Submitted:
19 August 2024
Posted:
21 August 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Questionnaire
2.2. Measures
Climate Literacy
'Greening' Behaviours
Attitudes
Adverse Experience
Socio-Demographics
2.3. Statistical Methods
3. Results
3.1. Evaluation of Response Accuracy
3.2. 'Greening' Behaviours vs Climate Literacy and Attitudes
3.3. Socio-Demographic Issues
3.4. Featuring Adverse Experience
3.5. Regression Analyses
4. Discussion
4.1. Methodological Implications for Literacy-Related Survey
4.2. The Literacy - Behaviour Gap
4.3. The Climate Literacy Significance
4.4. Other Than Climate Literacy Variables Affecting (or not) 'Greening' Behaviours
4.5. Socio-Demographic Issues to Address
4.6. Issues Regarding the Adverse Experience and Damage Extent
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
Appendix A
| Demographic variables and coding | Percentage (rounded-off values) | Demographic variables and coding | Percentage (rounded-off values) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (dichotomous1 or categorical) | Urban (residence environment, dichotomous) | ||
| 1. Female | 24 | Non-urban | 22 |
| 2. Male | 74 | Urban | 78 |
| 3. Other | 1 | Occupational sector (categorical) | |
| 4. Unspecified (in the questionnaire: don't want to say) | 1 | Other | 46 |
| Generation (ordinal) | Education | 14 | |
| 1. Gen-Z (<25 yrs old) | 6 | Research / Technology / Innovation | 13 |
| 2. Millennials (25-40) | 24 | Energy / Construction | 9 |
| 3. Gen-X (41-60) | 55 | Agriculture/Livestock/Fishing/Forestry | 7 |
| 4. Boomers (61-75) | 15 | Health | 7 |
| 5. Oldest (>75) | 1 | Tourism | 4 |
| Education (ordinal) | Prefecture2 (categorical) | ||
| 1. Elementary | 1 | Attica | 46 |
| 2. Secondary | 11 | Thessaloniki | 11 |
| 3. Post-high school qualification | 12 | Rest 49 (out of 51 in total) (all Prefectures were represented) | 43 |
| 4. University degree | 40 | ||
| 5. Postgraduate | 36 |
| 1. role of greenhouse effect on CC | 2. role of fossil fuel combustion on CC | 3. role of CO2 concentration on CC | 4. CC impact on extreme weather events | 5. CC role in temperature rise | 6. rate at which Europe is heating up | 7. heatwave duration | 8. drought duration | 9. extreme rainfall occurrence | 10. forest fire severity | 11. sea level | 12. sea surface temperature | |
| 1. role of greenhouse effect on CC | 1.00 | |||||||||||
| 2. role of fossil fuel combustion on CC | 0.77 | 1.00 | ||||||||||
| 3. role of CO2 concentration on CC | 0.77 | 0.84 | 1.00 | |||||||||
| 4. CC impact on extreme weather events | 0.63 | 0.66 | 0.66 | 1.00 | ||||||||
| 5. CC role in temperature rise | 0.65 | 0.69 | 0.70 | 0.79 | 1.00 | |||||||
| 6. rate at which Europe is heating up | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.15 | 0.20 | 0.17 | 1.00 | ||||||
| 7. heatwave duration | 0.64 | 0.65 | 0.64 | 0.70 | 0.73 | 0.12 | 1.00 | |||||
| 8. drought duration | -0.18 | -0.17 | -0.17 | -0.16 | -0.17 | 0.22 | -0.21 | 1.00 | ||||
| 9. extreme rainfall occurrence | 0.54 | 0.57 | 0.56 | 0.66 | 0.61 | 0.17 | 0.72 | -0.12 | 1.00 | |||
| 10. forest fire severity | 0.56 | 0.60 | 0.60 | 0.67 | 0.66 | 0.16 | 0.75 | -0.15 | 0.74 | 1.00 | ||
| 11. sea level | 0.50 | 0.57 | 0.55 | 0.61 | 0.60 | 0.19 | 0.62 | -0.07 | 0.62 | 0.65 | 1.00 | |
| 12. sea surface temperature | -0.10 | -0.10 | -0.08 | -0.05 | -0.09 | 0.23 | -0.12 | 0.45 | -0.06 | 0.06 | 1.00 |
| ‘greening’ level (GL) | willingness to pay (WP) | climate literacy (CL) | self-evaluation | policy literacy | disbelief | adaptation concern | personal impact concern | coping appraisal | trust in state | trust industry | trust in science | experience1 | gender2 | generation3 | education4 | urban5 | infos6 | extent7 | |
| ‘greening’ level (GL) | 1.00 | ||||||||||||||||||
| willingness to pay (WP) | 0.20 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||||||
| climate literacy (CL) | 0.24 | 0.40 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||||||
| self-evaluation | 0.16 | 0.11 | 0.28 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||||
