Climate action ‘should make life better’: Dr Neil Jennings

A sense that not enough was being done to address climate change first pushed Dr Neil Jennings into climate activism more than a decade ago. 

In our latest podcast, The Decarbonisation Dialogue, Neil explains that while working in the university sector, he founded Student Switch Off, a not-for-profit campaign promoting pro-environmental behaviour among students that later expanded internationally. 

Now partnership manager at Imperial College London’s Grantham Institute, he coordinates cross-college work on the health benefits of climate action and builds strategic links with policymakers, businesses and non-governmental organisations

His research focuses on the co-benefits of climate action - how measures to cut emissions can also create cleaner, fairer and healthier communities.

Neil sits on advisory groups for the Blueprint Coalition and London Councils’ One World Living programme.  At Imperial, he is part of the Climate Cares Centre, whose work on climate change and mental health - including a 2021 briefing cited by the World Health Organisation and has received global attention. 

He is also a former managing editor of Global Environmental Change, and continues as associate editor and lectures across several Imperial programmes on climate, health and management. Outside academia, he is a trustee of the Reach Foundation, which supports young people in Feltham and across the UK.

In our podcast, Neil explains how his work took a new direction when he joined the Grantham Institute at Imperial College London and began exploring a then-underexamined question: the link between climate change and mental health.

He says: “Initially I was quite sceptical about how there could be a link.

“But that discussion led to what has become one of our most productive areas of work over the last five or so years, including interest internationally.”

Today, much of Neil's research centres on how climate action can improve everyday life - often in ways the public may not immediately associate with environmental policy.

“A lot of the things we need to do to tackle climate change are things we should be doing anyway,” he says. 

“Making homes more affordable to heat, improving the quality of the air we breathe so kids don’t get asthma, these are meaningful changes for people at a local level.”

Poor air quality is one of the issues Neil believes must be placed at the forefront of climate discussions. The cumulative impact, he notes, is significant.

“Poor air quality cuts days and weeks off people’s lives. The updated figure is about 35,000 premature deaths a year in the UK,” he explains. “It affects every organ in our bodies, from before birth through to increasing the risk of dementia in later life.”

Most of the pollution stems from fossil-fuel combustion, especially in urban areas with heavy road traffic. And as the UK transitions toward electric transport, other sources of pollution - such as gas boilers - become more prominent.

“Shifting towards heat pumps offers a way to decarbonise and improve local air quality at the same time,” he says.

In Neil's recent research, when members of the public were asked what they could do to tackle climate change, the most common answer was simply: recycle more. For Neil, this highlights a critical communication gap.

“If people believe recycling is the main solution, they won’t see how climate action can improve their lives,” he says. “But when you talk about energy-efficient housing or cheaper heating, you can tell a much more positive and relevant story.”

In surveys where Neil presented eight potential ‘co-benefits’ of climate action, the top-ranked priority was clear: making homes more affordable to heat. Still, all eight benefits - from job creation to cleaner air - were rated important or very important by more than half of respondents.

Cost remains a sticking point in national discussions about climate action. But Jennings argues we focus too much on the cost of net zero and too little on what he calls “the cost of not zero.”

A striking example emerged during a focus group with members of London’s Somali community. Although they lived in different parts of the borough, every participant ranked improving air quality as the most important climate benefit - citing asthma, eczema and other health issues affecting themselves or their children.

“It illustrates the inequalities that exist,” Neil says. “Ethnic minority communities and low-income groups are more likely to live in areas with higher levels of air pollution. Tackling climate change can also help tackle inequality.”

Much of Neil's recent work has been with local authorities across the UK, particularly through a partnership with the climate change charity Ashden. After hundreds of councils declared climate emergencies five or six years ago, the need to align climate action with broader local priorities, especially public health, became urgent.

Ashden developed a toolkit helping councils link climate projects with social outcomes such as health improvements, reduced inequality and stronger communities.

“Many councils now front and centre the health benefits when communicating climate measures like improving air quality or encouraging active travel,” Neil says. 

“Talking about climate change itself often ranks lower because health resonates more with residents.”

He believes this grassroots focus is essential to maintaining public support for climate action. People need to see the change and the positives – the ‘doom and gloom’ is not helpful. It’s about finding the balance between climate action and climate crisis.

He says: “We still have high levels of public support in the UK, but to maintain that people need to see the benefits in their local area.

“We don’t talk enough about the positive vision - clean air, warm homes, green spaces. If we reach net zero, the places we live should be really lovely.”

Neil's current research examines how health benefits are - or are not - factored into climate-related decision-making. A forthcoming report will highlight opportunities for local and national bodies to embed health considerations into climate planning.

“Health benefits can make the case for faster climate action,” he says. “And they can help improve people’s physical and mental health in their day-to-day lives. That’s ultimately what this work is about.”

Let us know what you think of The Decarbonisation Dialogue. If you have ideas for guests or other podcast suggestions, please contact us at podcast [email protected]

We’d love to know what you think.

All episodes are available for streaming or download from your preferred podcast platform including Apple, Amazon and Spotify. The recordings are also available from our website.