The Program of Applied Research on Climate Action in CanadaLongitudinal Study: Wave 7

1. Background

In September 2021, in partnership with Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC) and Natural Resources Canada (NRCan), the Impact and Innovation Unit launched a multi-year program of research on climate change. The Program of Applied Research on Climate Action in Canada (PARCA) will combine behavioural science insights and methods with robust policy analysis to promote climate action.

Together with ECCC and NRCan, we will learn about how Canadians think, feel and act in response to climate change and the risks it creates. We will then develop and test, online and in the real world, specific behaviourally-informed solutions with the potential to reduce GHG emissions and promote climate adaptation at the individual and community level. This work will generate new insights on a rapid timeframe and use them to inform policy development, program design, and public communications.

+ Learn more

2. Methodology

The study is conducted with a General Population Random Sample using a longitudinal design (i.e. the same participants, where possible, will be completing the survey each wave), along with oversampling of underrepresented populations and other specific populations of interest. This initial study will span eight waves between December 2021 and March 2023, with data collected every two months to allow for optimal monitoring.

Advisory Committee

The longitudinal survey is designed in consultation with an advisory committee of academics and practitioners. The committee consists of subject matter experts from a diverse range of backgrounds, including behavioural science, environmental psychology, communications, political science, anthropology, climate policy, and sustainability.
Survey Objectives

The PARCA longitudinal study is public opinion research that uses a large and nationally representative sample of Canadians to gather data and track changes over time about how Canadians think, feel, and act in response to climate change and its impacts. The robust, quantitative evidence generated by this study will help identify where there is potential for promoting greater individual climate and environmental action.
Data Collection & Analysis

Surveys are conducted online, in English and French, by Advanis, a leading Canadian market research company. Respondents are recruited through random digit dialing calls and invited to complete the survey online. Each wave takes about 20 minutes to complete, after which participants are asked whether they may be contacted for future waves.

To ensure the sample is broadly representative of the Canadian population and to allow for analyses within and between subgroups of interests (e.g. regions, provinces, age groups, vulnerable groups), each wave consists of 2,000 participants. The sample includes general population respondents (n=1,500) weighted by region, age group, gender, and education using data from the 2016 Census, as well as an oversample (n=500) of populations of specific interest, which may change from one wave to the next. In Wave 1, the oversample was used to extend the general population sample to 2,000 participants.

Impact Canada conducts exploratory and confirmatory data analyses using descriptive and inferential statistics to identify emerging trends and test relationships among variables.

3. Key Insights

The multi-wave design of the PARCA longitudinal study enables the analysis of changes or stability in key beliefs, attitudes, and behaviours over time. Wave 7 represents one full year of data collection (Dec 2021 to Dec 2022). To maximize its potential value, Wave 7 includes both repeat respondents, who have answered one or more previous surveys and whose thoughts and behaviours may have been shaped by their participation in the study, alongside a new nationally-representative sample of 2,000 Canadians to enable clear year-over-year comparisons to the equivalent sample in Wave 1 (Dec 2021).

Further analysis is needed to identify and confirm the drivers of change or stability over time, and relationships among variables, but we see some clear trends:

Over the past year, seasonal and other contextual factors have shaped how Canadians think, feel, and act in response to climate change and its impacts.
Belief in climate change has provided a steady baseline that emphasizes the variability in other measures, like emotional responses, risk perceptions, and willingness to act.
Some mitigation behaviours appear to have varied seasonally, while adaptation behaviours seem to have followed extreme weather events, and support for energy resources has increased, possibly related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
But despite higher reported exposure to climate change across all information sources, most measures of attention paid to climate change have decreased slightly through the year.
And while many Canadians intend to undertake pro-climate actions, very few are following through.

