Abstract
Background Eco-anxiety, the experience of challenging emotions relating to environmental issues, such as climate change, and the threats they present, is of increasing global public health concern. Although responses to eco-anxiety can be positive and motivational, experienced to a severe extent, they may contribute to depressive and anxiety disorders, exacerbate existing mental health conditions and negatively impact general wellbeing. Children and young people may be more susceptible to higher levels eco-anxiety, but the factors which contribute to eco-anxiety are not well-understood. This systematic review explored the social, political and geographical factors influencing eco-anxiety among children and young people.
Methods A comprehensive search of articles published between 2017-2023 was conducted on using EBSCOhost for APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Child Development & Adolescent Studies, CINAHL, EconLit, GreenFILE, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, MEDLINE, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and SocINDEX, with additional individual searches conducted on PubMed, Google Scholar, MedRxiv and PsyArxiv. The quality of included articles was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklist. The findings were summarised using a narrative synthesis approach.
Results Eighteen studies were included in the synthesis after screening 2,588 articles. Determinants in three major categories were identified: social (including age, gender, socioeconomic position, education, news and social media), political (climate activism, government inaction and sense of betrayal), and geographical factors (direct exposure to climate change-related events and country/region). Nine studies were cross-sectional, five were qualitative, three were mixed methods and one was longitudinal. Most studies were from high-income countries, particularly Australia, New Zealand and Norway. Studies were of variable methodological quality, using different measurement approaches to eco-anxiety and most surveys were conducted online using non-representative samples.
Conclusion Eco-anxiety is influenced by a range of social, political, and geographical factors. Governments and the mass media could play an important role in preventing eco-anxiety becoming of clinical concern. Given the lack of high-quality studies in this area, further research is essential to better understand the determinants of eco-anxiety across cultures to help minimize its impact on mental health and wellbeing and ensure it is channeled positively.
Introduction
The consequences of climate change are widespread and diverse, encompassing rising global temperatures, altered precipitation patterns, more frequent and intense weather events, sea level rise, and disruptions to ecosystems and biodiversity [1]. These changes have far-reaching implications for communities, economies, and overall well-being of the planet’s inhabitants. Climate change is a significant global health threat, disrupting basic necessities like clean air, water, housing and food. Children and young people are particularly vulnerable, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that they will experience over 80% of the illnesses, injuries and fatalities linked to the impacts of climate change [2]. Their vulnerability stems from their less developed immune systems, direct environmental interaction, dependence on adults, and the cumulative risks across the life course [2,3].
Rates of depression and anxiety among children and young people are increasing, with adolescence being a key stage of the life course when mental health disorders often emerge [4]. More recent studies have demonstrated increasing mental health problems amongst children and young people in response to the COVID-19 pandemic [5]. To avoid further deterioration in young people’s mental health because of increasing anticipation and experience of the adverse impacts of the climate crisis, young people’s mental health and wellbeing is an increasing priority. Children will face much harsher environmental conditions in the future, with the current generation predicted to experience seven times more heatwaves than their grandparents [3], for example. This will have consequences not only for physical health, but also mental health and wellbeing.
Children and young people may experience a wide range of impacts on physical and mental wellbeing as a result of climate change, which range from acute to long-term health effects. Known risks to physical health include fatalities, injuries, health-related ailments, exposure to toxins, and the rise of vector-borne diseases [2]. Such consequences arise from both abrupt events like floods and wildfires, and longer-term issues such as drought and sea level rise. Low- and middle-income countries are particularly vulnerable to the effects of climate change, despite their historically low greenhouse gas emissions[1]. This is especially evident among indigenous communities, whose well-being is closely tied to nature and thus disproportionately affected by disrupted environments caused by climate change.
Though research on the psychological impact of climate change is limited and still emerging, evidence from related severe weather events indicates increased rates of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, anxiety, cognitive issues, and learning difficulties [1]. For example, after the 2010 floods in Pakistan, 73% of individuals between the ages of 10 and 19 exhibited high levels of PTSD, with displaced girls exhibiting the highest levels [2]. Extreme weather events may also trigger anxiety, distress, grief, anger, identity loss, and suicidality [1,2]. Children’s vulnerability also extends to indirect impacts like food scarcity, conflict, economic instability, and forced migration [2]. Dependency on caregivers can result in mental health and psychosocial consequences linked to parental well-being and family dynamics, exacerbating issues like gender-based violence and educational inequalities, particularly for girls in low- and middle-income countries [1,2]. There is also growing recognition that even the anticipation of changes to the climate may indirectly affect the mental health and wellbeing of people who have no direct experience of the impacts of climate change.
Multiple terms (e.g. eco- and climate anxiety) have emerged to characterize psychological reactions to climate change[3,6]. Eco-anxiety can be defined as the experience of challenging emotions relating to environmental issues, such as climate change, and the multiple threats they present[7]. Climate anxiety can be conceptualized as a component of eco-anxiety. In this article we use eco- and climate anxiety, worry and distress interchangeably. Eco-anxiety can be mild, manifesting as occasional insomnia and feelings of restlessness, to more severe symptoms like panic attacks and compulsive behaviour that impacts on daily functioning [7]. Social interactions can also be hindered by isolation, as the depth of some young people’s concern might differ from that of their peers [8]. Eco-anxiety may lead to mental health disorders, including anxiety and depressive disorders [2]. The uncertainty and distress caused by the impending impacts of climate change may disrupt healthy emotional development, affecting cognitive functioning, interpersonal relationships, and overall quality of life [1]. The burden of feeling powerless to effect meaningful change in the face of environmental challenges may also lead to hopelessness, despair and pessimism about the future, potentially increasing suicidal behaviour [9,10]. Several scales have been developed to attempt to measure levels of eco-anxiety, including the Climate Change Anxiety Scale (CAS) [11] and the Hogg Eco-Anxiety Scale (HEAS) [12], though assessing the validity of these scales across different countries and cultures is challenging.
