PDF

Published

2024-08-23

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 8 (2024): Published

Section

Research Articles

License

The journal adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which means that anyone can reuse and redistribute the materials for non-commercial purposes as long as you follow the license terms and the original source is properly cited.

Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed since 2023 Vol.8 No.2.

Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.

This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.

By providing open access, the following benefits are brought about:

  • Higher Visibility, Availability and Citations-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions increases citation of the article.
  • Ease of search-publications are easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
  • Rapid Publication – accepted papers are immediately published online.
  • Available for free download immediately after publication at https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP

 

Copyright Statement

1.The authors certify that the submitted manuscripts are original works, do not infringe the rights of others, are free from academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, and that there are no disputes over the authorship scheme of the collaborative articles. In case of infringement, academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, as well as disputes over the authorship scheme, all responsibilities will be borne by the authors.

2. The author agrees to grant the Editorial Office of Environment and Social Psychology a licence to use the reproduction right, distribution right, information network dissemination right, performance right, translation right, and compilation right of the submitted manuscript, including the work as a whole, as well as the diagrams, tables, abstracts, and any other parts that can be extracted from the work and used in accordance with the characteristics of the journal. The Editorial Board of Environment and Social Psychology has the right to use and sub-licence the above mentioned works for wide dissemination in print, electronic and online versions, and, in accordance with the characteristics of the periodical, for the period of legal protection of the property right of the copyright in the work, and for the territorial scope of the work throughout the world.

3. The authors are entitled to the copyright of their works under the relevant laws of Singapore, provided that they do not exercise their rights in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Journal.

About Licence

Environment and Social Psychology is an open access journal and all published work is available under the Creative Commons Licence, Authors shall retain copyright of their work and grant the journal/publisher the right of first publication, and their work shall be licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).

Under this licence, the author grants permission to third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content with attribution to the author. No permission from the author or publisher is required.

This broad licence is intended to facilitate free access to and unrestricted use of original works of all kinds. This ensures that published works remain free and accessible in perpetuity. Submitted manuscripts, once accepted, are immediately available to the public and permanently accessible free of charge on the journal’s official website (https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP). Allowing users to read, download, copy, print, search for or link to the full text of the article, or use it for other legal purposes. However, the use of the work must retain the author's signature, be limited to non-commercial purposes, and not be interpretative.

Click to download <Agreement on the Licence for the Use of Copyright on Environmental and Social Psychology>.

How to Cite

Iyer, A., & Jose K, A. (2024). A decade of climate change concern in India: Determinants of personal and societal climate concern. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(8). https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i8.2921

A decade of climate change concern in India: Determinants of personal and societal climate concern

Aishwarya Iyer

Christ University

http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8277-8830

Alphonsa Jose K

Christ University


DOI: https://doi.org/10.59429/esp.v9i8.2921


Keywords: India, climate change concern, environmental concern, climate change beliefs, political polarization, climate communication

Abstract

Scientists have called for a culturally relevant investigation of factors impacting public climate concern to devise relevant behavioural and policy interventions. Although India will be adversely affected by climate change, there is a shortage of models that track changes in Indian climate concern across time. The study tracked the growth of climate concern from 2006 to 2020 and identifies determinants of personal and societal climate concern. Secondary analyses of survey data from the International Science Survey and World Values Survey (2006-2020, N = 9254), were conducted to predict climate concern across the year, environmental protection versus economic growth preferences, and socio-demographic variables. Within responses from 2020 (N = 3176), the predictive role of anthropogenic climate change beliefs, trust in scientists, adequate government action, collective efficacy, environmental protection preferences, and sociodemographic variables were evaluated to understand personal and societal climate concern.  Binary logistic regression found that climate concern increased significantly from 2006 (2.6%) to 2020 (89.5%) and was predicted by education and preferences for environmental protection. Multiple regression results identified personal climate concern as predicted by education, anthropogenic climate change beliefs, trust in scientists, and environmental protection preferences; while government action beliefs and favouring left-wing affiliation predicted societal climate concern. There was mixed support for the political polarization of climate concern. The study shows an increase in Indian climate change concern over the past decade, with personal and societal climate concern being influenced by different psychological characteristics. Important implications for future climate communication research and social policy development are discussed.

