What do you think?
Rate this book
Just Earth: How a Fairer World Will Save the Planet
In this extraordinary, hopeful book, Britain's leading climate advocate and environmentalist Tony Juniper identifies the real problem at the heart of the issue - equality.
Climate change has already begun detrimentally affecting everybody's lives, and problems such as energy prices, fuel poverty, heatwaves, wildfires and migrations are only going to get worse. There is a central question at the heart of our predicament. How can we give people the lives that they deserve, without providing fast and cheap energy that will ultimately hasten global collapse? How can we ask those in developing countries not to partake in the environmentally-damaging technology, such as air conditioning, which will become essential to living in hotter climates? And how can we manage the enormous migration, as so-called 'wet bulb' temperatures in which humans cannot exist become prevalent in equatorial nations?
The answer lies in equality. A focus on growth as the answer to humanity's problems has led to an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor across the world. Social disparities are now harnessed to reject the need for environmental action at all. We need to break the trap that capitalism has set for the environment, while finding a way to save the ecosystem we rely upon for our existence. With an extraordinary range of interviews with experts from multiple fields and drawing on 40 years of the author's own participation in government summits and activism, this book explains how to achieve real change.
Climate change has already begun detrimentally affecting everybody's lives, and problems such as energy prices, fuel poverty, heatwaves, wildfires and migrations are only going to get worse. There is a central question at the heart of our predicament. How can we give people the lives that they deserve, without providing fast and cheap energy that will ultimately hasten global collapse? How can we ask those in developing countries not to partake in the environmentally-damaging technology, such as air conditioning, which will become essential to living in hotter climates? And how can we manage the enormous migration, as so-called 'wet bulb' temperatures in which humans cannot exist become prevalent in equatorial nations?
The answer lies in equality. A focus on growth as the answer to humanity's problems has led to an ever-widening gap between the rich and the poor across the world. Social disparities are now harnessed to reject the need for environmental action at all. We need to break the trap that capitalism has set for the environment, while finding a way to save the ecosystem we rely upon for our existence. With an extraordinary range of interviews with experts from multiple fields and drawing on 40 years of the author's own participation in government summits and activism, this book explains how to achieve real change.
- GenresNatureNonfiction
368 pages, Hardcover
Published June 17, 2025
13 people are currently reading
206 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
January 1, 2026
A very necessary book which I didn’t get a lot from - but that’s because equality and the climate crisis have long been in my marrow and so the connection between the two is blindingly obvious. It’s a Good Thing to have someone of Tony Juniper’s stature to bring them together so well and I hope this book reaches well beyond folk like me who have long been converted. He does an interesting job of trying not to make it about politics, or not the debate between left and right at least. It’s not convincing but I guess comes with trying to reach beyond the converted. I’d have loved to see some intellectual weight thrown in from the likes of Bookchin, Fromm and the like, but that’s because I’m a nerd and I accept that’s a niche that’s unhelpful to many. So I’m just gonna go and read Fromm’s To Have or To Be? to soothe that hunger pang.
A couple of bits I noted as new evidence for me:
In a paper published in 2015, climate researcher Colin Kelley and his colleagues set out a series of connections that related extreme weather caused by climate change to social unrest and civil war in Syria. They presented data revealing how the 2007-10 drought that preceded the country's decline into civil unrest and conflict was the most severe ever recorded, causing crop failure and the mass migration of farming families from the countryside to urban areas.
The story began with the impact of drought on water security, and the subsequent effect on farming as soil moisture dropped, crops withered, pastures shrivelled and animals died. This in turn caused as many as 1-5 million people to move from the farmed countryside to the towns and cities. Critical in causing this movement of people was the effect of ill-conceived policies that for years had damaged farmed landscapes. These included policies from the government of President Hafez al-Assad (the father of President Bashar al-Assad, who was in power when the civil war started) that aimed to increase agricultural output through more irrigation projects and subsidies for diesel.
These policies put pressure on already stressed water resources at a time when drought was becoming more frequent, causing the groundwater which supported much of the country's farming to become depleted. Over-abstraction of water caused rivers and irrigation canals to dry up. Across wide areas, farming could no longer continue. When drought hit, this depletion of the groundwater meant that the farming in the country's north-eastern breadbasket region, where some two thirds of Syria's crop yields were produced, collapsed. When the water evaporated, so did farm incomes, and when wheat had to be imported, there was in 2007 and 2008 an unprecedented rise in Syrian food prices. In a single year, the price of wheat, rice and feed more than doubled.