Key Insights by theme

Climate Change Perceptions
Since Wave 1 (Dec 2021), outright belief in climate change has remained high and stable. In contrast, other measures of belief and risk perception have varied through the year and appear to be linked to extreme weather events. Similarly, emotional responses, willingness to act, the perceived effect of individual actions, and perceived social norms have fluctuated. Respondents believe that private industry, international organizations, and the federal government have more responsibility to take climate action than do regular Canadians, but the perceived responsibility of all groups has decreased slightly from a year ago.
Mitigation Behaviours
Engagement in most mitigation behaviours has remained relatively stable over the past year, with seasonal shifts in active transportation (e.g., walking, cycling) and adjusting thermostats to save energy. Flying has rebounded since pandemic-related lows a year ago. Despite fluctuating energy prices, energy affordability has been relatively stable at the national level, but with important regional differences. Despite slight increases in costly, high-impact behaviours, there remain large gaps between intention and action. Very few repeat respondents have followed through on their intention to purchase hybrid and electric vehicles, while follow-through rates have been more variable across the different home retrofits. There has been little difference in the rates of pre-planned versus unplanned action. Intention to purchase hybrid and electric vehicles, as well as to engage in a variety of home retrofits, has decreased slightly from a year ago.
Adaptation Behaviours
Adaptation behaviours have varied through the year, with peaks corresponding to extreme weather events that had widespread impacts. Emergency preparedness has increased slightly from Wave 1, but intention to prepare has also decreased. Follow-through on intention to buy weather-related insurance has been relatively high. Adoption of emergency preparedness measures has been much higher among repeat respondents than in the broader population, and has been similar among those who said they planned to do so as among those who did not. This suggests that participation in the survey itself has increased emergency preparedness.
Climate Policy Support
Support for carbon pricing has decreased from a year ago, while already-high support for adaptation and nature-related policies has increased slightly. Support for the further development of all energy resources (except coal) has increased in the past year. Though still with mixed support, nuclear energy has had the biggest increase, followed by oil and natural gas. Strong support for solar, wind, hydro, ocean, and geothermal energy has also increased slightly.
Information Sources and Trust
Respondents report seeing more climate change information across nearly all sources compared to a year ago. Canadian TV and radio, newspapers and magazines, and family and friends, continue to be the sources through which Canadians most frequently encounter such information. Scientists remain the most trusted actor on climate change, while trust in family and friends, as well as in all levels of government, has decreased somewhat in the past year.

4. Considerations

Data Collected: November 29 to December 23, 2022
Sample Size: 2,786 (2,001 new and 786 longitudinal)

When interpreting the PARCA results, it is useful to keep in mind the context of the data collection period, which may have influenced the responses of survey participants. Prior to and during the Wave 7 data collection period:

Notable weather events in Canada included extreme snowstorms in BC and Ontario.
The Russian invasion of Ukraine and sanctions against Russian oil and gas continued. Ongoing energy security and geopolitical concerns continued to drive calls for fossil fuel production and an accelerated renewable energy transition.
The Conference of the Parties of the UNFCCC (COP27) took place November 6 – 18 in Egypt. The final agreement approved the establishment of a climate loss and damage fund to compensate developing countries for harms caused by climate change.
On November 24, the Government of Canada released the National Adaptation Strategy, which outlines Canada’s commitment to improving disaster resilience, infrastructure, and other areas related to climate adaptation. The strategy will be supported by $1.6 billion in new federal funding.
The Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (COP15) took place December 7 – 19 in Montreal. The main pledge in the final agreement was to protect at least 30% of the world’s land and water by 2030.
On December 20, the first stage of the federal single use plastic ban – banning the manufacture and import of some plastic products – came into effect.
On December 21, the Government of Canada announced proposed regulations for new vehicle sales, to ensure all new vehicles for sale by 2035 will be electric vehicles. The announcement also included new investments to install EV chargers, renew the EV rebate program, and invest in domestic EV manufacturing.

