Fear of COVID-19 reinforces climate change beliefs. Evidence from 28 European countries.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Stefkovics A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9329362 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Fear of COVID-19 reinforces climate change beliefs. Evidence from 28 European countries.
Stefkovics Ádám Á Hortay Olivér O
Environmental science & policy 20220728
The long-term nature of climate policy measures requires stable social legitimacy, which other types of crises may jeopardize. This article examines the impact of the COVID-19 fear on climate change beliefs based on an autumn 2020 population survey in the Member States of the European Union and the United Kingdom. The results show that deep COVID-19 concerns increase climate change concerns, awareness, and perceived negative impacts of climate change. These effects are more robust among the lowe ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study assesses how the implementation and lifting of non-pharmaceutical policy interventions (NPIs), deployed by most governments, to curb the COVID-19 pandemic, were associated with individuals' mental well-being (MWB) across 28 European countries. This is done both for the general population and across key-groups. We analyze longitudinal data for 15,147 respondents from three waves of the Eurofound-"Living, Working and COVID-19" survey, covering the period April 2020-March 2021. MWB is measured by the WHO-5 index. Our evidence suggests that restriction on international travel, private gatherings, and contact tracing (workplace closures) were negatively (positively) associated with MWB by about, respectively, -0.63 [95% CI: -0.79 to -0.47], -0.24 [95% CI: -0.38 to -0.10], and -0.22 [95% CI: -0.36 to -0.08] (0.29 [95% CI: 0.11 to 0.48]) points. These results correspond to -3.9%, -1.5%, and -1.4% (+1.8%) changes compared to pre-pandemic levels. However, these findings mask important group-differences. Women compared to men fared worse under stay-at-home requirements, internal movement restrictions, private gatherings restrictions, public events cancellation, school closures, and workplace closures. Those residing with children below 12, compared to those who do not, fared worse under public events cancellation, school closures and workplace closures. Conversely, those living with children 12-17, compared to those who do not, fared better under internal movement restrictions and public events cancelling. Western-Europeans vis-à-vis Eastern-Europeans fared better under NPIs limiting their mobility and easing their debts, whereas they fared worse under health-related NPIs. This study provides timely evidence of the rise in inequalities during the COVID-19 pandemic and offers strategies for mitigating them.
| S-EPMC8920116 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The resource-saving behavior in the recent period is escalating particularly due to the energy and prices crises in all of the European Union (EU). The COVID-19 pandemic not only caused changes in health concerns but also in environmental awareness and behavior. Thus, this paper aims to reveal whether the COVID-19 pandemic contributed to the resource-saving behavior, and how this pandemic changed the climate change perception and personal responsibility in the EU countries. Referring to two surveys conducted in all EU countries in 2019 and 2021, the results revealed that the level of climate change perception during this period significantly decreased in all EU. Meanwhile, the level of responsibility placed on the government to solve the climate change problem increased the most. A level of the personal responsibility increased negligibly. Considering resource-saving behaviors, only the lesser usage of disposable items from 2019 to 2021 increased statistically significantly. The results of an analysis of the main determinants of resource-saving behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic period revealed that personal responsibility and the climate change solution's benefit for health positively and significantly determined all the analyzed actions. The climate change perception and climate change solution's benefit for the economy statistically significantly influenced waste reduction, the purchase of efficient appliances, and the usage of pro-environmental transportation mode instead of personal cars. Health benefits instead of the economic benefits statistically significantly contributed to the resource-saving behaviors, except for actions that require more monetary investments. The satisfaction with the COVID-19 pandemic management had an insignificant negative impact on all resource-saving actions. Thus, the tools assigned to manage this pandemic did not motivate people to save natural resources.
| S-EPMC9925455 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Visual inspection of world maps shows that coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is less prevalent in countries closer to the equator, where heat and humidity tend to be higher. Scientists disagree how to interpret this observation because the relationship between COVID-19 and climatic conditions may be confounded by many factors. We regress confirmed COVID-19 cases per million inhabitants in a country against the country's distance from the equator, controlling key confounding factors: air travel, distance to Wuhan, testing intensity, cell phone usage, vehicle concentration, urbanization, and income. A one-degree increase in absolute latitude is associated with a 2.6% increase in cases per million inhabitants (p value <0.001). The Northern hemisphere may see a decline in new COVID-19 cases during summer and a resurgence during winter.