Rural poverty and hunger sparked mass migration to the peripheries of Syria's cities, which were already pressured following up to 1.5 million Iraqi refugees arriving in the wake of the Second Gulf War. This meant that the urban population of Syria increased dramatically, and fast, growing by more than 5o per cent in under a decade, placing housing, services and infrastructure under massive strain. This then exacerbated factors often cited as contributing to the unrest that ultimately exploded into civil war, including, the authors said, 'unemployment, corruption, and rampant inequality.
The civil war, of course, had ramifications that ran far beyond the borders of Syria, creating a refugee crisis that not only added to political tensions in Europe, but also prepared the ground for the spread of the Islamic State terrorist movement (ISIS). Such is the web of interconnections that shape events in the modern world, with, in this case, social inequality combining with climate change to create an explosive mix.
When the brutal regime of Bashar al-Assad finally came to its abrupt end in December 2024, there was little reflection or recollection in the coverage that followed as to the underlying causes of the unrest that led to 13 years of misery. The depredations visited on the Syrian people created a powder keg of resentment, and the spark that finally ignited the explosion was in part linked with wider pressures and trends, and which in our ever more stressed and volatile world it is important not to lose sight of. And what happened in Syria is not the only conflict that during recent times has been linked with the consequences of global heating.
Pp. 114-116
Multiple other examples from Afghanistan to the Sahel and Niger.
Me: Plenty of history written on crop failures, rising prices and revolutions in Europe over the years. Bizarre we don’t see it when it happens in the present day. Kenya an obvious one too.
This is a mad and useful insight into the global food system:
The less well-off tend to live in more polluted neighbourhoods, suffer worse effects from environmental damage, be at the front line of climate-change impacts and have least access to green space, and yet these things are often perpetuated because the remedies to deal with them are, paradoxically, presented as unfair to the less well-off! At the same time, the business models that shape present circumstances and prove so immune to change, from our continuing reliance on fossil fuels to the illusion of cheap food and water, are highly effective at concentrating wealth. In relation to the industries I have briefly touched upon here - food, water and energy - it is instructive to note how approaches that diminish environmental progress, and that are justified in the name of less-well-off consumers, tend to be part of a way of doing business that accumulates huge fortunes.
Take the business models that lie behind industrialized farming: the processed foods that flow from it, and some of the fast-food and retail outlets that bring those foods to consumers, have proven highly lucrative. During the period of food-price inflation which followed the COVID-19 pandemic and the outbreak of war in Ukraine they have done especially well. Danny Sriskandarajah, the former CEO of Oxfam, told me about his organization's research into the rise of billionaires. 3 "One stark finding,' he said, 'was the number of new billionaires added to the rich list on the basis of wealth gained largely through the food sector. We call them food billionaires, whose weath has come in a large part from their ownership or shareholdings in food businesses. Twelve members of the Cargill family are US dollar billionaires and so this is just the sort of most vulgar manifestation of inequalities.'
The Cargill company's core business is in global commodity trade, buying from farmers and selling to food-processing companies that in turn manufacture the products we see on the shelves. It is one of the world's largest private companies and, according to Oxfam, was in 2017 one of four companies that controlled over 70 per cent of the global market for agricultural commodities. Those food-price shocks that have caused such problems for consumers were not such bad news for the likes of the Cargills, enabling that family to expand its collective wealth by 65 per cent since 2020, with four of those billionaires joining the Forbes list of the richest 500 people in the world.
Among other global giants that enable the system to function as it does are the likes of Nestlé, PepsiCo and Walmart, themselves extracting multibillion-dollar dividends for their shareholders. Dividends are the financial rewards paid to investors who've put their money into buying shares in profitable enterprises. The more shares they have and the bigger the profits of the company, the more money they make. And senior company executives have enjoyed handsome earnings too, resulting trom a set of structures justified by, and protected in the name of, the 'cheap' food system that is the largest single engine of ecological destruction in the world today.
pp. 196-7
And of course our water companies are scoundrels:
The drive for cheap water, too, has led to ecological damage on an epic scale across England. In the name of low bills there has for years been underinvestment in the infrastructure needed to protect and restore rivers and wetlands, yet vast fortunes have nonetheless been extracted from the water companies in dividends paid out to shareholders. England's water companies have been an attractive bet for investors from around the world - and why wouldn't they be, with captive customers supplied by regional monopolies providing them with what was until recently a low-risk home for their cash?
