Abstract
Despite the overwhelming scientific consensus, climate change is a divisive national and international policy issue. There is still much public debate and uncertainty regarding the reality of climate change and the degree to which human activities are responsible. In terms of climate change issues, the US and China are of particular interest because they are disproportionately responsible for the world's greenhouse gas emissions. Using the data from a survey of US and Chinese college students, this paper compares climate change public opinion among young adults in these two countries. We found that US students much less likely to believe anthropogenic climate change is happening compared to Chinese students. US students were also less convinced of the consensus among climate scientists regarding human-induced climate change. In addition, US students rated the economy higher than the environment as a government priority, whereas Chinese students rated the economy and environment as equally important. In terms of familiarity with the current policy debate, Chinese students were more familiar with both national and international climate change policies. Although Chinese students favor joining an international agreement to address climate change more than US students, on average, there was a relatively strong support among students in both countries for joining such an agreement. However, within the US, there are significant differences in climate change public opinion between those with conservative and liberal political ideologies for almost every variable studied. These results are interesting and could have meaningful implications for both national and international climate change policies in the future.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The CDIAC CO2 emission estimates discussed herein are derived using the methods of Marland and Rotty (1984) from fossil fuel consumption statistics published by the United Nations (UN, 2010). While these data are inherently incomplete because they do not reflect all GHG emissions recognized by the UNFCCC, records of fossil fuel consumption maintained by the UN since 1950 are of high quality, are more readily available for both Annex I and non-Annex I nations, and are more easily correlated to CO2 emissions using generally accepted conversions between fuel amounts and CO2 emissions than are other contributions to global climate change. Net changes in CO2 concentration represent the majority (63 %) of climate forcing due to anthropogenic GHG emissions between the years 1750 and 2000 (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 2007). The 2008 data are the most recent available (non-estimate) from the CDIAC.
This question was presented in a drag and drop format, where respondents were instructed to select the three most important issues and individually drag and drop them into the appropriate box representing the most important, second most important, and third most important issue, respectively. This created some confusion among all respondents, especially for Chinese students, which resulted in a much higher nonresponse rate for this question compared to other questions. The resulting sample sizes are still reasonably large, and in our opinion, also reasonably representative of each group overall.
References
Anderegg W, Prall J, Harold J, Schneider S (2010) Expert credibility in climate change. P Natl Acad Sci USA 107(27):12107–12109
Boden TA, Marland G and Andres RJ (2011) Global, regional and national fossil-fuel co2 emissions. Carbon Dioxide Information Analysis Center, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge, TN. http://cdiac.ornl.gov/. Accessed September 1, 2012
China’s National Development and Reform Commission (2007) China’s national climate change program, Beijing. http://www.ccchina.gov.cn/WebSite/CCChina/UpFile/File188.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2012
China’s National Development and Reform Commission (2009) China’s policies and actions for addressing climate change: The progress report. http://www.ccchina.gov.cn/WebSite/CCChina/UpFile/File571.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2012
CIA World Factbook https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/. Accessed September 1, 2012
Dunlap R, McCright A (2008) A widening gap: republican and democratic views on climate change. Environ 50(5):26–35
Feldman L, Nisbet M, Leiserowitz A and Maibach E (2010) The climate change generation? Survey analysis of the perceptions and beliefs of young Americans. Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, New Haven, CT. http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/YouthJan2010.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2012
Gilley B (2012) Authoritarian environmentalism and China's response to climate change. Environ Polit 21(2):287–307
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007) Climate change synthesis report: The fourth assessment. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Krosnick J and MacInnis B (2010) Frequent viewers of Fox News are less likely to accept scientists' views of global warming. Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, Palo Alto, CA. http://woods.stanford.edu/docs/surveys/Global-Warming-Fox-News.pdf. Accessed September 1, 2012
Leiserowitz A, Maibach E, Roser-Renouf C and Smith N (2011) Global warmings six Americas in May 2011. Yale Project on Climate Change Communication, New Haven, CT. http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/images/files/6_Americas_May_2011_final.pdf Accessed September 1, 2012
Liu C-E, Leiserowitz A (2009) From red to green? environmental attitudes and behavior in urban China. Environ 51(4):32–45
Lorenzoni I, Pidgeon N (2006) Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Clim Chang 77:73–95
Marland G, Rotty RM (1984) Carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels: a procedure for estimation and results for 1950–82. Tellus 36(B):232–261
National Research Council (2010) Advancing the science of climate change. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
Oreskes N (2004) The scientific consensus on climate change. Science 306:1686
Pew Research Center (2008) A deeper partisan divide over global warming. http://www.people-press.org/2008/05/08/a-deeper-partisan-divide-over-global-warming/. Accessed September 1, 2012
Rabe B, Borick C (2010) The climate of belief: American public opinion on climate change. Issues in governance studies. Number 31. Brookings Institute, Washington, DC
Rajamani L (2009) Addressing the “post-Kyoto” stress disorder: reflections on the emerging legal architecture of the climate regime. Int Comp Law Q 58(Oct):803–834
Stiglitz, J (2006) A new agenda for global warming. The Economists’ Voice: Berkeley Electronic Press, 3.7. http://works.bepress.com/joseph_stiglitz/1. Accessed September 1, 2012
United Nations (2010) 2008 Energy Statistics Yearbook. United Nations Department for Economic and Social Information and Policy Analysis, New York, NY
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCCa) http://unfccc.int/meetings/items/6240.php. Accessed September 1, 2012
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCCb) http://unfccc.int/kyoto_protocol/items/2830.php. Accessed September 1, 2012
Villar A, Krosnick J (2010) Global warming versus climate change, taxes versus prices: does word choice matter? Clim Chang 18(Aug):1–12
World Bank Data Center http://data.worldbank.org/. Accessed September 1, 2012
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the many students and professors at all the universities in China and the US that participated in our surveys. We also gratefully acknowledge (list students) for their excellent work as research assistants on this project and funding from (university name) Office of Research and Sponsored Programs. Lastly, we thank participants at the Culture, Politics, and Climate Change Conference in Boulder, CO for their useful comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Jamelske, E., Barrett, J. & Boulter, J. Comparing climate change awareness, perceptions, and beliefs of college students in the United States and China. J Environ Stud Sci 3, 269–278 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-013-0144-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13412-013-0144-x