Author Biography

Aishwarya Iyer, Christ University

PhD Candidat, Department of Psychology

References

[1]. Krishnan M. Climate change: IPCC warns India of heat waves, droughts [Internet]. DW2021 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; Available from: https://www.dw.com/en/india-climate-change-ipcc/a-58822174

[2]. Picciariello A, Colenbrander S, Roy R. The costs of climate change in India: a review of the climate-related risks facing India, and their economic and social costs [Internet]. ODI: Think change2021 [cited 2023 Jan 7];Available from: https://odi.org/en/publications/the-costs-of-climate-change-in-india-a-review-of-the-climate-related-risks-facing-india-and-their-economic-and-social-costs/

[3]. Bhattacharya S, Sharma C, Dhiman RC, Mitra AP. Climate change and malaria in India. CURRENT SCIENCE 2006; 90(3).

[4]. Pailler S, Tsaneva M. The effects of climate variability on psychological well-being in India. World Development [Internet] 2018 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 106:15–26. Available from: https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0305750X18300123

[5]. Leiserowitz A. Climate Change Risk Perception and Policy Preferences: The Role of Affect, Imagery, and Values. Climatic Change [Internet] 2006 [cited 2023 Jan 8]; 77(1):45–72. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-006-9059-9

[6]. Leiserowitz AA. American Risk Perceptions: Is Climate Change Dangerous?: American Risk Perceptions. Risk Analysis [Internet] 2005 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 25(6):1433–42. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2005.00690.x

[7]. Dunlap RE, Jones R. Environmental concern: Conceptual and measurement issues. In: R. E. Dunlap, & W. Michelson (Eds.), Handbook of environmental sociology. London: Greenwood Press: London; 2002. page 482–542.

[8]. Spence A, Poortinga W, Butler C, Pidgeon NF. Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature Climate Change [Internet] 2011 [cited 2023 Jan 7];1(1):46–9. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1059

[9]. Smith N, Leiserowitz A. The Role of Emotion in Global Warming Policy Support and Opposition. Risk Analysis [Internet] 2014 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 34(5):937–48. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/risa.12140

[10]. Brügger A, Gubler M, Steentjes K, Capstick SB. Social Identity and Risk Perception Explain Participation in the Swiss Youth Climate Strikes. Sustainability [Internet] 2020 [cited 2023 Jan 7];12(24):10605. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/24/10605

[11]. United Nations. Goal 13: Take Urgent action to combat climate change [Internet]. United Nations Sustainable Development [cited 2024 Jul 23]; Available from: https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/climate-change/

[12]. Lewandowsky S, Gignac G, Vaughan S. The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science. Nature Climate Change 2013; 3:399–404.

[13]. Capstick S, Whitmarsh L, Poortinga W, Pidgeon N, Upham P. International trends in public perceptions of climate change over the past quarter century. WIREs Climate Change [Internet] 2015 [cited 2023 Jan 7];6(1):35–61. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wcc.321

[14]. Moser SC. Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions. WIREs Climate Change [Internet] 2010 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 1(1):31–53. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/wcc.11

[15]. Combes JL, Hamit-Haggar M, Schwartz S. A multilevel analysis of the determinants of willingness to pay to prevent environmental pollution across countries. The Social Science Journal [Internet] 2018 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 55(3):284–99. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.02.001

[16]. Kim SY, Wolinsky-Nahmias Y. Cross-National Public Opinion on Climate Change: The Effects of Affluence and Vulnerability. Global Environmental Politics [Internet] 2014 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 14(1):79–106. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1162/GLEP_a_00215

[17]. Shi J, Visschers VH, Siegrist M. Public perception of climate change: The importance of knowledge and cultural worldviews. Risk Analysis 2015; 35(12):2183–201.

[18]. Xue W, Hine DW, Loi NM, Thorsteinsson EB, Phillips WJ. Cultural worldviews and environmental risk perceptions: A meta-analysis. Journal of Environmental Psychology [Internet] 2014 [cited 2023 Jan 8]; 40:249–58. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494414000619

[19]. Xue W, Marks ADG, Hine DW, Phillips WJ, Zhao S. The new ecological paradigm and responses to climate change in China. Journal of Risk Research [Internet] 2018 [cited 2023 Jan 8]; 21(3):323–39. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13669877.2016.1200655

[20]. Chen MF. Social representations of climate change and pro-environmental behavior intentions in Taiwan. International Sociology [Internet] 2019 [cited 2023 Jan 8]; 34(3):327–46. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0268580919832737

[21]. Ngo CC, Poortvliet PM, Feindt PH. Drivers of flood and climate change risk perceptions and intention to adapt: an explorative survey in coastal and delta Vietnam. Journal of Risk Research [Internet] 2020 [cited 2023 Jan 8]; 23(4):424–46. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2019.1591484

[22]. Leiserowitz A, Thaker J, Feinberg G, Cooper D K. Global Warming’s Six Indias: An audience segmentation analysis. Yale University, New Haven, CT: Yale Project on Climate Change Communication; 2013.

