The IANUS partner, Radboud University, conducted a historical case study of trust in climate science and climate change. They reviewed and commented on various survey results on public perceptions of climate change across different regions and times. The following list presents the main surveys analyzed, accompanied by their corresponding results:
- Eurobarometer 2021 and 2023
In the EU, a high majority (78% in 2021, 77% in 2023) sees climate change as a serious issue, with the highest concern in Portugal, Cyprus, and Malta and the least in Latvia, Estonia, and Czechia. A significant proportion of EU citizens believe that national governments and the EU should act more intensively against climate change. - European Social Survey 2016-2017
Over 90% of surveyed countries believe in climate change, and a majority acknowledge human contributions to it. However, only 28% express significant worry, with the highest concern in Portugal, Spain, and Germany and the lowest in Ireland, Israel, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, and Russia. - PEW Research 2022-2023
In the U.S., the issue is more divisive. Only 57% consider climate change a serious problem, with 46% attributing it largely to human activity. Political affiliation and age significantly influence perceptions, with Democrats and younger people showing more concern than Republicans and older individuals. - Climate Change in the American Mind Survey 2021
In the U.S., 72% acknowledge global warming, with 57% attributing it to human activities. 65% express worry, a higher rate than in Europe. - UNDP Peoples’ Climate Vote (2020)
Globally, 64% view climate change as an emergency, with little regional variation. Recognition of the climate emergency correlates with higher education and younger age.
Overall, the surveys indicate a widespread acknowledgment of climate change, with variations in the degree of concern and acknowledgment of human impact, influenced by geography, political affiliation, education, and age. The above findings additionally with complementary literature, highlighted the following key takeaway messages:
- The USA (and specific parts of the Western world) seem to be exceptional in their skepticism and distrust.
- The effect of Climategate on distrust in climate science may have been affirmative (as in affirming prior beliefs), not causal (as in encouraging new beliefs). This introduces the possibility that trustworthy scientific conduct may be extraneous to distrust in climate science.
- During Climategate, opponents clearly define themselves as pro-science and as guardians of proper science. However, the standards they employ are often unrealistic or circular. In this case, mutually agreeing on conditions for trustworthy science will be highly problematic.