Since privatization, England's water companies have paid out about £72 billion in dividends to their shareholders, while many of the executives running these businesses have taken multimillion-pound salaries and bonuses. In the decade prior to 2019, the privatized water companies paid £13.4 billion in dividends, while at the same time the directors who enabled this to happen, including by keeping investments to upgrade water treatment works low, saw their pay soar upwards. 37
In 2019 alone, the income of the nine highest-paid directors rose by nearly nine per cent, with the two highest paid taking home more than two million pounds each. By contrast, the highest-paid executive at Scottish Water, which remains in public ownership, earned £366,000. And while vast fortunes have been extracted from monopoly utility companies providing an essential service, the companies themselves ran up huge debts - nearly £60 billion in total, with the largest one, Thames Water, accounting for about a quarter of that. It is worth remembering that when these companies were first sold off to private owners by Margaret Thatcher's government, they were debt-free, and on top of that, were set up with £i.5 billion of public money described as a 'green dowry’ to help upgrade their assets.
pp. 197-8
Fast fashion facts.
The fashion industry is now a nignly polluting industry, however, responsible for about a fifth of the wastewater produced across the world. It also emits more greenhouse gases than all international flights and maritime shipping combined. Much fast fashion is non-biodegradable, made from synthetic fabrics manufactured from oil. Microfibres are building up in the sea as our washing machines discharge tiny fragments of clothing into wastewater.
About a third of all microplastics now drifting in the ocean come from the laundering of synthetic fibres. They travel through sewage-treatment works, down rivers and into the marine environment, where they pollute food webs. And clothing left in the open, or which is buried, contaminates land, with the synthetic fibres, like the plastic in the ocean, taking centuries to degrade.
The fast-fashion industry has grown at a spectacular pace.
Clothing production doubled between 2000 and 2014 (to put that into perspective, the population increase was only about Is per cent)3 Behind that remarkable statistic lies an accelerating cultural shift which means that consumers are offered constantly changing collections available at low prices. Advertising and marketing encourage this frequent purchasing and discarding of clothes. On its own terms it has been a winning strategy. According to the McKinsey 2019 'state of fashion' report, the average number of clothing items bought by consumers rose by 60 per cent compared with the situation 15 years before, while at the same time consumers ended up keeping what they bought for only half as long. p. 231
And just a scary consumer fact:
Between 2016-2021 the world consumed a quantity of raw material equivalent to all the resources used during the entire twentieth century.
P. 232
A couple of bits I noted as new evidence for me:
In a paper published in 2015, climate researcher Colin Kelley and his colleagues set out a series of connections that related extreme weather caused by climate change to social unrest and civil war in Syria. They presented data revealing how the 2007-10 drought that preceded the country's decline into civil unrest and conflict was the most severe ever recorded, causing crop failure and the mass migration of farming families from the countryside to urban areas.
The story began with the impact of drought on water security, and the subsequent effect on farming as soil moisture dropped, crops withered, pastures shrivelled and animals died. This in turn caused as many as 1-5 million people to move from the farmed countryside to the towns and cities. Critical in causing this movement of people was the effect of ill-conceived policies that for years had damaged farmed landscapes. These included policies from the government of President Hafez al-Assad (the father of President Bashar al-Assad, who was in power when the civil war started) that aimed to increase agricultural output through more irrigation projects and subsidies for diesel.
These policies put pressure on already stressed water resources at a time when drought was becoming more frequent, causing the groundwater which supported much of the country's farming to become depleted. Over-abstraction of water caused rivers and irrigation canals to dry up. Across wide areas, farming could no longer continue. When drought hit, this depletion of the groundwater meant that the farming in the country's north-eastern breadbasket region, where some two thirds of Syria's crop yields were produced, collapsed. When the water evaporated, so did farm incomes, and when wheat had to be imported, there was in 2007 and 2008 an unprecedented rise in Syrian food prices. In a single year, the price of wheat, rice and feed more than doubled.
Rural poverty and hunger sparked mass migration to the peripheries of Syria's cities, which were already pressured following up to 1.5 million Iraqi refugees arriving in the wake of the Second Gulf War. This meant that the urban population of Syria increased dramatically, and fast, growing by more than 5o per cent in under a decade, placing housing, services and infrastructure under massive strain. This then exacerbated factors often cited as contributing to the unrest that ultimately exploded into civil war, including, the authors said, 'unemployment, corruption, and rampant inequality.