From a societal perspective, high levels of eco-anxiety among children and young people may have broader implications. An entire generation struggling with environmental uncertainties may result in reduced resilience, increased vulnerability to mental health disorders, and decreased overall well-being and productivity[2,9,13]. These factors can have cascading effects on social systems, healthcare resources, educational and economic outcomes. Moreover, eco-anxiety impacts may also strain families and communities, affecting social cohesion and collective well-being [1]. Thus, eco-anxiety is a growing public health issue, particularly among children and young people which demands urgent attention.
The emergence and intensity of eco-anxiety may be influenced by a multitude of factors. Disparities in vulnerability to climate change and exposure to environmental threats across different demographic groups may contribute to variations in eco-anxiety. Disadvantaged communities and individuals living in areas disproportionately affected by environmental hazards often experience higher levels of anxiety due to limited access to resources for adaptation and resilience[2,14]. The impact of the local environment, including pollution and coastal proximity, as well as lifestyles and behaviors may interact to generate eco-anxiety, while education systems and media influence the awareness and understanding of environmental issue[13,15]. Addressing eco-anxiety may not only be important from a mental health perspective, but also for overall well-being and societal progress. Chronic eco-anxiety may lead to emotional fatigue, eroding individuals’ capacity to engage effectively with environmental issues and contribute to sustainable solutions. Therefore, identifying the determinants of eco-anxiety becomes a crucial step in formulating comprehensive strategies that not only support psychological wellbeing, but also foster greater environmental resilience and positive action.
While studies have attempted to measure the prevalence of eco-anxiety, comprehensive investigations into the multifaceted factors that shape its emergence are lacking. This systematic review is essential to address a critical gap in the understanding of eco-anxiety among children and young people. While the topic has garnered increasing global attention, examination of the various social, political, and geographical determinants that may contribute to eco-anxiety remains limited. By synthesising a wide range of studies, this review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the factors that shape eco-anxiety experiences among children and young people. This will provide valuable insights for researchers, policymakers, educators, mental health professionals, parents and carers, facilitating an informed approach to understanding and mitigating the impact of eco-anxiety.
The review aims to answer the following research question:
What factors are associated with eco-anxiety among children and young people?
The following potential determinants will be considered:
- Social (e.g. gender, education)
- Political (e.g. political beliefs)
- Geographic (e.g. country, urbanicity).
Methods
This study used a systematic review methodology and employed a narrative synthesis to analyze a collection of articles focused on eco-anxiety and the factors determining it among children and young people. The review adhered to the guidelines by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) checklist [16]. The study’s structure aligns with the PICO framework [17], which establishes a systematic approach to frame research questions and identify key elements. In this context, Population encompasses children and young people aged 25 years and under; Intervention relates to social, political, and geographical determinants; Control is not applicable in this study; Outcome is eco-anxiety. The systematic review protocol was published on the PROSPERO website (ID=440162).
Inclusion and exclusion criteria
The following inclusion criteria were defined:
- All study designs encompassing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed method studies
- Studies involving human participants
- Studies which explored eco- or climate anxiety (including worry/concern/distress).
- Included children and/or young people (defined as aged 25 years and under).
- Included information of potential determinants of eco-anxiety (social/political/geographical).
- Studies in any geographic location and setting.
- Studies published from 2017 to present.
The exclusion criteria included:
- Review articles.
- Studies not involving human subjects.
- Studies focusing on people over the age of 25 years.
- Studies published in a language other than English.
- Studies published prior to 2017.
Search strategy
A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted for peer-reviewed articles, published from 2017 up to 2023 in English language. A comprehensive search using EBSCOhost was performed which included APA PsycArticles, APA PsycInfo, Child Development & Adolescent Studies, CINAHL, EconLit, GreenFILE, Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, MEDLINE, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, and SocINDEX. Additional individual searches were conducted on PubMed and Google Scholar (first 10 pages of results to search for grey literature). Relevant unpublished articles were searched for using pre-print servers (MedRxiv and PsyArxiv). A manual search of the reference lists of the included publications and publications that cited the included articles (backward and forward citation searches) was conducted to ensure completeness in the literature search process. To aid in the literature search Boolean commands (OR, AND) and truncation were used. The information for each separate database with search terms, number of articles found before and after de-duplication can be found in Appendix 1. A librarian at the University of Glasgow was consulted and approved the search strategy. The search terms were as follows: “Eco anxiety” or “climate change” or “climate anxiety” or “ecological grief”; “children“ or “young adults” or “young people” or “adolescents” or “youth”; “Social factors” or “cultural factors”; “Political factors” or “government policies”; “Geographical factors” or “regional variations”.
