Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Persons with disabilities have consistently been excluded from deliberations on climate change actions since the beginning of the global debate on this crucial issue. The Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region has the harshest weather conditions worldwide, highlighting the need to understand the factors that could impact awareness of climate change among persons with sensory impairments. Guided by Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour, this study sought to explore the relationship between attitudes towards climate change and participation in pro-environmental climate change behaviours among persons with sensory impairments in the MENA region. The Awareness of Climate Change and Pro-Environmental Behaviour Willingness Questionnaire was completed by 542 persons with sensory impairments. The data were subjected to hierarchical multiple regressions and moderation analysis. The findings indicate a significant relationship between attitude and participation in climate change behaviour. The study concludes with an urgent call to policymakers to engage the disability community in the MENA region in climate change action.

Keywords

climate change disability awareness Middle East and North Africa

Introduction

Climate change, one of the defining challenges of the 21st century, has profound implications for societies, economies, and vulnerable populations globally (Aziz & Anjum, 2024; Dietz et al., 2020; Okesanya et al., 2024; Rising et al., 2022). The urgency to mitigate climate change aligns closely with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly climate action (SDG 13), reducing inequalities (SDG 10), enhancing sustainable energy levels (SDG 7), and inclusive, sustainable economic growth (SDG 8). Despite high levels of concern for climate change action (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022; Kowalcyk & Dorevitch, 2024; Naser et al., 2024), practical action by governments, institutions, and individuals continues to be hindered by socio-economic, political, and informational barriers (Antwi-Agyei, Amanor, et al., 2021; Lefèvre et al., 2022; Nguyen et al., 2021). Empirical evidence has shown that though awareness of climate change’s impact is widespread, there remains a significant gap in the knowledge of adaptive strategies (Danish & Isaifan, 2024; Hügel & Davies, 2020; Khatibi et al., 2021; Marty et al., 2025).

Consequently, scholars have attempted to understand the drivers of climate change behaviour and attitudinal change towards climate change (Basiru et al., 2024; Ben Hassen & Zurayk, 2024; Brosch, 2021; Helm et al., 2021; Thøgersen, 2021; Whitmarsh et al., 2021; Wong-Parodi & Berlin Rubin, 2022). While discussions on climate change are increasing (Blimpo et al., 2024; Hase et al., 2021; Liao et al., 2024; Mukherjee & Fransen, 2024), the intersection between climate action and social inclusion remains underexplored (El-Husseiny et al., 2024; Garcia & Tschakert, 2022; Rao et al., 2025; Udo et al., 2025). Specifically, persons with sensory disabilities affected by both environmental and societal challenges (Devkota et al., 2024; Kosanic et al., 2022; Stein et al., 2024; Uddin et al., 2024; Wolbring & Escobedo, 2023) rarely contribute to global discussions on climate change. The purpose of the current study is to explore the factors that moderate the relationship between attitude and climate change behaviour awareness among persons with sensory impairments in contexts such as the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).

The MENA region, made up of 21 Arabic-speaking countries, is faced with severe and rapid climate change, which is mainly attributed to human activity (Hamed, Hasani et al., 2024; T. Mehmood et al., 2024). For instance, over the past four decades, there have been reports of increasing temperature, particularly in arid and semi-arid areas, with recent years recording unprecedented heat levels (Francis & Fonseca, 2024; Hamed, Sobh et al., 2024; Kenawy et al., 2025). Notably, in July 2023, extreme heatwaves affected countries such as Algeria, Kuwait, Tunisia, and Jordan (Francis & Fonseca, 2024; Hamed et al., 2025). This alarming trend highlights the urgency of enhancing climate change awareness and resilience across all societal sectors.

As one of the world’s most water-scarce regions, the MENA region faces acute vulnerabilities to climate-induced water shortages and extreme heat (Bhattarai & Yousef, 2025; Mfarrej, 2025; Namdar et al., 2021). Projections suggest that towards the end of the 21st century, nearly half the population could endure heatwaves exceeding 56°C for prolonged periods, posing critical challenges for marginalized populations (Wedler et al., 2023; Zittis et al., 2021), including persons with disabilities, who have limited resources and adaptive capacity (Jodoin et al., 2023; Marzouk et al., 2022). Furthermore, the region’s climate systems are highly susceptible to changes, such as shifts in the Intertropical Convergence Zone, impacting seasonal weather patterns, dust emissions, and atmospheric moisture transport (Alizadeh et al., 2025; Berhane et al., 2024; Darvishi Boloorani et al., 2024). These disruptions are likely to affect water availability, extreme weather events, and broader regional climate dynamics, necessitating adaptive strategies tailored to the region’s unique challenges.

The compounded effects of climate change and systemic inequities disproportionately affect vulnerable groups, particularly individuals with sensory impairments. Physical barriers, discriminatory attitudes, and inadequate policy frameworks exacerbate their exclusion from climate action and reduce their capacity to adapt (Bell et al., 2020; Jodoin et al., 2023; Kett et al., 2021; Kosanic et al., 2022; Uddin et al., 2024). While awareness of climate issues is growing, evidence shows that awareness alone does not lead to equitable action unless supported by targeted, context-specific interventions (Constantino et al., 2022; Eriksen et al., 2021; Mazumder & Hossain, 2024). For persons with sensory disabilities, barriers to accessing climate education, early warning systems, and resources further exacerbating their vulnerabilities, hindering both individual and collective action (Kisira et al., 2023; Kosanic et al., 2022; Stein et al., 2024). In addition to the physical challenges posed by climate change, societal exclusion restricts the participation of persons with sensory impairments in climate action. The lack of inclusive infrastructure and insufficient accommodations in disaster preparedness heighten their exposure to climate risks (Donkor & Mearns, 2021; Jodoin et al., 2023; Makamanzi, 2025; Ssennoga et al., 2022). The MENA region’s rapid population growth further amplifies these challenges, underscoring the need for infrastructural adaptation, equitable policy frameworks, and targeted climate awareness campaigns (Anwana & Owojori, 2024; El Bari et al., 2024; Jaad & Abdelghany, 2021; Maja & Ayano, 2021). Given the MENA region’s susceptibility to extreme climate events and socio-economic disruption, a proactive and inclusive climate change approach is imperative.

Globally and in the MENA region, persons with sensory impairments encounter significant barriers, ranging from limited access to education and employment to pervasive discrimination (Besoain-Saldaña et al., 2023; Ilyas et al., 2021; Kaur et al., 2024; Odame et al., 2021). These challenges are further compounded in the MENA region, where cultural attitudes and systemic obstacles intensify their exclusion (Al-Zoubi & Al-Zoubi, 2022; Ilyas et al., 2021; O’Dell, 2023). The region’s harsh climatic conditions, coupled with societal rejection and infrastructural shortcomings, could undermine the ability of persons with sensory disabilities to engage in climate-positive behaviours or effectively respond to climate-induced crises. During climate-induced disasters, individuals with sensory impairments often face heightened barriers to accessing critical services such as early warning systems, health care, and emergency shelters (Fraser, 2024; Jodoin et al., 2020; Uddin et al., 2024). For instance, hearing impairments can hinder responses to auditory alerts, while visual impairments may impede recognition of visual evacuation cues—both essential for timely action in emergencies. Moreover, the physical environment frequently lacks the necessary accommodations for inclusive disaster preparedness and response, leaving persons with sensory disabilities particularly vulnerable to the adverse impacts of climate change (Crock & McCallum, 2024; Kett et al., 2021; Namdar et al., 2021). It is concerning that persons with sensory impairments have been left out on discussions on climate change.

In the literature, there are intense advocacies for the inclusion of vulnerable groups such as those living with sensory disabilities in climate change policies, discussions, and initiatives (Bubb & Le Dé, 2022; Chtatou, 2023; Kim, 2024). According to Mertens (2021), power hierarchies exist in almost all societies. Majority groups dominate deliberations on climate change, suppressing the voices of minority groups (Adiga, 2024; Datta & Kairy, 2024; Porcuna-Ferrer et al., 2023). Persons with disabilities are more likely to be harmed or severely affected by harsh climate conditions (S. S. Ahmed et al., 2021; Lindsay et al., 2023; Tampubolon, 2023), and climate change initiatives without the input or perspectives of those with disabilities are likely to be unresponsive to their needs (Humalisto, 2022; Kim, 2024; Kosanic et al., 2022; Namdar et al., 2021). Advocacy for the inclusion of persons with disabilities in climate change initiatives has been promoted through initiatives such as climate justice, inclusive cities, and inclusive innovations (Bubb & Le Dé, 2022; Harpur & Stein, 2025; Kim, 2024). In view of this, the inclusion of persons with disabilities in climate change initiatives should enable them to make inputs, add their voices, and participate in adaptation strategies tailored to suit their uniqueness (Adiga, 2024; El Bari et al., 2024; Kim, 2024). There is therefore a need for empirical research capturing the voices of persons with sensory disabilities on climate change (Bråten, 2021; Kosanic et al., 2022; Mertens, 2021).

The literature on factors impacting on persons with sensory impairments’ attitudes and willingness to participate in climate change behaviour is limited, and there is therefore an urgent need for disability-inclusive climate policies that prioritize resilience, accessibility, and equity, alongside strategies for environmental awareness and education tailored to their needs. Addressing these challenges requires a comprehensive and intersectional approach that integrates persons with sensory disabilities into broader societal frameworks. Policymaking must confront attitudinal biases, close infrastructure gaps, and foster representation to enable active participation in climate resilience initiatives. Particularly in regions such as the MENA region, where climatic extremes and societal barriers intersect, advancing inclusion is essential for achieving equitable and effective climate action. Research addressing these issues, such as the present study, is needed to provide useful insights into how some of the issues may be addressed. The current study is novel and extend contemporary discussions on climate change attitudes and behaviour to persons with sensory disabilities. The overarching aim of this study is to understand the factors that could moderate the relationship between attitudes towards climate change and climate change behaviour awareness among persons with sensory impairments in the MENA region. The study was guided by the following research questions:

What is the contribution of attitude towards climate change in the variance in climate change behaviour awareness among persons with sensory impairments in the MENA region?

What are the moderators (demographic variables) of the relationship between attitude towards climate change and participation by persons with sensory impairment in climate change behaviour awareness in the MENA region?

In the current study, persons with sensory disabilities are understood to mean persons living with a form of hearing or visual impairment. This quantitative study consists of nine sections. Following the introduction, the remaining sections are organized as follows: the theoretical framework, review of the literature on attitudes towards climate change, review of the literature on climate change behaviour, study context, methodology, results, discussion, study limitations, and conclusion and implications for practice.

Theory Framework

One of the most widely used theories to study human intention towards a given behaviour is Ajzen’s (Ajzen, 1991) theory of planned behaviour (TPB). The TPB (Ajzen, 1991) was built on the theory of reasoned action, which holds that behaviour is the product of two related types of beliefs, normative and behavioural beliefs, which are mediated through intentions. However, in the MENA context, the TPB has rarely been applied in studies exploring climate change, attitudes, and climate change behaviour. While behavioural belief refers to one’s judgement of a given behaviour, normative belief, that is, the relevance and perception that an individual could engage in a given behaviour, refers to external pressure that views or perceptions could have on a person’s actions. However, Ajzen added that there could be a third type of behaviour, control belief, which could also, directly or indirectly, predict human behaviour. Control belief refers to a person’s perception that they have been given all the required resources and the conducive environment to engage in a behaviour. According to Ajzen, these three related beliefs, behavioural, normative, and control beliefs combine to predict human intention to engage in a behaviour.

In the current study, the three related beliefs were applied to the subject (see Figure 1). For instance, behavioural belief develops into attitudes towards a given behaviour such as advocating against climate change. Attitude is defined as one’s cognitive, affective, and perceptual beliefs towards a given behaviour. Thus, having an in-depth understanding of a given behaviour would enable individuals such as those living with sensory disabilities to form appropriate attitudes. Second, normative belief accumulates into perceived social norms in the form of support or pressure from peers or influential persons in an individual’s life. In turn, control beliefs develop into perceived behaviour control, which is an individual’s confidence in their ability to engage in a given behaviour. Based on information and resources provided, an individual could decide whether they have the ability to engage in a given activity.

Figure 1.

Graphical presentation of theory of planned behaviour.