5. Climate Change Attitudes & Perceptions

While belief in climate change has been stable, other risk perceptions have varied over time

Three quarters (73%) of respondents in Wave 7 (Dec 2022) strongly agree that climate change is real, but only 54% strongly agree that it is primarily caused by human activity, and 57% that it will have serious negative consequences. Belief in climate change has been relatively stable over the past year, providing a steady baseline by which to judge variability in other measures of belief and risk perception. In contrast, risk perceptions appear to vary wave to wave, and are linked in part to respondents’ recent experience of extreme weather; for example, perception of local impacts increased significantly in Wave 5 (Aug 2022), in part because of the widespread impact of the derecho (severe windstorm) in Ontario and Quebec in May.

Figure 1. Please rate your agreement or disagreement with the following statements about the issue of climate change. [% Strongly Agree]

Figure - Text description

Table 1. Please rate your agreement or disagreement with the following statements about the issue of climate change. [% Strongly Agree]

Emotional responses to climate change have fluctuated over the year, with a small summer peak

Negative emotional responses to climate change have subsided slightly since Wave 5 (Aug 2022). Half (48%) of respondents remain very or extremely worried, while a third feel very or extremely angry (32%). The proportion feeling very or extremely anxious has dropped slightly to 29%. A small percentage (10%) continue to feel very or extremely confused. People who feel very or extremely hopeful are a small minority (13%), with the proportion down slightly since peaking in Wave 6. While belief in climate change remained stable through the year, emotional responses fluctuated during the same period. Worry, anger, anxiety, and hope are down year over year, which represent statistically significant differences.

Figure 2. How do you currently feel about the issue of climate change? [% Very or Extremely]

Figure - Text description

Table 2. How do you currently feel about the issue of climate change? [% Very or Extremely]

Most Canadians are still willing to act, but willingness is lower now than one year ago

Three quarters (75%) of respondents strongly or somewhat agree that collective action can limit further climate change, while a slightly smaller share (71%) are willing to act to limit it. Less than two thirds (60%) of respondents say they have already made changes to mitigate climate change, with a similar share (64%) somewhat or strongly agreeing that their actions are impactful (i.e., self-efficacy). In terms of social norms, fewer think people close to them expect them to act (57%), or that their family and friends are taking action (52%) (i.e., social norms). Compared to stable belief in climate change, willingness to act, self-efficacy, and perceived social norms have varied through the year. All measures are down from a year ago, and all year-over-year decreases are statistically significant, except for “collective action”.

Figure 3. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements: [% Strongly or Somewhat Agree]

Figure - Text description

Table 3. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements: [% Strongly or Somewhat Agree]

Canadians continue to see industry and institutions as most responsible, but down slightly year over year

About two thirds of respondents think private industry, international organizations, and the federal government should do a lot more to limit further climate change. Fewer think regular people in Canada should being doing a lot more to mitigate climate change (42%), though three quarters still think that regular Canadians should take at least somewhat more action. Most Canadians do not believe that individuals have primary responsibility for climate action. Perceived responsibility has decreased slightly for all groups since this question was last asked in Wave 1 (Dec 2021), and the proportion of Canadians who think each group should do less has increased. Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples

Figure 4. To what extent do you think the following groups should be doing more or less to help limit climate change?

Figure - Text description

Table 4. To what extent do you think the following groups should be doing more or less to help limit climate change?

6. Climate Change Mitigation Behaviours

Canadians still highly reliant on private vehicles; rates of active transportation change seasonally

Dependence on private vehicles remains high, with 86% of respondents using them to get around at least once a week. Transportation behaviour is strongly shaped by structural and/or habitual factors, which helps explain this stability. Public transportation use rebounded following the end of pandemic-related restrictions but has been relatively steady since Wave 4 (Jun 2022). Active transportation has decreased since Wave 5 (Aug 2022), likely due to fall/winter weather, and appears to be have an annual cycle; it was about the same level in Dec 2021 and peaked in the summer. The use of e-bikes and e-scooters followed a similar pattern, though from a much lower baseline.

