Fear Theme 1: Change and instability.

A dominant perspective across participants was how there was an overwhelmingly rapid rate of (often) negative change and instability that was occurring (or predicted to occur) due to climate change (“Everything. The prospect that life as we know it is going to change” P85, F, Metropolitan QLD). That is, participants often indicated they were fearful about climate change because it was significantly changing and destabilising the natural world and their safety within it (“not knowing how bad things could get and what we do know all sounds terrible and complicated” P112, F, 29, Metropolitan NSW), with this destabilisation a direct consequence of climate impacts like “resource insecurity”, “extremely hot temperature”, or “rising sea levels”. This instability was seen to be both current (“Our way of life is no longer sustainable” P31, M, 31, Metropolitan VIC) and never-ending (“What will happen to everything (biotic and abiotic) if we can’t fix what we’ve already broken” P93, M, 36, Metropolitan NSW), which only increased participants sense of foreboding and fear (“The thought that the world could radically change in the coming years and may be uninhabitable for humans” P95, M, 21, Metropolitan QLD).

When participants discussed their fear of the growing instability due to climate change, certain contexts in which these rapid and negative changes were seen to occur were often mentioned. These included “changes in our way of life” (P118, M, 19, Metropolitan SA), “natural landmarks like the Great Barrier Reef” (P80, F, 20, Metropolitan NSW), “people having to relocate their homes” (P87, M, 62, Metropolitan WA), “disruption of food and water supplies” (P23, M, 50, Inner Regional TAS) and “damage to forests and other habitats for animals and people” (P26, F, 57, Metropolitan SA). Overwhelmingly, however, were mentions of changes in the natural environment as being fear-inducing (“The unknowns of when and if extreme weather will cause more natural disasters” P18, F, 39, Metropolitan VIC). Here participants mentioned specific and “unpredictable” weather events (“Catastrophic weather events (e.g., once in a decade floods, massive bushfires)” P66, M, 28, Metropolitan QLD), an increase in the frequency of natural disasters (“Natural disasters happening more often” P73, F, 39, Metropolitan NSW), and overall changes in the natural climate (“Extremely hot temperatures and no cooling” P76, M, 44, Outer Regional SA).

The idea of “survival” for humans, animals and nature was also a consistent response, with several participants noting they feared how climate change could lead to parts of the world becoming uninhabitable (“The thought that the world could radically change in the coming years and may be uninhabitable for humans” P95, M, 21, Metropolitan QLD). Some were concerned about the habitability of animals (“Animals losing their habitats” P170, M, 22, Metropolitan VIC), while others referred to natural habitats more generally (“Degradation of natural habitats” P281, F, 25, Metropolitan NSW). Yet one response succinctly captured participants’ fear of survival simply stating: “It is change; change is not stable; instability leads to death” (P43, M, 33, Inner Regional QLD).

Beyond the changes in the natural environment, participants also noted they were fearful of the wider alterations climate change would have on them and their way of life. At times this was discussed in terms of “changes in the way the world operates”, with specific reference to cost-of-living pressures (“Not being able to afford standard of living” P113, F, 22, Metropolitan VIC), while others were fearful of how their health and wellbeing would be impacted. This included being fearful of the increasing risk of “physical” and “mental” health problems and the increase in “diseases”, as well as overall “death” and “human extinction”. One participant who worked in healthcare even noted how they were fearful of “people dying” due to “smoke or heat stroke” and that this fear was intensified because “it is avoidable and tragic” (P254, F, 26, Metropolitan VIC). However, some referred to the health impacts on themselves and others in more abstract terms (“Understanding that I will be less able to protect myself and loved ones, including young children, from the worst of climate change (e.g., bushfires)” P269, F, 31, Metropolitan VIC). This lack of clarity appears to align with the uncertainty people experience regarding how the effects of climate change will materialise, as its impacts are far-reaching and challenging to comprehend [4].