[23]. Thaker J, Smith N, Leiserowitz A. Global Warming Risk Perceptions in India. Risk Analysis 2020;40.

[24]. Pew Research Centre. No Global Warming Alarm in the U.s, China. Washington, D.C.: 2006.

[25]. Clayton S, Devine-Wright P, Swim J, Bonnes M, Steg L, Whitmarsh L, et al. Expanding the role for psychology in addressing environmental challenges. American Psychologist 2016; 71(3):199–215.

[26]. Bord RJ, O’Connor RE, Fisher A. In what sense does the public need to understand global climate change?. Public Understanding of Science 2000;9(3):205.

[27]. Sjöberg L. Risk Perception and societal response. In: Handbook of risk theory. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer; 2012. page 661–75.

[28]. Van der Linden S, Weber EU. Editorial overview: Can behavioral science solve the climate crisis? Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences [Internet] 2021 [cited 2022 Nov 3]; 42:iii–viii. Available from: https://collaborate.princeton.edu/en/publications/editorial-overview-can-behavioral-science-solve-the-climate-crisi

[29]. van der Linden S. Determinants and Measurement of Climate Change Risk Perception, Worry, and Concern. In: The Oxford Encyclopedia of Climate Change Communication. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.; 2017.

[30]. Tyler TR, Cook FL. The mass media and judgments of risk: Distinguishing impact on personal and societal level judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1984; 47:693–708.

[31]. Elshirbiny H. Climate Change Risk Perception and Perceptions of Adaptation Measures in Egypt: A Mixed Methods Study of Predictors and Implications. 2018 [cited 2022 Oct 29]; Available from: http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/7619

[32]. Gilbert C, Lachlan K. The climate change risk perception model in the United States: A replication study. Journal of Environmental Psychology [Internet] 2023 [cited 2023 Jun 26]; 86:101969. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494423000178

[33]. van der Linden S. The social-psychological determinants of climate change risk perceptions: Towards a comprehensive model. Journal of Environmental Psychology [Internet] 2015 [cited 2022 Oct 29]; 41:112–24. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494414001170

[34]. Barth M, Masson T, Fritsche I, Fielding K, Smith JR. Collective responses to global challenges: The social psychology of pro-environmental action. Journal of Environmental Psychology [Internet] 2021 [cited 2022 Dec 22]; 74:101562. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494421000153

[35]. Hornsey MJ, Harris EA, Bain PG, Fielding KS. Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Clim Change [Internet] 2016 [cited 2023 Jan 9]; 6(6):622–6. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2943

[36]. Lee TM, Markowitz EM, Howe PD, Ko CY, Leiserowitz AA. Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world. Nature Climate Change [Internet] 2015 [cited 2023 Jan 8];5(11):1014–20. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate2728

[37]. Malka A, Krosnick JA, Langer G. The association of knowledge with concern about global warming: trusted information sources shape public thinking. Risk Analysis 2009; 29(5):633–47.

[38]. Slimak MW, Dietz T. Personal Values, Beliefs, and Ecological Risk Perception. Risk Analysis [Internet] 2006 [cited 2023 May 24]; 26(6):1689–705. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00832.x

[39]. Akerlof K, Maibach EW, Fitzgerald D, Cedeno AY, Neuman A. Do people “personally experience” global warming, and if so how, and does it matter? Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2013 [cited 2024 Jan 13]; 23(1):81–91. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378012000908

[40]. Milfont TL. The Interplay between Knowledge, Perceived Efficacy, and Concern About Global Warming and Climate Change: A One-Year Longitudinal Study. Risk Analysis [Internet] 2012 [cited 2024 Jul 19]; 32(6):1003–20. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01800.x

[41]. Heath Y, Gifford R. Free-Market Ideology and Environmental Degradation: The Case of Belief in Global Climate Change. Environment and Behavior [Internet] 2006 [cited 2023 Jan 9]; 38(1):48–71. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916505277998

[42]. Sundblad EL, Biel A, Gärling T. Cognitive and affective risk judgements related to climate change. Journal of Environmental Psychology [Internet] 2007 [cited 2023 May 24]; 27(2):97–106. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0272494407000084

