Youth feel deep climate anxiety as trust in government declines

In addition to government inaction, students also pointed to public apathy and the actions of high-emitting individuals or corporations as barriers. They described climate responsibility as unevenly distributed, with some groups shouldering consequences while others continue contributing disproportionately to emissions.

A new analysis reveals that college students are carrying a significant emotional burden related to climate change, yet their trust in the government’s willingness to address the crisis remains strikingly low. The researchers conducted a convergent parallel mixed-methods study that combines qualitative interviews with standardized measures of climate anxiety, providing one of the clearest snapshots to date of how young adults in higher education perceive climate risk, responsibility and political action.

The findings are detailed in the peer-reviewed study “College Students’ Perceptions and Emotions Related to Climate Change and Government Climate Action,” published in the journal Youth. The research examines the emotional landscape of climate concern, the personal and contextual factors shaping student perceptions, and the extent to which government action, or inaction, drives their frustration, disengagement or resolve.

The authors’ analysis reveals a complex emotional experience marked by worry, sadness, anger and fear about future climate impacts. While students reported low clinical impairment related to climate anxiety, they expressed pervasive negative emotions and widespread dissatisfaction with the U.S. government’s response. Despite this, most continue to adopt sustainable behaviors and coping strategies to manage their distress, even when they believe their individual actions are too small to meaningfully alter climate outcomes.

Students experience strong emotional reactions to climate change but report low clinical impairment

The researchers found that participants expressed consistent negative emotions, including worry, frustration, fear and sadness. Many students conveyed a sense of threat involving their own futures, the fate of future generations and the well-being of vulnerable communities. Some noted concerns about the long-term survival of ecosystems, the stability of global food and water supplies, and the economic and social consequences of a warming planet.

Although these emotions were intense and widely shared across the interview sample, clinical measures told a different story. Using the Climate Change Anxiety Scale, the study found that students scored low on impairment, indicating that climate-related worry does not rise to the level of clinical anxiety for most participants. The authors interpret this as evidence that students feel deeply emotionally affected by climate change but are not generally experiencing significant life disruption, dysfunction or chronic psychological impairment resulting from these concerns.

This combination, strong emotions but low clinical impairment, shapes how young adults interact with climate information and with their own sense of responsibility. Many students said they think about climate change regularly and acknowledged a heightened sense of urgency. Yet the emotions seldom translate into incapacitation. Instead, students described themselves as functioning normally in school, social life and work, even while carrying an undercurrent of persistent climate-related concern.

The demographic data adds nuance to these emotional responses. The sample was predominantly white, female and from upper-middle or upper socioeconomic backgrounds. Students from higher-income families were more likely to report direct experiences with climate impacts, such as severe weather exposure or knowing someone affected by environmental changes. Men in the sample were more likely to indicate a high level of awareness or engagement in climate issues, though the small sample size limits broader generalization. Overall, the demographic variables were not strongly predictive of climate anxiety levels, suggesting that concern crosses social boundaries within this population.

Backgrounds, privilege and personal experiences shape students’ understanding of climate risk

The study also examined how students’ backgrounds, experiences and social contexts shape their perceptions of climate change. Through reflexive thematic analysis of in-depth interviews, the researchers found that family values, educational exposure, personal identity and socioeconomic privilege all play roles in forming climate attitudes.

Participants described their climate consciousness as something molded by early schooling, conversations within their households, social networks and the values emphasized by their parents. Several students identified education as a major influence, explaining that discussions in classrooms or social circles heightened their understanding of climate science and environmental responsibility. For many, climate change became a moral issue tied to fairness, justice and intergenerational responsibility.

The study also highlights the role of privilege. Students who identified as having economic security or a higher standard of living reported a stronger awareness of their own responsibility in contributing to climate change. Some acknowledged benefiting from lifestyles associated with high consumption or emissions, which in turn increased their feelings of guilt or accountability. Conversely, those who felt shielded by privilege sometimes described climate change as an abstract topic, serious and important, yet distant from their daily lives.

Direct experiences with climate-related events, such as extreme heat, flooding or witnessing environmental degradation in personally meaningful places, also shaped perceptions. Students who had firsthand encounters with climate impacts expressed heightened concern and urgency. For others, climate change remained a scientific or political concept rather than a lived experience.

Coping strategies also varied widely. Some students described active coping, including seeking hopeful information, engaging in pro-environmental behaviors or discussing climate issues with peers. Others relied on avoidance when climate anxiety became overwhelming. Avoidance strategies included intentionally staying away from climate news, disengaging from discussions or deliberately shifting focus to more immediate aspects of student life. These strategies highlight an emotional tension: students want to stay informed and responsible, yet they sometimes feel the psychological need to step back from the issue.

Despite these coping variations, participants overwhelmingly reported engaging in pro-environmental actions such as recycling, reducing energy use, making sustainable consumption choices and minimizing travel. The authors noted that individual actions remained widespread even among those skeptical about their broader impact. This combination of emotional engagement, personal responsibility and frustration with systemic barriers forms a core thread in students’ perceptions.

Distrust in government action drives feelings of helplessness and low political efficacy

The study lastly addresses concerns regarding how students view the U.S. government’s climate policies and political response. Here, the findings were notably consistent: participants widely perceived the federal government as capable of addressing climate change but unwilling to take meaningful action.

Students identified multiple reasons for this perceived inaction, including corporate influence over policy decisions, political polarization, short election cycles that discourage long-term planning and the persistence of climate denial among elected officials. Many participants expressed the belief that government leaders prioritize political or financial interests over environmental protection, contributing to a sense of disillusionment and distrust.

This distrust has significant emotional consequences. Participants linked governmental inaction to feelings of helplessness, frustration and anger. They expressed doubts about whether voting or other political actions could meaningfully influence environmental policy, reflecting low political efficacy. For some, this reduced their engagement with climate activism or political participation, reinforcing a cycle in which concern is high but hope for systemic change is low.

In addition to government inaction, students also pointed to public apathy and the actions of high-emitting individuals or corporations as barriers. They described climate responsibility as unevenly distributed, with some groups shouldering consequences while others continue contributing disproportionately to emissions.

Despite this bleak assessment of government response, students still expressed a sense of duty to make personal changes. They recognized the limitations of individual behavior but continued engaging in sustainable habits. The authors interpret this as a sign that students are caught between wanting systemic solutions and being forced to rely on personal action in the absence of strong political leadership.

The study calls for both educational institutions and policymakers to take climate anxiety seriously. The authors recommend that universities expand climate-related mental health support, integrate climate education across disciplines, and empower students with opportunities to participate in climate-related decision-making. They also argue that government agencies must adopt more ambitious climate strategies and improve public communication to restore trust and mobilize youth engagement.