| S-EPMC7302306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:A simple question about climate change, with one choice designed to match consensus statements by scientists, was asked on 35 US nationwide, single-state or regional surveys from 2010 to 2015. Analysis of these data (over 28,000 interviews) yields robust and exceptionally well replicated findings on public beliefs about anthropogenic climate change, including regional variations, change over time, demographic bases, and the interacting effects of respondent education and political views. We find that more than half of the US public accepts the scientific consensus that climate change is happening now, caused mainly by human activities. A sizable, politically opposite minority (about 30 to 40%) concede the fact of climate change, but believe it has mainly natural causes. Few (about 10 to 15%) say they believe climate is not changing, or express no opinion. The overall proportions appear relatively stable nationwide, but exhibit place-to-place variations. Detailed analysis of 21 consecutive surveys within one fairly representative state (New Hampshire) finds a mild but statistically significant rise in agreement with the scientific consensus over 2010-2015. Effects from daily temperature are detectable but minor. Hurricane Sandy, which brushed New Hampshire but caused no disaster there, shows no lasting impact on that state's time series-suggesting that non-immediate weather disasters have limited effects. In all datasets political orientation dominates among individual-level predictors of climate beliefs, moderating the otherwise positive effects from education. Acceptance of anthropogenic climate change rises with education among Democrats and Independents, but not so among Republicans. The continuing series of surveys provides a baseline for tracking how future scientific, political, socioeconomic or climate developments impact public acceptance of the scientific consensus.
| S-EPMC4589389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPandemics such as the COVID-19 pandemic and other severe health care disruptions endanger individuals to miss essential care. Machine learning models that predict which patients are at greatest risk of missing care visits can help health administrators prioritize retentions efforts towards patients with the most need. Such approaches may be especially useful for efficiently targeting interventions for health systems overburdened during states of emergency.MethodsWe use data on missed health care visits from over 55,500 respondents of the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) COVID-19 surveys (June - August 2020 and June - August 2021) with longitudinal data from waves 1-8 (April 2004 - March 2020). We compare the performance of four machine learning algorithms (stepwise selection, lasso, random forest, and neural networks) to predict missed health care visits during the first COVID-19 survey based on common patient characteristics available to most health care providers. We test the prediction accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the selected models for the first COVID-19 survey by employing 5-fold cross-validation, and test the out-of-sample performance of the models by applying them to the data from the second COVID-19 survey.ResultsWithin our sample, 15.5% of the respondents reported any missed essential health care visit due to the COVID-19 pandemic. All four machine learning methods perform similarly in their predictive power. All models have an area under the curve (AUC) of around 0.61, outperforming random prediction. This performance is sustained for data from the second COVID-19 wave one year later, with an AUC of 0.59 for men and 0.61 for women. When classifying all men (women) with a predicted risk of 0.135 (0.170) or higher as being at risk of missing care, the neural network model correctly identifies 59% (58%) of the individuals with missed care visits, and 57% (58%) of the individuals without missed care visits. As the sensitivity and specificity of the models are strongly related to the risk threshold used to classify individuals, the models can be calibrated depending on users' resource constraints and targeting approach.ConclusionsPandemics such as COVID-19 require rapid and efficient responses to reduce disruptions in health care. Based on characteristics available to health administrators or insurance providers, simple machine learning algorithms can be used to efficiently target efforts to reduce missed essential care.
| S-EPMC10209940 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Public perceptions are well established as a key factor in support for climate change mitigation policies, and they tend to vary both within and between countries. Based on data from the European Social Survey Round 8 (N = 44,387), we examined the role of climate change beliefs and political orientation in explaining worry about climate change across 23 countries. We show that belief in anthropogenic climate change, followed by expectations of negative impacts from climate change, are the strongest predictors of worry about climate change. While the strength of the association between political orientation and worry about climate change varies across countries, self-positioning further to the right of the political spectrum is associated with lower levels of worry in most of the countries included in the analysis. We further show that political orientation moderates the relationship between climate change beliefs and worry. While increased confidence in the anthropogenic nature of climate change and expectations of negative impacts are both associated with increased worry across the political spectrum, the relationship is weaker among right-leaning as compared to left-leaning individuals. Notably, the main effect of political orientation on worry about climate change is no longer statistically significant when the interaction terms are present. Finally, a relatively small amount of the explained variance in worry is attributable to differences between countries. The findings might inform strategies for climate change communication in a European context.