When discussing the type of climate change instability they feared, participants also referred to the consequences these rapid changes would have for society. This included “population displacement and forced migration” (P255, M, 41, Inner Regional VIC), “global conflicts” (P208, M, 38, Metropolitan NSW) and “collapse of modern society” (P214, M, 30, Metropolitan NSW). For example, some participants noted that climate change could lead to social unrest (“I am scared of civil unrest and potential totalitarianism in response” P129, F, 31, Metropolitan VIC), suggesting that some people were fearful that the potential outcomes of climate change, such as environmental destruction and competition over resources, may result in domestic and international conflict. Other participants discussed the potential of resource insecurity, especially food and water shortages, as something to fear (“Disruption of food and water supplies. Also, risk of war arising from those shortages” P23, M, 50, Inner Regional TAS). Other responses acknowledged the inequality of climate change impacts, with participants mentioning climate migration and population displacements were also something to be fearful of (“All the climate refugees that will lose their homes” P222, M, 26, Metropolitan VIC).

Fear Theme 2: Inaction and negligence by government, corporations, and others.

Another climate change related fear participants noted came from the systems and authorities responsible for causing climate change, and their unwillingness to mitigate it. This included such authorities and systems as: “commercialisation”, “capitalism”, “the coal mining sector”, “the inaction of governments”, “the political divide and misinformation”, “corporate greed, “people in power”, “corruption” and “apathy”. Additionally, similar fears were expressed towards the general population that either denied the existence of climate change (“some people still deny it exists” P100, M, 18, Metropolitan NSW) or who did not care enough to alter their behaviour (“people’s lack of care for the impact their own actions have” P115, F, 19, Metropolitan QLD). Therefore, it appeared that participants not only feared the change and instability from climate change (see Theme 1 above), but they also feared the human barriers (e.g., power, greed, money) of significant, systemic inaction, especially from governments and major corporations. This perception aligns with recent research indicating that young Australians (15–19 years) are worried about how their futures are dependent on decisions of current leaders [39]. Specifically, this “lack of seriousness and urgency” (P130, F, 30, Metropolitan VIC), and instead the greed and/or apathy of these organisations, was seen as fear-inducing as it limited the global community’s ability to address climate change. As succinctly stated by some participants:

“What makes me truly fearful isn’t climate change because I believe humans have the capacity to innovate out solutions. However, with the greed apparent in the upper classes and the corruption in the government with Morrison [Scott Morrison, Prime Minister of Australia at the time the data was collected] at the helm makes me fearful” (P102, M, 21, Metropolitan VIC).

“The mega-rich wasting money going into space. Governments and big business who don’t care, govts. only care about power and votes and businesses only care about money and optics” (P39, F, 47, Metropolitan NSW).

When examining this theme more closely, many participants referred to the lack of government action or to governments’ negative influence in perpetuating climate change, a sentiment consistent with expert assessments at the time [40]. For example, while some participants consistently mentioned how the “Australian Federal Government” and their “slow rate” and/or resistance to mitigating climate change was fear-inducing (“Australia’s lackadaisical policies on doing anything” P177, Masc, 22, Metropolitan NSW), others expressed fears about the entanglement between government and business (“The Australian government works for the fossil fuel industry” P111, F, 59, Metropolitan SA) as well as politicians vested interests in maintaining “power” (“Lack of foresight from most governments, too much focus on re-election rather than solving problems” P191, M, 42, Metropolitan NSW). In contrast, other participants explicitly noted they were fearful of large corporations, including their contribution to climate change and their resistance to meaningful climate action (“I am fearful about climate change because I do not see the needs and wants of big business being put on the back burner in the face of impending doom” P282, F, 19, Metropolitan QLD), noting how corporations had vested interests (for example, investments in “traditional power generation sources” P74, M, 43, Metropolitan QLD) in not taking climate action (“big corporations and governments that invest in short cuts that are bad for the environment but make them money” P119, F, 20, Metropolitan VIC). Nevertheless, most participants were fearful that the current socio-economic system did not facilitate or incentivise either governments or big businesses to take necessary actions to significantly mitigate climate change, as clearly noted by one participant:

“The fact that commercialisation & industry & capitalism means that it is only going to get worse as governments and big businesses care more about making money than being environmentally conscious” P4, M, 27, Metropolitan NSW.