[43]. Xiao C, McCright AM. Gender Differences in Environmental Concern: Revisiting the Institutional Trust Hypothesis in the USA. Environment and Behavior [Internet] 2015 [cited 2024 Jan 13]; 47(1):17–37. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916513491571

[44]. Hoffmann R, Muttarak R. Learn from the Past, Prepare for the Future: Impacts of Education and Experience on Disaster Preparedness in the Philippines and Thailand. World Development [Internet] 2017 [cited 2024 Jan 4]; 96:32–51. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X15312559

[45]. McCright AM, Xiao C, Dunlap RE. Political polarization on support for government spending on environmental protection in the USA, 1974–2012. Social Science Research [Internet] 2014 [cited 2023 May 24]; 48:251–60. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0049089X1400132X

[46]. McCright AM, Dunlap RE, Marquart-Pyatt ST. Political ideology and views about climate change in the European Union. Environmental Politics [Internet] 2016 [cited 2023 May 24]; 25(2):338–58. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2015.1090371

[47]. Birch S. Political polarization and environmental attitudes: a cross-national analysis. Environmental Politics [Internet] 2020 [cited 2024 Jan 13]; 29(4):697–718. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2019.1673997

[48]. Bostrom A, Morgan MG, Fischhoff B, Read D. What Do People Know About Global Climate Change? 1. Mental Models. Risk Analysis [Internet] 1994 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 14(6):959–70. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1994.tb00065.x

[49]. Helgeson J, van der Linden S, Chabay I. The role of knowledge, learning and mental models in public perceptions of climate change related risks. In: Learning for Sustainability in Times of Accelerating Change. 2012. page 329–46.

[50]. Tobler C, Visschers VHM, Siegrist M. Consumers’ knowledge about climate change. Climatic Change [Internet] 2012 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 114(2):189–209. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0393-1

[51]. Hoogendoorn G, Sütterlin B, Siegrist M. The climate change beliefs fallacy: the influence of climate change beliefs on the perceived consequences of climate change. Journal of Risk Research [Internet] 2020 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 23(12):1577–89. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2020.1749114

[52]. Ogunbode CA, Demski C, Capstick SB, Sposato RG. Attribution matters: Revisiting the link between extreme weather experience and climate change mitigation responses. Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2019 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 54:31–9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378018302693

[53]. Van Valkengoed AM, Steg L. Meta-analyses of factors motivating climate change adaptation behaviour. Nature Climate Change [Internet] 2019 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 9(2):158–63. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-018-0371-y

[54]. Kellstedt PM, Zahran S, Vedlitz A. Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States. Risk Analysis [Internet] 2008 [cited 2023 Jan 9]; 28(1):113–26. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2008.01010.x

[55]. Roser-Renouf C, Nisbet M. The measurement of key behavioral science constructs in climate change research. International Journal for Sustainability Communication 2008; 3:37–95.

[56]. Aitken C, Chapman R, McClure J. Climate change, powerlessness and the commons dilemma: Assessing New Zealanders’ preparedness to act. Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2011 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 21(2):752–60. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378011000033

[57]. Guy S, Kashima Y, Walker I, O’Neill S. Investigating the effects of knowledge and ideology on climate change beliefs. European Journal of Social Psychology [Internet] 2014 [cited 2023 Jan 9]; 44(5):421–9. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/ejsp.2039

[58]. Leiserowitz A, Maibach EW, Roser-Renouf C, Feinberg G, Howe P. Climate Change in the American Mind: Americans’ Global Warming Beliefs and Attitudes in April 2013 [Internet]. 2013 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; Available from: https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2298705

[59]. Cutler MJ, Marlon J, Howe P, Leiserowitz A. ‘Is global warming affecting the weather?’ Evidence for increased attribution beliefs among coastal versus inland US residents. Environmental Sociology [Internet] 2020 [cited 2024 Apr 2]; 6(1):6–18. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/23251042.2019.1690725

[60]. Kasperson RE, Renn O, Slovic P, Brown HS, Emel J, Goble R, et al. The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework. Risk Analysis [Internet] 1988 [cited 2023 Jan 10]; 8(2):177–87. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb01168.x

[61]. Kasperson JX, Kasperson RE, Pidgeon N, Slovic P. The Social Amplification of Risk: Assessing 15 Years of Research and Theory [Internet]. Routledge; 2005 [cited 2023 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781849772549-21/social-amplification-risk-assessing-15-years-research-theory-jeanne-kasperson-roger-kasperson-nick-pidgeon-paul-slovic