The TPB model has been widely supported in disciplines such as teacher education (Dierendonck et al., 2024; Opoku, Nketsia, et al., 2023; Qin & Tao, 2021). To the best of our knowledge, the TPB is yet to be adopted for studies on climate change and persons with sensory disabilities. In the current study, two components of the TPB model were applied: attitude and actual behaviour. Attitude (used interchangeably with ‘awareness’ in this study) is believed to be the first stage towards understanding individuals’ behaviour. In view of this, the contribution of attitude towards climate change in the variance in climate change behaviour awareness was explored. Moreover, Ajzen (2011) argued that background variables could provide additional insight into intentions towards a given behaviour. It was suggested that authors explore the influence of background variables on the predictors of intentions. Consequently, in this study, the contribution of demographic variables, used as moderators in this study, on the relationship between attitudes and climate change behaviour awareness was explored.

Attitudes Towards Climate Change

Public attitudes towards climate change are critical in shaping the success of mitigation policies and climate action initiatives globally (Anwana & Owojori, 2024; Fairbrother, 2022; Khatibi et al., 2021; Luomi, 2021). Studies on attitudes towards climate change have evolved significantly, focusing on global perceptions (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022; Fairbrother, 2022; Gössling & Humpe, 2020; Ofori et al., 2023; Simpson et al., 2021), policy effectiveness (Bergquist et al., 2022; Epule et al., 2021; Ogunyiola et al., 2022; Otto & Gugushvili, 2020), and socio-demographic drivers (Ibrahim & Mensah, 2022; Muttarak, 2021; Thabane et al., 2024; Weckroth & Ala-Mantila, 2022).

In terms of global perception trends, studies reveal a widespread consensus on the urgency of addressing climate change (Adebayo, 2025; Bedasa & Deksisa, 2024; Pettorelli et al., 2021; Romanello et al., 2021; Zurek et al., 2022). For instance, focus group discussions conducted across 22 countries identified the urgent need to address climate change as a critical issue (Fritz et al., 2024). However, methods of mitigation, such as carbon taxation and renewable energy adoption, elicit mixed reactions due to differences in cultural and economic contexts (Baiardi & Morana, 2021; Biddau et al., 2022; Douenne & Fabre, 2020; Kabir et al., 2024; Maumoh & Onoja, 2024; O’Connell, 2024). More importantly, research underscores the power of targeted information in shaping public attitudes (Apollo & Mbah, 2021; Arıkan & Günay, 2021; Carmen et al., 2022; Jakob et al., 2020; Leiserowitz et al., 2021; Slothuus & Bisgaard, 2021). Providing clear, relatable insights on the fairness and efficacy of policies proves more effective than general climate awareness campaigns (Elvis Muse, 2025; Fegher, 2023; Kehler & Birchall, 2023; Mildenberger et al., 2022; Odoom & Fosu, 2023).

Similarly, individual behaviours and their alignment with policy have also received scholarly attention. Although individuals often express willingness to engage in climate-friendly actions, this does not consistently translate into support for broad policies (Ben-Enukora et al., 2025; Hornsey & Fielding, 2020). Behavioural studies highlight that alignment with personal financial or lifestyle considerations drives stronger climate change policy endorsement (Balogun et al., 2024; Ewulo et al., 2025). While persons without disabilities in the MENA region share common values and ways of doing things, people with sensory impairment could differ on factors which could impact on their attitudes and behaviours to addressing climate change.

Relative to the current literature, research consistently demonstrates that public support hinges on the perceived fairness and efficacy of policies (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2025; Ghafouri, 2023; Grelle & Hofmann, 2024; Huber & Wicki, 2021). For example, progressive mechanisms such as redistributive carbon taxes receive broader endorsement compared to regressive ‘pay-to-pollute’ schemes (Barrez, 2024; D’Acunto et al., 2022; Magistro & Alvarez, 2024). Moreover, economic concerns, including policy affordability and personal costs, significantly influence public attitudes (Douenne & Fabre, 2020; Jakučionytė-Skodienė & Liobikienė, 2022; Malerba, 2022; Sefa-Nyarko, 2024). For instance, farmers in the United States show greater optimism about technological solutions but less support for climate change initiatives and an increased propensity to express a preference to delay adaptation-related actions (Gardezi & Arbuckle, 2020). Furthermore, regional disparities reflect differing levels of vulnerability and socio-economic conditions. In high-income nations, policy support aligns with environmental awareness, while in middle-income countries, economic priorities often overshadow climate concerns (Lundquist, 2025; Trotter et al., 2022). The lack of policy support could derail efforts towards climate change initiatives. However, it remains unclear as to whether persons with sensory disabilities are aware of climate change as well as its effect on their willingness to contribute to climate change initiatives.

Demographic factors play a pivotal role in shaping attitudes to climate change. Younger individuals in developed nations exhibit heightened climate awareness (Calculli et al., 2021; Jürkenbeck et al., 2021), while in other low and middle-income settings, such as Africa, older respondents have shown greater knowledge of mitigation strategies (Ayalon et al., 2023; Galang & Vaughter, 2020; Katey & Zanu, 2024). Similarly, there is a close correlation between higher education levels and climate literacy and support for mitigation policies, reflecting an enhanced understanding of risks and solutions (Jaoul-Grammare & Stenger, 2022; Pan et al., 2023; Zouine et al., 2024). Economic standing influences attitudes (Dibeh et al., 2021; Duijndam & van Beukering, 2021), with wealthier urban populations demonstrating greater support for climate policies due to perceived affordability (Du et al., 2024; Immergluck & Balan, 2018; Ivković & Mandić, 2024; Zeigermann et al., 2023). In addition, urban respondents typically show stronger support for climate action compared to rural populations, which may prioritize immediate economic concerns (Allred et al., 2022; Haupt et al., 2020; Salvia et al., 2021; Zeigermann et al., 2023). The influence of demographic variables on attitudes to climate change among persons with sensory impairment is yet to be studied.

Participation in Climate Change Behaviour

The willingness of individuals to engage in climate change mitigation behaviours is a crucial determinant of global efforts to address environmental challenges (Amoah & Addoah, 2021; Anwana & Owojori, 2024; Hornsey & Fielding, 2020; van Valkengoed et al., 2022). Research into willingness to participate in climate change behaviours has evolved significantly over the past decade (Antwi-Agyei, Dougill & Abaidoo, 2021; Brosch, 2021; Haj-Salem et al., 2022; Kotcher et al., 2021; Xie et al., 2019). These show that when people are aware of the gravity of climate change issues, they are more likely to participate in climate change behaviours (Azeez et al., 2024; Haj-Salem et al., 2022; Ngcamu, 2023). Equally, when people believe the policies set by governments will be effective in averting the adverse effects of climate change, they will engage in behaviours that will help the policy succeed (Bergquist et al., 2022; Bradley et al., 2020; Fischer & Karl, 2022; Trotter et al., 2022; Whitmarsh et al., 2021; Zhang et al., 2020). Other studies using experimental designs have highlighted the impact of tailored information on enhancing public support, underscoring the role of evidence-based communication strategies (Alant & Bakare, 2021; Hamelin & Halawa, 2024; Leiserowitz et al., 2021; Matos et al., 2022; O’Neill et al., 2020). In these studies, Matos et al. (2022) and O’Neill et al. (2020) concluded that policymakers could commit resources to creating public awareness about climate change to enhance public support for climate change initiatives.

At a country/community level, recent trends emphasize global disparities in willingness to act, with high-income countries reporting greater climate scepticism despite widespread awareness (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022; Ejaz et al., 2024; Zhou & Shen, 2022). By contrast, middle- and low-income nations exhibit a greater willingness to engage in climate-inspired behaviours, driven by localized vulnerability and a need for community-driven interventions (Appau et al., 2024; Bush & Clayton, 2023; Saeed et al., 2023). However, most of these studies recruited their participants from urban and educated members of society, which limits their generalizability to vulnerable communities.

Demographic factors, including education, income, and political ideology, shape individuals’ willingness to act. For example, younger individuals show greater concern for climate change but less technical knowledge than older individuals, particularly in high-income countries (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022; Helm et al., 2021; Thomas et al., 2022). Relatedly, women generally express stronger concern for climate change and willingness to act but face barriers in technical knowledge and economic participation in certain regions (Awiti, 2022; Bryan et al., 2024; Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022; Nosheen et al., 2023). Higher educational attainment also correlates with greater support for progressive climate policies and the adoption of climate-friendly behaviours (Mahalik et al., 2021; Özbay & Duyar, 2022). In addition, economic constraints disproportionately limit lower-income groups, while higher-income individuals are more likely to adopt private behaviours to counter climate change, such as purchasing electric vehicles (Esteves et al., 2021; Evensen et al., 2025; Lee et al., 2024; Qiao & Dowell, 2022). Cultural norms and political affiliations further shape these patterns, with left-leaning individuals in many nations showing a greater willingness to support stringent climate policies compared to their right-leaning counterparts (Dechezleprêtre et al., 2022; Lægreid et al., 2025; Nishijima & Pal, 2023; Vuong et al., 2024). The limited literature on persons with sensory impairment lends support to understanding the demographic factors that could impact on climate change behaviour awareness.

Current Study

The current study investigates the complex relationship between attitudes towards climate change and climate change behaviours among individuals with sensory impairments in the MENA region. The MENA region has economic, cultural, and historical relevance. For example, the region plays a pivotal role in the global crude oil trade (Abdelsalam, 2023; Matallah, 2022; Olawuyi, 2021). Specifically, the region produces half of the world’s crude oil and gas. This makes the MENA an epicentre of global energy and trade. Moreover, the MENA is also major consumer of fossil fuel. Government subsidies on fossil fuel make it cheap for the general populace. This has culminated in international advocacy and pressure on countries in the region to introduce transformative policies aimed at reducing the emission of hydrocarbons.

Culturally, the MENA region is the birthplace of three major religions: Islam, Christianity, and Judaism (Meri, 2021; Ramazanova et al., 2022; Timothy, 2020). This has made the region an important destination for pilgrims. In view of this, issues such as climate change that threaten the lives of people in the region should be given scholarly attention. Governments in the region have taken a keen interest in discussions on climate change as the region hosted the COP28 and continues to engage in global deliberations on climate change.

Recent studies have highlighted that individual attitudes significantly predict climate-friendly behaviours (Emberger-Klein et al., 2021; Koessler et al., 2022; K. Mehmood et al., 2023; Skeirytė et al., 2022; Yadav et al., 2023). However, there is a lack of literature on awareness of climate change among persons with disability such as those with sensory disability. Furthermore, existing studies have focused disproportionately on high-income nations (Chaloner et al., 2021; Kulin et al., 2021; Schöngart et al., 2025; Sesana et al., 2021; Taff et al., 2025), limiting the global applicability of their findings. The link between attitude towards climate change and participation in pro-environmental behaviour has been widely studied among the general population. However, studies on climate change awareness and behaviour among persons with sensory disabilities in non-Western countries remain sparse, despite the heightened vulnerability of these groups to climate impacts. The participation of persons with sensory disabilities in climate change behaviour is vital as they are at risk due to the effects of climate change and should therefore contribute to global deliberations on climate change.

The overarching aim of this study is to explore the relationship between climate change awareness and its effect on climate change behaviour awareness. The study is novel as this is the first time the voices of persons with sensory disabilities were captured on issues such as climate change. According to Ajzen (1991), demographic variables can enhance understanding of awareness and actual behaviour. This study explored the distinct role of moderation effects—such as socio-economic status, policy awareness, and community support—in shaping attitudes and climate change behaviours among persons with sensory disabilities who may face multiple barriers.

Methods

The study was guided by a cross-sectional design in which data were collected at a given point in time from a given population (Wang & Cheng, 2020). This quantitative method, that is, using a questionnaire, is ideal for cross-sectional studies as it facilitates collecting data from a sizeable proportion of the target population (Hall, 2008).

Study Participants

The study sample consisted of persons with sensory disabilities residing in the MENA region. The participants were characterized by a shared Arabic language, religion, and cultural practices. The MENA region can be further divided into the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and non-GCC member states. The GCC consists of six countries—Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates—that play a significant role in the global crude oil industry. Moreover, the MENA region has seen the emergence of several disability advocacy organizations, such as the Arab Organization of Persons with Disabilities, which primarily consist of persons with sensory disabilities in the MENA. Other organizations such as the UAE Deaf Association and the Emirates Association for Visually Impaired helped with the recruitment. These advocacy groups constituted key participants in the study. To facilitate data collection, an electronic version of the research instrument was disseminated among the disability organization’s shared social media platforms for wider distribution.

