IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/sustdv/v34y2026i2p1808-1826.html

Seeing the Threat: A Study on Climate Change Risk Perceptions and Pro‐Environmental Behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Hend Yousef
  • Dina Yousri
  • Noha El‐Bassiouny

Abstract

Climate change along with its consequences continues to threaten global markets, particularly developing countries. However, individuals often base their judgments on associative and affective processing rather than scientific reasoning. This is due to the role experiences have in invoking strong striking feelings that tend to be more dominant when processing. Moreover, prior research on climate change models often studied risk perception and behaviour independently despite overlapping themes and constructs. Therefore, this paper aims to provide a comprehensive view of climate change risk perceptions and how they are translated to behaviour by expanding on prior models such as the climate change risk perception model, the cultural theory and the theory of planned behaviour. PLS‐SEM was used due to its powerful statistical approaches. Findings indicate that self‐efficacy, negative affect, and individualism positively influence climate change risk perception. Additionally, self‐efficacy and positive affect and risk perception were found to increase behavioural intentions. Findings also found risk perception to play a mediating role between psycho‐social dimensions and intention while perceived policy effectiveness plays a moderating role between intention and action. Furthermore, this study contributes theoretically by linking self‐efficacy, risk perception, and policy perceptions into an integrated framework and practically by offering pathways for communication and policy interventions that motivate meaningful climate action. Finally, future research should address methodological constraints, such as the reliance on non‐probability sampling, by adopting probability‐based methods to improve generalizability. It should also refine measurement tools, particularly cultural theory scales (e.g., hierarchicalism, fatalism), by developing items more consistent with grid/group dimensions.

