Introduction

Environmental problems are emerging as a potentially important factor for public mental health (Hayes, Blashki, Wiseman, Burke, & Reifels, 2018). Theorists have conceptualised the psychological impact of climate change into direct and indirect impacts (Doherty & Clayton, 2011). There is increasing evidence that awareness of climate change events and/or anticipating future risk from climate change can impact mental health and wellbeing indirectly (Clayton, 2020; Connell, Fien, Lee, Sykes, & Yencken, 1999; Hickman, 2020; Kelly, 2017; Lawrance et al., 2021; Lee, Gjersoe, O'Neill, & Barnett, 2020; Ogunbode et al., 2021; Strife, 2012; Tucci, Mitchell, & Goddard, 2007), with terms like ‘eco-anxiety’ being developed to describe adverse psychological responses (Albrecht, 2011). Eco distress is defined by the Royal College of Psychiatrists as ‘the wide range of thoughts and emotions people may experience when they hear bad news about our planet and the environment’, so it is not limited to pathological responses (Mellor, 2020). Additionally, there is strong evidence for the adverse mental health impacts of direct climate change events (Danese, Smith, Chitsabesan, & Dubicka, 2019; Evans & Oehler-Stinnett, 2006; Kar & Bastia, 2006).

In the UK context, a relatively low number of people have been dramatically effected by climate change. However, other local environmental issues besides climate change such as greenspace, air pollution and noise are also thought to have direct mental health impacts (Braithwaite, Zhang, Kirkbride, Osborn, & Hayes, 2019; Clark & Paunovic, 2018; Reiss, 2013; Vanaken & Danckaerts, 2018). Furthermore, nature connectedness is thought to be protective for adolescent mental health (Capaldi, Dopko, & Zelenski, 2014; Martin et al., 2020; McMahan & Estes, 2015; Piccininni, Michaelson, Janssen, & Pickett, 2018).

In order to understand and contextualise these quantified exposure effects, it is important to understand young people’s perspectives on how their local physical environments affect them in different contexts (for example, whether adolescents are aware of and worried about air quality in their area).

A number of studies have suggested that environmental issues can negatively impact child and adolescent wellbeing indirectly (Connell et al., 1999; Hokka et al., 1999; Kelly, 2017; Stokas, Strezou, Malandrakis, & Papadopoulou, 2017; Strife, 2012; Tucci et al., 2007). However, despite high levels of adolescent engagement with these issues, especially climate change, the literature does not yet conclusively tell us how widespread and severe emotional effects are, how they come about, or the contexts in which they occur, creating a need for fresh empirical data in different adolescent groups.

Therefore, the aim of this study was to conduct qualitative interviews with UK adolescents to explore their thoughts and feelings about the environment, understand their experiences of contextual environmental issues and inform change by improving our collective understanding of how young people can perceive and respond to these issues.

Methods

This qualitative study was guided by the recommended consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ) checklist (Appendix S1).

Patient and public involvement

A Young People’s Advisory Group (YPAG) of twelve adolescents was recruited using professional and personal networks, and they were paid for their time according to NIHR INVOLVE guidelines. Initial project planning was guided by a 3-hr in-person research design workshop with this group, and the information sheet, consent form and recruitment adverts were reviewed and edited by two of its members. From the YPAG, TH and ZK applied to be involved in more depth for the remaining research cycle as co-researchers. The interview questions and protocol were co-produced with TH and ZK in a 2-hr online workshop. TH, ZK and RT analysed the data across two 2-hr online workshops with independent working in-between and reflexive discussions, according to previous methodology developed for involving young people in qualitative thematic analysis (Dewa et al., 2019, 2020). TH and ZK also gave feedback on this manuscript.

Participants

Young people were recruited during Spring 2020 by circulating a digital flyer. Although professional and social networks were used, only two participants knew the interviewing researcher (RT, female 23-year-old PhD student, MSc) prior to interview. The flyer stated ‘14-19 year-olds wanted to give their thoughts and feelings about environmental problems! How do issues like air pollution affect you?’ and interested participants were invited to contact the interviewing researcher by phone or email. Inclusion criteria were that the participants must be aged 14–19, based in the UK, and English-speaking. Participants who got in touch were sent an information sheet via email outlining the study aims and what to expect from taking part. Written consent and background and demographic information (e.g. age and gender) were then obtained via email, and an interview was scheduled.