Figure 5. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things? Used [mode of transport] to get around. [% Using Mode of Transport at Least Once per Week]

Figure - Text description

Table 5. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things? Used [mode of transport] to get around. [% Using Mode of Transport at Least Once per Week]

Adoption of hybrid vehicles and e-bikes is up slightly, though intention to adopt is down slightly

About 11% of respondents report owning or leasing an electric vehicle (EV), a hybrid vehicle, or both. But nearly two thirds (61%) of these folks also have a gas- or diesel-powered vehicle. Current adoption rates for EVs (5%) and hybrid vehicles (8%) are low, but with a slight increase for hybrid vehicles since Wave 1 (Dec 2021). This demonstrates a large and persistent intention-action gap – even though 15% of respondents intended to buy EVs in Wave 1 (Dec 2021), there has been no apparent increase in adoption in the year since. Follow-through was certainly constrained, in part, by EV supply shortages. Intention to purchase or lease has decreased across all types of vehicles since Wave 1 (Dec 2021), potentially linked to inflation and a potential recession. Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 6. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

Figure - Text description

Table 6. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

Fewer than 10% followed through on EV/hybrid adoption; intention had no clear effect on action

Overall, fewer than 10% of repeat respondents who intended to purchase or lease a hybrid or electric vehicle in Wave 1 (Dec 2021) have followed through one year later. Similar to results for home retrofits, this shows the wide gap between intention and action for costly, high-impact behaviours. Some respondents bought/leased vehicles without having expressed an intention to do so in Wave 1. Notably, rates of adoption were similar for those who reported an intention as for those who did not. The sample sizes are too small to be sure, but over the past year, forward planning seems not to have had much effect on whether someone buys a hybrid vehicle, electric bike or scooter, or an electric vehicle. Note: The sample sizes shown here are quite small; comparisons should therefore be made with caution.

Figure 7. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

Figure - Text description

Table 7. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

Air travel has rebounded substantially since pandemic-related lows a year ago

Flying has a major climate impact despite its infrequency relative to other modes of transport. More than a quarter (26%) of respondents have taken at least one flight in the past two months, with 20% reporting at least one short flight (less than 5 hours), and 14% reporting at least one long flight (greater than 5 hours). Both short and long flights have increased significantly since Wave 6 (Oct 2022). Notably, most respondents answered this survey well before the peak of the holiday travel season in December. Flight behaviours are significantly higher than one year ago, when pandemic-related restrictions dampened travel. Further monitoring is needed to determine a long-term baseline for air travel.

Figure 8. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things? [% Taking Flight at Least Once in Last Two Months]

Figure - Text description

Table 8. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things? [% Taking Flight at Least Once in Last Two Months]

Food and waste behaviours remain steady over time; thermostat adjustment to save energy more seasonal

Recycling (92% always or frequently) and reducing food waste (78%) remain two of the most common pro-environmental actions, while eating a more plant-based diet remains the least common (33%). Over the past year, most food and waste behaviours have remained relatively steady over time. The exception is adjusting the thermostat to save energy, which seems to be slightly more common in the shoulder seasons (e.g., April and October). Year over year, reducing food waste increased slightly, while eating a plant-based diet decreased slightly. Both changes are small but statistically significant.

Figure 9. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things? [% Always or Frequently]

Figure - Text description

Table 9. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things? [% Always or Frequently]

Most Canadians repair or buy products second-hand

Most Canadians have engaged in circular economy behaviours, with 82% having repaired products and 74% having bought or traded things second-hand instead of new at least once in the past two months. While there was a statistically significant decrease in buying or trading items second-hand between Waves 1 and 4, the rate increased again in Wave 7. The differences between Waves 1, 4, and 7 for repairing products were not statistically significant.

Figure 10. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things?

Figure - Text description

Table 10. In the last TWO MONTHS, how frequently or infrequently have you done the following things?