Study selection
Articles were screened from titles and abstracts, using the inclusion and exclusion criteria to exclude irrelevant articles. The remaining articles were screened based on full texts and reasons for exclusion were recorded. Search results were exported to Rayaan (https://www.rayyan.ai/) and duplicate articles were removed. Rayaan and Zotero were used to manage references. The first reviewer (SK) carried out the initial screening process and the articles shortlisted for full-text screening were reviewed by the first and second reviewers. The project supervisor (CN) acted as the second reviewer. Any conflicts were resolved through discussion.
Data extraction
An excel spreadsheet was used to manage data from the selected publications. The extracted data encompassed various aspects: study characteristics (author, publication, abstract, year, study design, location, sample size), participant characteristics (age, gender), determinants and/or exposures, outcomes, key findings, limitations and quality assessment. Data extraction was performed by SK and checked by CN.
Quality appraisal
Given the diverse range of study designs included in this research area, the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal Tools [18] checklist was deemed the most appropriate quality assessment tool. The checklists used in this review were analytical cross-sectional, qualitative research, studies reporting prevalence data, and text and opinion. They consisted of a maximum of 10 questions and minimum of 8 questions depending on study design. 1 mark was given for a “Yes” response and 0 for any other response than “Yes”. After answering all questions a percentage was calculated per study. SK conducted the quality assessment and CN checked a 10% sample.
Data synthesis
The data synthesis involved an iterative process of analysing and summarizing the findings from the included studies. A narrative synthesis approach was employed to interpret and integrate the evidence on the factors associated with eco-anxiety. The Synthesis without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines [19] were consulted to improve transparency. Thematic analysis was conducted to identify common themes, patterns, and trends across studies. These themes were categorized based on the relevant factors of interest (social, political and geographical), allowing for the organization and comparison of findings. Further subgroup analyses were conducted to examine variations in findings. The subgroups were based on the research question related to themes within social, political and geographical determinants. The limitations of the included studies and any heterogeneity in the findings were acknowledged and discussed. The synthesized findings were presented in a narrative format, supported by appropriate tables.
Results
Study selection
During the initial stage of the literature search, a total of 1208 articles were identified. The lead reviewer (SK) performed the initial screening, and a comprehensive database search was conducted on the databases mentioned above. This search yielded 739 results. Additionally, separate searches were carried out on PubMed and Google Scholar, resulting in 466 articles and 3 articles, respectively. After removing duplicates, there were 992 articles remaining for further screening.
After a thorough evaluation and screening process, 65 articles for full text screening were identified. Both reviewers conducted the full-text screening using the specified eligibility criteria, resolving conflicts through discussion and 18 articles were selected for synthesis. To further ensure the comprehensiveness of the review, backward and forward citation searching was performed for the selected articles, resulting in a total of 1289 articles. After this screening process, no new article was included. After careful evaluation and screening, the reviewers labelled the excluded studies as having an irrelevant: outcome, publication type, study design, population or review/background article. In sum, 18 articles were selected for inclusion and included in the narrative synthesis as shown in Figure 1.
Prisma flowchart of included studies
Study characteristics
Eighteen articles were included in the systematic review (Figure 1), and the quality was evaluated using the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Critical Appraisal tools checklist. The quality of the articles varied, with the JBI checklist score ranging from 67% to 100% (scores for the included studies can be found in Appendix 2). All selected studies were published between 2017 and 2023. The data collection in most of the studies was conducted between 2017 to 2022, except for the longitudinal study conducted by Sciberras and Fernando, who assessed the course of eco-anxiety among young people born between March 1999 and February 2000, who were aged 4-5 years old during the first assessment [8].
The studies encompassed a range of study designs including cross-sectional [6,9,20–25], longitudinal [8], qualitative [10,14,15,26,27], and mixed methods [28–30], with most of the studies using cross-sectional surveys. Thirteen peer-reviewed and five grey literature articles were included in the review (postgraduate dissertations [27,29], report based on an undergraduate project [20], news article which included a survey [6] and pre-print [25]). The sample size of the studies varied from 11 [27] to 128,484 [21]. Most of the studies included participants aged ≤25 years and for those which included some older participants [15,22], data relating to the preferred age group (≤25 years) were extracted. Studies generally demonstrated a higher number of female participants compared to males.
In terms of geographic location, the studies were conducted in various countries including a mix of high-, middle- and low-income countries. There were four cross-national studies covering a number of different countries; including 1) Canada, USA, UK, Netherlands, Poland, United Arab Emirates, Republic of Korea, Jamaica, South Africa, Nigeria, Egypt, Kenya, India, Vietnam and the Philippines [26], 2) Australia, Brazil, Finland, France, India, Nigeria, Philippines, Portugal, UK, and USA [9], 3) UK, Netherlands, USA, Mexico, Germany, Greece, Denmark[30] and 4) China, India, Japan and USA [24]. The studies that included only one country were most commonly from Australia [8,20,28,31], Norway [15,21] and New Zealand [27,29], and single country studies from the UK [10], USA [25], France [22], Brazil [14] and the Philippines [23] were also identified. One study did not specify the geographic location, but it was likely to cover a variety of countries as its survey was open to everyone [6].