Suggested Citation

  • Hend Yousef & Dina Yousri & Noha El‐Bassiouny, 2026. "Seeing the Threat: A Study on Climate Change Risk Perceptions and Pro‐Environmental Behaviour," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(2), pages 1808-1826, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:sustdv:v:34:y:2026:i:2:p:1808-1826
    DOI: 10.1002/sd.70425
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.70425
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/sd.70425?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chuanhui Liao & Dingtao Zhao & Shuang Zhang & Lanfang Chen, 2018. "Determinants and the Moderating Effect of Perceived Policy Effectiveness on Residents’ Separation Intention for Rural Household Solid Waste," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. West, J. & Bailey, I. & Winter, M., 2010. "Renewable energy policy and public perceptions of renewable energy: A cultural theory approach," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 5739-5748, October.
    3. Christel W. van Eck & Bob C. Mulder & Sander van der Linden, 2020. "Climate Change Risk Perceptions of Audiences in the Climate Change Blogosphere," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-17, September.
    4. Nursey-Bray, Melissa & Pecl, G.T. & Frusher, S. & Gardner, C. & Haward, M. & Hobday, A.J. & Jennings, S. & Punt, A.E. & Revill, H. & van Putten, I., 2012. "Communicating climate change: Climate change risk perceptions and rock lobster fishers, Tasmania," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 753-759.
    5. Xin Shen & Bowei Chen & Markus Leibrecht & Huanzheng Du, 2022. "The Moderating Effect of Perceived Policy Effectiveness in Residents’ Waste Classification Intentions: A Study of Bengbu, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-12, January.
    6. Rui He & Jianjun Jin & Foyuan Kuang & Chenyang Zhang & Tong Guan, 2019. "Farmers’ Risk Cognition, Risk Preferences and Climate Change Adaptive Behavior: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-13, December.
    7. Elahi, Ehsan & Khalid, Zainab & Zhang, Zhixin, 2022. "Understanding farmers’ intention and willingness to install renewable energy technology: A solution to reduce the environmental emissions of agriculture," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    8. Paul Slovic & Melissa L. Finucane & Ellen Peters & Donald G. MacGregor, 2004. "Risk as Analysis and Risk as Feelings: Some Thoughts about Affect, Reason, Risk, and Rationality," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 311-322, April.
    9. Jarvis, Cheryl Burke & MacKenzie, Scott B & Podsakoff, Philip M, 2003. "A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 30(2), pages 199-218, September.
    10. Teun Terpstra, 2011. "Emotions, Trust, and Perceived Risk: Affective and Cognitive Routes to Flood Preparedness Behavior," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(10), pages 1658-1675, October.
    11. Jantsje M. Mol & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Julia E. Blasch & Hans de Moel, 2020. "Insights into Flood Risk Misperceptions of Homeowners in the Dutch River Delta," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1450-1468, July.
    12. Jingjing Zeng & Meiquan Jiang & Meng Yuan, 2020. "Environmental Risk Perception, Risk Culture, and Pro-Environmental Behavior," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(5), pages 1-18, March.
    13. Hang Lu & Jonathon Schuldt, 2015. "Exploring the role of incidental emotions in support for climate change policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 131(4), pages 719-726, August.
    14. James C. Anderson, 1987. "An Approach for Confirmatory Measurement and Structural Equation Modeling of Organizational Properties," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 525-541, April.
    15. Huilin Wang & Jiaxuan Li & Aweewan Mangmeechai & Jiafu Su, 2021. "Linking Perceived Policy Effectiveness and Proenvironmental Behavior: The Influence of Attitude, Implementation Intention, and Knowledge," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-17, March.
    16. La, Viet-Phuong & Nguyen, Minh-Hoang & Vuong, Quan-Hoang, 2023. "Are we on the right track for climate change mitigation?," OSF Preprints xv4u5, Center for Open Science.
    17. Saari, Ulla A. & Damberg, Svenja & Frömbling, Lena & Ringle, Christian M., 2021. "Sustainable consumption behavior of Europeans: The influence of environmental knowledge and risk perception on environmental concern and behavioral intention," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    18. Susanne Rippl, 2002. "Cultural theory and risk perception: a proposal for a better measurement," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(2), pages 147-165, April.
    19. Paul M. Kellstedt & Sammy Zahran & Arnold Vedlitz, 2008. "Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 113-126, February.
    20. Nick Pidgeon, 2012. "Public understanding of, and attitudes to, climate change: UK and international perspectives and policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(sup01), pages 85-106, September.
    21. Myoungsoon You & Youngkee Ju, 2020. "The Outrage Effect of Personal Stake, Familiarity, Effects on Children, and Fairness on Climate Change Risk Perception Moderated by Political Orientation," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-14, September.
    22. Ellis, Richard J. & Thompson, Fred, 1997. "Culture and the Environment in the Pacific Northwest," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 91(4), pages 885-897, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yin, Zhaoyun & Ma, Jing & Wang, Canyou & Cao, Jiajia & Li, Haimei, 2025. "How policies impact household waste-source separation: an exploratory study of China," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    2. Sun-Ki Chai & Dolgorsuren Dorj & Katerina Sherstyuk, 2018. "Cultural Values and Behavior in Dictator, Ultimatum, and Trust Games: An Experimental Study," Research in Experimental Economics, in: Experimental Economics and Culture, volume 20, pages 89-166, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    3. Mutlu, Asli & Roy, Debraj & Filatova, Tatiana, 2023. "Capitalized value of evolving flood risks discount and nature-based solution premiums on property prices," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 205(C).
    4. Nik Masdek Nik Rozana & Wong Kelly Kai Seng & Mohd Nawi Nolila & Sharifuddin Juwaidah & Wong Wang Li, 2023. "Antecedents of sustainable food waste management behaviour: Empirical evidence from urban households in Malaysia," Management & Marketing, Sciendo, vol. 18(1), pages 53-77, March.
    5. Helena Hansson & Carl Johan Lagerkvist, 2014. "Decision Making for Animal Health and Welfare: Integrating Risk‐Benefit Analysis with Prospect Theory," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(6), pages 1149-1159, June.
    6. Wim Kellens & Ruud Zaalberg & Philippe De Maeyer, 2012. "The Informed Society: An Analysis of the Public's Information‐Seeking Behavior Regarding Coastal Flood Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1369-1381, August.
    7. Rebecca Romsdahl & Lorilie Atkinson & Jeannie Schultz, 2013. "Planning for climate change across the US Great Plains: concerns and insights from government decision-makers," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 3(1), pages 1-14, March.
    8. Nicolás C. Bronfman & Pamela C. Cisternas & Paula B. Repetto & Javiera V. Castañeda & Eliana Guic, 2020. "Understanding the Relationship Between Direct Experience and Risk Perception of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2057-2070, October.
    9. Michael Siegrist, 2021. "Trust and Risk Perception: A Critical Review of the Literature," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 41(3), pages 480-490, March.
    10. Monica Galizzi & Tommaso Tempesti, 2015. "Workers’ Risk Tolerance and Occupational Injuries," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(10), pages 1858-1875, October.
    11. M. Aenne Schoop & Marco Verweij & Ulrich Kühnen & Shenghua Luan, 2020. "Political disagreement in the classroom: testing cultural theory through structured observation," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(2), pages 623-643, April.
    12. Tan-Soo, Jie-Sheng & Li, Jun & Qin, Ping, 2023. "Individuals' and households' climate adaptation and mitigation behaviors: A systematic review," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    13. Wim Kellens & Teun Terpstra & Philippe De Maeyer, 2013. "Perception and Communication of Flood Risks: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(1), pages 24-49, January.
    14. Lois Addo Agyepong & Xin Liang & Patrick Owusu Ansah, 2025. "Behavioral mechanism on flood risk response: a case study in Accra, Ghana," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 121(6), pages 6499-6523, April.
    15. Kazuya Nakayachi, 2015. "Examining Public Trust in Risk‐Managing Organizations After a Major Disaster," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(1), pages 57-67, January.
    16. Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke A. & Permadi, Dwiko B. & Yasmi, Yurdi, 2012. "The value of cultural theory for participatory processes in natural resource management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 99-106.
    17. Julie L. Demuth, 2018. "Explicating Experience: Development of a Valid Scale of Past Hazard Experience for Tornadoes," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1921-1943, September.
    18. Kazuya Nakayachi & Kazuhisa Nagaya, 2016. "The Effects of the Passage of Time from the 2011 Tohoku Earthquake on the Public’s Anxiety about a Variety of Hazards," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-12, August.
    19. Yaodong Yang & Huaqing Ren & Han Zhang, 2022. "Understanding Consumer Panic Buying Behaviors during the Strict Lockdown on Omicron Variant: A Risk Perception View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    20. Stuart Capstick & Nicholas Pidgeon, 2014. "Public perception of cold weather events as evidence for and against climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 122(4), pages 695-708, February.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:sustdv:v:34:y:2026:i:2:p:1808-1826. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1719 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.