| S-EPMC7378799 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Although Africa is the most vulnerable region to climate change, little research has focused on how climate change is perceived by Africans. Using random forest methodology, we analyze survey and climate data from second-order political boundaries to explore what predicts climate change beliefs in Africa. We include five different dimensions of climate change beliefs: climate change awareness, belief in anthropogenic climate change, risk perception, the need to stop climate change, and self-efficacy. Based on these criteria we identify five key results: (1) climate change in Africa is largely perceived through its negative impacts on agriculture; (2) actual changes in local climate conditions are related to climate change beliefs; (3) authoritarian and intolerant ideologies are associated to less climate change awareness, and a diminished risk perception and belief that it must be stopped; (4) women are less likely to be aware of climate change, and (5) not speaking French, English or Portuguese is linked to a hindered understanding of climate beliefs. Our combined results can help policy makers better understand the need to jointly consider the multilevel complexities of individual beliefs and hydroclimatic data for the development of more accurate adaptation and mitigation strategies to combat the impacts of climate change in Africa.
| S-EPMC8982886 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Europe has the world's most extensive network of conservation areas. Conservation areas are selected without taking into account the effects of climate change. How effectively would such areas conserve biodiversity under climate change? We assess the effectiveness of protected areas and the Natura 2000 network in conserving a large proportion of European plant and terrestrial vertebrate species under climate change. We found that by 2080, 58?±?2.6% of the species would lose suitable climate in protected areas, whereas losses affected 63?±?2.1% of the species of European concern occurring in Natura 2000 areas. Protected areas are expected to retain climatic suitability for species better than unprotected areas (P?<?0.001), but Natura 2000 areas retain climate suitability for species no better and sometimes less effectively than unprotected areas. The risk is high that ongoing efforts to conserve Europe's biodiversity are jeopardized by climate change. New policies are required to avert this risk.
| S-EPMC3116148 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The success of mass vaccination programs against SARS-CoV-2 hinges on the public's acceptance of the vaccines. During a vaccine roll-out, individuals have limited information about the potential side-effects and benefits. Given the public health concern of the COVID pandemic, providing appropriate information fast matters for the success of the campaign. In this paper, time-trends in vaccine hesitancy were examined using a sample of 35,390 respondents from the Eurofound's Living, Working and COVID-19 (LWC) data collected between 12 February and 28 March 2021 across 28 European countries. The data cover the initial stage of the vaccine roll-out. We exploit the fact that during this period, news about rare cases of blood clots with low blood platelets were potentially linked to the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine (or Vaxzeveria). Multivariate regression models were used to analyze i) vaccine hesitancy trends, and whether any trend-change was associated with the link between the AstraZeneca vaccine ii) and blood clots (AstraZeneca controversy), and iii) the suspension among several European countries. Our estimates show that vaccine hesitancy increased over the early stage of the vaccine roll-out (0·002, 95% CI: [0·002 to 0·003]), a positive shift took place in the likelihood of hesitancy following the controversy (0·230, 95% CI: [0·157 to 0·302]), with the trend subsequently turning negative (-0·007, 95% CI: [-0·010 to -0·005]). Countries deciding to suspend the AstraZeneca vaccine experienced an increase in vaccine hesitancy after the suspensions (0·068, 95% CI: [0·04 to 0·095]). Trust in institutions is negatively associated with vaccine hesitancy. The results suggest that SARS-CoV-2 vaccine hesitancy increased steadily since the beginning of the vaccine roll-out and the AstraZeneca controversy and its suspension, made modest (though significant) contributions to increased hesitancy.
| S-EPMC9491558 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ability of climate skeptics to block climate action depends on prevailing beliefs among the public. Research in advanced democracies has shown skepticism about the existence, the causes, and the consequences of climate change to be associated with socio-demographic features and political ideology. Yet, little is known about climate-related beliefs elsewhere. We address this gap by mapping beliefs in climate change and their correlates in Latin America. We show skepticism over the existence and anthropogenic origins of climate change to be limited, but identify a high number of skeptics around the severity of its consequences. Furthermore, we show skepticism to be correlated with psychological rather than socio-political factors: individualistic worldviews in particular drive disbelief in the severe consequences of climate change, a worrying finding in contexts where social trust is low. These findings offer a starting point for better addressing the constraining effects of climate skepticism in the Global South.
| S-EPMC10636181 | biostudies-literature