In a groundbreaking new study published in the renowned journal Nature Climate Change, an international team of researchers has shed light on a crucial and underexplored facet of the climate crisis: how public perception of extreme weather events influences support for climate policies worldwide. The researchers, including social psychologist Dr. Olga Białobrzeska and psychologist Professor Michał Parzuchowski from SWPS University in Poland, conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning 68 countries, investigating the intricate relationship between the personal experience of extreme weather and the attribution of these events to climate change. Their findings challenge prevalent assumptions and emphasize the significance of belief systems in shaping climate action.
Extreme weather events—such as devastating floods, pervasive wildfires, and record-breaking heatwaves—have escalated dramatically in frequency and severity due to anthropogenic climate change. These events inflict staggering economic damages globally, with annual costs attributed to climate-driven extreme weather estimated at approximately 143 billion US dollars. The toll is unevenly distributed, disproportionately impacting countries within the Global South, which encompass much of Africa, Asia, Latin America, and the Middle East. Despite bearing the brunt of these impacts, populations and governments in these regions are frequently marginalized in climate attribution studies and socio-psychological research, which tend to focus predominantly on the Global North.
Amid growing scientific evidence of climate-driven extreme weather, public and political pressure to implement stringent climate regulations remains lackluster. Understanding the drivers of public support for such policies is pivotal, as it can influence government action and policy-making agendas. Previous empirical studies examining whether experiencing extreme weather events translates into increased concern for climate change or support for mitigation policies have yielded contradictory results. While some research demonstrates a linkage between direct experience and belief or action, other studies find minimal or no correlation, reflecting a complex and heterogeneous landscape of public perception.
A critical dimension emerging from recent social climate research is the role of attribution—whether individuals perceive extreme weather events as direct consequences of human-induced climate change. Those who explicitly link these occurrences to global warming tend to display heightened risk perception and greater engagement in climate mitigation efforts. The latest multinational study harnesses this insight by merging large-scale climate risk modeling data from the CLIMADA platform with extensive global survey data collected through the “Trust in Science and Science-related Populism (TISP)” initiative, thereby enabling a nuanced assessment of the interplay between exposure, attribution, and policy support.
Analysis revealed a striking and somewhat counterintuitive pattern. While raw exposure to extreme weather events did not show a consistent relationship with increased backing for climate policies, individuals’ beliefs about the causation of these events held significant predictive power. People who recognized climate change as the driving force behind severe weather were markedly more disposed to endorse a spectrum of ambitious public policies aimed at curbing emissions and enhancing sustainability. This confirms that cognitive interpretation rather than experiential reality shapes public environmental engagement.
Specifically, the researchers examined support for five prominent policies: imposing higher taxes on carbon-intensive foods such as beef and dairy; increasing taxes on fossil fuels including oil and coal; expanding public transportation infrastructure; promoting sustainable energy usage; and protecting forests and land areas. Public endorsement varied, with policies focused on environmental conservation garnering broader acceptance, notably forest and land protection, which received support from 82% of respondents. Conversely, taxation-based measures—particularly carbon taxes on foods—elicited comparatively modest support, illustrating the political sensitivity and perceived personal cost associated with such interventions.
Differences in support levels between countries were pronounced and fascinating. Higher support levels were observed in many African and Asian countries, whereas nations like Poland, the Czech Republic, and Russia registered lower-than-average endorsement rates. Middle-ground support was found in countries including Australia, Costa Rica, and the United Kingdom. Demographically, support for climate policies was more prevalent among younger individuals, those with higher education, urban residents, affluent men, and people with stronger religious affiliation, underscoring the role of socio-economic and cultural factors in shaping climate-related attitudes.
As Professor Michał Parzuchowski notes, the findings illuminate a critical distinction: it is not merely the experience of extreme weather that motivates public demand for climate action, but rather the interpretation of these events through a climate change lens. However, the causal direction remains nuanced; individuals who already favor climate policies may be more inclined to attribute extreme weather phenomena to anthropogenic causes. The study calls for longitudinal research to disentangle these bidirectional influences and further unravel the psychological mechanisms underpinning climate engagement.
This pioneering research provides an essential foundation for policymakers and advocates aiming to galvanize public support for climate initiatives. By understanding that cognitive frameworks and belief systems critically mediate responses to extreme weather, communicators can tailor messaging and educational efforts to enhance climate change attribution and thereby cultivate greater policy backing. The globally diverse dataset also highlights the need for contextually adaptive approaches sensitive to cultural and geopolitical specificities in climate advocacy.
In sum, the study published on July 1, 2025, redefines our understanding of how climate change awareness relates to policy support. It moves the conversation beyond simple exposure to disasters and places emphasis on human perception and cognition. These insights carry far-reaching implications for future climate science communication strategies, social mobilization, and ultimately the political will necessary to confront the intensifying climate emergency on an international scale.
The full article entitled “Extreme weather event attribution predicts climate policy support across the world” is accessible via its DOI link in Nature Climate Change. It marks a pivotal contribution to environmental psychology and climate policy research, opening pathways for more effective climate action rooted in social understanding.
Subject of Research: People
Article Title: Extreme weather event attribution predicts climate policy support across the world
News Publication Date: 1-Jul-2025
Web References: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-025-02372-4, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02372-4
References: Białobrzeska, O., Parzuchowski, M., et al. (2025). Extreme weather event attribution predicts climate policy support across the world. Nature Climate Change. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02372-4
COI Statement: The authors declare no competing interests.
Keywords: climate change, extreme weather events, climate policy support, climate attribution, public perception, climate communication, carbon tax, sustainable energy, environmental psychology, global south, CLIMADA, climate regulations