Among the eighteen included studies, a notable trend was the use of online methods for data collection which used a variety of online platforms, perhaps reflecting that data collection for many studies tended to take place during the COVID-19 pandemic period. The absence of a standardised measure of eco-anxiety led to a variety of measurement approaches being implemented in quantitative studies. In studies that used a validated scale, the Hogg Eco-anxiety scale [25,29], Climate Change Anxiety Scale [22,24] and Reser’s climate distress scale[25] were used. In other studies, the authors developed their own measures, for example one study asked: “when you think about your future and the environment, which of the following words best describe how you feel?” with the response options: “worried”, “relaxed”, “indifferent”, “don’t know” [6]. In the longitudinal study which assessed worry about climate change across four survey waves over eight years, a consistent outcome measure was lacking, resulting in different questions being used at different time points [8]. At wave 4 participants were asked about how worried they were about the environment, whereas in waves 7 and 8 they were asked how concerned they were about climate change specifically. Amongst the qualitative and mixed method studies, data were collected via focus groups, semi-structured interviews, open ended survey questions and participatory action research. Most studies adopted convenience or quota sampling, but a few included representative samples [8,21]. Studies employed a variety of analytical methods, including thematic, descriptive and regression analyses, amongst others. The findings of the included studies are summarised in Table 1.
Synthesis of findings
Social determinants
Age
Most of the included studies highlighted that age could influence how young people perceive and respond to eco-anxiety. The 8-year longitudinal study conducted by Sciberras and Fernando found that the largest proportion of participants were classified as having increasing levels of climate change-related worry as age increased from 10-11 years up to 18-19 years, and this was linked to higher levels of depression at 18-19 years [8]. Tam et al. found that younger participants reported higher climate anxiety in India and the USA, but the opposite was found in China, and in Japan there was no difference by age, suggesting that the influence of age may vary by country context [24]. In a Norwegian study of people aged 13-19 years, Leonhardt at al. found that those aged 15-16 years were more likely to be worried about climate change, but the relationship with age was non-linear, decreasing among those aged 18-19 years [21]. In a qualitative study by Chou et al, the authors noted that children aged around 11-12 years may experience more climate-related distress compared to younger children as they develop and become more able to envisage a hypothetical future [14].
Gender
Studies often suggested that females express higher eco-anxiety levels than males, but few empirically tested for potential gender differences. Leonhardt et al. found that young women were more likely to experience eco-anxiety than men, 14% of females reported being very worried compared to 7% of males, and 28% of males reported being not worried at all, compared to 10% of females [21]. In their logistic regression models adjusted for sociodemographic factors and leisure activities, females had 2.60 (95% CI: 2.53–2.67) higher odds of eco-anxiety compared to males, and this association persisted after further adjustment for mental health and substance use (cannabis and alcohol). In a cross-national study by Tam et al. which included participants aged 18-24 years from China, India, Japan and the USA, the relationship between gender and eco-anxiety varied by country [24]. In India, young women had higher levels of eco-anxiety, but in China and the USA young men had greater levels. In the qualitative studies that used convenience sampling, there was often a larger proportion of female participants compared to males. A limitation of all studies concerned the lack of consideration around the non-binary nature of gender.
Socioeconomic position
Individuals from disadvantaged and low-income communities potentially face additional stressors related to eco-anxiety, such as limited access to essential resources, inadequate infrastructure, and heightened exposure to environmental risks. However, eco-anxiety appears to be shaped by awareness and knowledge of climate change, which is often higher amongst people with more advanced levels of education. Thus, it is possible that the relationship between socioeconomic position and eco-anxiety may differ depending on the indicator used (e.g. education level, individual/household income or wealth, and area-level deprivation).
According to Leonhardt et al., individuals who perceived their family’s financial situation as good had lower risk of being worried about climate change compared to those who perceived their financial situation as poor, suggesting that family financial stability could play a role in shaping adolescents’ levels of climate-related worry in Norway [21]. However, this association reversed when adjusted for sociodemographic factors and leisure activities, with no association remaining after further adjustment for mental health and substance use. Leonhardt et al. also found that the level of parental education was consistently associated with eco-anxiety in all models calculated [21]. Compared to those with no higher education, young people whose parents had higher education had 1.57 (95 CI: 1.52–1.61) higher odds of being worried about climate change. On the other hand, a survey conducted by Tam et al. across China, India, Japan, and the USA only found a positive correlation between higher levels of education and eco-anxiety among participants from China [24]. Income was also positively correlated with eco-anxiety in China, but a negative correlation was observed in Japan, and no association was found in the other countries. However, only simple correlational analysis was performed in this study.
Chou et al. elaborated in their qualitative study using focus groups with participants aged 5-18 years in three areas of Brazil [14], that the socioeconomic context shapes the awareness and engagement with climate change:
“ ‘‘There are two types of rich and poor people who deal with this situation: the rich ones either don’t care, they only think about money – or are informed and try to do as much as possible, because they have the money for it. There are two types of poor people, who either have no place to find information – or they have information, but they don’t have money to afford organic food’’ (12,F) “ p260 [14].
Further, they found that the groups who were more aware and engaged with climate change issues belonged to the wealthier social classes [14]. This group comprised children and adolescents whose parents were more engaged in environmental action or who attended private schools which had climate change integrated into their curricula. The influence of parental occupation was noted by a participant whose mother was a journalist and subsequently felt well-informed by them. This group of engaged young people were also more likely to report anxiety around climate change, which manifested via anxiety attacks and disturbed sleep, as described by two participants:
“ ‘‘I felt scared, at two in the morning it came to my mind that we could die because of that’’ [14, M]”; ‘‘I ended up having an anxiety attack, in which I get nervous, I can’t breathe right and it’s weird’’ (12, F).” “ p263 [14].
