In a landmark study published in Nature Climate Change, researchers have unveiled compelling insights into public perceptions of climate policies across seven major countries in the global south. This research offers a nuanced understanding of how climate knowledge, trust, and policy preferences intersect among internet-enabled populations in diverse socio-political contexts. By delving beyond simplistic survey questions, this study challenges prevailing assumptions about climate awareness and priorities in regions disproportionately vulnerable to climate change impacts.
The research team embarked on an ambitious project to assess climate knowledge among respondents in countries from Africa, Asia, and Latin America, focusing on those with internet access to tap into a significant, though not fully representative, population segment. Their findings reveal that climate knowledge in the global south exhibits remarkable similarities across these varied countries, showing, on average, a 20% reduction in correct responses compared to previous studies focused on developed nations in the global north. This disparity predominantly emerges in understanding the core physical science behind climate change and its long-term consequences, while recognizing the anthropogenic causes remains relatively consistent.
Delving deeper into the factors influencing climate knowledge, the study highlights education and sources of climate information as crucial drivers. Notably, the most pronounced association is found in participants’ attention to and trust in scientists. This phenomenon manifests as a significant multiplier effect: trust in scientific sources correlates with a doubling of climate knowledge comparable to the impact of obtaining a college degree. This finding underscores the public’s receptivity to scientific communication and the critical importance of bridging the divide between climate research and public understanding.
An intriguing aspect of the survey involved gauging the perceived importance of climate change. When respondents answered a straightforward Likert-scale question, the consensus was strong, averaging 4.6 on a 5-point scale for the importance of addressing climate change—a near-universal acknowledgment of its urgency. However, this initial expression of concern conceals a more intricate reality uncovered through subsequent trade-off questions. When forced to prioritize between different policy areas, climate change often recedes in importance relative to other immediate national challenges. Among the seven countries surveyed, only Vietnam positioned climate change among its top three policy priorities, while Nigeria and South Africa ranked it in the lower third of concerns.
These findings illuminate a crucial strength and vulnerability in climate policy advocacy: simplistic polling questions may inflate perceived public support for aggressive climate action, whereas more nuanced inquiries expose competing priorities that can thwart policy momentum. This gap between abstract concern and policy prioritization raises pressing questions about how policymakers interpret public opinion and the potential for misalignment between expressed values and concrete political will.
A striking insight emerging from the study centers on public health concerns, particularly respiratory diseases linked to air pollution. Across all surveyed nations, reducing respiratory illnesses tops the list of public health priorities. Given that fossil fuel combustion is a major contributor to both climate change and air pollution, this co-benefit of emission reductions offers a potent avenue to align health and climate policy objectives. Understanding how populations integrate these overlapping issues—environmental hazards and immediate health impacts—may prove essential in designing effective policies that resonate broadly.
The researchers further employed best–worst scaling exercises to explore public agreement with various climate policy statements. One statement stood out consistently: the assertion that climate change represents the most critical long-term problem facing the world enjoyed the strongest support across all countries. Conversely, policy positions advocating for minimal immediate action to address climate change were widely unpopular. This suggests a general consensus recognizing the urgency of the problem but reveals tensions when it comes to balancing long- and short-term priorities.
Intriguingly, the study also investigated preferences for the allocation of carbon tax revenues, a policy tool often debated among economists and policymakers. Across the global south countries surveyed, despite some differences, three uses of carbon tax revenue emerged as clear favorites: directing funds toward health and education services, subsidizing solar energy infrastructure, and financing research and development aimed at reducing future clean energy costs. These preferences indicate that populations value investments that promise both current social benefits and long-term technological solutions.
Conversely, mechanisms favored by some economic theorists—such as rebating carbon tax revenues equally to citizens or using these funds to alleviate government budget deficits—were consistently rated as the least popular options. This divergence between economic orthodoxy and public preferences underscores the importance of incorporating citizen values into policy design to ensure legitimacy, acceptance, and effectiveness.
Methodologically, the researchers combined rich sociodemographic data with detailed attitudinal surveys and choice experiments, enabling more precise modeling of how individual beliefs and knowledge shape climate policy preferences. This approach allows for segmentation of respondents into clusters based on shared worldview and priorities, offering policymakers and researchers a valuable framework for targeted communication and intervention.
The study points toward promising avenues for complementary qualitative research. In-depth interviews and ethnographic methods could deepen understanding of how climate knowledge coheres with lived experiences and policy attitudes, especially in the underexamined contexts of the global south. By bolstering quantitative findings with narrative insights, future research can offer richer, context-sensitive explanations that may enhance climate engagement and action.
The innovative rank-ordering exercises designed to elicit trade-offs mark a methodological advance, inviting respondents to make concrete choices between plausible policy options. This granular approach transcends traditional surveys’ limitations in capturing the complexity of public opinion, especially in contexts where climate competition with other developmental priorities is intense. The authors anticipate that these tools will see widespread application in global south settings, where nuanced measurement is vital for understanding public climate engagement.
Importantly, this research uncovers a dual narrative. On the one hand, climate change is widely recognized as a serious, long-term challenge. On the other, when juxtaposed against immediate local concerns—health, education, economic development—climate issues often slip in public prioritization. This duality poses a critical challenge for governments seeking to galvanize broad support for emissions reductions policies while simultaneously addressing pressing societal needs.
Ultimately, this work underscores the pivotal role of trust in scientists and the effective communication of climate science in fostering public knowledge. It emphasizes the necessity of integrating climate initiatives with tangible benefits, such as improved health outcomes and education, to build resilient policy coalitions. As the global south faces increasingly severe climate impacts, these findings provide a roadmap for aligning scientific understanding with public values, encouraging policies grounded in both evidence and equity.
As climate change moves from a distant threat to an immediate crisis in many parts of the developing world, this study offers timely insights into public perceptions that could shape the trajectory of environmental policymaking. The synthesis of scientific literacy, trust, and nuanced public priorities charted here paves the way for climate strategies that are not only scientifically sound but socially resonant and politically feasible.
Subject of Research: Public perceptions and climate policy preferences in seven large global south countries.
Article Title: The public’s views on climate policies in seven large global south countries.
Article References:
Carson, R.T., Lu, J., Khossravi, E.A. et al. The public’s views on climate policies in seven large global south countries. Nat. Clim. Chang. (2025). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02389-9
Image Credits: AI Generated