The recruitment of participants and data collection were guided by the following inclusion criteria: (a) persons with disabilities residing in the MENA region, (b) persons diagnosed with either visual or hearing impairments, (c) adults with disabilities, and (d) persons with the capacity to provide consent for participation. Simple random sampling was used with an online survey shared on social media as well as the social media platforms of disability organization. Simple random sampling was appropriate, as a heterogeneous (S. K. Ahmed, 2024) population of persons with sensory disability who satisfied the inclusion criteria had an equal chance to participate in this study. Persons with sensory disabilities do not live as a homogeneous group. Moreover, in the MENA region, disability is a very sensitive issue, making it difficult to identify or reach such groups (Ghazy et al., 2025; Javaid, 2024; Sweileh, 2024). Recruiting participants via disability groups was determined to be a viable option for this study. Specifically, persons with sensory disabilities are usually members of disability groups who usually use social media platforms to share information. Sharing the survey link on such social media platforms gave diverse members an equal chance to participate in this study.

The organizations contacted have a total membership of about 3,000, of which 18% participated in this study. A total of 542 participants took part in the study: of these participants, 58% were from GCC countries, while 42% were from non-GCC countries, as indicated in Table 1. Participants with visual impairment constituted 63% of the participants, with the remaining 37% reporting hearing impairments. In terms of gender distribution, 54% of the participants were female, while 46% were male (see Table 1 for details).

Table 1.

Demographic Characteristics of Participants.

Category (N = 542)	Frequency	Percentage
Disability type
Hearing impairment	198	37
Visual impairment	344	63
Gender (n = 528)
Male	242	46
Female	286	54
Country
GCC	226	42
Non-GCC	316	58
Age (n = 519)
18–25 years	131	25
26–35 years	55	11
At least 36 years	333	64
Marital status (n = 528)
Never married	261	49
Married	216	41
Divorced or widowed	51	10
Number of children (n = 519)
No child	313	60
1–3 children	141	27
4 or more children	65	13
Educational qualification (n = 521)
No formal qualification	130	25
High school qualification	158	30
At least bachelor degree	233	45
Employment status (n = 505)
Self-employed	97	19
Public servant	193	38
Unemployed	215	43
Training in climate change (n = 513)
Yes	171	33
No	342	67

Instrument

A two-part survey instrument was employed for the data collection. The first part captured participants’ demographic information (see Table 1). The second part consisted of the Awareness of Climate Change and Pro-Environmental Behaviour Willingness Questionnaire (ACCPEBWQ), which employs Likert scales to measure attitudes. These two parts align with the two principles of the TPB that guided the study. While the Awareness of Climate Change measures attitudes towards climate change, the Pro-Environmental Behaviour Willingness Questionnaire measures climate change behaviour awareness. The ACCPEBWQ was adapted from a previous study conducted in Nigeria and modified to better fit the current context. For instance, references to generators (commonly used in Nigeria), were replaced with solar energy, which is prevalent in the MENA region.

The instrument was structured around two domains: (a) Awareness of Climate Change (29 items) and (b) Pro-Environmental Climate Change Behaviour (15 items). The awareness domain included three subscales, namely Perceptions on Climate Change (7 items), Causes of Climate Change (11 items), and Effects of Climate Change (11 items). The pro-environmental behaviour domain consisted of two subscales: (a) General Societal Support (7 items) and (b) Personal Educational Initiatives (9 items). Responses were recorded on a five-point Likert scale, ranging from ‘Strongly Disagree’ to ‘Strongly Agree’.

The revised instrument was translated into Arabic for accessibility and reviewed by six bilingual (Arabic and English) experts with a research interest in climate change. In addition, two academics affiliated with a regional disability organization reviewed the instrument. Based on their recommendations, data reporting was divided into GCC and non-GCC categories rather than assigned to specific countries. Feedback from reviewers led to modifications, including dividing the pro-environmental behaviour scale into two subscales, which was supported by expert consensus. The revised instrument underwent pilot testing before full-scale implementation.

In this project, the instrument used for data collection was valid and found to have appropriate goodness-of-fit indices (Authors, in press). For example, computation of confirmatory factor analysis yielded the following goodness-of-fit indices: chi-square = 5.14, comparative fit index = .94, Tucker–Lewis index = .91, square root of the mean error of approximation = .08, and standard root mean square residual = .04. The reliability of the scale, using Cronbach’s alpha, was as follows: Overall ACCPEBWQ = .90, awareness of climate change = .85, and participation in pro-climate change behaviour = .91.

Procedure

The study obtained ethical approval from the Social Science Research Ethics Committee at United Arab Emirates University (ERSC-2023_3934). Subsequently, executives and collaborators of disability organizations in the MENA region were invited to distribute the instrument among their members. Data were collected digitally via Google Forms between June 2023 and April 2024. The instrument was primarily shared on the social media platforms of disability organizations, with additional accessibility features tailored to participants’ needs.

For potential participants with hearing impairments, a sign language video explaining the study was provided. For those with visual impairments, an audio recording accompanied the survey link. The survey included details on the study objectives, voluntary participation, the confidentiality of the data, and withdrawal procedures. Personal identifiers and country-specific data were excluded from being reported to ensure anonymity.

Participants were assured that the research team would maintain the confidentiality of their responses and that no external parties would have access to the data gathered. Participants received no compensation for their participation. They were also continuously reminded of their right to withdraw at any time without repercussions. All the participants read and signed an e-consent embedded at the beginning of the questionnaire.

Data Analysis

The data were transferred to Excel for cleaning before it was imported to SPSS for data analysis. The data were assumed to be normally distributed based on the sample size (Field, 2013). Based on the data analysis, the research questions were answered.

To answer research question 1, hierarchical multiple regression was used to explore the contribution of attitude towards climate change in the variance in pro-environmental climate change behaviour. Attitude was used as an independent variable to estimate its impact on the willingness of persons with sensory impairments to participate in pro-environmental climate change behaviour. In step 1, attitudes were regressed directly to climate change behaviour. In step 2, demographic variables (e.g., gender, age) were added to the model to understand their individual contributions as well as their combination with attitudes to understand their contribution to the variance in pro-environmental climate change behaviour awareness. The following assumptions were observed, and it was evident that they had not been violated: normality, linearity, multicollinearity, and homoscedasticity (Pallant, 2020).

To answer research question 2, following the computation of the hierarchical regression, demographic variables that made significant contributions to the variance in pro-environmental climate change behaviour were used as moderator(s) to explore their influence on the relationship between the independent variables and the outcome variables. Hayes’s (2022) moderation method 1 was used for the computation. The moderation effect was assumed as follows: (a) the significance effect was noted at an alpha value less than .05; (b) the moderator and the predictor had a direct effect on the dependent variable; and (c) the moderator had a significant effect on the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.

Results

The mean scores were computed at domain and sub-scale levels: awareness of climate change (M = 3.50, SD = .71) and participation in pro-environment climate change behaviour (M = 3.79, SD = .76). For awareness of climate change, the sub-scales yielded the following mean scores: Perception (M = 3.57, SD = .78), effect (M = 3.50, SD = .82), and causes (M = 3.42, SD = .88). With respect to pro-environment climate change behaviour, the means for the sub-scales were: General societal support (M = 3.90, SD = .79) and Educational initiatives (M = 3.67, SD = .79).

Predictors of Climate Change Behaviour Awareness

Predictors of climate change behaviour were explored using hierarchical multiple regression (see Table 2). In step 1, attitude towards climate change (β = .56, p = .001) was regressed directly and found to contribute 31% (R²change = .31) to the variance in climate change behaviour, F (1, 476) = 212.16, p = .001.

Table 2.

Predictors of Climate Change Behaviour.

Category	Uns. beta	S.E.	Stand. beta	t	p
Step 1
Attitude towards climate change	.63	.04	.56	14.57	.001**
Step 2
Attitude towards climate change	.66	.05	.58	14.72	.001**
Disability type	.11	.06	.07	1.88	.06
Gender	.22	.07	.14	3.32	.001**
Country	.22	.06	.14	3.45	.001**
Age	−.06	.05	−.06	−1.05	.30
Marital status	−.09	.06	−.08	−1.68	.09
Number of children	.07	.05	.06	1.33	.19
Educational qualification	−.15	.05	−.15	−3.11	.002**
Employment status	−.02	.04	−.02	−.36	.72
Training in climate change	−.21	.06	−.13	−3.26	.001**

p ≤ .01.

In step 2, nine demographic variables were added to the model, which contributed 7% (R²change = .07) to the variance in climate change behaviour, F (9, 476) = 6.09, p = .001. The combined demographic variables and attitude made a 38% (R²change = .38) contribution to the variance in climate change behaviour, F (10, 467) = 28.73, p = .001. At this stage, attitude (β = .58, p = .001), gender (β = .14, p = .001), country (β = .14, p = .001), educational qualification (β = −.15, p = .001), and training in climate change (β = −.13, p = .001) made individual contributions to the variance in climate change behaviour. However, attitude towards climate change made a greater contribution to pro-environment climate change behaviour than the other variables.

Moderators of the Relationship Between Attitude and Climate Change Behaviour Awareness

Following the hierarchical multiple regression (see Table 3), demographic variables which impacted on climate change behaviour awareness were used as moderators (gender, country, educational qualification, and training in climate change).

Table 3.

Moderators of Attitude and Climate Change Behaviour.

Category	Beta	S.E.	t	p	Confidence interval [lower, upper]
Gender	.83	0.28	2.96	.003**	[0.28, 1.38]
Attitude	.94	0.13	7.43	.001**	[0.69, 1.18]
Attitude and Gender	−.24	0.08	−3.03	.003**	[−0.39, −0.08]
Country	.63	0.27	2.28	.02*	[0.09, 1.17]
Attitude	.75	0.13	5.96	.001**	[0.50, 1.00]
Attitude and country	−12	0.08	−1.59	.11	[−0.28, 0.03]
Educational qualification	−1.26	0.17	−7.45	.001**	[−1.59, −0.93]
Attitude	−.01	0.11	−.05	.96	[−2.15, 0.21]
Attitude and Educational qualification	.32	0.05	6.74	.001**	[0.23, 0.42]
Training in climate change	1.65	0.32	5.24	.001**	[1.03, 2.27]
Attitude	1.48	0.16	9.48	.001**	[1.18, 1.79]
Attitude and Educational qualification	−.49	0.09	−5.58	.001**	[−0.66, −0.32]

p ≤ .01. *p ≤ .05.

First, the interactive effect of gender on the relationship between attitude and climate change behaviour awareness was explored. The overall model was significant, R² = .30, F (3, 524) = 74.55, p = .001. Individually, attitude (β = .94, t = 743, p = .001, 95% CI [.69, 1.18]) and gender (β = .83, t = 2.96, p = .003, 95% CI [.28, 1.38]) contributed to the variance in climate change behaviour. Gender significantly moderated (β = −.24, t = −3.03, p = .003, 95% CI [−.39, −.08]) the relationship between attitude and climate change behaviour, R²change =.01, F (1, 524) = 9.17, p = .003. To elaborate, for male participants, a significant relationship was found between attitude and climate change behaviour, β = .70, t = 12.28, p = .001, 95% CI [.58, 81]. However, for female participants, a significant relationship was also found between attitude and climate change behaviour, β = .46, t = 8.44, p = .001, 95% CI [.35, .57].

Figure 2 illustrates that when attitude is low, climate change behaviour is low. Similarly, when attitude is low, females were more likely to participate in climate change behaviour compared to their male counterparts. However, as attitude increased, climate change behaviour also increased. When attitude increased, males’ climate change behaviour was higher than that of females.

Figure 2.

Gender as a moderator of attitude and behaviour.

Second, training in climate change was found to be a significant moderator of attitude and climate change behaviour, R² = .37, F (3, 509) = 99.09, p = .001. Attitude (β = 1.48, t = 9.48, p = .001, 95% CI [1.18, 1.79]) and training in climate change (β = 1.65, t = 5.24, p = .001, 95% CI [1.03, 2.27) were direct predictors of climate change behaviour. Training in climate change significantly moderated (β = −.49, t = -5.58, p = .001, 95% CI [−66, −.32]) the relationship between attitude and climate change behaviour, R²change = .04, F (1, 509) = 31.14, p = .001. In the event that persons with sensory impairment had received training in climate change, a significant relationship was found between attitude and climate change behaviour, β = .99, t = 13.28, p = .001, 95% CI [.85, 1.14]. In addition, when participants had no training in pro-environment climate change behaviour, a significant relationship was found between attitude and climate change behaviour, β = .50, t = 10.88, p = .001, 95% CI [.41, .59].

Figure 3 illustrates that when attitude is low, participants who indicated they had no training in climate change scored higher compared to those who indicated otherwise. However, as attitude increased, those who had participated in training in climate change scored higher on climate change behaviour compared to those who indicated that they had not received any training in climate change.

Figure 3.

Training in climate change as a moderator of attitude and behaviour.