Slight increase in some retrofits, but fewer Canadians intending to retrofit now than last year

Most (85%) survey respondents who are homeowners report having at least one home energy upgrade; however, adoption varies widely across retrofits, with a large and persistent intention-action gap across all retrofits. The most common upgrades are energy efficient windows and doors (59%), followed by smart or adaptive thermostats (42%). The least common is solar water heaters (1%). Compared to Wave 1 (Dec 2021), overall home retrofit adoption remains largely unchanged, with small increases in some retrofits. However, there has been a slight decrease in intention to adopt almost all retrofits (e.g., insulation dropped 3%). Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 11. Please note whether you have each of the following in your home/residence:

Figure - Text description

Table 11. Please note whether you have each of the following in your home/residence:

Follow-through on retrofits varied widely by type; intention had no clear effect on action

Overall, fewer than half of homeowners who intended to perform a given retrofit within the next year in Wave 1 (Dec 2021) have followed through one year later. Again, this demonstrates the gap between intention and action for costly, high-impact behaviours. However, this proportion varied widely by retrofit, with much higher follow-through for energy efficient windows or doors (46%), and much less for solar panels (10%). A further share of homeowners spontaneously performed retrofits without having expressed an intention to do so in Wave 1. Spontaneous retrofits were notably highest for energy efficient windows/doors (52%) and smart thermostats (35%); for these retrofits, spontaneous adoption was higher than pre-planned adoption. The sample sizes are too small to be sure, but over the past year, forward planning seems not to have had as much effect for some home retrofits that have clearer economic benefits. Note: The sample sizes shown here are quite small; comparisons should therefore be made with caution.

Figure 12. Please note whether you have each of the following in your home/residence:

Figure - Text description

Table 12. Please note whether you have each of the following in your home/residence:
[Note: These results are preliminary due to small sample sizes. The precise number of respondents who undertook each home retrofit since Wave 1 is noted in the graph.]

Overall energy unaffordability steady, highest in Alberta and Atlantic Canada

At the national level, 10% of respondents reported that they could not afford enough energy to meet their daily needs. Despite fluctuating energy prices over the past year, energy affordability remains largely stable, nationally. Energy is least affordable for residents of rural areas (16%). Compared to Wave 6 (Oct 2022), unaffordability increased for residents of suburbs, and decreased for those living in small cities.

Figure 13. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs?

Figure - Text description

Table 13. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs?

Figure 14. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs? [By region]

Figure - Text description

Table 14. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs? [By region]

Figure 15. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs? [By community size]

Figure - Text description

Table 15. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs? [By community size]

Highest and most variable energy unaffordability, over time, in Atlantic provinces, lowest in Quebec

When viewed over time, residents of the Atlantic provinces tend to report the highest energy unaffordability and residents of Quebec the lowest, likely due to differences in provincial energy systems. Notably, however, there were recent increases in unaffordability in the Prairies and Quebec, and decreases in BC and the Atlantic provinces.

Figure 16. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs? [% Unaffordable]

Figure - Text description

Table 16. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you been able to afford enough energy (e.g., electricity, natural gas, gasoline, wood fuel) to meet your daily needs? [% Unaffordable]

7. Climate Change Adaptation Behaviours

Canadians recently experienced more windstorms and excessive cold

Two thirds (64%) of respondents report having experienced at least one kind of extreme weather event in the past two months, down from 68% in Wave 6 (Oct 2022). Of the most common extreme weather events, severe windstorms (38%), power outages (29%), and periods of excessive cold (22%) increased. Respondents who reported experiencing excessive cold were more likely to reside in BC, Alberta, and Manitoba/Saskatchewan, regions which all experienced unusually (and sometimes record-breaking) cold temperatures during the survey period.

Figure 17. Over the LAST TWO MONTHS, which of the following extreme weather-related events have you personally experienced in your local Canadian area? [% Selected]

Figure - Text description

Table 17. Over the LAST TWO MONTHS, which of the following extreme weather-related events have you personally experienced in your local Canadian area? [% Selected]

Adaptation behaviours varied through the year, tracking extreme weather experience

More than half (57%) of respondents report having engaged in no adaptation behaviours in the last two months, similar to Wave 6 (Oct 2022). The most common behaviours are information-seeking about extreme weather events (27%) and climate change impacts (26%), alongside taking action to protect one’s home against weather risks (12%). Those who live in the Atlantic provinces continue to report protecting their home against weather risks at higher rates than in other regions; this is likely still related, in part, to Hurricane Fiona at the end of September, even though not technically within the two-month window. Adaptation behaviours varied throughout the year, with increases corresponding to major extreme weather events with widespread impacts. For example, Wave 3 had the fewest number of respondents reporting extreme weather events, while Wave 4, with the highest, occurred after the derecho in May.

