Current Sociology

Please welcome our Sociologist of the Month for December 2025, Anna Clot-Garrell (Universidad de Barcelona, Spain). Her article for Current Sociology Voices of emergency: Imagined climate futures and forms of collective action is Free Access this month.

Anna Clot-Garrell

Could you please tell us about yourself? How did you come to your field of study?

A. Clot-Garrell: My path in sociology has not been linear but has been marked by a variety of interests and diverse themes I have engaged with. What began as casual curiosities and personal concerns gradually evolved into a commitment to sociological thinking—drawn by its capacity to offer insightful perspectives and tools for approaching and understanding social phenomena in stimulating ways. At the heart of my work and research impulse lies a continuous weaving together of sociological theory and qualitative methods—a fertile iterative process where theory guides empirical inquiry, and empirical data in turn deepen and sometimes challenge my theoretical assumptions and understandings. This dynamic interplay has become the foundation of my scholarship and continues to shape my approach today in the study of socio-ecological transformations through the intertwined lenses of social imaginaries, collective political articulations, and material legacies. My immersion in environmental issues over the past seven years, however, stems from viewing them not as a niche topic but as central to sociology’s core questions and its critical analysis of power relations and social inequalities. I see ecological crisis as one of the most pressing challenges of our time—if not the most pressing—since it confronts, and in many ways demands that we revisit the very foundations of modern, industrial and capitalist societies, which also shaped the emergence of sociology.

What prompted you to research the area of your article, “Voices of emergency: Imagined climate futures and forms of collective action”?

A. Clot-Garrell: My research on imaginaries of climate futures and collective action was sparked by the global civic responses following the publication of the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C in October 2018, which warned of dangerous temperature rises by 2030 without urgent action. This report triggered unprecedented mobilisation, including the rise of new climate movements such as Fridays for Future and Extinction Rebellion. This singular “eventful” phenomenon, using Sewell’s terms, captured my sociological attention as I observed how these movements suddenly emerged as catalysts and carriers of collective climate action. I was particularly interested in how they inspired people to move beyond individual concern and engage in organised, direct action—often their first experience with collective political involvement. Since these movements took shape around the idea of a “threatened future”, my research aimed to explore how imaginaries of the future shape collective climate action, drawing on sociological theories about the mobilising force of imagined futures as not merely mental representations and discursive constructions, but as drivers of action. Specifically, I have examined the ways in which the anticipated disasters that characterised thematisations of climate change as an “emergency” propelled and configured forms of collective climate action.

What do you see as the key findings of your article?

A. Clot-Garrell: One key finding, in my view, is that the article brings nuance to what is often a binary debate about the (de)politicising effects of adverse imagined climate futures. While catastrophic or dystopian climate discourses are frequently criticised for leading to apathy or paralysis, my research shows that the anticipation of climate threats can also have a mobilising effect for some individuals, providing both urgency and legitimacy for direct action. This was particularly evident in the wave of large-scale climate protests between 2019 and the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The public visibility of these protests—and their role in ‘staging’ climate risks, in Ulrich Beck’s terms—made collective action feel not only feasible but also desirable for many, including those who had not previously been involved in environmental movements. Although the study does not allow us to track sustained engagement over time, it does point to the importance of considering how different temporal perceptions of climate risks shape different forms of agency and collective articulations in the present. Another finding to highlight is the role of emotions—not just in driving participation, but in shaping collective organisation. Climate futures are not imagined only cognitively, they are also shaped by affect. Interestingly, the results evidence that negative emotions do not necessarily discourage action. On the contrary, many participants described collective action as a way to cope with feelings of distress and climate anxiety. In this sense, emotional work emerged as a crucial—though often less visible—part of these new environmental movements, offering both meaning and support as people navigated together their climate concerns.

In line with the broader aim of bringing nuance to debates on catastrophic climate futures, a key insight from the article is that mobilisations driven by dystopian imaginaries often also contain utopian impulses. The research illustrates how dystopian and utopian forces are not mutually exclusive but can be deeply intertwined. The article shows that problematising the future does not simply foreclose possibilities but can, in fact, open up space for imagining alternatives—alternatives that inspire experimentation and action in the present, both individually and collectively. I have made this tension intelligible through the lens of what Appadurai (2013) terms the ‘ethics of probability’ and the ‘ethics of possibility’, arguing that the interplay between seemingly determined climate models and open-ended transformative impulses underpins the mobilising force of imagined climate futures in how collective climate action is being articulated.

At the same time, it is important to recognise that the mobilising potential of these imaginaries is not uniform. These narratives operate in ambivalent and context-dependent ways. While they can open up spaces for creative agency, they are also shaped—and constrained—by institutional structures and socio-political conditions. This suggests that understanding the social and political impact of imagined climate futures requires careful attention to how diverse lived realities, across different geographic and social contexts, shape both their content and their capacity to mobilise action.