| policy literacy | 0.10 | 0.05 | 0.28 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||||
| disbelief | -0.21 | -0.27 | -0.70 | -0.06 | 0.07 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||
| adaptation concern | -0.09 | -0.12 | -0.21 | 0.06 | 0.08 | 0.31 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||
| personal impact concern | 0.22 | 0.30 | 0.53 | 0.13 | -0.42 | 1.00 | |||||||||||||
| coping appraisal | -0.09 | -0.25 | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.33 | -0.43 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||
| trust in state | 0.11 | -0.05 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.17 | 0.11 | -0.10 | 0.17 | 1.00 | ||||||||||
| trust industry | -0.05 | 0.08 | -0.10 | 0.06 | 0.16 | 0.06 | -0.10 | 0.15 | 0.49 | 1.00 | |||||||||
| trust in science | 0.22 | 0.37 | 0.71 | 0.16 | -0.60 | -0.28 | 0.40 | -0.19 | 1.00 | ||||||||||
| experience1 | 0.11 | 0.09 | -0.07 | 0.19 | -0.13 | -0.08 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||
| gender2 | -0.15 | -0.17 | 0.08 | 0.11 | 0.21 | 0.16 | -0.15 | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.13 | -0.14 | 1.00 | |||||||
| generation3 | 0.16 | -0.06 | -0.05 | 0.05 | 0.07 | -0.09 | 0.06 | -0.10 | 1.00 | ||||||||||
| education4 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.10 | 0.12 | 0.10 | -0.10 | -0.08 | 0.09 | 0.13 | -0.07 | 1.00 | ||||||||
| urban5 | 0.08 | -0.06 | 0.05 | 0.08 | -0.07 | 0.09 | 1.00 | ||||||||||||
| infos6 | 0.27 | 0.13 | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.14 | -0.12 | 0.15 | -0.06 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.08 | 1.00 | ||||||
| extent7 | 0.17 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.10 | -0.17 | 0.49 | -0.28 | -0.10 | -0.10 | 0.15 | -0.10 | 1.00 |
References
- IPCC (2023) Climate Change 2023: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, H. Lee and J. Romero (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, pp. 35-115. [CrossRef]
- Wynes S, Motta M, Donner SD (2021) Understanding the climate responsibility associated with elections. One Earth 4(3):363-371. [CrossRef]
- Johnston JD (2020) Climate Change Literacy to Combat Climate Change and Its Impacts. In: Leal Filho, W., Azul, A.M., Brandli, L., Özuyar, P.G., Wall, T. (eds) Climate Action. Encyclopedia of the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Springer, Cham. [CrossRef]
- NOAA (2024) https://www.climate.gov/teaching/what-is-climate-science-literacy. Accesses 1 June 2024.
- Azevedo J, Marques M (2017) Climate literacy: a systematic review and model integration. International Journal of Global Warming 12:414 – 430. [CrossRef]
- Leve AK, Michel H, Harms U. (2023) Implementing climate literacy in schools — what to teach our teachers?. Climatic Change 176,134. [CrossRef]
- Powdthavee N (2020) The Causal Effect of Education on Climate Literacy and Pro-Environmental Behaviours: Evidence from a Nationwide Natural Experiment. IZA Discussion Paper No. 13210, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3596676. [CrossRef]
- Cooper O, Keeley A, Merenlender A (2019) Curriculum gaps for adult climate literacy. Conservation Science and Practice 1:e102. [CrossRef]
- De Silva DG, Pownall RAJ (2013) Going green: does it depend on education, gender or income?. Applied Economics 46(5):573–586. [CrossRef]
- Sheasby J, Smith A (2023) Examining the Factors That Contribute to Pro-Environmental Behaviour between Rural and Urban Populations. Sustainability 15(7):6179. [CrossRef]
- Díaz MF, Charry A, Sellitti S, Ruzzante M, Enciso K, Burkart S (2020) Psychological Factors Influencing Pro-environmental Behavior in Developing Countries: Evidence From Colombian and Nicaraguan Students. Front Psychol 11:580730. [CrossRef]
- Unesco (2019) Country progress on Climate Change Education, Training and Public Awareness. Online open access at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000372164?posInSet=1&queryId=efe0bfe8-3d41-4b29-816b-fbf18a14f86d. Accessed 1 June 2024.
