Take Back the Climate!
The untapped, future-forward power of organized Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries
There is a subset of a subset of a subset of Americans today who are both concerned about a stable future environment and possess the eye-popping financial clout necessary to reverse dire, planet-scale climate forecasts.
They don’t realize they hold this power. They just need to see it. They aren’t confined by national borders or cultural limitations. Best of all, they have the law on their side, enabling them to claim their rights, no matter where the status quo places them in the traditional pecking order.
In this particular case, the needs of the few are equal to the needs of the many.
A mashup of surveys, including those by the Transamerica Center for Retirement Studies, says:
Generation Z, comprising 68 million Americans, represents 21% of the U.S. population. They range in age from 13 to 27. About 60% of adult-aged Gen Z still live at home, facing challenges such as job and economic uncertainties, student debt, and high housing costs that hinder their independence.
Of these, 48 million are of working age (16 to 27), while the remaining 20 million are aged 13 to 15. Gen Z will begin retiring around 2062, 12 years after the world is expected to reach net-zero emissions.
Between one and two million of these Gen Z workers are employed in government jobs that offer the coveted defined-benefit (DB) pension plans—the most desirable of retirement schemes. Despite, perhaps, struggling to move out of their parents’ basements, they contribute a portion of each paycheck to fund these pensions, supporting current retirees while earning a distant retirement benefit for themselves.
Roughly half of Gen Z DB pension participants are concerned about the impact of the climate crisis on their future retirement and their pensions' complicity. The other half, equally disheartened, do not think about retirement at all, either because it is too distant, more immediate financial concerns take precedence, or they fear that systems like their own DB plan will collapse before they can benefit. (So, why pay a contribution deduction? Just to get the job?)
The tiny cohort of “Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries,” comprising just 0.15% to 0.3% of all Americans, holds the yet untapped potential to influence climate-friendly investments equivalent to 15% of the $27 trillion U.S. GDP.
In this context, Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries are the most important people in the world right now. This drives Bank of Nature's legal strategy, which is starting in Massachusetts as a model for Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries globally. When this specific group is harmed by the mismanagement of funds legally designated for their future, it impacts us all.
Fair is fair
The genius of fiduciary law is that it requires fiduciaries of a single fund, like the $105-billion public pension trust here in Massachusetts, to “handle” each pension participant, old or young, with a “Duty of Impartiality.”
If a trust has two or more beneficiaries, the trustee shall act impartially in investing and managing the trust assets, taking into account any differing interests of the beneficiaries.
It’s a legal obligation, even if it isn’t always reflected in a common fiduciary practice that, instead, puts short-term needs of current retirees ahead of the long-term interests of the youngest future-beneficiaries. When fairness is neglected, it constitutes a breach of fiduciary duty that can be argued in law. That is the opportunity at hand. “Was that fiduciary dollar spent with my future in mind, too? Prove it.”
And, just like any other case of harm, it falls upon the victims to seek justice.
In this challenge to the status quo, the complainants are Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries who:
Falsely believe, or have been duped into believing, that they have little-or-no influence over the decisions of older generations impacting the future.
Are frustrated by the older generations' inadequate response to the climate crisis, knowing they won’t bear the brunt of its consequences.
Are, in fact, the embodiment of #climatehope, because they alone are equipped with the financial and legal tools required to “Take Back the Climate” for every climate activist who doesn’t have such tools.
Can make a compelling legal argument that they deserve equal consideration, equal access, and equal optimism for a future shaped by the $4 trillion in US pension investments driving the global economy today.
If the “olds” deserve to be shamed for letting the house burn down, this unique legal strategy is the untried fire hose with the capacity equal to the scale of the climate crisis. It doesn’t require a global moral awakening to counteract extractive, climate-damaging economics. Altruism isn’t necessary. Self-interest is.
Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries don’t have to care whether “It’s complicated” or “It’s just not how things are done” or other excuses for inaction, like “We have no other choice.” A toxic future is not a choice.
This is what happens when young civil servants, as one category of Gen Z-eco-beneficiary, sues their pension fiduciaries — by exercising their existing protections in non-controversial fiduciary law. It’s not for money, but for a change in behavior that complies with intergenerational loyalty owed to them and, just so happens, redirects big money toward protecting the climate for everyone.
In Massachusetts, young civil servants contribute about $4,500 per year, or 9% of each paycheck, to the Pension Reserve Investment Management (PRIM) board. That’s $4,500 that could otherwise be spent on more immediate Gen Z priorities like technology upgrades, travel, student debt repayment, young families or even a trio of Coachella VIP tickets. Instead, that money is invested in enterprises focused on the near-term needs of current retirees and compromises the future retirement of Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries who will live in the consequences of today’s fiduciary decisions.
This fiduciary practice is far from impartial.
It fails to meet the legal standards for all classes of pension participants who have a stake in this obligation.
It assigns a financial cost to harm, as that $4,500 per year starts losing value the moment it’s handed over to PRIM and invested in a portfolio whose long-term value is compromised by anti-future fiduciary choice.
Said another way: Fiduciaries of defined-benefit pension plans valued $105 billion in Massachusetts (or $4 trillion in US, or $20 trillion globally) must be spend that fiduciary money in ways that the treat the 1% with retirement 40 years away the same as the 67% currently retired.
"Don't trust anyone over 30"
If Baby Boomers — the grandparents of Gen Zs — got anything right, it was how to mobilize a youth-led protest.
"Don't trust anyone over 30" was a slogan coined by Jack Weinberg, a Silent Generation maverick-environmentalist-free speech advocate that was adopted by the Baby Boomer rebellion in the 1960s. It turns out to be good advice even today five generations later.
Back then, this kind of ageism was a “rage against the machine” rallying cry among the counterculture hippies and student activists who felt that the older generation, particularly those in positions of power, were out of touch with the ideals and needs of youth. The phrase showcased the generational divide of the time, with young people advocating for social change, civil rights, and anti-war movements, often in opposition to the more conservative views of their Silent Generation elders. It symbolized a rejection of the status quo and a call for younger generations to take control of their own future.
As another bit of Boomer organizing inspiration from ago, concurrent with “Don’t trust anyone over 30”, is the second-wave feminism cause dubbed “Take Back the Night.” These rallies, often held at night, were aimed at reclaiming safe spaces for women to protest and raise awareness about issues like rape, domestic violence, and sexual harassment. #MeToo built on these earlier foundations.
Fast forward to a today marked, again, by youth dissatisfaction with older generations.
The plaintiffs in Juliana v. United States, a case where young people sued the U.S. government for causing climate change, are mostly Gen Z.
Greta Thunberg and the Fridays for Future movement are Gen Z.
The Sunrise Movement, led by Gen Z, advocates for political action on climate change and the Green New Deal in the U.S.
Zero Hour emphasizes intersectional environmentalism, with Gen Zs tackling both climate change and social justice.
Earth Uprising is a global youth-led movement focused on climate education and grassroots activism.
The International Indigenous Youth Council, born from the Standing Rock protests, champions Indigenous rights and environmental justice.
Some of these groups have new civil servants on their rosters. Send them to me.
Boomer history shows how quickly youthful rebellion fades when there’s no financial support and the desire for stability — kids, a house, a job — takes over. The difference now, generations later, is the evolution of money — specifically, the power of massive financial aggregations governed by fiduciary law. Gen Zs like Greta Thunberg have every reason to trust their under-30 Gen Z-eco-beneficiary peers to "Take Back the Climate!" because they’re backed by planet-scale funds that the counterculture warriors of the '60s could never have imagined.
Gen Z-eco-beneficiaries can spend it now that they know they have it.
Digital-age activism
In 2020, a TikTok stunt driven by Gen Z agitators asked K-pop fans and other followers to reserve tickets for a rally for then-President Donald Trump in Tulsa, Oklahoma. The imps had no intention of showing up. This led to lower-than-expected attendance at the event and ongoing crowd size-related political embarrassment. It demonstrated a super power for organizing modern protest. It’s the kind of strategy we need now to recruit Gen Z to this untried climate security strategy paid for by pensions with the mission, duty and scale to do it.
Repurposing "Take Back the Night" for a “Take Back the Climate” environmental cause captures the essence of reclaiming control over the planet's future.
1. Vast Financial Influence:
Gen Z DB holders are part of a system that controls a significant portion of the $4 trillion in U.S. defined-benefit pension assets. This financial clout gives them the ability to influence how these funds are invested, potentially steering billions of dollars towards sustainable and climate-conscious investments.
This is a stark contrast to the symbolic protests of the 1960s, that were rhetorically powerful, but lacked the financial backing to enact systemic change on a large scale.
2. Eco-Awareness:
Gen Z is widely recognized for its strong environmental consciousness. This eco-awareness, combined with the financial leverage of their pension funds, positions them uniquely to finance real change, when as individuals they might concurrently struggle to find rent money.
3. A New Cultural Drive:
The phrase "Don't Trust Anyone Over 30" can be reimagined in this context as a challenge to older generations' approaches to environmental stewardship, advocating for more aggressive, innovative strategies to address the climate crisis — but this time rolling in the dough.
4. Doing More Than Yelling:
Unlike past movements that relied on protest and public demonstration as their primary means of influence, digital-savvy Gen Z has the potential to enact change through financial mechanisms and social media channels.
By advocating for fiduciary compliance for themselves, regardless of the world order of power, Gen Z can do far more than just raise their voices — they can directly influence the global economy.
Every Gen Z-eco-beneficiary can post, tag, text, phone, snail mail, Tiktok and skywrite their pension fiduciaries for proof of their compliance to the #DutyofImpartiality. They can visit the statutes governing their pensions to see how explicitly, if at all, this #intergenerationalloyalty duty is stated and put forward bills to correct any confusion. They can demand a fiduciary review of pension portfolios to screen every asset for its compliance with the Duty of Impartiality. They can connect with me to start a legal strategy in their jurisdiction — because most pensions will fail this kind of challenge, and because the size of the dollars is material to climate outcomes. Thy can bring it up in collective bargaining. Any financing that works for near term returns with the cost of long-term damage is working only for current retirees. That’s any future-dimming enterprise including, but not limited to, oil and gas. We can take that to a judge.