Figure 18. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you done any of the following things? [% Selected]

Figure - Text description

Table 18. In the LAST TWO MONTHS, have you done any of the following things? [% Selected]

Emergency preparedness up slightly year over year, but persistent intention-action gap

Widespread intention to create emergency supply kits and disaster emergency plans – behaviours with few, if any, structural or systemic barriers – has produced very little action. For instance, in Dec 2021, 29% of respondents in our nationally-representative sample said they would buy or create an emergency supply kit within a year; by Dec 2022, there had only been a 1% increase in those who reported having one, nationally. Overall, fewer than half (46%) have an emergency supply kit, while only 29% have a household-level emergency plan. And there has been a slight decrease in intention to act across all behaviours. Flood-related home insurance is the exception, with a year-over-year increase that accounts for two-thirds of reported intention. But only 50% of respondents from the Atlantic provinces have home insurance for flood-related risks, despite having recently experienced such risks due to Hurricane Fiona. Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 19. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

Figure - Text description

Table 19. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

Varying levels of follow-through on emergency preparedness

For the repeat respondents who intended to improve their household emergency preparedness in the next year in Wave 1, their rate of follow-through one year later varied by the type of preparation. Highest follow-through occurred for weather-related insurance (70% for flooding and 74% for other weather-related risks), while only a quarter (26%) of respondents followed through on creating an emergency plan. A further share of homeowners made spontaneous emergency preparations, meaning that they expressed no intention in Wave 1 but have done so one year later. Such unplanned actions occurred at either similar or lower rates to those that were pre-planned. Notably, except for flood insurance, these follow-through rates among repeat respondents were much higher than those implied by data from new respondents. This strongly suggests that participation in the survey itself seems to have increased follow-through, whether or not the respondent reported an intention to act.

Figure 20. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:

[Note: These results are preliminary due to small sample sizes. The precise number of respondents who undertook each preparation since Wave 1 is noted in the graph.]

Figure - Text description

Table 20. Please indicate whether you have each of the following:
[Note: These results are preliminary due to small sample sizes. The precise number of respondents who undertook each preparation since Wave 1 is noted in the graph.]

8. Support for Climate Policies

High and relatively stable support for climate adaptation and nature-related policies year over year

The vast majority of respondents support efforts to protect ecosystems (93%), increase greenspace (89%), and improve the resilience of vital infrastructure to extreme weather events (88%), up slightly from Wave 1 (Dec 2021). Strengthening partnerships with Indigenous people also has high total support (75%), similar to Wave 1. Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 21. How much do you support or oppose the following policies?

Figure - Text description

Table 21. How much do you support or oppose the following policies?

Mixed support for mitigation policies, down slightly since last year

While they receive less support than nature-related and adaptation policies, a majority of respondents still strongly or somewhat support limiting emissions from oil and gas production (71%), setting a global carbon price (67%), and setting a national carbon price (61%). Though somewhat variable over time, overall support for all three policies has decreased slightly, and overall opposition increased, since Wave 1 (Dec 2021). Notably, there is consistently greater support for (+6%), and less opposition to (-7%), a global carbon price than a national carbon price. Findings from an analysis of data from Wave 4 (Jun 2022) suggest that, while outright support for mitigation policies is lower than for nature-related and adaptation policies, it may also be more enduring. Specifically, when respondents were asked to make trade-offs among policy areas, they selected mitigation as a high priority more often than they did adaptation or protection of nature.

Figure 22. How much do you support or oppose the following policies?

Figure - Text description

Table 22. How much do you support or oppose the following policies?