Discussion

The current study explores factors that can moderate the relationship between attitudes to climate change and the willingness of persons with sensory impairments to participate in pro-environmental climate change behaviour. This study was conducted because of the scarcity of research on disability and climate change awareness globally. It is concerning that, while persons with sensory impairments could be affected by worsening climate, their perceptions and understanding of climate change have not been explored, especially in the MENA region, which is one of the world’s regions that are most likely to be negatively impacted by climate change (Akasha et al., 2023; Marzouk et al., 2022; T. Mehmood et al., 2024; Namdar et al., 2021).

The study was guided by a component of Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour, that is, attitude and behaviour. According to Ajzen, attitude combines with other two variables (social norms and self-efficacy) to predict behaviour directly or indirectly. However, the two other variables were not included in this study. The results align with Ajzen’s conceptualization of attitudes making a significant contribution to variances in behaviour. The results of this study indicate that enhancing the positive attitudes of people with sensory impairment could have positive effects on their participation in climate change behaviour. The findings affirm those of a previous study which reported that there is a relationship between attitude towards climate change and participation in climate change behaviour within the general population (Ogunbode et al., 2022). This finding is valuable because attitude represents the first stage in eliciting support for a given initiative (Ajzen, 1991). Once individuals understand a given phenomenon and perceive it positively, they are inclined to support advocacy for such a behaviour. Consistently, awareness creation has been recommended as pivotal in global efforts for putting in place structures for climate change interventions (Anwana & Owojori, 2024; Ben Hassen & Zurayk, 2024; Constantino et al., 2022; Govind, 2022; Ziervogel et al., 2022).

It is undeniable, however, that persons with disabilities have been excluded from global discussions on climate change (Amenyedzi, 2022; Kim, 2024; Kosanic et al., 2022; Stein & Stein, 2022; Uddin et al., 2024). This is unsurprising because in most global initiatives, such as Coronavirus vaccination, these groups are rarely consulted or engaged, which has led, for example, to their hesitancy towards vaccination (Opoku, Belbase, et al., 2023; Sebring et al., 2022; Wiggins et al., 2022).

Another important finding concerns the neutrality of participants in terms of both their attitudes and participation in pro-climate change behaviour. This finding is unsurprising because, according to the theory of planned behaviour, Ajzen argued that favourable attitudes intersect with willingness to execute a given behaviour. In this regard, it is expected that if persons with sensory disabilities possess favourable attitudes, this should correlate with positive behaviour to yield favourable responses. However, in this study, the reverse was noted. One of the reasons for this result could be that people with disabilities are not sufficiently included in climate change discussions by policymakers in the MENA countries, as was also found by researchers such as Stein and Stein (2022) and Kosanic et al. (2022).

Sustainability Development Goals 7 and 13 call for the participation and involvement of all segments of society in climate change initiatives and actions. It is apparent that the disability population are yet to be considered in the context of the global call for climate change. Indeed, a disability climate change action should be considered by the international community spearheading global initiatives against climate change. Without that, persons with sensory impairments may bear the consequences of climate change as they would be powerless to advocate for sustainable climate action. This finding serves as a call to action to stakeholders in climate change in the MENA to begin engaging the disability community and educating them about climate change, as well as adding their inputs to climate change actions.

Ajzen (2011) further argued that demographic variables are important because they could explain intentions towards a given behaviour. As expected, in the current study, some demographic variables made a significant impact on the relationship between attitudes and pro-climate change behaviour. For instance, gender moderated the relationship between attitudes and pro-climate change behaviour. The moderation analysis indicated that when attitudes were high, males were more likely to engage in climate change behaviour compared to females. This finding is somehow inconsistent with previous studies, which found an insignificant relationship between gender, attitude, and participation in climate change behaviour (Gannon et al., 2025; Pinho, 2025). The MENA region presumably represents a patriarchal society in which women are more reserved and unlikely to engage in societal activities (Haddad et al., 2025; Lust & Benstead, 2024). It could therefore be inferred that the females who took part in this study hail from and were influence by their cultural background. Although there is intense advocacy to get more females involved in societal activities, it is clear that when it comes to climate change and actions geared towards the disability community, more needs to be done to encourage the participation of females. Specifically, policymakers could design targeted climate change training programmes for persons with sensory disabilities in the MENA region based on gender.

Another demographic variable which moderated the relationship between attitude and climate change behaviour is training in climate change. The moderation analysis demonstrated that when attitude is high, those who indicated that they had engaged in training in climate change reported a high level of willingness to participate in pro-climate change behaviour. One should caution here that over 60% of the study participants indicated that they had not received any training in climate change. However, the trend identified in this study could be capitalized on by climate change policymakers in the MENA region. Specifically, training in a given initiative is at the heart of attitudinal change and pro-environment climate change behaviour (Melariri et al., 2021; Trott & Weinberg, 2020; Ziervogel et al., 2022). In other domains, such as education, training teachers or community members has a positive effect on their attitudes as well as their willingness to engage in desired behaviour (Hassanein et al., 2021; Koliqi & Zabeli, 2022; Opoku et al., 2022; Scanlon et al., 2022).

In the field of climate change, training has been identified as fundamental to addressing climate change and promoting awareness of actions to counter climate change. Consequently, the findings indicate that the institutionalization of training programmes in climate change for the disability community could positively impact their attitudes and commitment to taking action on climate change. The responsibility lies with policymakers in the MENA region to develop climate change training programmes targeting the disability community.

Study Limitations

The findings of this study should be interpreted with caution due to certain limitations. First, participants were recruited electronically via social media, primarily through disability organizations in the MENA region. This recruitment approach may have introduced potential biases, as members of the disability organizations could have shared the study information within their networks of interest. This also means recruitment may have excluded individuals without access to social media platforms. To counteract this, the research team also shared the survey link with individuals outside these disability organizations and encouraged wider dissemination. Future research studies could employ printed questionnaires to integrate perspectives from individuals in underserved communities lacking digital access. Moreover, there was no direct interaction between participants and the research team, excluding the possibility of participants querying researchers for clarification. Nonetheless, comprehensive and accessible information was provided to prospective participants to facilitate informed survey completion. Furthermore, the study focused on two out of the five components of Ajzen’s theory of planned behaviour, leaving scope for future research to include the additional components for a more comprehensive understanding of the intentions of persons with sensory impairments in the MENA region or other contexts regarding climate change.

In addition, the study used a self-reported measure to assess climate change awareness and did not independently verify participants’ responses. However, the survey was administered in participants’ native language, which likely facilitated accurate self-expression. Furthermore, expanding the scope of the study in the future to include persons with other types of disabilities, such as cognitive impairments, as well as their families and special education teachers, could also offer valuable insights into how climate change is taught and perceived within these groups.

Conclusion and Implication for Practice

The current study explored the moderators of the relationship between attitudes towards climate change and the willingness of persons with sensory impairments to participate in climate change behaviour. The study used the TPB as a theoretical framework to explore a novel field in the contemporary literature on climate change. The findings support Ajzen’s proposed relationship between attitudes and behaviour, demonstrating that attitude towards climate change make a significant contribution to the variance in willingness of the disability community to participate in climate change action. In addition, demographic variables such as gender and training in climate change significantly moderated the relationship between attitude and participation in climate change action. However, the mean scores demonstrated the study participants’ ambivalence, which could be considered in future climate change actions targeting the disability community.

It is undeniable that the international community has yet to consider the input of the disability community in climate change actions and initiatives. This study therefore advocates that policymakers should urgently engage the disability community on climate change actions. The findings could have implications for future climate change policy initiatives. For instance, policymakers could develop a climate change training curriculum as part of efforts to extend climate change actions to the disability community. Policymakers could also engage the disability community to gain insight into their understanding of climate change and how they could contribute towards climate change actions. This would help develop insight into their perspectives as well as capture their views on ways in which they could participate in climate change initiatives. Based on the principle of nothing about us, without us, this step is pivotal to ensure that tailored training is provided to the disability community.

Second, media campaigns and disability advocates interested in climate change could be used as part of public education efforts. Policymakers could adopt a training-the-trainer approach where persons with disabilities are trained on climate change actions to then transfer this knowledge to members of their communities. The training should focus on changing attitudes and increasing awareness of climate change behaviour. Third, training could be tailored based on gender in the MENA region. This would ensure that appropriate training is provided to the various disability groups in the region.

The SDGs emphasize the interconnectedness of environmental sustainability and social equity. Effective climate policies must be inclusive, recognizing that marginalized groups often experience the greatest barriers to participation (Adebayo, 2025; Adiga, 2024; Khatibi et al., 2021; Kim, 2024; Kosanic et al., 2022). The current study addressed an important issue, that is, extending the discussion of climate change to the disability community to capture the attention of policymakers. This focus is not only timely but critical, given the MENA region’s unique socio-political and climate vulnerabilities.

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the participants who contributed to this study.

ORCID iD

Maxwell Peprah Opoku

Ethical Considerations

Approval was obtained from the Social Science Research Ethics Committee at United Arab Emirates University, United Arab Emirates (ERSC_2023_3934). The procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent to Participate

All the participants read and signed an e-consent embedded at the beginning of the questionnaire.

Author contributions

Conceptualization; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ahmed Abubakar Kuyini, Gyimah Ebenezer Mensah, Aysha Alnuaimi, Lilian Frimpomaa, Ashraf Mustafa

Data curation; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ashraf Mustafa

Formal analysis; Maxwell Peprah Opoku

Funding acquisition; N/A

Investigation; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ahmed Abubakar Kuyini, Gyimah Ebenezer Mensah, Aysha Alnuaimi, Lilian Frimpomaa, Ashraf Mustafa

Methodology; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ahmed Abubakar Kuyini, Lilian Frimpomaa

Project administration; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ashraf Mustafa

Resources; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ashraf Mustafa

Software; N/A

Supervision; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ashraf Mustafa

Validation; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ashraf Mustafa

Visualization; N/A

Roles/Writing - original draft; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ahmed Abubakar Kuyini, Gyimah Ebenezer Mensah, Aysha Alnuaimi, Lilian Frimpomaa, Ashraf Mustafa

Writing - review & editing; Maxwell Peprah Opoku, Ahmed Abubakar Kuyini, Gyimah Ebenezer Mensah, Aysha Alnuaimi, Lilian Frimpomaa, Ashraf Mustafa

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

References

Abdelsalam

M. A. M.

(2023). Oil price fluctuations and economic growth: The case of MENA countries. Review of Economics and Political Science, 8(5), 353–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/REPS-12-2019-0162

Adebayo

W. G.

(2025). Resilience in the face of ecological challenges: Strategies for integrating environmental considerations into social policy planning in Africa. Sustainable Development, 33(1), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3113

Adiga

(2024). Inclusive communication strategies to elevate marginalized voices in climate policy. Journal of Law for Future Security, 1(2), 1–9.

Ahmed

Hasan

Md.Z.

Pongsiri

M. J.

Ahmed

M. W.

Szabo

(2021). Effect of extreme weather events on injury, disability, and death in Bangladesh. Climate and Development, 13(4), 306–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/17565529.2020.1772705

Ahmed

S. K.

(2024). How to choose a sampling technique and determine sample size for research: A simplified guide for researchers. Oral Oncology Reports, 12, Article 100662. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oor.2024.100662

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T

Ajzen

(2011). The theory of planned behaviour: Reactions and reflections. Psychology & Health, 26(9), 1113–1127. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2011.613995

Akasha

Ghaffarpasand

Pope

F. D.

(2023). Climate change, air pollution and the associated burden of disease in the Arabian Peninsula and neighbouring regions: A critical review of the literature. Sustainability, 15(4), 3766. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043766

Alant

B. P.

Bakare

O. O.

(2021). A case study of the relationship between smallholder farmers’ ICT literacy levels and demographic data w.r.t. their use and adoption of ICT for weather forecasting. Heliyon, 7(3), e06403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e06403

10.

Alizadeh

Ahmadi

Sauter

(2025). Climatology and trends of dust emission in the Kavir Desert, Iran. International Journal of Climatology, 45, e8863. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.8863

11.

Allred

S. B.

Chatrchyan

A. M.

Tsintsadze

(2022). Local municipal capacity for climate change action in New York State: Exploring the urban–rural divide. Review of Policy Research, 39(5), 570–601. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12475

12.

Al-Zoubi

S. M.

Al-Zoubi

S. M.

(2022). The portrayal of persons with disabilities in Arabic drama: A literature review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 125, Article 104221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2022.104221

13.

Amenyedzi

(2022). Disability and water taboos in Ghana: Socio-cultural and theological reflections on the environment. African Thought: A Journal of Afro-Centric Knowledge, 1(2), 88–136.

14.

Amoah

Addoah

(2021). Does environmental knowledge drive pro-environmental behaviour in developing countries? Evidence from households in Ghana. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 23(2), 2719–2738. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00698-x

15.

