Eco-Depression and Eco-Anxiety Among Youth: A Sex and Gender Analysis

Introduction

Mental health problems arising from climate change are an increasing concern, with a growing literature focusing on eco-anxiety (i.e., climate-related anxiety) and eco-depression (i.e., climate-related grief or depression). ¹ Research on adults demonstrates that women and gender-diverse individuals may be disproportionately impacted by climate-related distress, ² highlighting the need for applying a sex and gender lens when examining climate-related mental health. Few studies have examined these associations among youth, who may be especially affected by concerns about their future amidst reports of climate change. ³ Pre-existing mental health concerns have been shown to be associated with eco-depression and eco-anxiety ³ making it important to control for the effects of these underlying conditions. We examined the associations of sex, gender and psychological distress with eco-anxiety and eco-depression using a survey of mental health and drug use in Ontario-based youth.

Methods

We completed a secondary analysis of the 2021 Ontario Student Drug Use and Health Survey, a recurring survey of students in grades 7 to 12 (aged 11–19). ⁴ The study received approval from relevant school boards and the Centre for Addiction Mental Health Research Ethics Board; parents provided written consent.

Primary outcomes of eco-anxiety and eco-depression were measured with single items, both with Likert response scaling (5-point and 4-point, respectively). Sex-assigned-at-birth was self-reported as male or female. Gender identity was categorized as cisgender boy, cisgender girl, and gender diverse. The Kessler 6-item Psychological Distress scale ⁵ was used to identify psychological distress, with a cut-off score of ≥8 considered moderate to serious distress.

Statistical Analysis

Eco-depression and eco-anxiety were examined across sex-assigned-at-birth using Mann–Whitney tests and by sex and gender controlling for psychological distress using analysis of variances, with post-hoc Bonferroni-corrected pairwise t-tests using JASP. As a small number of gender-diverse students fell in the “little distress” category, an analysis of covariance was used to examine the effect of gender while controlling for psychological distress as a continuous variable for both eco-depression and eco-anxiety.

Results

Sample: Climate questions were randomly administered to half the sample and only grades 9 to 12 students were asked about gender identity (sex-based analysis: n = 1029; gender-based analysis: n = 623).

Sex-based analysis: In both unadjusted and adjusted analysis (i.e., controlling for psychological distress), youth who were assigned-female-at-birth (AFAB) reported higher eco-anxiety (adjusted F(1, 999) = 4.697, p = 0.03, η_p² = 0.005) and eco-depression (adjusted F(1, 999) = 4.697, p = 0.03, η_p² = 0.005) than those who were assigned-male-at-birth (AMAB). Individuals with stronger psychological distress also reported higher eco-depression F(1, 999) = 19.639, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.019 and eco-anxiety F(1, 1004) = 19.873, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.019; see Figure 1. No interactions between psychological distress and sex were found.

Figure 1.

Comparisons of eco-depression and eco-anxiety across (a) sex-assigned-at-birth and psychological distress and (b) gender identity.

Gender-based analysis: For eco-depression, a significant main effect of gender (F(2, 620) = 12.43, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.038) was found, with gender-diverse youth reporting more eco-depression than cisgender girls (t(411) = −3.782, p < 0.001, d = −0.552) and cisgender boys (t(262) = −4.933, p < 0.001, d = −0.753 (see Figure 1). A main effect of gender emerged for eco-anxiety (F(2, 620) = 12.15, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.038), with gender-diverse youth reporting higher eco-anxiety than cisgender boys (t(262) = −4.425, p < 0.001, d = −0.675) and cisgender girls (t(410) = −2.743, p = 0.041). Also, cisgender girls reported higher eco-anxiety than cisgender boys (t(566) = −3.616, p < 0.001, d = 0.314). Although a small number of gender-diverse youth in this sample report no psychological distress, when psychological distress is accounted for as a covariate, gender effects remain significant for eco-depression (F(2, 608) = 7.131, p < 0.001, η_p² = 0.023) and eco-anxiety (F(2, 607) = 7.114, p = 0.006, η_p² = 0.017).

Discussion

Consistent with findings in adults, important sex and gender differences in eco-anxiety and eco-depression were found among youth, with AFAB, gender diverse, and cisgender girls more likely to report high levels of eco-anxiety and eco-depression than AMAB, cisgender boys and girls, and cisgender boys, respectively. ² Youth reporting higher psychological distress ³ were more likely to experience eco-anxiety and eco-depression. However, when psychological distress was accounted for, gender-diverse youth endorsed more eco-depression and eco-anxiety, suggesting that baseline psychological distress alone did not explain differences in eco-related mental health concerns across gender.

Conclusions

Gender-diverse youth and youth AFAB may be especially likely to experience eco-depression and eco-anxiety. Future research would benefit from youth engagement in better-understanding predictors of eco-distress and exploring eco-resilience intervention models ³ in youth, as well as more thoroughly operationalizing youth eco-depression and eco-anxiety.