[62]. Kahan DM. Ideology in or Cultural Cognition of Judging: What Difference Does it Make Essay. Marquette Law Review [Internet] 2008 [cited 2023 Jan 10]; 92(3):413–22. Available from: https://heinonline.org/HOL/P?h=hein.journals/marqlr92&i=419

[63]. Kahan DM, Peters E, Wittlin M, Slovic P, Ouellette LL, Braman D, et al. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nature Climate Change [Internet] 2012 [cited 2023 Jan 10]; 2(10):732–5. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1547

[64]. Jachimowicz JM, Hauser OP, O’Brien JD, Sherman E, Galinsky AD. The critical role of second-order normative beliefs in predicting energy conservation. Nat Hum Behav [Internet] 2018 [cited 2022 Dec 2]; 2(10):757–64. Available from: http://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-018-0434-0

[65]. Bouman T, Verschoor M, Albers CJ, Böhm G, Fisher SD, Poortinga W, et al. When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions. Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2020 [cited 2024 Jan 4]; 62:102061. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378019301736

[66]. De Groot JIM, Steg L. Value Orientations and Environmental Beliefs in Five Countries: Validity of an Instrument to Measure Egoistic, Altruistic and Biospheric Value Orientations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology [Internet] 2007 [cited 2023 Jan 10]; 38(3):318–32. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022107300278

[67]. Inglehart R. Culture shift in advanced industrial society. Princeton University Press; 1990.

[68]. McCright AM, Dunlap RE. Anti-reflexivity. Theory, Culture & Society [Internet] 2010 [cited 2024 Jan 3]; 27(2–3):100–33. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409356001

[69]. Dunlap RE, York R. The Globalization of Environmental Concern and the Limits of The Postmaterialist Values Explanation: Evidence from Four Multinational Surveys. The Sociological Quarterly [Internet] 2008 [cited 2024 Jan 13]; 49(3):529–63. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.2008.00127.x

[70]. Franzen A, Vogl D. Two decades of measuring environmental attitudes: A comparative analysis of 33 countries. Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2013 [cited 2024 Jan 13]; 23(5):1001–8. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378013000563

[71]. Joffe H. Risk: From perception to social representation. British Journal of Social Psychology [Internet] 2003 [cited 2023 Jan 10]; 42(1):55–73. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1348/014466603763276126

[72]. Smith EK, Mayer A. A social trap for the climate? Collective action, trust and climate change risk perception in 35 countries. Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2018 [cited 2024 Apr 10]; 49:140–53. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378017309585

[73]. Weber EU. What shapes perceptions of climate change?: What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change [Internet] 2010 [cited 2023 Jan 7]; 1(3):332–42. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcc.41

[74]. Thaker J, Howe P, Leiserowitz A, Maibach E. Perceived Collective Efficacy and Trust in Government Influence Public Engagement with Climate Change-Related Water Conservation Policies. Environmental Communication [Internet] 2019 [cited 2023 Jan 9]; 13(5):681–99. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1438302

[75]. Chen MF. Impact of fear appeals on pro-environmental behavior and crucial determinants. International Journal of Advertising [Internet] 2016 [cited 2023 May 18]; 35(1):74–92. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2015.1101908

[76]. Morton TA, Rabinovich A, Marshall D, Bretschneider P. The future that may (or may not) come: How framing changes responses to uncertainty in climate change communications. Global Environmental Change [Internet] 2011 [cited 2023 May 18]; 21(1):103–9. Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S095937801000097X

[77]. Bandura A. Exercise of Human Agency through Collective Efficacy. Curr Dir Psychol Sci [Internet] 2000 [cited 2023 May 18]; 9(3):75–8. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8721.00064

[78]. Wang X. The role of attitudinal motivations and collective efficacy on Chinese consumers’ intentions to engage in personal behaviors to mitigate climate change. The Journal of Social Psychology [Internet] 2018 [cited 2023 Jan 9]; 158(1):51–63. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00224545.2017.1302401

[79]. Pew Research Centre. International Science Survey 2019-2020 [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: 2019. Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/dataset/international-science-survey/

[80]. Inglehart R, Haerpfer C, Moreno A, Welzel C, Kizilova K, Diez-Medrano J, et al. World Values Survey: Round Five - Country-Pooled Datafile. [Internet]. Madris, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat; 2018. Available from: doi.org/10.14281/18241.7

[81]. Inglehart R, Haerpfer C, Moreno A, Welzel C, Kizilova K, Diez-Medrano J, et al. World Values Survey: Round Six - Country-Pooled Datafile [Internet]. Madris, Spain & Vienna, Austria: JD Systems Institute & WVSA Secretariat; 2018. Available from: doi.org/10.14281/18241.8

[82]. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Lang AG, Buchner A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods 2007;39(2):175–91.