Antwi-Agyei

Amanor

Hogarh

J. N.

Dougill

A. J.

(2021). Predictors of access to and willingness to pay for climate information services in north-eastern Ghana: A gendered perspective. Environmental Development, 37, Article 100580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envdev.2020.100580

16.

Antwi-Agyei

Dougill

A. J.

Abaidoo

R. C.

(2021). Opportunities and barriers for using climate information for building resilient agricultural systems in Sudan savannah agro-ecological zone of north-eastern Ghana. Climate Services, 22, Article 100226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cliser.2021.100226

17.

Anwana

Owojori

O. M.

(2024). Policy options for achieving sustainable development goals (SDGs) in the MENA region through the effective implementation of multilateral environmental agreements. Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy (The), 15(2), 86–113. https://doi.org/10.4314/jsdlp.v15i2.4

18.

Apollo

Mbah

M. F.

(2021). Challenges and opportunities for climate change education (CCE) in East Africa: A critical review. Climate, 9(6), 93. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli9060093

19.

Appau

P. K.

Asibey

M. O.

Grant

(2024). Enabling asset-based community development solutions: Pro-poor urban climate resilience in Kumasi, Ghana. Cities, 145, Article 104723. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104723

20.

Arıkan

Günay

(2021). Public attitudes towards climate change: A cross-country analysis. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 23(1), 158–174. https://doi.org/10.1177/1369148120951013

21.

Awiti

A. O.

(2022). Climate change and gender in Africa: A review of impact and gender-responsive solutions. Frontiers in Climate, 4, Article 895950. https://doi.org/10.3389/fclim.2022.895950

22.

Ayalon

Roy

Aloni

Keating

(2023). A scoping review of research on older people and intergenerational relations in the context of climate change. The Gerontologist, 63(5), 945–958. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnac028

23.

Azeez

R. O.

Rampedi

I. T.

Ifegbesan

A. P.

Ogunyemi

(2024). Geo-demographics and source of information as determinants of climate change consciousness among citizens in African countries. Heliyon, 10(7), e27872. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e27872

24.

Aziz

Anjum

(2024). Transformative strategies for enhancing women’s resilience to climate change: A policy perspective for low- and middle-income countries. Women’s Health, 20, 17455057241302032. https://doi.org/10.1177/17455057241302032

25.

Baiardi

Morana

(2021). Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union. Energy Economics, 96, Article 105163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2021.105163

26.

Balogun

O. S.

Nwahia

O. C.

Nwebor

(2024). Climate-smart agriculture for sustainable agricultural development in Nigeria: An empirical review. Journal of Applied Sciences and Environmental Management, 28(6), 1853–1858. https://doi.org/10.4314/jasem.v28i6.26

27.

Barrez

(2024). Public acceptability of carbon pricing: Unravelling the impact of revenue recycling. Climate Policy, 24(10), 1323–1345. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2024.2376747

28.

Basiru

Liu

Arkorful

V. E.

Lugu

B. K.

Yousaf

Hussain

Jama

O. M.

(2024). Indigenous perceptions of factors influencing behavioral intentions towards climate change mitigation: An assessment. International Journal of Public Administration, 47(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/01900692.2022.2078838

29.

Bedasa

Deksisa

(2024). Food insecurity in East Africa: An integrated strategy to address climate change impact and violence conflict. Journal of Agriculture and Food Research, 15, Article 100978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jafr.2024.100978

30.

Bell

S. L.

Tabe

Bell

(2020). Seeking a disability lens within climate change migration discourses, policies and practices. Disability & Society, 35(4), 682–687. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2019.1655856

31.

Ben Hassen

Zurayk

. (2024). Catalysts of change: MENA universities’ journey towards sustainability and climate change mitigation. In Filho

W. Leal

Sima

Salvia

A. Lange

Kovaleva

Manolas

(Eds.), University initiatives on climate change education and research (pp. 1–18). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-25960-9_124-1

32.

Ben-Enukora

C. A.

Soroaye

M. P.

Ejem

A. A.

Asogwa

C. E.

Ojih

S. E. U.

Ezegwu

D. T.

(2025). Correlation between post-pandemic climate change advocacy on TikTok and knowledge, attitude, and adaptation practices among TikTok users in Nigeria. Journalism and Media, 6(1), 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/journalmedia6010036

33.

Bergquist

Nilsson

Harring

Jagers

S. C.

(2022). Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws. Nature Climate Change, 12(3), 235–240. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-022-01297-6

34.

Berhane

S. A.

Kumar

K. R.

(2024). A 13-year space-based climatological evolution of desert dust aerosols in the Middle East and North Africa regions observed by the CALIPSO. Science of The Total Environment, 948, Article 174793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.174793

35.

Besoain-Saldaña

Bustamante-Bravo

Rebolledo Sanhueza

Montt-Maray

(2023). Experiences, barriers, and facilitators to sexual and reproductive health care access of people with sensory impairments: A scoping review. Sexuality and Disability, 41(2), 411–449. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11195-023-09778-y

36.

Bhattarai

Yousef

(2025). Water scarcity and climate change in MENA: Challenges, innovations, and geopolitical impacts (pp. 105–136). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-83967-2_5

37.

Biddau

Brondi

Cottone

P. F.

(2022). Unpacking the psychosocial dimension of decarbonization between change and stability: A systematic review in the social science literature. Sustainability, 14(9), 5308. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095308

38.

Blimpo

M. P.

Dato

Mukhaya

Odarno

(2024). Climate change and economic development in Africa: A systematic review of energy transition modeling research. Energy Policy, 187, Article 114044. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2024.114044

39.

Bradley

G. L.

Babutsidze

Chai

Reser

J. P.

(2020). The role of climate change risk perception, response efficacy, and psychological adaptation in pro-environmental behavior: A two nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, Article 101410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101410

40.

Bråten

(2021). The (dis) ableisation of environmental governance: A qualitative exploration of the ‘disabling effects’ of Oslo’s climate strategy [Master’s thesis]. University of Oslo.

41.

Brosch

(2021). Affect and emotions as drivers of climate change perception and action: A review. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 15–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.001

42.

Bryan

Alvi

Huyer

Ringler

(2024). Addressing gender inequalities and strengthening women’s agency to create more climate-resilient and sustainable food systems. Global Food Security, 40, Article 100731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfs.2023.100731

43.

Bubb

Le Dé

(2022). Participation as a requirement: Towards more inclusion or further exclusion? The community disaster and climate change committees in Vanuatu as a case study. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 76, Article 102992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.102992

44.

Bush

S. S.

Clayton

(2023). Facing change: Gender and climate change attitudes worldwide. American Political Science Review, 117(2), 591–608. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055422000752

45.

Calculli

D’Uggento

A. M.

Labarile

Ribecco

(2021). Evaluating people’s awareness about climate changes and environmental issues: A case study. Journal of Cleaner Production, 324, Article 129244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129244

46.

Carmen

Fazey

Ross

Bedinger

Smith

F. M.

Prager

McClymont

Morrison

(2022). Building community resilience in a context of climate change: The role of social capital. Ambio, 51(6), 1371–1387. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-021-01678-9

47.

Chaloner

T. M.

Gurr

S. J.

Bebber

D. P.

(2021). Plant pathogen infection risk tracks global crop yields under climate change. Nature Climate Change, 11(8), 710–715. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01104-8

48.

Chtatou

(2023). Understanding and maximizing diversity education in the MENA region. In Abouabdelkader

Tomalin

(Eds.), Diversity education in the MENA region (pp. 313–362). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42693-3_14

49.

Constantino

S. M.

Sparkman

Kraft-Todd

G. T.

Bicchieri

Centola

Shell-Duncan

Vogt

Weber

E. U.

(2022). Scaling up change: A critical review and practical guide to harnessing social norms for climate action. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 23(2), 50–97. https://doi.org/10.1177/15291006221105279

50.

Crock

M. E.

McCallum AO

R. C

. (2024). Disability, conflict, and environmental conditions: Introduction. In Rioux

M. H.

Buettgen

Zubrow

Viera

(Eds.), Handbook of disability (pp. 1–7). Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1278-7_73-2

51.

D’Acunto

Möhrle

Neumeier

Peichl

Weber

(2022). How to finance climate change policies? Evidence from consumers’ beliefs. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4097853

52.

Danish

Isaifan

R. J.

(2024). Strategic plans to support action against climate change in the Arab countries in the Middle East Region. Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy (The), 15(1), 304–335. https://doi.org/10.4314/jsdlp.v15i1.11

53.

Darvishi Boloorani

Nasiri

Soleimani

Papi

Neysani Samany

Amiri

Al-Hemoud

. (2024). Climate change, dust storms, and air pollution in the MENA region (pp. 327–343). https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2024_1144

54.

Datta

Kairy

(2024). Decolonizing climate change adaptations from indigenous perspectives: Learning reflections from munda indigenous communities, coastal areas in Bangladesh. Sustainability, 16(2), 769. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16020769

55.

Dechezleprêtre

Fabre

Kruse

Planterose

(2022). Fighting climate change: International attitudes toward climate policies (No. w30265). National Bureau of Economic Research. http://www.nber.org/papers/w30265.

56.

Dechezleprêtre

Fabre

Kruse

Planterose

Sanchez Chico

Stantcheva

(2025). Fighting climate change: International attitudes toward climate policies. American Economic Review, 115(4), 1258–1300. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20230501

57.

Devkota

H. R.

Poudel

Shrestha

M. K.

Oli

R. U.

Rai

N. K.

Poudel

Banjara

Malla

Hazel

Y. P.

Dahal

Gurung

(2024). Examining the association between perceived stigma, its correlates, and restrictions in participation among persons with disabilities in Nepal: A cross-sectional study. BMC Public Health, 24(1), 1176. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18682-9

58.

Dibeh

Fakih

Marrouch

Matar

(2021). Who cares about environmental quality in the MENA region? Social Indicators Research, 157(2), 603–629. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-021-02667-x

59.

Dierendonck

Poncelet

Tinnes-Vigne

(2024). Why teachers do (or do not) implement recommended teaching practices? An application of the theory of planned behavior. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1269954. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1269954

60.

Dietz

Shwom

R. L.

Whitley

C. T.

(2020). Climate change and society. Annual Review of Sociology, 46(1), 135–158. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054614

61.

Donkor

F. K.

Mearns

(2021). Building inclusive disaster management systems: Opportunities and constraints in addressing the needs of the vulnerable. In Nhamo

Dube

(Eds.), Cyclones in Southern Africa. Sustainable development goals series (pp. 105–118). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-74262-1_7

62.

Douenne

Fabre

(2020). French attitudes on climate change, carbon taxation and other climate policies. Ecological Economics, 169, Article 106496. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2019.106496

63.

Cao

Huang

(2024). The effect of income satisfaction on the relationship between income class and pro-environment behavior. Applied Economics Letters, 31(1), 61–64. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2022.2125491

64.

Duijndam

van Beukering

(2021). Understanding public concern about climate change in Europe, 2008–2017: The influence of economic factors and right-wing populism. Climate Policy, 21(3), 353–367. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1831431

65.

Ejaz

Altay

Fletcher

Nielsen

R. K.

(2024). Trust is key: Determinants of false beliefs about climate change in eight countries. New Media & Society, 27(9), 5281–5300. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448241250302

66.

El Bari

Habchi

Morchid

Cherqaoui

. (2024). Climate change vulnerability and sustainable tools for mitigation and adaptation achievement in MENA region (pp. 1–18). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-91260-4_33-1

67.

El-Husseiny

Mashaly

Azouz

Sakr

Seddik

Atallah

(2024). Exploring sustainable urban mobility in Africa-and-MENA universities towards intersectional future research. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 26, Article 101167. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2024.101167

68.

Elvis Muse

. (2025). Assessing the role of radio on climate change communication in the Bamenda municipality, Cameroon. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5139471

69.

Emberger-Klein

Schöps

Menrad

(2021). The influence of climate attitudes and subjective and social norms on supermarket consumers’ intention toward climate-friendly food consumption. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 5, Article 764517. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2021.764517

70.

Epule

T. E.

Chehbouni

Dhiba

Moto

M. W.

Peng

(2021). African climate change policy performance index. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, 12, Article 100163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2021.100163

71.

Eriksen

Schipper

E. L. F.

Scoville-Simonds

Vincent

Adam

H. N.

Brooks

Harding

Khatri

Lenaerts

Liverman

Mills-Novoa

Mosberg

Movik

Muok

Nightingale

Ojha

Sygna

Taylor

Vogel

West

J. J.

(2021). Adaptation interventions and their effect on vulnerability in developing countries: Help, hindrance or irrelevance? World Development, 141, Article 105383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.105383

72.

