"The disconnect between science and politics is almost unbearable"

Ms. Quitsch, let's get straight to the point: How is the topic of sustainability currently faring politically, especially in the context of the earlier federal election?

The short answer? Not well. The slightly longer answer? Not well at all. Of course, politicians are responding to acute crises such as the energy crisis or the war in Ukraine, but prioritizing them does not make issues such as the climate crisis disappear. We now know that 2024 was the warmest year since 1850, the first time we have broken the 1.5° warming barrier compared to pre-industrial levels. This shows the urgency of the climate crisis. The disconnect between science and facts and politics is almost unbearable. At the last general election, I still had the feeling that the issue of sustainability was getting more attention, but that has changed. This time it is playing less of a role - perhaps also because of the shorter election campaign.

Sustainability has different dimensions - can you see any differences at the political level?

The climate crisis naturally only reflects one dimension of sustainability, but it also has an impact on social and economic conditions. The different dimensions are therefore interlinked. For example, those who make the smallest contribution to the climate crisis, such as socially disadvantaged population groups, are disproportionately affected by the consequences. They cannot afford to simply travel to a cooler region when the weather is particularly hot. Or to equip themselves with the new technical aids. Such social injustices lead to division, and (overall) social cohesion can suffer as a result. As a consequence, social crises also become more precarious and urgent.

How is it that the climate crisis is such a focal point when it comes to the topic of sustainability?

The climate crisis represents the ecological dimension of sustainability and is determined by natural conditions and planetary boundaries - so it cannot be discussed away, as is at least partially possible with the other dimensions. There is less inevitability when it comes to social, cultural or economic sustainability. Of course, they are still just as important. But the climate crisis is particularly noticeable. Current measures - both in Germany and globally - are not sufficient, which means that the drivers of the crisis remain. This is not an optimistic view, but there is a consensus in the scientific community in particular and the hope that this is wrong is wishful thinking.

You said that the issue is fading into the background amid the election campaign. How can it be brought back into focus in society?

If only there was a simple answer... The political discourse on sustainability is very polemical and dramatic. And yet the concrete measures behind it are often not so bad. For many people, it is now considered part of their identity to be committed to sustainability. And attacks on identity - perceived or real - naturally lead to stronger emotional reactions.

Scientists for Future is also concerned with the question of how we can continue to position the issue despite the increasing fatigue in society when it comes to sustainability. Fortunately, we have a lot of scientific findings that can help. A tried and tested approach is not to present sustainability as an 'on-top issue', i.e. as something that has to be dealt with in addition to many other problems, but instead to link it to issues that are already of interest and concern to individuals. For example, by highlighting the impact of the climate crisis on their own children or individual hobbies. This can lead to a "Because X is important to me, I am committed to sustainability" mindset.

Now it's time to form a government. What do we need at a political level in order to take the necessary steps towards sustainable transformation?

We definitely also need structural, systemic changes; politics is responsible for this. They shape the framework conditions for all our actions. If you change these and remove barriers, people will find it easier to follow suit - we are creatures of habit. Such changes must take place both at a technical level, e.g. in the energy or mobility infrastructure, and at a social and societal level. The former is of course more tangible, but questions of social justice should always be taken into account. Generally speaking, we no longer have a knowledge problem, but an implementation problem. It's not as if we don't have any solutions...

How can the University of Kassel contribute to sustainable transformation?

The following applies to universities in general: on the one hand, they contribute through their research and, on the other, by training people who will make decisions in the future. It is also important to enable students to deal with complexity and ambiguity. This counteracts polemics and polarization or the susceptibility to them.

In my opinion, the University of Kassel is well on the way to acting as a shaper. Perhaps we can be even bolder here. In terms of sustainability, the university already has a really broad base in research and teaching.

And what is your view of the university's new study programs on sustainability?

I find it particularly interesting why young people want to study sustainability. On the one hand, there are those who have opted for it out of intrinsic motivation, out of idealism. But now I think there is also a growing extrinsic motivation: the field offers new career paths. The demand on the job market for people with knowledge of sustainability, especially in conjunction with specialist knowledge, is increasing. The topic is not going away, so the occupational field is quite future-proof. It is precisely this integration of sustainability into the respective areas that we need. So extrinsic motivation is by no means worse than intrinsic motivation.

Interview: Lisa-Maxine Klein