While some participants discussed how they feared the lack of action and negligence by the government and large organisations, others expressed that they feared disengagement and lack of concern shown by others in the general population. Here, participants explicitly flagged “climate change deniers”, “humanity”, and “selfishness” as all things they currently feared. Some participants even mentioned how the “media” and “news reports” represented climate change was something that made them fearful (“Seeing news reports about future projections of climate change. Seeing images of flooding, fires, hurricanes” P65, M, 23, Metropolitan NSW).

Interestingly, some participants also reported that individuals who denied the existence of climate change or did not acknowledge their behaviour’s contribution to the problem, was fear-inducing. For example, when explicitly referring to climate change deniers, participants noted how they feared the way they blocked progress (“That it requires a collective effort to curb it, which seems like a massive challenge given the climate change deniers” P67, F, 29, Metropolitan VIC) and continued to debate the existence of climate change (“Disagreements about its existence” P118, M, 19, Metropolitan SA). In contrast, others said that they were fearful of the little care shown by others (“People don’t seem to care about all the resources they use and the pollution that is created that is damaging the environment” P26, F, 57, Metropolitan SA), with one participant pointing to “self-interest groups” and “religiosity” specifically (P98, M, 75, Metropolitan QLD). Despite an increase in the number of Australians alarmed about climate change [41], participants within this theme appeared to continue to grapple with the pervasive fear of climate change denial and carelessness shown by others.

Along similar lines, participants’ responses also described how they were fearful and doubtful that humanity would be able to tackle climate change meaningfully. For example, one participant demonstrated this by stating that “Humans are incapable of changing” (P14, M, 32, Metropolitan VIC). In contrast, others expressed their dissatisfaction with humanity’s current efforts in mitigating climate change by using the possessive determiner “we” to signify their evaluation of collective efforts (“we are not doing enough” P160, F, 28, Metropolitan VIC) and the slow rate of this change (e.g., “That we aren’t making changes fast enough” P169, F, 30, Metropolitan NSW). These responses indicate potentially deep-seated fears and doubts about humanity’s capacity to effectively “deal” with the challenges of climate change. The added layer of urgency indicated by the belief that “we” may not be able to halt the trajectory of climate change suggests that people’s opinion is that accelerated and collective action may be needed to address climate change effectively.

Fear Theme 3: Intergenerational impacts and legacy.

This final theme captures how participants also discussed how fearful they were for future generations due to climate inaction, specifically demonstrating angst about the “future” and young people’s experience of the “planet” in the not-so-distant future (“I am fearful as it will make the planet a terrible place to live in the future” P199, M, 51, Metropolitan WA). This included a general fear for “younger generations” and “future generations” but also a fear for their current or future “children”. Some younger participants even noted how they were fearful for their future. As one participant aptly noted:

“I’m fearful that as a young person I will be alive to see negative changes to the earth and possibly see the earth become uninhabitable. I’m also worried about the state of the earth for future generations, especially if I have kids of my own one day” P206, F, 19, Metropolitan VIC).

Many of the participant responses in this theme were connected to “children”, with participants often using the possessive determiner such as “my” and “our”. For example, some expressed concerns about the quality of life their children might endure because of climate change (“That we will make the planet unliveable for my children” P137, M, 46, Metropolitan WA). Others referred to the idea of what current generations would leave behind for young people to inherit (“leaving our planet in a much worse state for future generations” P91, F, 29, Metropolitan QLD). The use of possessive determiners and the idea of leaving a degraded planet for future generations suggests that many participants experienced a sense of responsibility, as well as fear, for how climate change would impact younger people in the future.