In the self-written commentary by Diffey et al. involving 23 young people, they also highlighted the potential influence of occupation, highlighting that subsistence farmers from drought-prone regions, such as India, Egypt, Nigeria and Kenya, may be at heightened risk [26]. However, there is an overall lack of studies exploring the importance of occupational factors and social class for eco-anxiety.
Media, Engagement and Communication
Many studies mentioned social media as an important factor affecting how children and young people experience eco-anxiety. A mixed methods study by Gunasiri et al. including 46 participants aged 18-24 years in Australia found that negative stories about climate change shared on social media can contribute to feelings of hopelessness, guilt, shame and anxiety, which can be overwhelming.
“ “I do get a lot of climate anxiety when I read the stuff about how June was the hottest month, I’m like yeah I can’t do anything about that. [Interview participant 7]” “ p6 [28].
On the other hand, social media was also reported to have a positive role, providing a platform for young people’s voices and demonstrating action:
“ “You can be speaking to people on the other side of the globe that you’d never interact with at any other point in your life and you’re able to build a community and a network… “ “ p7 [28].
In another Australian study by Scriberras and Fernando, which followed young people over several years, greater societal engagement, including consumption of news relating to international affairs, was related to high and increasing levels of climate-related worry over time [8]. A qualitative study by Thompson et al. with 15 participants from the UK found that adolescents obtained information about environmental issues from social media (73.3%), news outlets (40%), friends and family (93.3%) and school (66.7%) [10]. The news was found to worsen feelings of stress, especially if stories were catastrophised and did not provide solutions, which lead to avoidance among some young people. Similarly, a qualitative study of young climate activists in New Zealand, conducted by Myers as part of their Master’s thesis, found that negative news coverage contributed to higher eco-anxiety [27]. Parry et al’s study of English-speaking participants across eight countries also found that 78% (18 out of 23) participants reported increased climate change anxiety due to social media coverage [30]. Nadarajah et al., in their cross-sectional survey among young adults in France, found a significant interplay between individuals’ coping mechanisms and their engagement in seeking climate change information, which notably influenced their anxiety levels related to future climate impacts [22]. In contrast to the above, the large cross-sectional Norwegian study by Leonhardt et al. found that individuals who expressed higher levels of concern about climate change tended to spend less time using social media [21]. Young people also highlighted the stigma surrounding climate-related concern and the unwillingness to talk about these issues in countries like Jamacia (where some older people considered extreme weather to be a normal occurrence), but also in the UK (where it is more of a taboo subject) [26]. They also mentioned struggling with whether to discuss their concerns with family, friends and colleagues, and with the decision to have children arising from their concern about children’s future quality of life [26].
Political determinants
Sense of betrayal by people in positions of power
Studies consistently revealed concern from children and young people regarding their lack of inclusion and representation in decision-making processes, inducing a sense of disempowerment and betrayal which exacerbated eco-anxiety. The cross-sectional study by Hickman et al. with data from 10,000 young people across ten countries found that participants felt more betrayal (highest in Brazil, India and the Philippines) than reassurance towards the government and children believed that government responses to the climate crisis has been inadequate, which correlated with climate anxiety and distress [9]. Several studies found that the perception of climate inaction by politicians and corporations related to increased frustration and distress among participants [10,14,26]. Some studies suggested that the feelings around betrayal extended to the perception that previous generations have not adequately addressed environmental issues, leaving young people to bear the burden of climate change consequences. Parry et al. found that some young people felt anger towards older adults for not making adequate efforts to mitigate the effects of climate change [30]. However, in other studies participants avoided directing anger at older generations:
“ “I don’t buy it [blaming older generations for the climate crisis]. You can’t care about the environment until you’re in a position to care about it. My grandparents didn’t care…with their upbringing there was no way they could have cared.” (Paul, 25).” p59 [27].
Government inaction
Government inaction was a recurring theme contributing to eco-anxiety. A study conducted as part of an undergraduate student project in Australia with a sample of 74 participants by Chiw et al. found very low approval for the government’s policies and commitment to tackling climate change [20]. The cross-sectional study by Hickman et al., highlighted young people’s negative perceptions of governmental responses to climate change, with a mean score of 14.96 on a 9-18 scale (SD 2.57), which was associated with increased levels of distress[9]. Moreover, government inaction was frequently mentioned to be intertwined with political interests and industry lobbying, exemplified by Myers et al. in Australia, which highlighted young people’s frustration and anger as they witnessed fossil fuel industries influencing policymaking and distributing misinformation [27]. This hindered effective climate action leading to reduced trust and contributing to eco-anxiety, especially when young people felt their concerns were being dismissed.
Climate Activism
The literature consistently highlighted that young people are increasingly participating in activism to demand more significant action on climate change and inclusion in policy decisions. Sciberras and Fernando found that adolescents with consistently high or increasing climate change-related worry were more politically engaged [8]. Tam et al. found similar results in their survey including participants from India, China, Japan and the USA; increased climate anxiety was associated with climate activism across all countries [24]. Gunasiri et al. similarly found that participants who took climate action reported higher levels of worry, but that there were also positive benefits (e.g. feeling more in control) [28]. Some studies also noted concern around the potential repercussions of protest involvement [27].
