition. Sustainable Development 31(1): 1–586.
McKinnon, C. (2014). Climate change: Against despair. Ethics & the Environment, 19(1), 31-48.
Milkoreit, M. (2017). Imaginary politics: Climate change and making the future. Elementa: Science of the Anthropocene, 5, 62.
Oreskes, N., Conway, E. (2010). Defeating the merchants of doubt. Nature 465, 686–687.
Patterson, J. J. (2023). Backlash to climate policy. Global Environmental Politics, 23(1), 68-90.
van der Sluis, M. (2023). The European Green Deal Paradox – remarkably successful, but falling short? Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law, 30(3), 231-235.
Sokolova, T. (2023). Co-producing ‘The Future(s) We Want’: How does political imagination translate into democratised knowledge-action models for sustainability transformations? Environmental Science & Policy, 144, 162-173.
Toivanen, T. & Lähde, V. (2024). Reaalipoliittinen ilmastoasiantuntijuus ilmastotoimien estäjänä. Tiede & Edistys, 1-2: 12–37.