Semi-structured interviews The questions were broad and exploratory, thus allowing young people’s perspectives and experiences to guide our understanding of what environmental problems and factors affect their wellbeing. The interview structure varied depending on flow, but was roughly divided into sections asking about: Pollution and their local environment The environment more broadly and its future Engagement, influences and information (regarding environmental issues) Responsibility and power (to influence the environment)

Interviews took place via video call (Skype, Facetime or WhatsApp) or telephone call between the interviewing researcher and the participant only. Question type and order were applied flexibly, with follow-up questions or probes used as the conversation warranted (full questions and protocol in Appendix S2). Interviews were recorded using the ‘eXtra Voice Recorder Lite App’ and transcribed verbatim along with notes of any important additional details. After the interview, the recording was stopped and participants were given the opportunity for questions and provided with a list of resources for support. Participants were reimbursed for their time with a £20 e-voucher.

Analysis

The underlying theoretical perspective of the analysis was interpretivist, as the aim of the study was to meaningfully capture and interpret the subjective experiences of a group of young people in response to these contextual issues without assuming them to be predictable or fixed (Ezzy, 2013; Holloway, 1997). Therefore, there were no specific hypotheses, and codes and themes were drawn from the data inductively.

It was decided a priori to begin with 12 interviews, conduct the initial coding analysis, and then continue in sets of three interviews until code saturation was reached (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Francis et al., 2010; Guest, Bunce, & Johnson, 2006). Braun and Clarke’s six stages of thematic analysis were applied to the data. Initially, the researcher (RT) and co-researchers (ZK and TH) discussed the aims of the project and analysis and familiarised themselves with the first transcript. They then generated initial codes using Microsoft Word’s Highlighting and Comment functions and discussed the first transcript’s codes in a two-hour virtual meeting. The three researchers then independently coded the remaining transcripts (using Word’s Highlighting and Comments functions) according to their own iterative coding frameworks (RT all transcripts, ZK 8 transcripts and TH 7 transcripts). Codes were then triangulated to produce a full list. In another two-hour virtual meeting between the three researchers, the full code list was discussed, edited and organised into an initial thematic framework and map. RT, ZK and TH then checked all the data against each theme for referential adequacy. The referential adequacy and structure of the themes, codes and data were reviewed by an independent researcher (peer debriefing, HLF). Feedback from the group (HLF, RT and ZK) was incorporated to finalise the thematic map and code structure, for which several themes were rephrased, or their structure re-ordered (e.g. renaming ‘the future’ ‘perceptions of the future’).

Results

Fifteen participants aged 14–18 from a range of demographic backgrounds took part in the interviews (Table 1). Their experience of mental health and environmental engagement or activism also varied considerably (Table 1). Twelve interviews took place initially, which were then coded, and an additional three interviews were conducted to reach data saturation (no new codes arose in interviews 11–15). The mean interview length was 25.02 min (range 16.36–36.18 m).

Table 1. Participant background and demographic information Demographic characteristic Coding N (%) Age 14 years 2 (13.3) 15 years 3 (20.0) 16 years 5 (33.3) 17 years 2 (13.3) 18 years 3 (20.0) Gender Female 10 (66.7) Male 4 (26.7) Non-binary 1 (6.7) Ethnicity White 12 (80.0) Black 2 (13.3) Declined to answer 1 (0.7) School type Private 6 (40.0) Comprehensive 9 (60.0) Location Rural 5 (33.3) Urban 10 (66.7) Self-reported environmental campaigninga Yes 8 (53.3) No 7 (46.7) Self-reported prior mental health difficulties Present 2 (13.3) Absent 12 (80.0) Declined to answer 1 (6.7) a Mostly attending the climate strikes. Themes

There were 52 codes in the final framework, resulting in six themes and 11 subthemes (Figure 1). All codes and their prevalence can be found in Appendix S3.

Co-produced thematic map depicting adolescents' responses to the environment

Impact of the local environment Harmful influences Factors described as having a harmful influence included air pollution; most talked about its impact on health and mortality and participants used many general negative terms (e.g. ‘bad’ and ‘concerning’). Noise was reported to have a negative impact on wellbeing; distraction and stress or anxiety were the most widely discussed effects of noise, but annoyance, feeling trapped, and impact on sleep and physical health were also mentioned. In addition, overcrowding, traffic, litter and uncleanliness were widely reported to have a harmful impact, because they both increase pollution and noise and are themselves stressful stimuli. Some aspects of the local environment such as litter, pollution and noise were talked about negatively in terms of their non-personal effects on the climate and on wildlife. A common thread to the sources and effects of harmful influences seemed to be a sense of feeling overwhelmed or bombarded by numerous features of the urban environment.

