Survey across the Global South sheds new light on support for climate policies

A sweeping cross-country survey of public opinion in the Global South reveals a nuanced reality: most people value climate action, yet its priority often drops when weighed against immediate needs like healthcare, education, and poverty reduction. The findings, drawn from 8,400 respondents in Chile, Colombia, India, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, and Vietnam, challenge simplistic readings of public support and point to practical ways to align climate policy with social priorities.

Beyond yes-or-no questions: testing real-world trade-offs

Rather than asking respondents to broadly agree or disagree with climate statements, the study presented concrete choices between competing uses of public funds. When people had to rank spending—say, between strengthening hospitals, improving schools, boosting jobs, or funding climate action—climate usually slipped a step behind. This doesn’t signal indifference; instead, it reflects the everyday calculus in countries where multiple urgent needs vie for limited resources.

Key patterns across seven countries

• Climate concern is widespread, but its salience is sensitive to context. When judged in isolation, respondents endorsed climate action strongly. When forced to choose among priorities, health, education, and livelihoods often came first.
• Knowledge matters more than formal schooling. People with a firmer grasp of climate causes and impacts were much more likely to back ambitious policies, including carbon pricing—regardless of their level of formal education.
• Scientists command the highest trust. Among information sources tested, scientific experts topped the list, ahead of government, business, and news media. This trust gap suggests that credible, science-based communication can meaningfully shift support.
• Earmarking carbon revenues wins support. Respondents favored using money from carbon taxes to fund health and education, instead of reducing deficits or issuing uniform cash rebates. Linking climate policy to visible social benefits strengthens buy-in.

What this means for climate politics in the Global South

The seven countries surveyed are home to hundreds of millions of people who are both vulnerable to climate impacts and pivotal to global emissions trajectories. The study indicates that support for climate policy in these contexts is not brittle; it is conditional. Policies that deliver co-benefits—cleaner air, better transport, new jobs, safer cities—stand a better chance of surviving political headwinds, especially when household budgets are tight and public services are under strain.

Equally important, the finding that climate knowledge is a stronger predictor of policy support than education level challenges common assumptions. Targeted, accessible climate literacy efforts—delivered through trusted messengers—could yield outsized gains in public backing for robust action.

Policy design lessons

• Pair climate measures with social investment. Link carbon pricing or regulatory reforms to visible improvements in healthcare, schools, or local infrastructure. Earmarking revenues for these priorities can turn abstract policy into tangible progress.
• Leverage trusted voices. Engage scientific institutions and local experts to communicate risks and solutions. Integrate community leaders and practitioners to bridge national policy and everyday realities.
• Focus on co-benefits. Emphasize immediate gains—clean air, reduced congestion, energy reliability, and green jobs—alongside long-term climate targets to bolster public support.
• Be transparent about trade-offs. Explain how funds are used, who benefits, and how vulnerable groups are protected. Clear reporting builds credibility.
• Tailor to context. While patterns are shared across countries, policy packages should reflect local priorities, labor markets, and fiscal constraints.

A richer dataset for aligning policy with public priorities

Spanning Chile, Colombia, India, Kenya, Nigeria, South Africa, and Vietnam, the survey offers a rare, comparable snapshot of climate attitudes across diverse economies. By moving past simple opinion polling and testing real trade-offs, it equips decision-makers with granular insights: how people weigh climate against health and education, which messengers they trust, and what fiscal designs they will support.

The bottom line is clear. Publics across the Global South are not rejecting climate action; they are asking for policies that protect livelihoods, improve services, and deliver fairness. Design climate policies that meet these tests—and support rises. Ignore them—and even well-intended measures may falter.