Hoegh-Guldberg, O. et al. The human imperative of stabilizing global climate change at 1.5 C. Science 365, eaaw6974 (2019).
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate change 2023: synthesis report. In Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds Lee, H. & Romero, J.) (IPCC,2023).
Kahan, D. M. et al. The polarizing impact of science literacy and numeracy on perceived climate change risks. Nat. Clim. Change 2, 732–735 (2012).
Smith, E. K., Bognar, M. J. & Mayer, A. P. Polarisation of climate and environmental attitudes in the United States, 1973–2022. NPJ Clim. Action 3, 2 (2024).
Kahan, D. M., Braman, D., Gastil, J., Slovic, P. & Mertz, C. K. Culture and identity-protective cognition: explaining the white-male effect in risk perception. J. Empir. Leg. Stud. 4, 465–505 (2007).
Stanovich, K. E. The Bias That Divides Us: The Science and Politics of Myside Thinking (MIT Press, 2021).
Michaelsen, P., Sundström, A. & Jagers, S. C. Mass support for conserving 30% of the Earth by 2030: experimental evidence from five continents. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 122, e2503355122 (2025).
Pörtner, H. O. et al. Scientific Outcome of the IPBES–IPCC Co-sponsored Workshop on Biodiversity and Climate Change (IPBES Secretariat, 2021).
Dobson, A., Rowe, Z., Berger, J., Wholey, P. & Caro, T. Biodiversity loss due to more than climate change. Science 374, 699–700 (2021).
Hernandez, R. R. et al. Environmental impacts of utility-scale solar energy. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 29, 766–779 (2014).
Kim, J. Y., Koide, D., Ishihama, F., Kadoya, T. & Nishihiro, J. Current site planning of medium to large solar power systems accelerates the loss of the remaining semi-natural and agricultural habitats. Sci. Total Environ. 779, 146475 (2021).
Kitano, M. & Shiraki, S. Estimation of bird fatalities at wind farms with complex topography and vegetation in Hokkaido, Japan. Wildl. Soc. Bull. 37, 41–48 (2013).
Pörtner, H. O. et al. Overcoming the coupled climate and biodiversity crises and their societal impacts. Science 380, eabl4881 (2023).
Smith, P. et al. Which practices co-deliver food security, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and combat land degradation and desertification? Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 1532–1575 (2020).
Siegrist, M. & Árvai, J. Risk perception: reflections on 40 years of research. Risk Anal. 40, 2191–2206 (2020).
Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. Risk and Culture: An Essay on the Selection of Technical and Environmental Dangers (University of California Press, 1982).
Dake, K. Orienting dispositions in the perception of risk: an analysis of contemporary worldviews and cultural biases. J. Cross Cult. Psychol. 22, 61–82 (1991).
Hart, P. S. & Feldman, L. Would it be better to not talk about climate change? The impact of climate change and air pollution frames on support for regulating power plant emissions. J. Environ. Psychol. 60, 1–8 (2018).
Entman, R. M. Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. J. Commun. 43, 51–58 (1993).
Chong, D. & Druckman, J. N. Framing theory. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 10, 103–126 (2007).
Mossler, M. V., Bostrom, A., Kelly, R. P., Crosman, K. M. & Moy, P. How does framing affect policy support for emissions mitigation? Testing the effects of ocean acidification and other carbon emissions frames. Glob. Environ. Change 45, 63–78 (2017).
IPBES. Summary for Policymakers of the Methodological Assessment Report on the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature (eds Pascual, U. et al.) (IPBES Secretariat, 2022).
Díaz, S. et al. The IPBES conceptual framework—connecting nature and people. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 14, 1–16 (2015).
Pascual, U. et al. Valuing nature’s contributions to people: the IPBES approach. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 26–27, 7–16 (2017).
Pascual, U. et al. Diverse values of nature for sustainability. Nature 620, 813–823 (2023).
Chan, K. M. A. et al. Opinion: why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 113, 1462–1465 (2016).
Klain, S. C., Olmsted, P., Chan, K. M. A. & Satterfield, T. Relational values resonate broadly and differently than intrinsic or instrumental values, or the New Ecological Paradigm. PLoS ONE 12, e0183962 (2017).
