Research indicates that men are generally less likely than women to express concern about climate change, a trend that may be influenced by social and psychological factors related to identity and perceptions of masculinity. Studies suggest that some men downplay the seriousness of global warming partly to avoid appearing “too feminine,” reflecting broader societal norms about gender and environmental attitudes.
Michael Haselhuhn, an associate professor of management at the University of California, Riverside, has explored this phenomenon through a series of studies drawing on data from the United States and Europe. His findings reveal that men who strongly identify with traditional notions of manhood tend to show less concern about climate issues and feel less responsible for addressing them. Conversely, men who express environmental concern are often perceived as warmer and more caring, traits that can conflict with stereotypical masculine ideals.
This dynamic offers one perspective on why men may be less inclined to engage in climate activism. However, other research points to divergent factors as well. A large study of over 9,000 scientists across 115 countries found that those who believe technological innovation will largely resolve climate challenges are significantly less likely to participate in protests, petitions, or adopt substantial lifestyle changes to reduce carbon emissions. This suggests that faith in technology—sometimes referred to as techno-optimism—can reduce personal motivation for climate action, irrespective of gender.
When considering how to effectively communicate climate issues to men, Haselhuhn has tested various approaches with mixed results. Appeals to family responsibility or parental care did not significantly change men’s willingness to act. On the other hand, messaging that emphasized financial benefits rather than environmental concerns proved more effective. For instance, about 80% of men opted for energy-efficient showerheads when the choice was framed as a cost-saving measure, compared to a lower uptake when environmental benefits were highlighted.
Climate scientists like Katherine Hayhoe of Texas Tech University emphasize that resistance to climate action is often less about denying scientific facts and more about "solution aversion." This term describes the reluctance to accept climate policies perceived as threatening to a person’s identity, beliefs, or worldview. People may unconsciously engage in motivated reasoning, selectively accepting information that aligns with their existing attitudes and dismissing what conflicts with their ideologies.
Hayhoe notes that practical steps yielding personal benefits, such as installing solar panels that reduce energy bills, can lead to shifts in climate attitudes. These actions may open the door for individuals who were previously sceptical to reconsider their views when they experience improvements in both their finances and the environment.
The research underscores the complex interplay between identity, ideology, and communication strategies in shaping public engagement with climate change. While scientific facts remain critical, understanding the social and psychological factors involved is essential to fostering broader support for climate solutions.