The civil war, of course, had ramifications that ran far beyond the borders of Syria, creating a refugee crisis that not only added to political tensions in Europe, but also prepared the ground for the spread of the Islamic State terrorist movement (ISIS). Such is the web of interconnections that shape events in the modern world, with, in this case, social inequality combining with climate change to create an explosive mix.
When the brutal regime of Bashar al-Assad finally came to its abrupt end in December 2024, there was little reflection or recollection in the coverage that followed as to the underlying causes of the unrest that led to 13 years of misery. The depredations visited on the Syrian people created a powder keg of resentment, and the spark that finally ignited the explosion was in part linked with wider pressures and trends, and which in our ever more stressed and volatile world it is important not to lose sight of. And what happened in Syria is not the only conflict that during recent times has been linked with the consequences of global heating.
Pp. 114-116
Multiple other examples from Afghanistan to the Sahel and Niger.
Me: Plenty of history written on crop failures, rising prices and revolutions in Europe over the years. Bizarre we don’t see it when it happens in the present day. Kenya an obvious one too.
This is a mad and useful insight into the global food system:
The less well-off tend to live in more polluted neighbourhoods, suffer worse effects from environmental damage, be at the front line of climate-change impacts and have least access to green space, and yet these things are often perpetuated because the remedies to deal with them are, paradoxically, presented as unfair to the less well-off! At the same time, the business models that shape present circumstances and prove so immune to change, from our continuing reliance on fossil fuels to the illusion of cheap food and water, are highly effective at concentrating wealth. In relation to the industries I have briefly touched upon here - food, water and energy - it is instructive to note how approaches that diminish environmental progress, and that are justified in the name of less-well-off consumers, tend to be part of a way of doing business that accumulates huge fortunes.
Take the business models that lie behind industrialized farming: the processed foods that flow from it, and some of the fast-food and retail outlets that bring those foods to consumers, have proven highly lucrative. During the period of food-price inflation which followed the COVID-19 pandemic and the outbreak of war in Ukraine they have done especially well. Danny Sriskandarajah, the former CEO of Oxfam, told me about his organization's research into the rise of billionaires. 3 "One stark finding,' he said, 'was the number of new billionaires added to the rich list on the basis of wealth gained largely through the food sector. We call them food billionaires, whose weath has come in a large part from their ownership or shareholdings in food businesses. Twelve members of the Cargill family are US dollar billionaires and so this is just the sort of most vulgar manifestation of inequalities.'
The Cargill company's core business is in global commodity trade, buying from farmers and selling to food-processing companies that in turn manufacture the products we see on the shelves. It is one of the world's largest private companies and, according to Oxfam, was in 2017 one of four companies that controlled over 70 per cent of the global market for agricultural commodities. Those food-price shocks that have caused such problems for consumers were not such bad news for the likes of the Cargills, enabling that family to expand its collective wealth by 65 per cent since 2020, with four of those billionaires joining the Forbes list of the richest 500 people in the world.
Among other global giants that enable the system to function as it does are the likes of Nestlé, PepsiCo and Walmart, themselves extracting multibillion-dollar dividends for their shareholders. Dividends are the financial rewards paid to investors who've put their money into buying shares in profitable enterprises. The more shares they have and the bigger the profits of the company, the more money they make. And senior company executives have enjoyed handsome earnings too, resulting trom a set of structures justified by, and protected in the name of, the 'cheap' food system that is the largest single engine of ecological destruction in the world today.
pp. 196-7
And of course our water companies are scoundrels:
The drive for cheap water, too, has led to ecological damage on an epic scale across England. In the name of low bills there has for years been underinvestment in the infrastructure needed to protect and restore rivers and wetlands, yet vast fortunes have nonetheless been extracted from the water companies in dividends paid out to shareholders. England's water companies have been an attractive bet for investors from around the world - and why wouldn't they be, with captive customers supplied by regional monopolies providing them with what was until recently a low-risk home for their cash?
Since privatization, England's water companies have paid out about £72 billion in dividends to their shareholders, while many of the executives running these businesses have taken multimillion-pound salaries and bonuses. In the decade prior to 2019, the privatized water companies paid £13.4 billion in dividends, while at the same time the directors who enabled this to happen, including by keeping investments to upgrade water treatment works low, saw their pay soar upwards. 37
In 2019 alone, the income of the nine highest-paid directors rose by nearly nine per cent, with the two highest paid taking home more than two million pounds each. By contrast, the highest-paid executive at Scottish Water, which remains in public ownership, earned £366,000. And while vast fortunes have been extracted from monopoly utility companies providing an essential service, the companies themselves ran up huge debts - nearly £60 billion in total, with the largest one, Thames Water, accounting for about a quarter of that. It is worth remembering that when these companies were first sold off to private owners by Margaret Thatcher's government, they were debt-free, and on top of that, were set up with £i.5 billion of public money described as a 'green dowry’ to help upgrade their assets.
pp. 197-8
Fast fashion facts.