Higher support for compensating farmers, homeowners, and businesses than for compensating developing countries

There was higher support for policies related to compensating people who are affected by weather-related disasters (74%) than for compensating developing countries that experience losses and damage caused by climate change (54%), similar to Wave 1 (Dec 2021). News coverage of related negotiations at COP27, which resulted in the creation of a loss-and-damage compensation fund for developing countries, seems not to have had any effect on support for that policy. Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 23. How much do you support or oppose the following policies?

Figure - Text description

Table 23. How much do you support or oppose the following policies?

Slightly increased support for the further development of all renewables

Among respondents in our study, there is strong consensus that Canada should further develop its renewable energy resources, including solar (88% strongly or somewhat support), wind (82%), hydro (81%), ocean (82%), and geothermal (82%) energy. However, there is less agreement on bioenergy, natural gas, and nuclear energy. Compared to Wave 1 (Dec 2021), there have been increases in support for further developing all energy resources other than coal. Total support for solar and wind energy remained the same, but strong support increased (+2-3%). Total support for hydro, ocean, and geothermal energy increased slightly (+1-3%) but with larger increases in strong support (+2-4%). Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 24. Please indicate whether you support or oppose further development of the following energy resources in Canada.

Figure - Text description

Table 24. Please indicate whether you support or oppose further development of the following energy resources in Canada.

Increased but still mixed support for nuclear, natural gas, and oil; little support for coal

Compared to other types of low-carbon energy resources, support for bioenergy (56% strongly or somewhat support) and nuclear (55%) is mixed. Among fossil fuels, natural gas has similarly mixed support (53%), with lower support for oil (35%) and very little support for coal (13%). Compared to Wave 1 (Dec 2021), support for nuclear energy has increased by the largest margin (+7%), followed by oil (+6%) and natural gas (+4%). Total support for bioenergy and coal remain steady, though strong support for bioenergy has increased slightly (+2%). Increased support for energy resource development is likely related to the price increases and instability caused by the war in Ukraine, alongside calls for greater energy production in support of Europe’s independence from Russian oil and gas. Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 25. Please indicate whether you support or oppose further development of the following energy resources in Canada.

Figure - Text description

Table 25. Please indicate whether you support or oppose further development of the following energy resources in Canada.

9. Information Sources & Trust

Canadians are exposed to more climate change information than a year ago

Canadian TV and radio channels (43%) and newspapers and magazines (33%) and their websites remain the most common source of climate change information. Fewer respondents report always or frequently coming across such information on social media platforms (6-20%). Though friends and family are a less common source (24%), they are widely trusted. Few people frequently access government websites for information (16%), but half of respondents do so at least occasionally. Compared to Wave 1 (Dec 2021), respondents report seeing more climate change information across almost all sources (+2-3%). Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly show year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 26. How often do you come across information about climate change from the following sources? [% Always or Frequently]

Figure - Text description

Table 26. How often do you come across information about climate change from the following sources? [% Always or Frequently]

Scientists, family and friends are most trusted on climate change, governments relatively distrusted

A strong majority of respondents completely or somewhat trust scientists to make good decisions about climate change (80%) – much more than any other group – while family and friends are also widely trusted (68%). Compared to Wave 1 (Dec 2021), there have been slight decreases in total trust in family and friends (-4%), as well as for all levels of government (-3-4%). There has also been an increase in complete trust in scientists (+4%). Note: The Wave 7 results shown here include only new respondents (n = 2,001) to clearly assess year-over-year differences in two nationally-representative samples.

Figure 27. To what extent do you trust or distrust the following people/groups to make good decisions about climate change?

Figure - Text description

Table 27. To what extent do you trust or distrust the following people/groups to make good decisions about climate change?