Esteves

Alonso-Martínez

de Haro

(2021). Profiling Spanish prospective buyers of electric vehicles based on demographics. Sustainability, 13(16), 9223. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13169223

73.

Evensen

Uratani

J. M.

Sovacool

B. K.

Griffiths

(2025). A novel model for barriers to electric vehicle adoption in the Middle East. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 142, Article 104714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2025.104714

74.

Ewulo

T. A.

Akinseye

F. M.

Teme

Agele

S. O.

Yessoufou

Kumar

(2025). Factors driving Climate-Smart Agriculture adoption: A study of smallholder farmers in Koumpentum, Senegal. Frontiers in Agronomy, 7, Article 1552720. https://doi.org/10.3389/fagro.2025.1552720

75.

Fairbrother

(2022). Public opinion about climate policies: A review and call for more studies of what people want. PLOS Climate, 1(5), e0000030. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000030

76.

Fegher

(2023). Developing communication strategies on climate change in Kenya. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4574958

77.

Field

(2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (3rd ed.). Sage.

78.

Fischer

Karl

J. A.

(2022). Predicting behavioral intentions to prevent or mitigate COVID-19: A cross-cultural meta-analysis of attitudes, norms, and perceived behavioral control effects. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 13(1), 264–276. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506211019844

79.

Francis

Fonseca

(2024). Recent and projected changes in climate patterns in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region. Scientific Reports, 14(1), Article 10279. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60976-w

80.

Fraser

(2024). Climate change and eye disease: Eye health and blindness in a hostile environment (pp. 1–30). Taylor & Francis.

81.

Fritz

Baum

C. M.

Brutschin

Low

Sovacool

B. K.

(2024). Climate beliefs, climate technologies and transformation pathways: Contextualizing public perceptions in 22 countries. Global Environmental Change, 87, Article 102880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2024.102880

82.

Galang

E. I. N.

Vaughter

(2020). Generational local ecological knowledge on the benefits of an agroforestry landscape in Mindanao, Philippines. Asian Journal of Agriculture and Development, 17(1), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.37801/ajad2020.17.1.6

83.

Gannon

K. E.

Eskander

S. M. S. U.

Avila-Uribe

Castellano

Diop

Agol

(2025). The role of gender in firm-level climate change adaptation behaviour: Insights from small businesses in Senegal and Kenya. Climate Risk Management, 48, Article 100699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crm.2025.100699

84.

Garcia

Tschakert

(2022). Intersectional subjectivities and climate change adaptation: An attentive analytical approach for examining power, emancipatory processes, and transformation. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 47(3), 651–665. https://doi.org/10.1111/tran.12529

85.

Gardezi

Arbuckle

J. G.

(2020). Techno-optimism and farmers’ attitudes toward climate change adaptation. Environment and Behavior, 52(1), 82–105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916518793482

86.

Ghafouri

(2023). Fairness in climate change mitigation: The case of carbon taxation. American Journal of Climate Change, 12(04), 548–578. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajcc.2023.124025

87.

Ghazy

R. M.

Ali Ahmed Shiba

Alsaleem

S. A.

(2025). The Stigma associated with speech delay in the middle east and north Africa. In Bennett

Goodall

(Eds.), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of disability (pp. 1–12). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40858-8_344-1

88.

Gössling

Humpe

(2020). The global scale, distribution and growth of aviation: Implications for climate change. Global Environmental Change, 65, Article 102194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102194

89.

Govind

(2022). Towards climate change preparedness in the MENA’s agricultural sector. Agronomy, 12(2), 279. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy12020279

90.

Grelle

Hofmann

(2024). When and why do people accept public-policy interventions? An integrative public-policy-acceptance framework. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 19(1), 258–279. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916231180580

91.

Haddad

T. N.

Abou-Habib

Sakr

(2025). Feminist mobilizing for legal reform in nationality laws: Reflections and learning. In T. N. Haddad, L. Abou-Habib & T. Skar (Eds.), Transformative feminist mobilization in the Arab Region (pp. 20–32). Routledge.

92.

Haj-Salem

Ishaq

M. I.

Raza

(2022). How anticipated pride and guilt influence green consumption in the Middle East: The moderating role of environmental consciousness. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 68, Article 103062. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jretconser.2022.103062

93.

Hall

(2008). Cross-sectional survey design. In Lavrakas

P. J.

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of survey research methods (pp. 173–174). Sage Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947.n120

94.

Hamed

M. M.

Al-Hasani

A. A. J.

Nashwan

M. S.

Sa’adi

Shahid

(2024). Assessing the growing threat of heat stress in the North Africa and Arabian Peninsula region connected to climate change. Journal of Cleaner Production, 447, Article 141639. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.141639

95.

Hamed

M. M.

Sobh

M. T.

Ali

Nashwan

M. S.

Shahid

(2024). Aridity shifts in the MENA region under the Paris Agreement climate change scenarios. Global and Planetary Change, 238, Article 104483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2024.104483

96.

Hamed

M. M.

Ullah

Jasim Al-Hasani

A. A.

Nashwan

M. S.

Shahid

(2025). Rising threats of compound droughts and heatwaves in MENA: Implications for population and agriculture under Paris agreement scenarios. Earth Systems and Environment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-025-00575-5

97.

Hamelin

Halawa

(2024). Harnessing social media for climate action in developing countries: A case study of Egypt. Sustainability, 16(9), 3553. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16093553

98.

Harpur

Stein

M. A.

(2025). Eco-ableism and climate change justice for persons with disabilities in the Global South: Charting the legal terrain. In S. Grech & J. Weber (Eds.), An introduction to disability inclusive disaster risk reduction (pp. 67–86). Routledge.

99.

Hase

Mahl

Schäfer

M. S.

Keller

T. R.

(2021). Climate change in news media across the globe: An automated analysis of issue attention and themes in climate change coverage in 10 countries (2006–2018). Global Environmental Change, 70, Article 102353. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102353

100.

Hassanein

E. E. A.

Alshaboul

Y. M.

Ibrahim

(2021). The impact of teacher preparation on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusive education in Qatar. Heliyon, 7(9), e07925. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07925

101.

Haupt

Chelleri

van Herk

Zevenbergen

(2020). City-to-city learning within climate city networks: Definition, significance, and challenges from a global perspective. International Journal of Urban Sustainable Development, 12(2), 143–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/19463138.2019.1691007

102.

Hayes

F. A.

(2022). Introduction to mediation, moderation and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (3rd ed). The Guilford Press.

103.

Helm

Kemper

J. A.

White

S. K.

(2021). No future, no kids–no kids, no future? Population and Environment, 43(1), 108–129. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-021-00379-5

104.

Hornsey

M. J.

Fielding

K. S.

(2020). Understanding (and reducing) inaction on climate change. Social Issues and Policy Review, 14(1), 3–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12058

105.

Huber

R. A.

Wicki

(2021). What explains citizen support for transport policy? The roles of policy design, trust in government and proximity among Swiss citizens. Energy Research & Social Science, 75, Article 101973. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.101973

106.

Hügel

Davies

A. R.

(2020). Public participation, engagement, and climate change adaptation: A review of the research literature. WIREs Climate Change, 11(4), e645. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.645

107.

Humalisto

(2022). Generative spaces of climate change adaptation: Focus on disability inclusion. In H. Katsui & V. Mesiäislehto (Eds.), Embodied inequalities in disability and development (pp. 13–34). Stellenbosch African Sun Media.

108.

Ibrahim

Mensah

(2022). Rethinking climate migration in sub-Saharan Africa from the perspective of tripartite drivers of climate change. SN Social Sciences, 2(6), 87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-022-00383-y

109.

Ilyas

Siddiqui

A. A.

Afroze

Al-Enizy

A. S.

Alam

M. K.

(2021). Developmental disabilities in the Arab world. In Laher

(Ed.), Handbook of healthcare in the Arab world (pp. 2177–2195). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-36811-1_88

110.

Immergluck

Balan

(2018). Sustainable for whom? Green urban development, environmental gentrification, and the Atlanta Beltline. Urban Geography, 39(4), 546–562. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2017.1360041

111.

Ivković

Mandić

(2024). Psychological and socio-demographic drivers of pro-environmental behaviour in generation Z. In N. U. Islam, M. Chaudhary & I. M. Vukadin (Eds.), Tourism in a VUCA world: Managing the future of tourism (pp. 119–141). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-83753-674-020241009

112.

Jaad

Abdelghany

(2021). The story of five MENA cities: Urban growth prediction modeling using remote sensing and video analytics. Cities, 118, Article 103393. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103393

113.

Jakob

Flachsland

Christoph Steckel

Urpelainen

(2020). Actors, objectives, context: A framework of the political economy of energy and climate policy applied to India, Indonesia, and Vietnam. Energy Research & Social Science, 70, Article 101775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101775

114.

Jakučionytė-Skodienė

Liobikienė

(2022). The changes in climate change concern, responsibility assumption and impact on climate-friendly behaviour in EU from the Paris Agreement Until 2019. Environmental Management, 69(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-021-01574-8

115.

Jaoul-Grammare

Stenger

(2022). Quel rôle joue l’éducation dans les préoccupations environnementales? Céreq In short, 417(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.3917/bref.417.0001

116.

Javaid

S. F.

(2024). Disability stigma in the middle east. In Bennett

Goodall

(Eds.), The Palgrave Encyclopedia of disability (pp. 1–6). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-40858-8_72-1

117.

Jodoin

Buettgen

Groce

Gurung

Kaiser

Kett

Keogh

Macanawai

S. S.

Muñoz

Powaseu

Stein

M. A.

Stein

P. J. S.

Youssefian

(2023). Nothing about us without us: The urgent need for disability-inclusive climate research. PLOS Climate, 2(3), e0000153. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000153

118.

Jodoin

Lofts

K. A.

Ananthamoorthy

(2020). A disability rights approach to climate governance. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3610193

119.

Jürkenbeck

Spiller

Schulze

(2021). Climate change awareness of the young generation and its impact on their diet. Cleaner and Responsible Consumption, 3, Article 100041. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clrc.2021.100041

120.

Kabir

de Vries Robbe

Godinho

(2024). Climate change mitigation policies in agriculture: An overview of sociopolitical barriers. WIREs Climate Change, 15(6), e916. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.916

121.

Katey

Zanu

(2024). Climate change and population aging: The role of older adults in climate change mitigation. Journal of Aging Studies, 71, Article 101274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaging.2024.101274

122.

Kaur

Kallakuri

Mulatu

Ketema

Thornicroft

(2024). Stigma and discrimination against people with psychosocial disabilities in low-and middle-income countries. In Kaur

Kallakuri

Mulatu

Ketema

Thornicroft

(Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of disability and global health (pp. 268–281). Routledge.

123.

Kehler

Birchall

S. J.

(2023). Climate change adaptation: How short-term political priorities trample public well-being. Environmental Science & Policy, 146, 144–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.05.012

124.

Kenawy

A. El

Al-Awadhi

Abdullah

Ostermann

F. O.

Abulibdeh

(2025). A multidecadal assessment of drought intensification in the middle east and north Africa: The role of global warming and rainfall deficit. Earth Systems and Environment. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-025-00576-4

125.

Kett

Sriskanthan

Cole

(2021). Disability and climate justice. Open Society Foundations.

126.

Khatibi

F. S.

Dedekorkut-Howes

Howes

Torabi

(2021). Can public awareness, knowledge and engagement improve climate change adaptation policies? Discover Sustainability, 2(1), 18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-021-00024-z

127.

Kim

D.-W.

(2024). The role of the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in ensuring disability-inclusive responses to climate change in Africa. African Disability Rights Yearbook, 12(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.29053/adry.v12i1.5528

128.

Kisira

Ssennoga

Mugagga

Nadhomi

(2023). Persons with disabilities and resilience: Coping with environmental hazards case of landslides in Mount Elgon region, Uganda. Environmental Hazards, 22(4), 349–366. https://doi.org/10.1080/17477891.2022.2149454

129.

Koessler

A.-K.

Vorlaufer

Fiebelkorn

(2022). Social norms and climate-friendly behavior of adolescents. PLoS ONE, 17(4), e0266847. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0266847

130.

Koliqi

Zabeli

(2022). Variables affecting the attitudes of teachers’ towards inclusive education in Kosovo. Cogent Education, 9(1), Article 2143629. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2022.2143629

131.

Kosanic

Petzold

Martín-López

Razanajatovo

(2022). An inclusive future: Disabled populations in the context of climate and environmental change. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 55, Article 101159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2022.101159

132.

Kotcher

Maibach

Miller

Campbell

Alqodmani

Maiero

Wyns

(2021). Views of health professionals on climate change and health: A multinational survey study. The Lancet Planetary Health, 5(5), e316–e323. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00053-X

133.