I think it affects quite a lot of my thoughts, like sometimes when I’m walking it’s just sort of, in a city, I get kind of paranoid about pollution and things and what I’m breathing. (Participant #8, Female(F), age 14)

It’s too noisy, so I feel like there’s nowhere to go to like relax. (Participant #10, F, 14)

Helpful influences Adolescents reported that influences in their local environment could be helpful to their wellbeing, in particular greenspace, nature and fresh air. This created an overarching perspective of the natural environment as soothing in contrast to urban experiences. Accessibility to places, activities and other people was the only feature associated with the urban environment that was discussed fondly.

…being able to go outside, I think that has quite a big impact on young people’s mental health especially…it’s nice to have parks and greenspaces to go to, just to get out of the house and not just walk around the streets all the time but walk in the park and see nature and things like that. (Participant #15, F, 17)

Light, safety and personal space were all described as having effects (too much light, feeling unsafe or not having personal space as harmful and the contrary as beneficial), but these elements of the local environment were not as strongly emphasised as other factors such as greenspace and traffic.

I think having lots of space, is very nice, and particularly now, but having the ability to go into a garden and spend time and you can’t, you can’t see people next to you, if they’re in their garden like you have your own privacy. (Participant #7, F, 15)

Efficacy

Young people talked about their ability to affect their environment and address their environmental concerns. This was largely talked about on a global scale (e.g. related to climate change) but also somewhat on the local level.

Progress and empowerment Many of the young people talked about making a difference and described this as feeling good, usually describing their impact as collectively rather than individually driven, and recognising group efficacy as more relevant to these issues than individual action. Another common characteristic of these discussions was references to adolescent activism such as the climate strikes, and this adolescent group described their generation as especially interested in, engaged with, and passionate about environmental issues:

It makes me feel a bit more hopeful, you know if I’ve taken action as an individual, hopefully some other people out there are doing the same and as a collective, it will have an impact. (#12, M, 16)

Talking from my perspective, like my friends, I know most of my friends are interested in the environment. (#13, F, 18)

Powerlessness In contrast, a very palpable perspective which emerged was widely expressed feelings of powerlessness, and many interviewees expressed fears that climate change is out of control, that it was too late to avert a climate crisis, and that they did not know what to do to prevent it. Sometimes, this lack of control was attributed to their being one individual, but often participants said that their age and the associated lack of power were further restricting their ability to exert an influence.

I can feel a bit stuck a bit useless I’m like, why isn’t this happening…I don’t know what I can do, it feels like, I feel a bit lost in just not being able to do much because I’m just one person, I dunno, it feels like it’s out of control. (Participant #11, F, 15)

Challenging emotions

This theme captures the extensive challenging emotions that were expressed. The more welcomed emotions mentioned (passion, solidarity and hope) were less numerous and therefore were conceptualised under the themes of efficacy and perceptions of the future. Positive feelings tended to be elicited by specific questions about pro-environmental action or how participants viewed the future, whereas more open questions about environmental issues in general elicited negative responses.

The participants expressed anxiety and sadness about the environment, its present state, our treatment of it, and where they anticipated it going. Feelings of guilt about not doing enough or their own privilege in not yet being directly affected were also discussed.

It’s always at the back of your mind, lingering…There is a big little voice in the back of your head going, the world is dying, are you gonna make it past 50? (#1, F, 16)

I’d say that I don’t go out of my way to learn more things about it because I dunno, it’s quite depressing in a way. (#3, Male (M), 16)

Furthermore, many young people expressed frustration, anger and annoyance at societal structures or other people.

I would say I feel quite frustrated that nothing, like, not that nothing is being done but I don’t see as much progress as I would think there would have been, especially like people in power you would think that they would take the environmental problems seriously and try and tackle it so it’s quite frustrating that there’s a lack of progress or a lack of initiative taken place. (#14, F, 16)

Information

The interviews touched upon the sources young people get their information about the environment from, and their main influences in terms of their environmental knowledge and opinions.

Sources The main influences and sources of information young people discussed were social media (73.3%), the news (40.0%), friends and family (93.3%), and school (66.7%).