- Allen M (2016) Understanding Pro-Environmental Behavior: Models and Messages. In: Strategic Communication for Sustainable Organizations. CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. Springer, Cham. [CrossRef]
- Zafar S, Ammara S (2024) Variations in climate change views across Europe: An empirical analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production. 42. [CrossRef]
- Pan WL, Fan R, Pan W, Ma X, Hu C et al. (2023) The role of climate literacy in individual response to climate change: evidence from China. J. Clean. Prod., 405. [CrossRef]
- Alenda-Demoutiez J (2022) Climate change literacy in Africa: the main role of experiences. International Journal of Environmental Studies,79:981-997. [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Hao, F.; Liu, Y. Pro-Environmental Behavior in an Aging World: Evidence from 31 Countries. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public, Health 2021, 18, 1748. [CrossRef]
- Allianz (2023) Allianz Climate Literacy Survey 2023. https://www.allianz.com/en/economic_research/insights/publications/specials_fmo/2023_11_29-Climate-Literacy.html Accessed 1 June 2024.
- Allianz (2021) Allianz Climate Literacy Survey 2021. https://www.allianz.com/content/dam/onemarketing/azcom/Allianz_com/economic-research/publications/specials/en/2021/october/2021_10_27_Climate-literacy.pdf Accessed 1 June 2024.
- EC (2023) Eurobarometer 2023. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_23_3934/IP_23_3934_EN.pdf Accessed 1 June 2024.
- Sarafidis Y, Demertzis N, Georgopoulou E, Avrami L, Mirasgedis S et al. (2024) Socioeconomic Impacts of Climate Mitigation Actions in Greece: Quantitative Assessment and Public Perception. Atmosphere 15(4):454. [CrossRef]
- Lagouvardos K, Kotroni V, Bezes A, Koletsis I, Kopania T et al. (2017) The automatic weather stations NOANN network of the National Observatory of Athens: Operation and database. Geosci. Data J. 4:4–16. [CrossRef]
- Lagouvardos K, Kotroni V, Koussis A, Feidas H, Buzzi A et al. (2003) The meteorological model BOLAM at the National Observatory of Athens: Assessment of two-year operational use. J. Appl. Meteorol. 42:1667–1678.
- Masud MM, Akhtar R, Afroz R, Al-Amin AQ, Kari FB (2015) Pro-environmental behavior and public understanding of climate change. Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change 20(4):591-600. [CrossRef]
- Hu S, Luo Y, Wang H, Cheng X, Liu Z et al. (2023) Won't Get Fooled Again: Answering Questions with False Premises. In Proceedings of the 61st Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Volume 1: Long Papers), pages 5626–5643, Toronto, Canada. Association for Computational Linguistics.
- Robinson MA (2018) Using multi-item psychometric scales for research and practice in human resource management. Hum. Resour. Manage. 57, 739–750.
- Nunnally JC (1994) Psychometric Theory. 3rd ed., TataMcGraw-Hill Education, The McGraw-Hill Companies: NY, USA.
- Miles J (2014) Tolerance and variance inflation factor. Encycl. Stat. Behav. Sci. [CrossRef]
- Holgersson S (2013) In the quest for economic significance: Assessing variable importance through mean value decomposition. Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 326, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies. Thomas & Norman, Therese & Tavassoli.
- Eurostat (2024) 'Population by educational attainment level, sex and age (%)'. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/edat_lfs_9903/default/table?lang=en. Accessed 1 June 2024.
- Eurostat (2021) 'Statistics explained - Urban-rural Europe. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Urban-rural_Europe_-_introduction. Accessed 1 June 2024.
- Ozili PK (2022) The Acceptable R-Square in Empirical Modelling for Social Science Research. Social Research Methodology and Publishing Results, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4128165. [CrossRef]
- Estoque RC, Ooba M, Togawa T. Yoshioka A, Gomi K et al. (2022) Climate impact chains for envisaging climate risks, vulnerabilities, and adaptation issues. Reg Environ Change 22, 133. [CrossRef]
- Hoydis J, Bartosch R, Gurr JM (2023). Climate Change Literacy. Cambridge University Press.