Kowalcyk

Dorevitch

(2024). A framework for evaluating local adaptive capacity to health impacts of climate change: Use of Kenya’s county-level integrated development plans. Annals of Global Health, 90(1), Article 15. https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.4266

134.

Kulin

Johansson Sevä

Dunlap

R. E.

(2021). Nationalist ideology, rightwing populism, and public views about climate change in Europe. Environmental Politics, 30(7), 1111–1134. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2021.1898879

135.

Lægreid

O. M.

Klemetsen

Aasen

(2025). Popular support for climate policies across political divides? The importance of climate concern. Scandinavian Political Studies, 48(2), e70001. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9477.70001

136.

Lee

D.-Y.

McDermott

M. H.

Sovacool

B. K.

Isaac

(2024). Toward just and equitable mobility: Socioeconomic and perceptual barriers for electric vehicles and charging infrastructure in the United States. Energy and Climate Change, 5, Article 100146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egycc.2024.100146

137.

Lefèvre

Le Gallic

Fragkos

Mercure

J.-F.

Simsek

Paroussos

(2022). Global socio-economic and climate change mitigation scenarios through the lens of structural change. Global Environmental Change, 74, Article 102510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2022.102510

138.

Leiserowitz

Roser-Renouf

Marlon

Maibach

(2021). Global Warming’s Six Americas: A review and recommendations for climate change communication. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 97–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.04.007

139.

Liao

Lyon

C. J.

Ying

(2024). Climate change, its impact on emerging infectious diseases and new technologies to combat the challenge. Emerging Microbes & Infections, 13(1), Article 2356143. https://doi.org/10.1080/22221751.2024.2356143

140.

Lindsay

Hsu

Ragunathan

Lindsay

(2023). The impact of climate change related extreme weather events on people with pre-existing disabilities and chronic conditions: A scoping review. Disability and Rehabilitation, 45(25), 4338–4358. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2022.2150328

141.

Lundquist

(2025). The economy-environment tradeoff: Are individual environmental priorities decoupled from national economic conditions? Environmental Politics, 34, 647–669. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2024.2386797

142.

Luomi

(2021). Climate change policy in the Arab region. In Mills

Sim

L. C.

(Eds.), Low carbon energy in the middle east and North Africa. International political economy series (pp. 299–332). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-59554-8_11

143.

Lust

Benstead

L. J.

(2024). Is the future female? Lessons from a conjoint experiment on voter preferences in six Arab countries. Comparative Political Studies, 57(14), 2376–2413. https://doi.org/10.1177/00104140241237462

144.

Magistro

Alvarez

R. M.

(2024). Appealing to Independents: Information on negative externalities increases support for environmental corrective taxes. Environmental Politics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2024.2439686

145.

Mahalik

M. K.

Mallick

Padhan

(2021). Do educational levels influence the environmental quality? The role of renewable and non-renewable energy demand in selected BRICS countries with a new policy perspective. Renewable Energy, 164, 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2020.09.090

146.

Maja

M. M.

Ayano

S. F.

(2021). The impact of population growth on natural resources and farmers’ capacity to adapt to climate change in low-income countries. Earth Systems and Environment, 5(2), 271–283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41748-021-00209-6

147.

Makamanzi

(2025). Integrating disability-inclusive disaster management education; The case of Chimanimani district, Zimbabwe. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5071507

148.

Malerba

(2022). The effects of social protection and social cohesion on the acceptability of climate change mitigation policies: What do we (not) know in the context of low- and middle-income countries? The European Journal of Development Research, 34(3), 1358–1382. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41287-022-00537-x

149.

Marty

Amghar

Barrera Patlan

Adams

(2025). The psychosocial impacts of slow onset climate change events among youth in LMICs: A rapid evidence review. The Journal of Climate Change and Health, 22, Article 100416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joclim.2025.100416

150.

Marzouk

Duman

Meier

Khudhur

Alani

(2022). Assessment of perceptions of climate change and its causes and impacts on mental health and psychosocial wellbeing among a group of internally displaced persons in Iraq. Intervention, 20(1), 98. https://doi.org/10.4103/intv.intv_40_21

151.

Matallah

(2022). Economic diversification and governance challenges in MENA oil exporters: A comparative analysis. The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, 26, e00255. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeca.2022.e00255

152.

Matos

Viardot

Sovacool

B. K.

Geels

F. W.

Xiong

(2022). Innovation and climate change: A review and introduction to the special issue. Technovation, 117, Article 102612. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2022.102612

153.

Maumoh

Onoja

(2024). Climate change policy uncertainty and challenges in carbon emission for east and southern African regions. Transactions in Energy and Sustainability, 1(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/29768632241291418

154.

Mazumder

Hossain

M. M.

(2024). Climate change education for health-care professionals: Crucial gaps in low-income and middle-income countries. The Lancet Planetary Health, 8(4), e216. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00010-X

155.

Mehmood

Jabeen

Rehman

Iftikhar

Khan

N. A.

(2023). Understanding the boosters of employees’ voluntary pro-environmental behavior: A time-lagged investigation. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 26(4), 9847–9869. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-03121-3

156.

Mehmood

Hassan

M. A.

Ashraf

Ilić

Peng

Bibi

Sattar

Bilal

Ali

Yousaf

Hussain

S. A.

Sohail

Parveen

(2024). Changing carbon dynamics under climate change and land degradation in MENA region: Prospective of innovative management practices. In Al-Quraishi

Negm

Benzougagh

(Eds.), Climate change and environmental degradation in the MENA region. The handbook of environmental chemistry (Vol. 136, pp. 3–27). Springerhttps://doi.org/10.1007/698_2024_1095

157.

Melariri

H. I.

Kalinda

Chimbari

M. J.

(2021). Training, Attitudes, and Practice (TAP) among healthcare professionals in the Nelson Mandela Bay municipality, South Africa: A health promotion and disease prevention perspective. PLoS ONE, 16(11), e0259884. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0259884

158.

Meri

(2021). Teaching interfaith relations at universities in the Arab Middle East: Challenges and strategies. Religions, 12(5), 330. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12050330

159.

Mertens

D. M.

(2021). Transformative research methods to increase social impact for vulnerable groups and cultural minorities. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069211051563

160.

Mfarrej

M. F. B.

(2025). Exploring the nexus between climate change, water scarcity, and security dynamics in the Middle East and North Africa. Next Research, 2(1), Article 100168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexres.2025.100168

161.

Mildenberger

Howe

P. D.

Trachtman

Stokes

L. C.

Lubell

(2022). The effect of public safety power shut-offs on climate change attitudes and behavioural intentions. Nature Energy, 7(8), 736–743. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-022-01071-0

162.

Mukherjee

Fransen

(2024). Exploring migration decision-making and agricultural adaptation in the context of climate change: A systematic review. World Development, 179, Article 106600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2024.106600

163.

Muttarak

(2021). Demographic perspectives in research on global environmental change. Population Studies, 75(sup1), 77–104. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2021.1988684

164.

Namdar

Karami

Keshavarz

(2021). Climate change and vulnerability: The case of MENA countries. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(11), 794. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10110794

165.

Naser

Haq

Naughton

B. D.

(2024). The impact of climate change on health services in low- and middle-income countries: A systematised review and thematic analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 21(4), 434. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph21040434

166.

Ngcamu

B. S.

(2023). Climate change effects on vulnerable populations in the Global South: A systematic review. Natural Hazards, 118(2), 977–991. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11069-023-06070-2

167.

Nguyen

T.-H.

Sahin

Howes

(2021). Climate change adaptation influences and barriers impacting the Asian agricultural industry. Sustainability, 13(13), 7346. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137346

168.

Nishijima

Pal

(2023). Can the political left save the planet? Impact of leftist mayors on deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4426220

169.

Nosheen

Iqbal

Ahmad

(2023). Economic empowerment of women through climate change mitigation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 421, Article 138480. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138480

170.

O’Connell

A.-L.

(2024). The financing dynamics of niche innovation in energy transitions: A South African perspective. Energy Research & Social Science, 111, Article 103478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103478

171.

Odame

Opoku

M. P.

Nketsia

Swanzy

Alzyoudi

Nsowah

F. A.

(2021). From university-to-work: An in-depth exploration into the transition journey of graduates with sensory disabilities in Ghana. Disability & Society, 36(9), 1399–1422. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1804328

172.

O’Dell

E. J.

(2023). Disability on Arab screens: Cripping class, religion, and gender in Syria, Egypt, and Lebanon. Disability & Society, 38(8), 1410–1434. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1997715

173.

Odoom

Fosu

(2023). Towards promoting climate change communication for improved adaptation in Africa: A Ghanaian perspective. Journal of Policy and Development Studies, 14(1), 156–174.

174.

Ofori

B. Y.

Ameade

E. P. K.

Ohemeng

Musah

Quartey

J. K.

Owusu

E. H.

(2023). Climate change knowledge, attitude and perception of undergraduate students in Ghana. PLoS Climate, 2(6), e0000215. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000215

175.

Ogunbode

C. A.

Doran

Hanss

Ojala

Salmela-Aro

van den Broek

K. L.

Bhullar

Aquino

S. D.

Marot

Schermer

J. A.

Wlodarczyk

Jiang

Maran

D. A.

Yadav

Ardi

Chegeni

Ghanbarian

Zand

… Karasu

(2022). Climate anxiety, wellbeing and pro-environmental action: Correlates of negative emotional responses to climate change in 32 countries. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 84, Article 101887. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2022.101887

176.

Ogunyiola

Gardezi

Vij

(2022). Smallholder farmers’ engagement with climate smart agriculture in Africa: Role of local knowledge and upscaling. Climate Policy, 22(4), 411–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2021.2023451

177.

Okesanya

O. J.

Alnaeem

K. F. H.

Hassan

H. K.

Oso

A. T.

Adigun

O. A.

Bouaddi

Olaleke

N. O.

M kheir

S. G.

Haruna

U. A.

Shomuyiwa

D. O.

Manirambona

Asebot

M. T.

(2024). The intersectional impact of climate change and gender inequalities in Africa. Public Health Challenges, 3(1), e169. https://doi.org/10.1002/puh2.169

178.

Olawuyi

D. S.

(2021). Can MENA extractive industries support the global energy transition? Current opportunities and future directions. The Extractive Industries and Society, 8(2), Article 100685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.02.003

179.

O’Neill

B. C.

Carter

T. R.

Ebi

Harrison

P. A.

Kemp-Benedict

Kok

Kriegler

Preston

B. L.

Riahi

Sillmann

van Ruijven

B. J.

van Vuuren

Carlisle

Conde

Fuglestvedt

Green

Hasegawa

Leininger

Monteith

Pichs-Madruga

(2020). Achievements and needs for the climate change scenario framework. Nature Climate Change, 10(12), 1074–1084. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-00952-0

180.

Opoku

M. P.

Belbase

Nsowah

F. A.

Yeboah

Nketsia

Mohamed

Agyei-Okyere

Amponteng

Saah

Safi

(2023). Coronavirus disease vaccination among persons with disabilities: Understanding vaccine perceptions and hesitancy in Ghana. The Linacre Quarterly, 90(4), 452–471. https://doi.org/10.1177/00243639231178626

181.

Opoku

M. P.

Nketsia

Amponteng

Mprah

W. K.

Kumi

E. O.

(2023). Attitudes and self-efficacy of preservice teachers toward teaching gifted and talented students. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 46(2), 167–193. https://doi.org/10.1177/01623532231162673

182.

Opoku

M. P.

Nketsia

Mohamed

A. H.

(2022). The self-efficacy of private school teachers toward the implementation of inclusive education in Ghana: A mixed-methods study. Frontiers in Education, 7, Article 985123. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.985123

183.

Otto

Gugushvili

(2020). Eco-social divides in Europe: Public attitudes towards welfare and climate change policies. Sustainability, 12(1), 404. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12010404

184.

Özbay

Duyar

(2022). Exploring the role of education on environmental quality and renewable energy: Do education levels really matter? Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 4, Article 100185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100185

185.

Pallant

(2020). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using IBM SPSS. Open University Press.

186.

Pan

W.-L.

Fan

Pan

(2023). The role of climate literacy in individual response to climate change: Evidence from China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 405, Article 136874. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.136874

187.

Pettorelli

Graham

N. A. J.

Seddon

Maria da Cunha Bustamante

Lowton

M. J.

Sutherland

W. J.

Koldewey

H. J.

Prentice

H. C.

Barlow

(2021). Time to integrate global climate change and biodiversity science-policy agendas. Journal of Applied Ecology, 58(11), 2384–2393. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13985

188.