Geographical determinants
Direct experience of climate-related events
The direct experience of climate-related events (e.g. wildfire) was highlighted in several studies that explored children and young people’s personal experiences. A cross-sectional study by Vercammen et al in the USA reported that individuals who had direct experience of climate change had higher mean scores for climate distress and eco-anxiety compared to those who had not encountered such impacts, even when taking into account age, gender, education level, family affluence, urban/rural residence and ethnicity [25]. The cross-sectional study conducted by Lykins et al investigated Australian youth mental health in the aftermath of the Black Summer Bushfires during 2019/20, highlighting the mental health impact of localised events related to climate change on the individuals affected directly [31]. Young people directly exposed to the bushfires experienced higher levels of climate change distress and concern compared to those who were not directly exposed, as well as more adverse mental health outcomes, such as depression and anxiety. The study found that the proximity of the bushfire event, whether in terms of physical distance, social, or temporal aspects, did not appear to have an impact on anxiety levels [31]. Simon et al similarly found that young people living in the Philippines, where many people constantly experience first-hand the effects of climate change-related typhoons and droughts, were prone to experiencing eco-anxiety, but this also motivated them to take climate action [23].
Qualitative research in New Zealand highlighted the potential impact of living in a coastal community, where one participant saw first-hand the erosion of the foreshore on his journey to school [27]. Chou et al also highlighted that having family members impacted by climate related events, such as flooding, led to feelings of fear amongst some participants in their qualitative study based in Brazil [14]. In the self-written article by 23 adolescents from various countries, participants mentioned that climate-related worry and other climate-related emotions, such as hopelessness and grief, were persistent and increased when directly experiencing the effects of climate change [26]. The majority of participants had experienced the direct impacts of climate change, such as heatwaves and drought. People living in low-lying countries, such as the Philippines and Jamacia, reported experiencing despair that their homelands may cease to exist in the future due to sea-level rise and flooding [26].
Country and regional factors
In their cross-sectional study including ten countries, Hickman et al demonstrated that young people from poorer countries in the ‘Global South’ (such as the Philippines (49% extremely worried), and India (35% extremely worried)) exhibited higher levels of climate anxiety compared to those in the ‘Global North’ [9]. In the ‘Global North’, Portugal had the highest levels of worry (30% extremely worried) and the authors highlighted that this country had seen large increases in wildfires in recent years. This was also found in the article by Diffey et al which included participants from 15 countries: people from poorer countries expressed more worries about climate change [26]. Results from Tam et al’s cross-national survey including China, India, Japan, and the USA, suggested that climate anxiety is more prevalent in countries who are most vulnerable to the effects of climate change and who have weaker readiness to adapt [24]. India had the highest levels of climate anxiety (according to the cognitive-emotional impairment domain of the Climate Change Anxiety Scale), followed by China, Japan and the USA. For the functional impairment domain similar patterns were found, but the USA had slightly higher scores than Japan. The prevalence of eco-anxiety among adolescents in Norway was 37.6% in the study by Leonhardt et al including 128,484 participants in which they found that adolescents living in urban areas were more prone to eco-anxiety, compared to those living in rural areas [21].
Discussion
Summary of findings
This review aimed to synthesise the research relating to the social, political, and geographical factors contributing to eco-anxiety in children and young people. While the issue has recently garnered global attention, a more comprehensive understanding of the underlying factors was necessary. Overall, the included studies demonstrate that eco-anxiety is a multifaceted issue with research still in its infancy. The quality of existing studies was variable, with only one longitudinal study identified. The review highlights that eco-anxiety is experienced across cultural and geographical boundaries, manifesting as a shared encounter that resonates with younger generations globally. The identified determinants of eco-anxiety among children and young people reveal a complex tapestry of influences that contribute to their psychological responses in the face of environmental challenges. While we found a range of factors to be associated with eco-anxiety, including social (age, gender, education level and socioeconomic position, social and news media), political (feelings of betrayal, lack of action, activism), and geographical factors (direct experience of climate-related events, country and region), the review also identifies a number of significant gaps in the literature.
As children and young people move through different stages of development, their experience of eco-anxiety may evolve. Some studies suggested that eco-anxiety may become apparent when children are able to envisage a hypothetical future (around age 10-11 years[14]). Eco-anxiety may increase across the early stages adolescence, but some may experience a decline in later adolescence towards the ages of 18-19 years. The nature of eco-anxiety may also change as young people transition from being concerned about the issues to developing a deeper understanding of the what the future may look like as climate change unfolds, as well as a result of the direct experience of severe weather events. Further exploration of the longitudinal development of eco-anxiety throughout the lifecourse is needed to fully understand age-related trajectories and the influence on mental health disorders and general wellbeing. It was also suggested that the relationship between age and eco-anxiety is likely to differ depending on the context and country of study. For example, a cross-national study found that younger participants reported higher climate anxiety in India and the USA, but the opposite was found in China, and in Japan there was no apparent difference by age [24].
There was a general lack of studies examining potential gender differences in levels of eco-anxiety. However, among studies that did explore this, younger girls and women seem to be more affected by eco-anxiety. Stigma and societal norms relating to emotional expressiveness and empathy might partly account for females exhibiting a greater tendency for heightened eco-anxiety[14,30]. In some contexts boys often learn to hide their emotions and might be more subtle in expressing their worries about the environment. These different reactions based on gender highlight how emotions can interact with the cultural context, but again, further research is required to fully understand the interplay between gender and eco-anxiety that also includes gender minority groups.