This theme is consistent with other qualitative research investigating parents’ perceptions of climate change, indicating that people are concerned about how the adverse effects predicted by IPCC [1] are likely to impact their children’s lives [42]. In particular, parents expressed sadness, hopelessness, and anxiety when considering how climate change will impact their children, specifically referring to environmental degradation, species extinction, and quality of life [42]. Similarly, when asked, “How do you feel about climate change?” Australian scientists also revealed concern for current and future generations, explicitly referring to their own children. Engaging in climate action to protect current and future generations was found to be a top priority among North American participants [43]. The current study’s findings build upon this research by showing that Australians fear how climate change will impact current and future generations.

Hope Theme 1: Changing attitudes and changing pro-environmental habits.

While in Fear Theme 2 (see above) participants expressed a fear of sceptical climate change attitudes and behavioural disengagement in the issue, many participants also described that people becoming aware of climate change, and their individual impact on the issue, made them hopeful for the future. This was especially evident when participants said they felt hopeful when seeing people who “care”, who “are listening”, and who are “changing their ways”. Much of the language utilised in this theme also aligned with dynamic norms (i.e., the positive shift in pro-environmental engagement overtime among society) [44] (“Human behaviour changing & making more of an effort to reduce carbon footprint & take more sustainable approaches” P236, F, 40, Metropolitan VIC).

For most participants, a frequent source of hope was the public’s awareness of climate change, with participants using terms such as “accepting”, “care”, “attention”, “interested”, “listening”, and “engagement” to demonstrate this view. Some even emphasised that the ongoing and active processes of “increasing awareness” was hope-inducing, using such phrasing as “becoming aware”, “growing awareness”, and “more people beginning to care”, thereby showing the dynamic nature of hope of participants. Moreover, this source of hope appeared to come from the observation that more people in society had shifted from climate change scepticism to “acceptance” and were taking it more “seriously” (e.g., “People are starting to accept its happening” P6, F, 25, Metropolitan VIC). A few participants even noted how “schools” that were now educating students about climate change, thus increasing awareness among young people, made them feel hopeful (“Schools are teaching students about greenhouse gasses and some things that need to be changed in order to be on track to rid climate change” P9, M, 24, Metropolitan NSW).

Another source of hope for participants was their observation that more individuals were “making a change” and engaging in individual pro-environmental behaviours. This was reflected in such phrases as: “people are making small changes”, “individual change”, and “actions of individuals”. While some participants’ responses described how norms were changing (“More and more individuals are changing their ways” P73, F, 39, Metropolitan NSW), others specified behaviours such as “reducing plastic waste”, “favouring electric cars”, “reducing fast fashion”, and “changes to their diet” as hope-inducing. These perspectives align with previous research on American adults and Swedish teenagers that found witnessing others engage in pro-environmental behaviours was a source of hope [18–20], and that individuals respond positively to depictions of ordinary people engaging in pro-environmental behaviour [45]. Our study extends these findings by showing that Australians also find hope in seeing ordinary people engage in pro-environmental behaviour.

Participants also noted how collective efforts to combat climate change made them hopeful, frequently using terms like “community”, “public”, and “people” (“Collaborative global efforts to affect change and/or prevent further damage” P209, 33, F, Metropolitan NSW). Some even emphasised how “many people” and “countries” were working together to address climate change inspired hope (“That there are people working to make a change and that there are a lot of people that support this” P67, F, 29, Metropolitan VIC). Some even noted how “humanity’s” capacity to confront “challenges” in the past raised their hopes in tackling climate change, pointing to the human characteristics of “resilience and resourcefulness” and “intelligence” as essential to this endeavour. From this perspective, participants’ hopes were closely intertwined with their belief in collective action and humanity’s resilience. These insights shed light on the multifaceted nature of hope in the context of climate change, emphasising the significance of community involvement and the perceived innate human ability to address environmental challenges when there is the desire to do so.