Pinho

(2025). Climate change anxiety and pro-environmental behaviours: Disentangling gender disparities. Frontiers in Sociology, 10, Article 1589501. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2025.1589501

189.

Porcuna-Ferrer

Calvet-Mir

Guillerminet

Alvarez-Fernandez

Labeyrie

Porcuna-Ferrer

Reyes-García

(2023). “So many things have changed”: Situated understandings of climate change impacts among the Bassari, south-eastern Senegal. Environmental Science & Policy, 148, Article 103552. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2023.103552

190.

Qiao

Dowell

(2022). Environmental concerns, income inequality, and purchase of environmentally-friendly products: A longitudinal study of U.S. counties (2010-2017). Research Policy, 51(4), Article 104443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2021.104443

191.

Qin

Tao

(2021). Understanding preservice music teachers’ intention to remain in the profession: An integrated model of the theory of planned behaviour and motivation theory. International Journal of Music Education, 39(4), 355–370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0255761420963149

192.

Ramazanova

Sabitova

Orsayeva

Bairkenova

Smailova

(2022). Financial sector components in a religious context: Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 34, Article 100656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2022.100656

193.

Rao

Sathe

Grist

(2025). Gender, intersectionality and climate smart agriculture in South Asia: A review. PLOS Climate, 4(2), e0000482. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000482

194.

Rising

Tedesco

Piontek

Stainforth

D. A.

(2022). The missing risks of climate change. Nature, 610(7933), 643–651. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05243-6

195.

Romanello

McGushin

Di Napoli

Drummond

Hughes

Jamart

Kennard

Lampard

Solano Rodriguez

Arnell

Ayeb-Karlsson

Belesova

Cai

Campbell-Lendrum

Capstick

Chambers

Chu

Ciampi

Dalin

… Hamilton

(2021). The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: Code red for a healthy future. The Lancet, 398(10311), 1619–1662. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01787-6

196.

Saeed

Makhdum

M. S. A.

Anwar

Yaseen

M. R.

(2023). Climate change vulnerability, adaptation, and feedback hypothesis: A comparison of lower-middle, upper-middle, and high-income countries. Sustainability, 15(5), 4145. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15054145

197.

Salvia

Reckien

Pietrapertosa

Eckersley

Spyridaki

N.-A.

Krook-Riekkola

Olazabal

De Gregorio Hurtado

Simoes

S. G.

Geneletti

Viguié

Fokaides

P. A.

Ioannou

B. I.

Flamos

Csete

M. S.

Buzasi

Orru

de Boer

Foley

… Heidrich

(2021). Will climate mitigation ambitions lead to carbon neutrality? An analysis of the local-level plans of 327 cities in the EU. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 135, Article 110253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110253

198.

Scanlon

Radeva

Pitsia

Maguire

Nikolaeva

(2022). Attitudes of teachers in Bulgarian kindergartens towards inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 112, Article 103650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103650

199.

Schöngart

Nicholls

Hoffmann

Pelz

Schleussner

C.-F.

(2025). High-income groups disproportionately contribute to climate extremes worldwide. Nature Climate Change, 15(6), 627–633. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-025-02325-x

200.

Sebring

J. C. H.

Capurro

Kelly

Jardine

C. G.

Tustin

Driedger

S. M.

(2022). “None of it was especially easy”: Improving COVID-19 vaccine equity for people with disabilities. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 113(6), 887–897. https://doi.org/10.17269/s41997-022-00621-z

201.

Sefa-Nyarko

(2024). Ghana’s national energy transition framework: Domestic aspirations and mistrust in international relations complicate ‘justice and equity.’ Energy Research & Social Science, 110, Article 103465. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2024.103465

202.

Sesana

Gagnon

A. S.

Ciantelli

Cassar

Hughes

J. J.

(2021). Climate change impacts on cultural heritage: A literature review. WIREs Climate Change, 12(4), e710. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.710

203.

Simpson

N. P.

Andrews

T. M.

Krönke

Lennard

Odoulami

R. C.

Ouweneel

Steynor

Trisos

C. H.

(2021). Climate change literacy in Africa. Nature Climate Change, 11(11), 937–944. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01171-x

204.

Skeirytė

Krikštolaitis

Liobikienė

(2022). The differences of climate change perception, responsibility and climate-friendly behavior among generations and the main determinants of youth’s climate-friendly actions in the EU. Journal of Environmental Management, 323, Article 116277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.116277

205.

Slothuus

Bisgaard

(2021). How political parties shape public opinion in the real world. American Journal of Political Science, 65(4), 896–911. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12550

206.

Ssennoga

Kisira

Mugagga

Nadhomi

(2022). Resilience of persons with disabilities to climate induced landslide hazards in the vulnerable areas of Mount Elgon, Uganda. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 80, Article 103212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103212

207.

Stein

P. J. S.

Stein

M. A.

(2022). Disability, human rights, and climate justice. Human Rights Quarterly, 44(1), 81–110. https://doi.org/10.1353/hrq.2022.0003

208.

Stein

P. J. S.

Stein

M. A.

Groce

Kett

Akyeampong

E. K.

Alford

W. P.

Chakraborty

Daniels-Mayes

Eriksen

S. H.

Fracht

Gallegos

Grech

Gurung

Hans

Harpur

Jodoin

Lord

J. E.

Macanawai

S. S.

McClain-Nhlapo

C. V.

… Van Susteren

(2024). Advancing disability-inclusive climate research and action, climate justice, and climate-resilient development. The Lancet Planetary Health, 8(4), e242–e255. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2542-5196(24)00024-X

209.

Sweileh

(2024). Stigma research in Arab countries: A rapid review. Mental Health and Social Inclusion, 28(6), 1014–1024. https://doi.org/10.1108/MHSI-10-2023-0111

210.

Taff

S. D.

Yoo

M. G.

Carlson

K. A.

Bakhshi

(2025). Climate change and occupational therapy: Meeting the urgent need for adaptation, mitigation, and resilience. Occupational Therapy in Health Care, 39(2), 296–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/07380577.2023.2277220

211.

Tampubolon

(2023). Climate justice for persons with disability: Few harmed much, fewer still harmed too much. UNU-WIDER. https://doi.org/10.35188/UNU-WIDER/2023/310-9

212.

Thabane

V. N.

Agholor

I. A.

Sithole

M. Z.

Morepje

M. T.

Msweli

N. S.

Mgwenya

L. I.

(2024). Socio-demographic determinants of climate-smart agriculture adoption among smallholder crop producers in Bushbuckridge, Mpumalanga Province of South Africa. Climate, 12(12), 202. https://doi.org/10.3390/cli12120202

213.

Thøgersen

(2021). Consumer behavior and climate change: Consumers need considerable assistance. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 42, 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.02.008

214.

Thomas

Martin

Wicker

Benoit

(2022). Understanding youths’ concerns about climate change: A binational qualitative study of ecological burden and resilience. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health, 16(1), 110. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-022-00551-1

215.

Timothy

D. J.

(2020). Tourism and the multi-faith heritage of the Middle East and North Africa. In S. Seyfi & M. Hall (Eds.), Cultural and heritage tourism in the Middle East and North Africa (pp. 34–53). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429279065-2

216.

Trott

C. D.

Weinberg

A. E.

(2020). Science education for sustainability: Strengthening children’s science engagement through climate change learning and action. Sustainability, 12(16), 6400. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12166400

217.

Trotter

P. A.

Mannan

Brophy

Sedzro

Yussuff

Kemausuor

Mulugetta

(2022). How climate policies can translate to tangible change: Evidence from eleven low- and lower-middle income countries. Journal of Cleaner Production, 346, Article 131014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.131014

218.

Uddin

Tasnim

Islam

M. R.

Islam

M. T.

Salek

A. K. M.

Khan

M. M.

Gosney

Haque

M. A.

(2024). Health impacts of climate-change related natural disasters on persons with disabilities in developing countries: A literature review. The Journal of Climate Change and Health, 19, Article 100332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joclim.2024.100332

219.

Udo

Bhanye

Daouda Diallo

Naidu

(2025). Evaluating the sustainability of local women’s climate change adaptation strategies in Durban, South Africa: A feminist political ecology and intersectionality perspective. Sustainable Development, 33, 3212–3227. https://doi.org/10.1002/sd.3284

220.

van Valkengoed

A. M.

Abrahamse

Steg

. (2022). To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nature Human Behaviour, 6(11), 1482–1492. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01473-w

221.

Vuong

Q.-H.

V.-P.

Nguyen

M.-H.

(2024). Weaponization of climate and environment crises: Risks, realities, and consequences. Environmental Science & Policy, 162, Article 103928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2024.103928

222.

Wang

Cheng

(2020). Cross-sectional studies. Chest, 158(1), S65–S71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.012

223.

Weckroth

Ala-Mantila

(2022). Socioeconomic geography of climate change views in Europe. Global Environmental Change, 72, Article 102453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102453

224.

Wedler

Pinto

J. G.

Hochman

(2023). More frequent, persistent, and deadly heat waves in the 21st century over the Eastern Mediterranean. Science of The Total Environment, 870, Article 161883. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.161883

225.

Whitmarsh

Poortinga

Capstick

(2021). Behaviour change to address climate change. Current Opinion in Psychology, 42, 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.04.002

226.

Wiggins

L. D.

Jett

Meunier

(2022). Ensuring equitable COVID-19 vaccination for people with disabilities and their caregivers. Public Health Reports, 137(2), 185–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/00333549211058733

227.

Wolbring

Escobedo

(2023). Academic coverage of social stressors experienced by disabled people: A scoping review. Societies, 13(9), 211. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc13090211

228.

Wong-Parodi

Berlin Rubin

(2022). Exploring how climate change subjective attribution, personal experience with extremes, concern, and subjective knowledge relate to pro-environmental attitudes and behavioral intentions in the United States. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 79, Article 101728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101728

229.

Xie

Brewer

M. B.

Hayes

B. K.

McDonald

R. I.

Newell

B. R.

(2019). Predicting climate change risk perception and willingness to act. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 65, Article 101331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101331

230.

Yadav

Kumar

Luthra

(2023). How does anticipatory trauma reaction and climate-friendly behaviour make an affect at the individual level? The role of social norms and self-efficacy. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(7), 4028–4045. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3352

231.

Zeigermann

Kammerer

Böcher

(2023). What drives local communities to engage in climate change mitigation activities? Examining the rural–urban divide. Review of Policy Research, 40(6), 894–919. https://doi.org/10.1111/ropr.12528

232.

Zhang

Ruiz-Menjivar

Luo

Liang

Swisher

M. E.

(2020). Predicting climate change mitigation and adaptation behaviors in agricultural production: A comparison of the theory of planned behavior and the Value-Belief-Norm Theory. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, Article 101408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101408

233.

Zhou

Shen

(2022). Confirmation bias and the persistence of misinformation on climate change. Communication Research, 49(4), 500–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/00936502211028049

234.

Ziervogel

Enqvist

Metelerkamp

van Breda

(2022). Supporting transformative climate adaptation: Community-level capacity building and knowledge co-creation in South Africa. Climate Policy, 22(5), 607–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2020.1863180

235.

Zittis

Hadjinicolaou

Almazroui

Bucchignani

Driouech

El Rhaz

Kurnaz

Nikulin

Ntoumos

Ozturk

Proestos

Stenchikov

Zaaboul

Lelieveld

(2021). Business-as-usual will lead to super and ultra-extreme heatwaves in the Middle East and North Africa. NPJ Climate and Atmospheric Science, 4(1), 20. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-021-00178-7

236.

Zouine

EL Adnani

M. J.

Salhi

S. E.

(2024). Higher education’s impact on CO2 mitigation: MENA insights with consideration for unemployment, economic growth, and globalization. Frontiers in Environmental Science, 12, Article 1325598. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2024.1325598

237.

Zurek

Hebinck

Selomane

(2022). Climate change and the urgency to transform food systems. Science, 376(6600), 1416–1421. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abo2364

Extending Climate Change Action to Persons with Disabilities in the Middle East and North Africa: Exploring the Moderators of Attitudes and Climate Change Behaviour Awareness Among Persons with Sensory Disabilities

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Theory Framework

Attitudes Towards Climate Change

Participation in Climate Change Behaviour

Current Study

Methods

Study Participants

Instrument

Procedure

Data Analysis

Results

Predictors of Climate Change Behaviour Awareness

Moderators of the Relationship Between Attitude and Climate Change Behaviour Awareness

Discussion

Study Limitations

Conclusion and Implication for Practice

Footnotes

Acknowledgements

ORCID iD

Ethical Considerations

Consent to Participate

Author contributions

Funding

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Data Availability Statement

References