What are the broader social implications of your research in the current social climate? How do you think things will change in the future?

A. Clot-Garrell: One wider implication of my research is that it provides empirically grounded insights that can inform current debates on the climate crisis beyond the academic context. By highlighting the situated nature of people’s experiences and agency, the research contributes to a more nuanced and complex understanding of how adverse or undesired imagined climate futures shape our social horizons. A second implication lies in challenging overly individualised narratives of climate responsibility and foregrounding the importance of social inequalities and colonial legacies. Climate futures are not imagined in a vacuum; they are traversed by power relations that determine whose visions of the future are legitimised, whose are marginalised, and how the very idea of “the future” is configured—particularly for those for whom a promised future has never fully existed. A third implication derives from my current work on the materiality of futures. Imagined futures are not just images or discursive projections; they take shape and become embedded in material forms—infrastructures, for instance—that influence how the future is lived and negotiated in the present. This perspective invites us to ask: What past futures are we living with today?—such as the enduring material legacies of fossil infrastructures or toxic remains. And, conversely, what futures are we currently materialising—the so-called futures-in-the-making? For example, green energy infrastructures and other technological developments are already physically inscribing particular socio-ecological visions into the present. These questions are crucial for understanding how power, temporality, and materiality converge in shaping what kinds of futures become possible, and for whom.

Regarding how I think things will change in the future, I avoid making sociological predictions. However, reflecting on the particular results of the article, I note that climate movements and protests have already undergone rapid change since my empirical research was conducted. The COVID-19 pandemic drastically altered the trajectory of these protests and affected the momentum of the movements. Additionally, there has been a noticeable trend towards the radicalisation and reconfiguration of climate activism—evident, for example, in movements like Fridays for Future. New political and governmental dynamics have also contributed to the increasing criminalisation of climate activism, a development we have already begun to observe with great concern.

Do you have any links to images, documents or other pieces of research which build on or add to the article? Or a suggested reading list?

A. Clot-Garrell: I can provide some images from my fieldwork for the interview publication.

I also share a reading list:

• Adam B and Groves C (2007) Future Matters: Action, Knowledge, Ethics. London: Brill.
• Altstaedt S (2024). Future-cultures: How future imaginations disseminate throughout the social. European Journal of Social Theory, 27(2), 279-297.
• Appadurai A (2013) The Future as Cultural Fact: Essays on the Global Condition. London: Verso.
• Beck U (2015) Emancipatory catastrophism: What does it mean to climate change and risk soci- ety? Current Sociology 63(1): 75–88.
• Beckert J (2013) Imagined futures: Fictional expectations in the economy. Theory and Society 42(3): 219–240.
• Cantó-Milà N and Seebach S (2015) Desired images, regulating figures, constructed imaginaries: The future as an apriority for society to be possible. Current Sociology 63(2): 198–215.
• Cantó-Milà N Seebach S (2024) Between temporalities, imaginaries and imagination: A framework for analysing futures. European Journal of Social Theory, 27(2), 298-313.
• Cassegård C and Thörn H (2018) Toward a postapocalyptic environmentalism? Responses to loss and visions of the future in climate activism. Environment and Planning: Nature and Space 1(4): 561–578.
• Folkers A (2021) Fossil modernity: The materiality of acceleration, slow violence, and ecological futures. Time & Society, 30(2), 223-246.
• Gordillo GR (2014) Rubble: The afterlife of destruction. Durhman: Duke.
• Mische A (2009) Projects and possibilities: Researching futures in action. Sociological Forum 24(3): 694–704.
• Moore JW (2015) Capitalism in the Web of Life: Ecology and the Accumulation of Capital. London: Verso.
• Moss T (2024) Usable Infrastructure Pasts: Mobilising History for Urban Technology Futures. In: Addie JPD, Glass MR, Nelles J (Eds) Infrastructural Times, Bristol University Press, pp. 49-71.
• Neckel S, Hasenfratz M. (2021). Climate emotions and emotional climates: The emotional map of ecological crises and the blind spots on our sociological landscapes. Social Science Information, 60(2), 253-271.
• Norgaard KM (2018) The sociological imagination in a time of climate change. Global and Planetary Change 163: 171–176.
• Pyyhtinen O (2015) More-than-Human Sociology: A New Sociological Imagination. London: Palgrave.
• Stoler AL (2013) Imperial Debris: On Ruins and Ruination. Durham: Duke.
• Tutton R (2017) Wicked futures: Meaning, matter and the sociology of the future. The Sociological Review, 65(3), 478-492.
• Tutton R (2023) The Sociology of Futurelessness. Sociology 57(2): 438–453.
• Wagner P (2024) Carbon Societies: The Social Logic of Fossil Fuels. London: Polity.