- Vieira J, Castro SL, Souza AS (2023) Psychological barriers moderate the attitude-behavior gap for climate change. PLoS ONE 18(7): e0287404. [CrossRef]
- Metzger MJ, Murray-Rust D, Houtkamp J, Jensen A, La Riviere I et al. (2018) How do Europeans want to live in 2040? Citizen visions and their consequences for European land use. Reg Environ Change 18, 789–802. [CrossRef]
- Makri A, Petraki V, Yannis G (2023) Critical travel time impact factors at the implementation of the Athens Great Walk, Transportation Research Procedia 72(2):3324-3331. [CrossRef]
- Zhou X, Tang X, Zhang R (2020) Impact of green finance on economic development and environmental quality: a study based on provincial panel data from China. Environ Sci Pollut Res 27, 19915–19932. [CrossRef]
- Xiao Z, Ge H, Lacasse MA, Wang L, Zmeureanu R (2023) Nature-Based Solutions for Carbon Neutral Climate Resilient Buildings and Communities: A Review of Technical Evidence, Design Guidelines, and Policies. Buildings , 13, 1389. [CrossRef]
- IEA (2022) Technology and Innovation Pathways for Zero-carbon-ready Buildings by 2030. IEA, Paris https://www.iea.org/reports/technology-and-innovation-pathways-for-zero-carbon-ready-buildings-by-2030. Accessed 1 June 2024.
- Lee TM, Markowitz EM, Howe PD, Ko C, Leiserowitz AA (2015) Predictors of public climate change awareness and risk perception around the world. Nature Clim Change 5:1014–1020. [CrossRef]
- Sill TE, Ayala JR, Rolf J, Smith S, Dye S (2023) How Climate Literacy and Public Opinion Are the Driving Forces Behind Climate-Based Policy: A Student Perspective on COP27. ACS Omega, 8, 4430-4435. [CrossRef]
- Ricart S, Gandolfi C, Castelletti A (2023) Climate change awareness, perceived impacts, and adaptation from farmers' experience and behavior: a triple-loop review. Reg Environ Change 23, 82. [CrossRef]
- Ma W, Rahut DB (2024) Climate-smart agriculture: adoption, impacts, and implications for sustainable development. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 29, 44. [CrossRef]
- Metcalfe SE, Schmook B, Boyd DS, De la Barreda-Bautista B, Endfield GE et al. (2020) Community perception, adaptation and resilience to extreme weather in the Yucatan Peninsula, Mexico. Reg Environ Change 20, 25. [CrossRef]
- Akter S, Krupnik TJ, Khanam F (2017) Climate change skepticism and index versus standard crop insurance demand in coastal Bangladesh. Reg Environ Change 17:2455–2466. [CrossRef]
- Hieronimi A, O'Reilly F, Schneider M, Wermuth I, Schulte-Körneet G et al. (2024) A Germany-wide survey of caregiving professionals on climate change and mental health of children and adolescents - factors influencing their relevance rating of extreme weather event associated mental health impairments. BMC Public Health 24, 120. [CrossRef]



| Variable (n) | Mean | SD | min | max | Cronbach's a 1/ Factor item loadings 2 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Literacy-related (1962) | |||||
| climate literacy3 (CL) | 3.75 | 0.77 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| self-evaluation | 3.40 | 0.97 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| policy literacy4 | 2.93 | 1.12 | 0 | 4 | N/A |
| Attitudes (1962) | |||||
| disbelief | 2.01 | 0.90 | 1 | 5 | 0.77/(4 items: 0.60-0.77) |
| adaptation concern | 2.89 | 1.22 | 1 | 5 | 0.85/(3 items: 0.74-0.85) |
| personal impact concern | 2.81 | 1.04 | 1 | 5 | 0.88/(3 items: 0.75-0.86) |
| coping appraisal | 2.44 | 0.82 | 1 | 5 | 0.68/(2 items) |
| trust in state | 1.82 | 0.78 | 1 | 5 | 0.82/(2 items) |
| trust industry | 1.69 | 0.68 | 1 | 5 | 0.86/(2 items) |
| trust in science | 3.35 | 1.20 | 1 | 5 | 0.93/(2 items) |
| Adverse Experience | |||||
| experience (1962) | 0.40 | 0.49 | 0 | 1 | N/A |