The fashion industry is now a nignly polluting industry, however, responsible for about a fifth of the wastewater produced across the world. It also emits more greenhouse gases than all international flights and maritime shipping combined. Much fast fashion is non-biodegradable, made from synthetic fabrics manufactured from oil. Microfibres are building up in the sea as our washing machines discharge tiny fragments of clothing into wastewater.
About a third of all microplastics now drifting in the ocean come from the laundering of synthetic fibres. They travel through sewage-treatment works, down rivers and into the marine environment, where they pollute food webs. And clothing left in the open, or which is buried, contaminates land, with the synthetic fibres, like the plastic in the ocean, taking centuries to degrade.
The fast-fashion industry has grown at a spectacular pace.
Clothing production doubled between 2000 and 2014 (to put that into perspective, the population increase was only about Is per cent)3 Behind that remarkable statistic lies an accelerating cultural shift which means that consumers are offered constantly changing collections available at low prices. Advertising and marketing encourage this frequent purchasing and discarding of clothes. On its own terms it has been a winning strategy. According to the McKinsey 2019 'state of fashion' report, the average number of clothing items bought by consumers rose by 60 per cent compared with the situation 15 years before, while at the same time consumers ended up keeping what they bought for only half as long. p. 231
And just a scary consumer fact:
Between 2016-2021 the world consumed a quantity of raw material equivalent to all the resources used during the entire twentieth century.
P. 232
June 22, 2025
Not much here came as a surprise but that doesn't make it any less horrifying. The link between justice and environmental degradation is well known and well presented, but we need long term solutions, antithetical to the way our politics is currently undertaken - and the efforts made thus far appear to have made very little difference. The manifesto presented is laudable but in the present, erm...climate, very unlikely.
September 20, 2025
This is a disappointing book. It’s not that I disagree with the arguments, I don’t on the whole. It’s just that Juniper does not make the arguments very well. I remember seeing him just before the pandemic in a debate about capitalism and climate change. Juniper was on the side that argued abolishing capitalism was not necessary in order to avert climate change. His arguments were punchy and to the point. That is not the case in this book.
A big weakness of the book is that there is too much about Tony Juniper in it. Some might argue that is fair enough, he has campaigned on environmental issues nearly all of his life. But the book often becomes anecdotal, which does not make for convincing arguments. Indeed, in the chapter on treaties and international agreements, he gives the impression that they were something of a success, when in fact, apart from the Montreal Protocol, they have all been failures in a big picture sense. I think the reason Juniper does this is that he was present at the forging of these agreements. So he felt compelled to cast them in a good light.
When he is not drawing on anecdotes, Juniper’s use of statistics is not great either. There is a splurge of numbers in the chapter that sets out the problem on inequality. They are overwhelming and confusing. So much so that he appears to be arguing that inequality between countries has decreased and increased at the same time.
He can also try to squeeze too much from the evidence. He is stretching a point when he argues that Type 2 diabetes is in part caused by lack of access to nature. But he then argues that the drugs used to combat the diabetes are polluting the environment – a tenuous vicious circle, if you like.
None of his policy recommendations stand out as innovative or especially compelling. Indeed, some of them seem ill-thought-through.
He does make some interesting points. But they are few and far between. My overall impression is that this is a rather boring book that I was glad to finish.
A big weakness of the book is that there is too much about Tony Juniper in it. Some might argue that is fair enough, he has campaigned on environmental issues nearly all of his life. But the book often becomes anecdotal, which does not make for convincing arguments. Indeed, in the chapter on treaties and international agreements, he gives the impression that they were something of a success, when in fact, apart from the Montreal Protocol, they have all been failures in a big picture sense. I think the reason Juniper does this is that he was present at the forging of these agreements. So he felt compelled to cast them in a good light.
When he is not drawing on anecdotes, Juniper’s use of statistics is not great either. There is a splurge of numbers in the chapter that sets out the problem on inequality. They are overwhelming and confusing. So much so that he appears to be arguing that inequality between countries has decreased and increased at the same time.