10. Regional Profiles

Regional Profile	Canada	BC/YK	AB/NT	MB/SK/ NU	ON	QC	ATL
Regional Profile	(n=2,786)	(n=343)	(n=366)	(n=309)	(n=928)	(n=587)	(n=253)
Age
18-34 years	27%	26%	29%	29%	28%	25%	23%
35-54 years	32%	32%	36%	32%	32%	32%	30%
55 years and older	41%	42%	35%	39%	40%	44%	47%
Gender
Male	50%	51%	51%	49%	49%	51%	50%
Female	49%	46%	48%	50%	50%	49%	48%
Other	2%	3%	1%	1%	1%	1%	3%
Education
High school or less	10%	9%	10%	15%	8%	9%	11%
College/trades	39%	43%	42%	38%	36%	39%	42%
University / post-graduate	51%	48%	46%	45%	55%	51%	45%
Size of community
A large city	45%	38%	67%	47%	47%	44%	18%
A suburb near a large city	19%	22%	9%	6%	18%	31%	10%
A small city or town	24%	29%	14%	26%	25%	19%	43%
A rural area	11%	10%	10%	21%	11%	5%	28%
Employment
Full-time (30+ hours per week)	48%	44%	49%	44%	49%	51%	43%
Part-time ([30 hours per week)	6%	8%	9%	5%	5%	5%	5%
Self-employed	11%	12%	11%	11%	13%	8%	7%
Unemployed	3%	1%	3%	1%	4%	2%	2%
Full-time student	3%	2%	2%	4%	3%	4%	7%
Retired	25%	27%	21%	26%	23%	27%	34%
Full-time homemaker	2%	2%	2%	4%	1%	1%	2%
Other	2%	4%	3%	5%	2%	2%	2%
Income
Under $20,000	4%	4%	4%	3%	4%	4%	5%
$20,000 to just under $40,000	10%	8%	11%	13%	9%	10%	11%
$40,000 to just under $60,000	10%	11%	11%	11%	10%	11%	12%
$60,000 to just under $80,000	12%	10%	12%	13%	11%	15%	12%
$80,000 to just under $100,000	14%	13%	9%	13%	14%	16%	15%
$100,000 to just under $150,000	20%	19%	18%	21%	19%	22%	21%
$150,000 to just under $200,000	10%	11%	9%	10%	11%	9%	7%
$200,000 to just under $250,000	5%	6%	7%	4%	4%	4%	2%
$250,000 and above	5%	4%	6%	3%	7%	3%	1%
Household size
1 to 2	63%	59%	61%	49%	63%	68%	69%
3 to 4	29%	31%	30%	39%	28%	26%	26%
5+	8%	10%	9%	12%	9%	6%	5%
Parents
Yes	62%	66%	59%	74%	58%	64%	66%
Have children under 18
Yes	24%	26%	25%	36%	20%	24%	17%
Language(s) spoken at home
English	75%	94%	92%	93%	89%	20%	92%
French	20%	0%	1%	1%	4%	75%	5%
Spanish	1%	0%	1%	1%	0%	1%	1%
Other	5%	5%	6%	5%	6%	4%	2%
Home ownership
Owned	73%	69%	77%	79%	72%	73%	74%
Rented	25%	28%	21%	20%	26%	26%	25%
Immigration
Born in Canada	80%	77%	83%	86%	79%	81%	84%
Recent immigrants (2001-2021)	8%	9%	5%	7%	8%	9%	6%
Long-term immigrants (2000 and before)	8%	8%	8%	6%	9%	7%	5%
Prefer not to say	3%	5%	3%	2%	2%	1%	3%
Ethnicity
White	81%	80%	78%	85%	77%	85%	87%
South Asian (e.g., East Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, etc.)	3%	3%	2%	1%	5%	1%	2%
Chinese	2%	3%	2%	0%	3%	1%	1%
Black	3%	1%	1%	4%	4%	5%	3%
Filipino	1%	2%	2%	1%	1%	0%	1%
Latin American	2%	2%	2%	1%	2%	3%	2%
Arab	2%	1%	1%	0%	2%	3%	1%
Southeast Asian	0%	1%	1%	0%	0%	1%	0%
West Asian	0%	0%	0%	0%	1%	0%	1%
Korean	0%	1%	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Japanese	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%	0%
Other	4%	4%	6%	4%	5%	2%	2%
Prefer not to say	5%	5%	8%	6%	4%	3%	4%