| extent (792)5(average of the four items:) | 2.18 | 0.81 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| financial | 2.25 | 1.08 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| health | 1.97 | 1.07 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| mental health | 2.81 | 1.25 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| radical changes | 1.71 | 1.06 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| ‘Greening’ behaviours (1962) | |||||
| 'greening' level (GL) | 3.96 | 1.52 | 1 | 7 | N/A |
| willingness to pay (WP) | 2.58 | 0.89 | 1 | 5 | N/A |
| Climate literacy items | Mean | SD | Min | Max | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| At the global level, about the: | |||||
| 1. role of greenhouse effect on CC | 3.65 | 1.16 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 2. role of fossil fuel combustion on CC | 3.71 | 1.2 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 3. role of CO2 concentration on CC | 3.76 | 1.21 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 4. CC impact on extreme weather events | 3.52 | 1.19 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 5. CC role in temperature rise | 3.71 | 1.26 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 6. rate at which Europe is heating up | 2.19 | 0.95 | 1 | 5 | FPQ |
| On the East Mediterranean and the observed changes in: | |||||
| 7. heatwave duration | 3.84 | 1.14 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 8. drought duration | 1.95 | 1 | 1 | 5 | FPQ |
| 9. extreme rainfall occurrence | 3.67 | 1.13 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 10. forest fire severity | 3.79 | 1.25 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 11. sea level | 3.08 | 1.23 | 1 | 5 | TRUE |
| 12. sea surface temperature | 1.71 | 0.93 | 1 | 5 | FPQ |
| Sample population (considering only females & males) | Affected population (i.e., ‘experience’ = 1) | |||
| ‘Greening’ level (GL) | Willingness to pay (WP) | ‘Greening’ level (GL) | Willingness to pay (WP) | |
| climate literacy (CL) | 0.16(0.08)* | 0.32(0.04)*** | 0.23(0.12) | 0.24(0.07)** |
| disbelief | -0.06(0.06) | -0.01(0.03) | 0.01(0.10) | 0.02(0.06) |
| adaptation concern | -0.03(0.03) | -0.03(0.02) | 0.02(0.04) | -0.02(0.03) |
| personal impact concern | 0.19(0.04)*** | 0.15(0.02)*** | 0.24(0.07)*** | 0.20(0.04)*** |
| coping appraisal | 0.08(0.04) | 0.16(0.03)*** | 0.03(0.07) | 0.13(0.04)** |
| trust in state | 0.01(0.05) | 0.11(0.03)*** | 0.02(0.08) | 0.10(0.04)* |
| trust industry | -0.03(0.05) | 0.05(0.03) | -0.08(0.09) | 0.05(0.05) |
| trust in science | 0.07(0.04) | 0.09(0.02)*** | 0.03(0.06) | 0.14(0.04)*** |
| experience | 0.05(0.07) | -0.02(0.04) | extent: 0.12(0.07) | extent: 0.04(0.04) |
| gender | -0.36(0.08)*** | 0.05(0.04) | -0.38(0.13)** | 0.08(0.07) |
| generation | 0.39(0.04)*** | -0.03(0.02) | 0.37(0.07)*** | -0.02(0.04) |
| education | -0.01(0.03) | 0.03(0.02) | 0.01(0.05) | 0.01(0.03) |
| infos | 0.37(0.04)*** | 0.04(0.02)* | 0.37(0.06)*** | -0.01(0.03) |
| urban | -0.07(0.08) | -0.07(0.04) | 0.03(0.12) | -0.07(0.07) |
| constant | 1.47(0.41)*** | -0.09(0.23) | 0.83(0.68) | -0.07(0.39) |
| R-squared | 0.18 | 0.25 | 0.19 | 0.22 |
| Adjusted R-squared | 0.18 | 0.24 | 0.17 | 0.21 |
| VIF | 1.58 | 1.58 | 1.53 | 1.53 |
| No. observations | 1919 | 1919 | 773 | 773 |
| Predictor variable | Economic significance for GL | Economic significance for WP |
|---|---|---|
| climate literacy (CL) | 3.2% | 9.3% |
| personal impact concern | 5.1% | 6.1% |
| coping appraisal | N/A | 5.1% |
| trust in state | N/A | 3.4% |
| trust in science | N/A | 4.3% |
| infos | 8.6% | 1.6% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).