Research shows that support for climate interventions is linked to both hope and worry

A global survey of over 30,000 people in 30 countries has revealed how people around the world feel about climate change and how those feelings relate to the perception and support of climate interventions that can help address the crisis. The new research is published in the Journal Risk Analysis.

To investigate the intersection between the intensity of “climate sentiment” on a global scale and perceptions of climate intervention, a team of researchers from the University of Alfs in Denmark and researchers from the International Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA) in Austria conducted an online survey in 19 different languages ​​for adults in 30 countries. Responses were collected from August to December 2022.

In data analysis, the team repeats 30 countries. Clear differences in climate sentiment have emerged all over the world:

Among the 12 most hopeful countries around climate change were 11 developing and emerging economies in the southern part of the world (including Nigeria, Kenya, India and Indonesia). The only country that represented the group’s global north was the United States. European countries are ranked among the most hopeful, including Germany, Austria and Sweden. This is despite participants from these countries (and global north) who have little experience with natural disasters and report reduced expected harms from climate change. Anger and sadness were most strongly expressed by participants from three Southern European countries: Spain, Italy and Greece. Brazilian participants expressed the greatest degree of both fear and worry about climate change.

The key goal of this study was to explore climate sentiment and how people around the world felt about climate intervention techniques, including solar radiation modulation (SRM) and carbon dioxide removal (CDR).

“In addition to the types of climate action such as mitigation and adaptation, climate interventions are attracting greater attention due to insufficient evidence of climate disasters and the pace of emission reduction,” says Chad M. Baum, chief author of the development of business development technology development at Aarfs University in Herring, Denmark.

He and his colleagues examined the statistical relationship between five climate sentiments and the support of ten different climate intervention techniques, including planting, direct air capture and stratospheric aerosol injection.

Hope (most strongly expressed by respondents in the Global South) emerged as an important predictor of support for climate intervention, particularly for SRM approaches such as direct air capture and new forms of CDR. Fear was also positively related to supporting climate intervention techniques, but it was less effective than hope and worry.

“Along with hope and worry, this suggests that fear and desire for protective behavior are actively linked to supporting more controversial forms of climate intervention,” Baum says.

“Our results demonstrate both differences in climate sentiment at a global level and, importantly, the potential consequences of not being involved in the diverse perspectives on climate change in the southern part of the world and of several proposed solutions.”