Interestingly, while in Fear Theme 2 (see above) expressed fear towards the inaction of governments and businesses, it appeared they experienced hope when thinking about collective community driven movements for climate action. In fact, for some participants, the resurgence in climate activism and how it could force governments and large corporations to “change their ways” also induced hope, indicating that seeing or knowing others engage in activist behaviour (not just individual behaviour) was something that made them hopeful (“there seems to be a growing movement that are recognising the dangers and campaigning for change” P252, M, 47, Metropolitan QLD). One participant went so far as to say that they found hope in seeing others engage in digital activism:

“That there are people who are trying to mitigate it by picking up trash from the ocean, planting trees and are using their social media platforms to influence other people to join in” (P241, F, 19, Metropolitan NSW).

Similarly, in the context of “increasing pressure on decision-makers” (P129, F, 31, Metropolitan VIC), another participant specifically pointed to climate change protests that occurred in Melbourne and Sydney in 2019:

“The climate change rallies/protests in Melbourne and Sydney in 2019 show that this is an issue that more people are becoming concerned about, which may pressure the Australian Government to do more to address climate change” P67, F, 29, Metropolitan VIC)

While prior research has found people respond negatively to environmental activism, especially radical activism [46], participants in the current study instead tied some of their hope to the burgeoning wave of climate activism, where individuals and groups, through their campaigns, protests, and digital endeavours, actively engaged in advocating for environmental action. This collective push, epitomised by events like the climate rallies in Australian cities, may reflect a growing societal commitment to addressing climate change and the hope that collective action can be successful. Although in Fear Theme 3 (see above) many participants felt fearful for the future of young people, several were also hopeful due to younger generations being the most “fired up” demographic in mitigating climate change. When discussing this youth engagement, participants often referred to activism or activist-like behaviours carried out by young people as being hope-inducing (“Young activists taking a stand for change” P201, F, 20, Inner Regional SA), with one participant aptly noting that they were hopeful because “slowly younger people are making their voices heard” (P45, F, 28, Metropolitan VIC). One participant even mentioned the School Strikes for Climate, also known as Fridays for Future, noting that seeing these events made them feel hopeful that progress was possible because of “Young people like Greta Thunberg and everyone else who is campaigning for action to be taken now” (P39, F, 47, Metropolitan NSW).

Overall, viewing others’ behaviours as hope-inducing is somewhat unsurprising given that prior research has shown that people observing others engage in climate activism can increase collective efficacy beliefs (i.e., humanity’s ability to mitigate climate change effectively) [47]. Further still, other findings indicate that familiarity with Greta Thunberg, the pioneer of school strikes for climate and often depicted as the symbol of youth climate activism, is positively associated with collective action intentions and collective efficacy beliefs [48]. In the current study, responses about young people and climate activism suggest that observing or being aware of young people’s engagement with the issue of climate action could trigger feelings of hope.

Hope Theme 2: Progress, sustainability, technology, and innovation.

While Fear Theme 2 (see above) emphasised how governmental and industry inaction resulted in fear of participants, this theme reflects how participants felt hope when scientists, governments, and corporations were seen to be meaningfully working towards change. This was reflected in responses that pertained to participants hopes about “progress” in mitigating climate change and advancements in “technology”, “initial actions towards sustainability” (P173, M, 39, Metropolitan QLD), and “scientists…working hard” (P186, F, 31, Metropolitan ACT). For instance, some emphasised the future promise of science and technological solutions, specifically noting that their hope arose from the potential of “technological advances” and “innovation from scientists”. Others noted that their hope was that action on climate change had the “potential for a surge in development of better technologies” (P23, M, 50, Inner Regional TAS), and that scientific and technological solutions would be found that did not require “people to change their habits” (P1, F, 35, Inner Regional VIC) (“Surely there must be some scientific and technological solutions which will eventually be brought to bear on the issue” P166, M, 47, Metropolitan QLD). A small number of participants even pointed to historical actions from governments and businesses to mitigate the effects of human behaviour on the environment as a reason to be hopeful (e.g., “In the 90’s there was a lot of emphasis on the hole in the ozone layer, which led to reforms in CFC usage/refrigerants etc. that ultimately addressed the issue” P288, F, 38, Metropolitan NSW).