The burden of climate change disproportionately affects individuals from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds, leaving them particularly vulnerable to the immediate impacts of climate change and environmental degradation. Among the studies which examined the impact of socioeconomic circumstances on eco-anxiety, a mixed picture emerged. Income was related to increased levels of climate anxiety (across both cognitive and functional impairment domains of the Climate Change Anxiety Scale) in China, but in Japan higher income was related to reduced levels of climate anxiety [24]. In India and the USA the correlation between income and climate anxiety was positive, but not statistically significant. Similarly, in Norway the association between perceived financial situation and worry about climate change was variable [21]. Some qualitative studies highlighted the role of wealth and the interaction with level of knowledge and awareness around climate change. Education level was associated with eco-anxiety in some contexts, for example, in the cross-national study including the four countries above, higher education level was related to increased levels of eco-anxiety in India but only when using the cognitive-emotional impairment domain of the Climate Change Anxiety Scale [24]. In China and Japan, the correlation between education level and climate anxiety was negative but not statistically significant. Higher parental education was also associated with greater levels of climate-related worry in a Norwegian study and several qualitative studies highlighted that greater knowledge of climate change led to more anxiety due to being more aware of its effects [21]. Few studies explored the role of parental occupation, with some qualitative studies mentioning parents with certain occupations, such as journalists, meant they were more informed and engaged, but this group experienced more negative emotions and anxiety around climate change. The interplay between education, income and occupation requires further exploration to fully grasp their contribution towards eco-anxiety experiences.
Relatedly, communication by news media, characterized by alarmist and catastrophic narratives lacking feasible solutions, was highlighted in several studies as a source of worsening eco-anxiety, leading to feelings of hopelessness and powerlessness, compounded by confusion and mistrust arising from mixed messages and inconsistent information from various sources. Social media was also found to be a potential factor influencing levels of eco-anxiety, both positively and negatively. Social media platforms have revolutionized the landscape of social engagement, with digital spaces serving as both catalysts for connections and sources of eco-anxiety due to the interplay between the potential for fostering collective action and the resultant psychological effects. The continuous distressing content on social media, along with the immediacy and potential sensationalization of environmental news, can foster feelings of helplessness and apprehension about the future. This is further exacerbated by the constant pressure to stay informed and engaged, potentially leading to emotional fatigue and strain, particularly among younger generations heavily immersed in the online sphere. Social media can serve as a positive force by disseminating accurate information, inspiring climate action, fostering a sense of community, and highlighting success stories. This can help to empower individuals to channel their concerns into proactive efforts and a collective drive for environmental sustainability, thus harnessing its potential to mitigate eco-anxiety while promoting positive change. However, there is a need for further research into the potential positive and negative aspects of social media in relation to climate anxiety.
The global nature of climate change highlights nations’ interconnectedness and their efforts to mitigate and adapt to its effects. Nonetheless, when countries fail to fulfil their climate-related commitments and when international agreements fall short, it can evoke a sense of betrayal among children and young people. Studies found that a lack of confidence in the government and not having a say in decision making was a common concern of adolescents. This sense of betrayal intensified eco-anxiety as young people realized that their future is compromised by the inaction of those in positions of power. It was evident that children and young people felt disproportionately affected as they felt a sense of powerlessness and frustration at decisions made without their input, which will affect them the most.
Government inaction, like failure to implement effective policies, evokes frustration, disappointment, and helplessness, and the disconnect between the urgency of the climate crisis and inadequate responses erodes trust, intensifying feelings of betrayal. The survey conducted by Chiw et al. underscored a significant lack of trust in the government’s capability to handle climate change-related challenges, indicating a widespread agreement that climate action is not being prioritized [20]. Similar findings were replicated by other studies from various countries. This inaction amplified existential concerns and fueled uncertainty about the future, fostering a sense of powerlessness. The emotional burden of witnessing inadequate government action contributed to a heightened sense of anxiety. Perceptions of unequal decision-making and inadequate policies at the political level instigated frustration and disillusionment, contributing to eco-anxiety.
Climate activism was shown to contribute to feelings of empowerment by providing a platform to voice concerns and demand action, fostering a sense of purpose, and reducing the emotional toll of eco-anxiety. Climate activism has enabled young people to express climate-related concerns and provided coping strategies for addressing eco-anxiety. Conversely, climate activism might also heighten eco-anxiety among young people. Active participation exposes young people to the stark realities of the climate crisis and inadequate policy responses, intensifying frustration, disappointment, and distress. Further research is also needed in this space to identify for whom climate activism leads to positive outcomes, the features of climate activism which may exacerbate anxiety and what helps activists to cope with eco-anxiety.
