<p>Climate politics are in crisis. After gathering pace following the Paris Agreement and the climate protests, it has become obvious how difficult it is to achieve ambitious goals and how fundamental the necessary changes to society are. Accordingly, conflicts are deepening - and further crises are emerging, such as the social aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic, military conflicts that are moving closer to Germany and their economic impact, and, as a result, the rise of populist political tendencies. Against this backdrop, this article develops a line of argumentation for how climate policy could succeed.</p><p>1. A consistent combination of different policy measures is necessary - in particular, a mix of soft and hard measures - so that energy and climate policies are perceived as feasible, successful, fair and politically credible and find broad acceptance among the population. In this context, the present article argues in favour of considering bundles of measures for the successful design and implementation of necessary energy and climate policies.</p><p>2. Carbon pricing is a key climate policy measure for bringing about behavioural changes that may lead to lower emissions. Carbon pricing is generally accepted, at least at a moderate level, if a (perceptible) positive climate effect is achieved with the funds raised. As a sole climate policy measure, carbon pricing, however, is not sufficient. It is important, for example, to also have compensatory measures in place to cushion social hardships and to avoid placing unproportional burdens on population groups in relation to their income. </p><p>3. So-called soft policy measures rely on voluntary mechanisms to bring about behavioural changes in society. They tend to have an advisory or supportive function and rely on the motivation of citizens. Examples include information campaigns, tax breaks, and funding programmes. The acceptance of soft measures is generally high because they hardly restrict everyday life and decisions of people or companies, and they support those who are willing to contribute. In that way soft policy measures provide the context for social discussions and the emergence of social norms. However, their direct impact on society at a larger scale is often limited, especially with regard to long-term behavioural changes.</p><p>4. Hard policy measures refer to concrete and binding measures that are implemented by appropriate regulation and have an immediate effect on behaviour. Examples include bans, mandatory requirements, and taxes. These restrict the choices of people, companies, and institutions more strongly and more directly than soft policy measures. Due to their binding nature, hard measures can be very effective in contributing to the energy transition or CO₂ reduction. However, due to their highly regulatory nature, hard measures are often unpopular and require a social majority consensus as well as the political will to implement them. This is especially true if the impression arises that hard measures cause high individual costs, are not sufficiently explained, or are difficult to implement in everyday life.</p><p>5. The acceptance of political measures among the population is strongly influenced by their perceived effectiveness, the attributed fairness, as well as trust in the responsible institutions and the individual capacity to adapt. These influencing factors must be taken into account when designing and implementing energy and climate policy measures.</p>