Within this theme, participants also reflected feeling hopeful about progress or advances in specific forms of technology, primarily renewable energy. Multiple participants made explicit reference to “renewable energy”, with some even saying they were hopeful because Australia was a prime location for renewable energy to be successful (“Renewable Energy and Australia is abundant in it” P49, M, 31, Metropolitan VIC). Some even pointed to the possible positive economic outcomes of adopting renewable energy and environmentally friendly alternatives, noting it will result in “more jobs”, that “Green hydrogen will make manufacturing cheaper in Australia” and that “Australia has the potential to export green energy” (P111, F, 59, Metropolitan SA).

Participants’ belief that technology and science alone are sufficient to mitigate climate change has also been found in prior research. For instance, holding strong beliefs that technology and innovation will solve climate change appears to diffuse individual responsibility for mitigating climate change, decrease risk perceptions, and increase behavioural disengagement [19,47]. Furthermore, relying on external sources (government intervention, technological advancements) in solving complex issues, such as climate change, is associated with a personal lack of control [12,49]. When this occurs, a reduction in motivation to confront and mitigate climate change is more likely due to a reduction in urgency and an increase in complacency [12,50]. While technology and science appear to increase climate-related hope in participants, this prior research also suggests that inducing hope by describing progress in government interventions and technological advancements may also result in counterproductive attitudes, such as relying solely on technology.

Hope Theme 3: An opportunity for change.

While less commonly seen across participants, Hope Theme 3 outlines how some participants saw the potential benefits of climate change as a source of hope, suggesting that participants were engaging in a positive reappraisal of climate change itself (“Positive changes to the human experience if we deal with it correctly” P109, F, 27, Metropolitan NSW). For instance, some indicated that they hoped climate change would catalyse action, which was reflected in participants using words such as “make”, “drive”, and “force” when talking about the positive changes that could arise from climate action. Similarly, participants also expressed that they were hopeful that “feeling the effects of climate change”, such as experiencing extreme weather events (see Fear Theme 1 above), would be a “wake-up call” for people and governments to “do something about it”. As one participant noted: “Humans in general aren’t great at dealing with problems proactively so hopefully with enough unavoidable problems there will be incentive to act” (P288, F, 38, Metropolitan NSW).

While some participants engaged in a positive reappraisal of climate change, this reappraisal did differ across participants. Some referred to more human-centred opportunities for innovation and positive changes to the human experience (“I think that there are opportunities for innovation and positive changes in the way we live, e.g., more solar panels, less carbon footprint” P121, F, 26, Inner Regional VIC). In contrast, others mentioned the potential environmental benefits of climate change for “species”, “flora”, “fauna”, and the “planet”, noting this could result in positive adaptations or opportunities for certain species (“Some species may actually benefit from climate change and others might adapt to it” P32, M, 32, Metropolitan VIC).

Overall, it appeared that for some participants, there was hope that the negative impacts of climate change could catalyse public pro-environmental change to avoid future climatic disasters, a phenomenon recently referred to as ‘transilience’. Transilience contains three components that capture how people adapt to climate change, one of which is the ability to transform positively in response to climate change [51]. However, transilience refers to the individual benefits of responding to climate change, whereas most responses in this theme refer to collective benefits. Nevertheless, significant societal changes can be triggered by opportunities to address the underlying causes of disasters [52,53]. For instance, the widespread adoption of low-carbon alternatives from traditional power sources in response to extreme weather events or natural disasters linked to climate change. While positive reappraisals have been linked to increases in pro-environmental behaviours in adolescent populations (< 18 years) [32,54–56], this theme suggests that Australian adults may also engage in positive reappraisal, emphasising the opportunities to cope with climate change effectively.