Arias-Arévalo, P., Martín-López, B. & Gómez-Baggethun, E. Exploring intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values for sustainable management of social-ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 22, 43 (2017).
Lefcheck, J. S. PiecewiseSEM: piecewise structural equation modelling in R for ecology, evolution, and systematics. Methods Ecol. Evol. 7, 573–579 (2016).
Campbell, T. H. & Kay, A. C. Solution aversion: on the relation between ideology and motivated disbelief. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 107, 809–824 (2014).
Yamawaki, T. & Kobayashi, T. How polarization differs between Japan and the United States: a comparison of SMPP and U.S. public opinion surveys. In Nihon no Bunden wa Doko ni Aru no ka (eds. Ikeda, K. et al.) 17–44 (Keiso Shobo, 2024).
Kihara, H., Habara, Y., Kim, Y. & Matsubara, N. The relationship between how to grasp countermeasures for climate change and the attitude necessary for a decarbonized society. People Environ. 46, 2–17 (2020).
World Wide Views. World Wide Views on Climate and Energy. http://climateandenergy.wwviews.org/results/ (2015).
Kosugi, M. & Baba, K. Determinants of implementation of countermeasures to climate change risk. J. Environ. Sci. Soc. Jpn. 35, 227–236 (2022).
Cabinet Office of Japan. Public opinion survey on climate change. Government of Japan. https://survey.gov-online.go.jp/environment/202510/r07/r07-kikohendo/considerations/ (2025).
Kahan, D. M., Jenkins-Smith, H. & Braman, D. Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J. Risk Res. 14, 147–174 (2011).
Xue, W., Hine, D. W., Loi, N. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B. & Phillips, W. J. Cultural worldviews and environmental risk perceptions: a meta-analysis. J. Environ. Psychol. 40, 249–258 (2014).
Takagi, A. & Takeda, M. Cultural worldviews and public risk perception regarding climate change in Japan. Jpn. J. Risk Anal. 35, 37–44 (2025).
Siegrist, M. & Berthold, A. The lasting effect of the romantic view of nature: how it influences perceptions of risk and the support of symbolic actions against climate change. Risk Anal. 45, 1399–1409 (2025).
McFarlane, B. L. Public perceptions of risk to forest biodiversity. Risk Anal. 25, 543–553 (2005).
Shi, J., Visschers, V. H., Siegrist, M. & Arvai, J. Knowledge as a driver of public perceptions about climate change reassessed. Nat. Clim. Change 6, 759–762 (2016).
IPBES. Summary for Policymakers of the Thematic Assessment Report on the Interlinkages among Biodiversity, Water, Food and Health (eds McElwee, P. D. et al.) (IPBES Secretariat, 2024).
Takeda, M., Takagi, A. & Toriyama, R. An attempt to construct a Japanese version of cultural worldviews scale. Jpn. J. Pers. 36, 34–36 (2025).
Tateishi, W., Nakawake, Y., Fujii, S., Shibasaki, S. & Nakadai, R. Nature’s value associated with traditional worldviews: psychological validation of relational, intrinsic, and instrumental dimensions in Japan. CRESP 10, 100259 (2026).
Soga, M. & Gaston, K. J. Cross-country variation in people’s connection to nature. One Earth 8, 101194 (2025).
Joshi, A. Motivating sustainable behaviors by framing biodiversity loss as a public health risk. J. Risk Res. 25, 156–175 (2022).
Wilson, R. S., Zwickle, A. & Walpole, H. Developing a broadly applicable measure of risk perception. Risk Anal. 39, 777–791 (2019).
Kosugi, M., Baba, K. & Tanaka, M. Japanese attitude towards climate change risk: clarification of target and tasks for communication. J. Jpn. Soc. Civ. Eng. G (Environ.) 74, I-41–I-52 (2018).
National Institute of Science and Technology Policy. The Change of the Public Attitudes to Science and Technology—The Findings from Face-to-face Interviews and from a Monthly Internet Survey (NISTEP, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT), Japan, Research Material No. 211, 2012).
Xue, W., Hine, D. W., Marks, A. D., Phillips, W. J. & Zhao, S. Cultural worldviews and climate change: a view from China. Asian J. Soc. Psychol. 19, 134–144 (2016).
R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2025).