He can also try to squeeze too much from the evidence. He is stretching a point when he argues that Type 2 diabetes is in part caused by lack of access to nature. But he then argues that the drugs used to combat the diabetes are polluting the environment – a tenuous vicious circle, if you like.
None of his policy recommendations stand out as innovative or especially compelling. Indeed, some of them seem ill-thought-through.
He does make some interesting points. But they are few and far between. My overall impression is that this is a rather boring book that I was glad to finish.
January 12, 2026
An argument that one of the leading causes of climate change isn’t overconsumption, isn’t greed, isn’t crapitalism - it’s inequality.
A lot of the arguments made in this book are weak at best; one point he argues that Type 2 diabetes is caused by lack of access to nature, which is a real oversimplification of the factors that can lead to diabetes. Between these weak arguments are numerous anecdotes of times he visited green spaces as a child, which happens so often it seems like the book started as means for Juniper to complain things were better/greener/cleaner back in his day, and then he dug up facts and conclusions to back this claim up.
Very little of the information presented was new to me; in fact I found it rather tame. Juniper discusses the concern that the most vulnerable (i.e. the poorest) will be the most exposed to the effects of climate change, but does nothing to discuss how that came to be. I also found the suggestions at the end to be unhelpful - while I’m glad it was more substantial than “Recycle :) Bike to work :) Grow a plant :)”, the suggestions were more aimed at government officials and legal procedures than at things that can be done across the board.
I think this book suffered a little from being an audiobook with no citations; if I’d had a copy with a reference list or footnotes, the data and arguments put forward may have held more weight. I want to give it a little grace for this, but honestly this book didn’t introduce anything new to people already vaguely aware of climate change, and meanders about following weak arguments too much to risk recommending to people who - somehow - know nothing at all about climate change. For that reason, I’m going to have to give it a 1.5/5, rounded up to 2 on relveant platforms.
August 30, 2025
A big ole [much needed] bummer. In gen z speak, I think we're cooked chat.
For real though, this is an enraging read, because I think many of us are fed up being told it's our fault for not recycling enough, for not carpooling to one of our two jobs, and for having the audacity to get a sweet treat every now and then. Meanwhile the rich get richer and take their private jet straight to the bank. (Obviously we all need to do our part, but like, you get it.) it's mentioned multiple times in multiple different ways, but it's worth reiterating - the greatest impact on our climate crisis is coming from the smallest and most privileged among us. Not only that, but the effects of the climate crisis are felt most by those among us contributing the LEAST. We need to get our shit together.
**I received my copy from Netgalley.
For real though, this is an enraging read, because I think many of us are fed up being told it's our fault for not recycling enough, for not carpooling to one of our two jobs, and for having the audacity to get a sweet treat every now and then. Meanwhile the rich get richer and take their private jet straight to the bank. (Obviously we all need to do our part, but like, you get it.) it's mentioned multiple times in multiple different ways, but it's worth reiterating - the greatest impact on our climate crisis is coming from the smallest and most privileged among us. Not only that, but the effects of the climate crisis are felt most by those among us contributing the LEAST. We need to get our shit together.
**I received my copy from Netgalley.
July 26, 2025
While the contents of the book is well presented, factual and informative, it didn't contain anything I don't already know and the call to action didn't provide the practical steps to achieving it that I hoped it might. Perhaps the hope is that our government leaders read this book, which could be very impactful, but for someone who already reads a lot around this subject it didn't offer anything new or practical as I had hoped it would.
September 21, 2025
I absolutely agree with everything Juniper writes here, so my middling rating isn't ideological. I found the first two thirds of the book covering old (and depressing) ground, and was hoping for more on what action can be taken, and how individuals can help. Perhaps I'm not the target audience for the book as there is a lot of 'persuade' in here. For balance, this is meticulously researched, well written and the hopeful last 50 pages were a tonic.
October 23, 2025
A thorough discussion of the efforts fighting climate change and injustice in the UK. Include a lot about the difficulties dealing with the government - resistance and inconsistency with setting up legislation to deal with climate change is not unique to the US. Likewise, the rise of social and financial inequality is also experienced in the UK as well as the US.
August 6, 2025
Interesting as measure of the shifting overton window on inequality and climate/nature justice.
But as a book, simply not radical enough. Fails to properly engage with racism, classism etc. and tbh is quite tiresome at points.
But as a book, simply not radical enough. Fails to properly engage with racism, classism etc. and tbh is quite tiresome at points.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews