Ten years of Swiss climate votes since the Paris Agreement

White smoke? Like in other countries, the issue of climate policy – and emissions reduction – can be divisive in Switzerland. Keystone / Salvatore Di Nolfi

Series 10 years Paris Agreement, Episode 5:

In the ten years since countries in Paris committed to cut global carbon emissions, Swiss voters have gone to the ballot box at least as many times to decide on climate issues. We take a look back at the outcomes.

If the decade since the Paris Agreement has shown one thing, it’s that climate policy is deeply political. States are still at loggerheads about who should do what when it comes to emissions cuts; the US has left the deal altogether.

Meanwhile in the Swiss system of direct democracy, politicians not only have to hammer out laws among themselves; citizens can also have a say, whether via referendum or people’s initiative.

Read more about the workings of the Swiss system of popular votes in our explainer:

And over the past ten years, Swiss voters have faced a wide range of climate-related issues. The Paris treaty itselfExternal link, agreed on December 12, 2015 and ratified by the Swiss parliament in 2017, was not challenged to a referendum.

However, ballots have been held on other related issues: some directly about carbon emissions policy, others about climate and the environment more generally. Here is a rundown of the major ones. 

In the series “10 Years of the Paris Agreement”, we highlight what has been done in terms of emissions, renewable energy, climate policies and climate research in Switzerland and around the world since 2015.

September 2016: no to a smaller footprint

According to an annual estimate by the Global Footprint Network, a pro-sustainability NGO, if everyone in the world lived like the Swiss, almost three Earths would be needed to sustain it all. The Green Party, who said this was too much, collected the required 100,000 signatures for a people’s initiative calling to rein it in. By 2050, their plan demanded, Switzerland should limit its relative use of resources to one planet’s worth per year.

The proposal was unclear about how exactly this would be done, though backers talked more about research and innovation than about rules to cut consumption. Opponents, including the government, warnedExternal link that the plan would involve “drastic economic measures” that would hit Swiss competitiveness, growth, and jobs. In the end, 63.6% of voters rejected the idea; only one canton (Geneva) said yes.

May 2017: more renewables, no nuclear

Less than a year after voters rejected another Green Party initiative calling for an end to nuclear power, they accepted a new package of measures – backed by government and parliament – with the same effect. The Swiss “Energy Strategy 2050”, initially drawn up after the 2011 Fukushima accident in Japan, pledged to cut fossil fuel usage, boost renewables, and phase out nuclear power by banning the construction of any new reactors.

Some 58% of voters approved the strategy, which was backed by almost all political parties. Yet the fact that a referendum was brought in the first place, by the right-wing Swiss People’s Party – who warned of red tape and higher electricity costs – showed that shifts in energy policy are rarely straightforward. As for the nuclear issue, a recurring one in Swiss votes, this wasn’t the end of it either; a decade later, the government is considering droppingExternal link the ban on new reactors. Some, including the International Atomic Energy AgencyExternal link, say nuclear can be an effective ingredient in mitigating climate change.

The Gösgen nuclear power plant in canton Solothurn. Keystone / Gaetan Bally

June 2021: a setback for the government’s Paris plan

Four years after parliament ratified the Paris Agreement, the main plank of Switzerland’s plan to hit its targets was put to voters – and was narrowly rejected. The revised CO2 Act aimed to halve carbon emissions by 2030 in comparison with 1990 levels via a range of measures such as incentives to replace oil and gas heating with cleaner energy sources, more investment in electric car infrastructure, and a levy on flight tickets.

Despite wide political backing for the reform, 51.6% of voters ultimately rejected it; post-vote analyses found that many were worried that the reform would hit their wallets. For the energy minister at the time, Simonetta Sommaruga, it was back to the drawing board. Switzerland is not leaving the Paris Agreement, Sommaruga said after the vote. “But it will now be difficult to achieve the climate targets.”

June 2023: yes to long-term climate neutrality

Two years later, a headline target of the Paris Agreement did manage to find its way into the Swiss constitution: 59.1% of voters approved the aim of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050. The new “climate and innovation law”, an indirect counterproposal to the “glacier initiative”, aimed to kill several birds with one stone: it set emissions targets for meeting Switzerland’s Paris commitments, and it aimed to reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels by promoting domestic renewables.

Why were voters in favour this time? Exit polls pointed to broad support for the general long-term vision of sustainability. The law, and the campaign in favour of it, also shifted the approach from taxes and restrictions onto proactive incentives: for example, financial help for homeowners and businesses to become more renewable. The law was also backed by a big coalition of political, civil society, and business; opposition came mostly from the right-wing People’s Party, who warned of rising energy costs.

What would it actually take to become climate neutral by 2050? We asked an expert after the 2023 vote:

June 2024: securing a steady supply

A year later, voters approved a new electricity law, adopted by parliament in 2023, which aimed to boost renewables and guarantee Switzerland’s future supplies, especially in winter. Notably, it set out plans to ease restrictions for the construction of big new hydro, solar, and wind parks, and set the goal to boost production of electricity to at least 35 terawatt hours (TWh) from renewables by 2035. 

Opposition to this law wasn’t just from the right. The law was also attacked by the Franz Weber Foundation, a nature lobby group worried about the impact of big solar and wind installations on Alpine ecosystems. In the end, 68.7% of voters approved the legislation, but the conservationist debates continue: in July this year, two new people’s initiatives were submitted calling for restrictions on the building of wind farms. 

The early stages of a solar park at Sedrun, canton Graubünden, August 2024. By 2028, the site is set to house some 5,700 panels. Keystone / Gian Ehrenzeller

February 2025: the limits of an ambitious initiative

This time, the youth section of the Greens forced a vote on a constitutional amendment that would require the Swiss economy to operate within “planetary boundaries” – limits beyond which nature can’t regenerate itself. To achieve this, things like CO2 emissions, biodiversity loss and water use would need to be seriously cut; Switzerland would have had to decrease its per capita carbon footprint by 90%, Greenpeace estimated.

The idea didn’t include a concrete roadmap for how this would be done, but did specify that it should be done in a “socially acceptable” way, and within ten years. Opponents said the plan was unfeasible and ruinous; in the end, almost 70% of citizens rejected it. After the vote, Energy Minister Albert Rösti told nau.chExternal link the result was not however a rejection of environmental protection, nor of the Paris agreement – whose goals had been clearly “accepted by the population” in the 2023 climate law ballot.

The others: roads, animals, food, and more

Over 80 national votes have been held in Switzerland since December 2016, and naturally quite a few others have included elements related to climate. In 2024, for example, a plan to expand the country’s motorways was rejected after a campaign which focused heavily on the issue of emissions and the environment. A people’s initiative to protect biodiversity was turned down the same year; a 2022 bid to ban factory farming was also rejected. Ecological concerns also featured in ballots on a food security law (accepted in 2017) and two ethical food initiatives (rejected 2018).

A 2022 initiative against factory farming argued, among other things, that animal products were responsible for 85% of all agricultural emissions. Keystone / Ennio Leanza

What’s next: nuclear, turbines, climate fund

More climate-related votes are already in the pipeline. In November, a left-wing proposal is on the menu to tax big inheritances and use the proceeds for pro-climate action. Parliament is debating the “Blackout” initiative, which has re-opened the nuclear debate; and government is to give its opinion on two campaigns to restriction where, and when, wind turbines can be built. Meanwhile a so-called “climate fund”, which would set aside up to 1% of Swiss GDP for the environment, is ready for a public vote; government and parliament are against it.

Edited by Benjamin von Wyl/sb

Series 10 years Paris Agreement

• Episode 1: 1. Climate experts in Switzerland: 1.5°C target is out of reach
• Episode 2: 2. Swissinfo climate scientist survey 2025
• Episode 3: 3. Will the sun still shine on renewable energy tomorrow? 
• Episode 4: 4. Switzerland’s climate researchers reveal the emotional side of science
• Episode 5: 5. Ten years of Swiss climate votes since the Paris Agreement
• Episode 6: 6. We can still solve the climate crisis – here’s how 
• Episode 7: 7. Emission reductions: the countries doing the ‘dirty work’ for Switzerland