Direct experiences of extreme climate change events, often tied to particular geographic locations—which are more vulnerable to climate change— were found to elevate distress. The local environment’s impact, encompassing exposure to pollution and natural disasters, can influence anxiety. Acknowledging these multifaceted influences underscores the complexity of eco-anxiety and the necessity of holistic approaches to understanding and managing it. When young people witness the visible consequences of climate change, such as extreme weather events and environmental degradation, their sense of safety and stability is disrupted. This fuels anxiety about the unpredictable future. Various interviews and surveys concluded that participants directly impacted by climate change experience more climate-related anxiety and distress. Witnessing environmental degradation, like coastal erosion, can intensify eco-anxiety among young people, who can develop a sense of powerlessness and worry for the future. Direct encounters with those impacted by climate change can shape the views of children and young people. While a number of studies have been conducted within high-income countries, there is a need for more research in low and middle-income countries, where the impact of climate change is more intense. There was an overall important gap in research which linked aspects of the environment, such as air pollution, flooding risk, and temperature, to experiences of eco-anxiety.
Implications for research, policy, and practice
The findings of this systematic review hold significant implications for research, policy, and practice concerning eco-anxiety in children and young people. The identified social, political, and geographical determinants underscore the need for a multidimensional approach to understanding and addressing eco-anxiety. Integrating climate education within formal curricula, recognizing the mental health impacts of climate change within education at all levels and helping pupils and students develop effective coping mechanisms may help to enhance their well-being. Education is a pivotal arena where reform is needed to equip children and young people with accurate information regarding climate change and coping mechanisms to ensure eco-anxiety is channeled positively. Equally crucial is the role of mental health professionals, who must recognize eco-anxiety as a valid concern and offer appropriate support and coping strategies to prevent eco-anxiety developing into clinical anxiety, but also being mindful to prevent over-medicalization. Responsible media coverage can shift narratives from despair to empowerment and amplify opportunities for constructive change. Governments also play an important role in the degree to which eco-anxiety may be experienced within a population. Young people increasingly feel like their views are not being heard, that they lack a say in important decisions which will affect them the most, and that the government is failing to take appropriate climate action. This can foster feelings of disempowerment and hopelessness among young people. Political leaders can take important steps towards more inclusive and equitable decision making. Reform of voting systems which often exclude young people is one way in which young people could feel more empowered. Teachers, health professionals and parents/carers, amongst others, could also more actively encourage civic engagement among young people [33].
Most existing research focuses on high-income contexts, particularly Australia and New Zealand, leaving an important gap in the understanding of how cultural, societal, and geographical differences might influence eco-anxiety manifestations across diverse populations. Due to the lack of standardised measures of eco-anxiety, the prevalence is difficult to establish and studies are difficult to compare. Hence, there is a need to develop and validate eco-anxiety measurement scales to understand the prevalence and determinants among different groups and across diverse contexts.
A significant research gap pertains to the long-term impacts of eco-anxiety on mental health and general wellbeing of children and young people. There is limited attention given to how early-life eco-anxiety influences later psychological trajectories, coping strategies, and decision-making behaviours over time. There is a key need for longitudinal studies that track eco-anxiety during youth into adulthood, limited by the current lack of available data and measures. The limited exploration of coping mechanisms for children and young people to manage their eco-anxiety, may hinder the development of strategies to mitigate its potential adverse impacts. Furthermore, more research is needed exploring the influence of ethnicity and its intersection with other factors such as gender, education and income. Studies that explore geographical factors, like living in urban, rural or coastal settings, are needed to understand eco-anxiety experiences in different places. These research gaps highlight the need for a more nuanced understanding of eco-anxiety that considers a broader range of determinants.
Strengths and limitations
This systematic review has several strengths. The comprehensive search strategy utilised various inter-disciplinary databases and included relevant studies across various contexts and populations. Initial searches found that most studies were published after 2017, hence the inclusion criteria were set to include articles published from 2017, ensuring we were considering the most-up to date studies. However, this may have resulted in the exclusion of key papers published prior to 2017. Including qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method studies further enriched the review’s depth of understanding and insight into the drivers of eco-anxiety. Moreover, we assessed the quality of studies using the JBI checklist, but some limitations with this approach have been identified [34].
We included only studies that were published in English language, which may have introduced bias, potentially omitting valuable insights from non-English language literature. Bias could have arisen during data extraction and synthesis, but this was minimized via the input of two reviewers. While this review comprehensively covered a diverse range of determinants, evidence on specific factors, such as gender, were lacking, limiting the depth of synthesis for these aspects. Most studies also recruited participants using online methods, which potentially excludes those without internet access, such as people who live in more remote areas and indigenous groups who may be at higher risk from climate change. There was a general lack of diversity in the country of study, with several studies from Australia, New Zealand and Norway, but very few which covered populations living in Africa and South America. Further research is needed from low- and middle-income countries to understand the applicability of the concept among different cultures. Despite these limitations, this systematic review offers a foundation for understanding the multifaceted determinants of eco-anxiety among children and young people.
Conclusion
This systematic review explored the complex factors underpinning eco-anxiety in children and young people, shedding light on both the diverse determinants and the research gaps that signal the need for further investigation. The review enhances our current understanding of the factors that contribute to eco-anxiety. Social media and climate activism can function in a dual role, both increasing awareness of climate change and actions taken, but also amplifying distress. Responsible media practices are urgently required to leverage the potential of social media platforms, while mitigating their adverse psychological impacts. The review highlights substantial gaps in the existing research landscape. Notably, more studies from lower-income regions are needed and a more nuanced examination of social and cultural influences would enrich our understanding of how these factors intersect and shape eco-anxiety experiences in different contexts.
Data Availability
All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript
Footnotes
shamal.kankawale{at}gmail.com
References