[83]. Pew Research Centre. Pew Global Attitudes Project: Spring 2007 Survey. 2007;

[84]. Parida R, Katiyar R, Rajhans K. Identification and analysis of critical barriers for achieving sustainable development in India. JM2 [Internet] 2023 [cited 2024 Feb 26]; 18(3):727–55. Available from: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/JM2-11-2020-0288/full/html

[85]. Rosentiel T. Fewer Americans See Solid Evidence of Global Warming [Internet]. Pew Research Center2009 [cited 2023 Jan 8]; Available from: https://www.pewresearch.org/2009/10/22/fewer-americans-see-solid-evidence-of-global-warming/

[86]. Bergquist P, Warshaw C. Does Global Warming Increase Public Concern about Climate Change? The Journal of Politics [Internet] 2019 [cited 2024 Jan 13]; 81(2):686–91. Available from: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/701766

[87]. Sloggy MR, Suter JF, Rad MR, Manning DT, Goemans C. Changing opinions on a changing climate: the effects of natural disasters on public perceptions of climate change. Climatic Change [Internet] 2021 [cited 2024 Jan 4]; 168(3):25. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-021-03242-6

[88]. Brooks J, Oxley D, Vedlitz A, Zahran S, Lindsey C. Abnormal Daily Temperature and Concern about Climate Change Across the United States. Review of Policy Research [Internet] 2014 [cited 2024 Jul 19];31(3):199–217. Available from: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ropr.12067

[89]. Konisky DM, Hughes L, Kaylor CH. Extreme weather events and climate change concern. Climatic Change [Internet] 2016 [cited 2024 Jul 19]; 134(4):533–47. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-015-1555-3

[90]. Ballew MT, Goldberg MH, Rosenthal SA, Cutler MJ, Leiserowitz A. Climate Change Activism Among Latino and White Americans. Frontiers in Communication [Internet] 2019 [cited 2023 Mar 28]; 3. Available from: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcomm.2018.00058

[91]. Marlon JR, Wang X, Bergquist P, Howe PD, Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, et al. Change in US state-level public opinion about climate change: 2008–2020. Environ Res Lett [Internet] 2022 [cited 2024 Jan 4]; 17(12):124046. Available from: https://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aca702

[92]. Jose K A, Srinivas T V. Populist Leadership and Climate Crisis [Internet]. In: Chacko Chennattuserry J, Deshpande M, Hong P, editors. Encyclopedia of New Populism and Responses in the 21st Century. Singapore: Springer Nature; 2023 [cited 2024 Jul 22]. page 1–4.Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-9859-0_37-1

[93]. Feldman L, Hart PS, Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C. Do Hostile Media Perceptions Lead to Action? The Role of Hostile Media Perceptions, Political Efficacy, and Ideology in Predicting Climate Change Activism. Communication Research [Internet] 2017 [cited 2023 Mar 28]; 44(8):1099–124. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650214565914

[94]. Trivedi B. Green Issues in Electoral Politics in India: An Analysis. Contemporary Social Sciences 2020; 29(4).

[95]. Yu TK, Lavallee JP, Di Giusto B, Chang IC, Yu TY. Risk perception and response toward climate change for higher education students in Taiwan. Environmental Science and Pollution Research [Internet] 2020 [cited 2024 Jul 19]; 27(20):24749–59. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-019-07450-7

[96]. Bohensky EL, Smajgl A, Brewer T. Patterns in household-level engagement with climate change in Indonesia. Nature Clim Change [Internet] 2013 [cited 2024 Jan 4]; 3(4):348–51. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/nclimate1762

[97]. Akerlof KL, Delamater PL, Boules CR, Upperman CR, Mitchell CS. Vulnerable Populations Perceive Their Health as at Risk from Climate Change. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health [Internet] 2015 [cited 2023 May 24]; 12(12):15419–33. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/12/12/14994



21 Woodlands Close #02-10 Primz Bizhub Singapore 737854

Email:editorial_office@as-pub.com