…also my friends do similar things so when we talk about it we get the information, we all get information from various sources and then we talk about it so I get it from that as well. (#7, F, 16)

either school or Instagram, I think. Sometimes the news, but yeah it depends on what I’m doing that day, but usually school I think and media. (#14, F, 16)

Responses This subtheme is about responses to information about environmental issues. The most salient perspective emerging from this was a mistrust of the media and media/news stress. The news was generally not perceived as constructive but rather as stressful, negative and catastrophising, without offering solutions, perspective or nuance. Some young people talked about avoiding the news, or even general content or discussion about environmental issues, for these reasons.

you know what the media are like, they’re fear mongers, a lot of media, it’s very hard to get media that truly shows you the big picture and shows you the big picture as what it is, not as you know, an overdramatised scary model. (#5, M, 16)

I stay away from the news because it’s so negative, it’s so depressing. (#1, F, 16)

Hindrances

Young people reported that not enough was being done to take care of the environment, especially with respect to climate change, and this theme encompasses the factors they identified as hindering this progress.

Indifference This subtheme encompasses how participants identified people’s indifference as a cause of environmental problems. This indifference was attributed to a lack of awareness or denial, people’s psychological avoidance of the issue, and because many people in the UK are not affected at present. Often this indifference was discussed in the context of generational differences, with participants suggesting that younger people are especially engaged because they expect these issues to have an effect on them in their lifetime. Education was highly cited as an important solution.

I think where a lot of people feel relaxed is when they know that they’re not going to be affected in the future whereas for a lot of young people it’s, we will be affected, we will live through this. So that’s where a lot of the worry I think comes from. (#11, F, 15)

Power/responsibility This subtheme is about which people or organisations the young people held responsible for our environments, and which people or organisations they saw as holding the power to bring about change (these essentially went hand in hand). The strongest effect was that the government as capable of affecting and culpable for our environmental problems, though there was also blame geared towards big companies and older generations for damaging our local and global surroundings:

Frustration with people in power, like people in government, politicians who aren’t, it feels like sometimes they’re not listening… And also frustration with like bigger companies like global players in that sense, who, it just, I also think it really wouldn’t kill them to just make the change. (#11, F, 15)

I think we feel like we’ve kind of, we have to try and fix the mistakes that have been made in the generations above us, so we’re kind of trying to do what we can I guess. (#14)

Other/competing priorities A final reason for a lack of progress on environmental problems mentioned by the young people was how other issues can take priority. On a societal level, competing policy objectives and the pursuit of profit or a strong economy were identified as reasons why governments or companies might not be eco-friendly. On the level of the individual, the young people spoke about how people do not always have the time or resources to live in an eco-friendly way, and how people may not want to give up their present lifestyles.

It’s not good enough, it’s not that the people in charge don’t have access to do it, they just don’t because it’s more efficient, it’s more profitable and it’s easier. (#4, Non-binary, 17)

Unfortunately, a lot of the environmentally friendly stuff is the more expensive stuff. (#5, M, 16)

Perceptions of the future

How participants talked about the future was thematically organised into positive and negative perceptions.

Hopeful for change When asked about their expectations, there were some positive expectations of increased awareness and action, and that a crisis could be preventable:

More pressure to be applied on the government to take action I think, from protests as well, is understanding that we won’t sit and watch the world just deteriorate, I guess. I expect people to understand a lot more. (#12, M, 16)

I know eventually we will get there, it might take time, in a way I reckon that if things do get worse, it’s not necessarily a good thing but it is almost a good thing because it will kick the government into gear… I’m fairly certain, it might take time, but I reckon it will get better, they just, we need to wake up almost. (#2, M, 16)

When asked about their hopes for the future, adolescents’ wished for increased awareness, increased action and a cleaner more sustainable world for future generations:

…a lot more trees, more trees being planted rather than so many being cut down, like people using charity shops more and second-hand things more, using local farmers stuff like that for food so they don’t have to transport it miles and miles, and then more places, like clean water, litter cleaned up every week or two, just a nice place to be really. (#10, F, 14)

I want to see a just world where everyone’s equal and that countries are not gonna, are not being exploited for their materials and we’ve found alternatives. There is already alternatives we’re just not using them to their greatest extent, like wind power, solar power, wave power, we’re just not using them, and I think those resources have to be used and we have to build upon them and create a just transition for everyone. (#9, F, 18)

Catastrophic Under the subtheme of catastrophic perceptions of the future, some participants discussed urgency or said that we are running out of time, and some indicated that the world is dying or becoming uninhabitable. In discussing the future of the world, there was a general sense of impending doom or catastrophe.

There’s a sense that the world is starting to become, not necessarily dying, but dying for us. As in we won’t be able to live in it for much longer… it’s kind of like ah my adulthood might not be a thing. Or, me being an adult might be in a world where we are getting constant weather issues, constant floods, where you have to wear a mask outside because you can’t breathe. (#1, F, 16)

I don’t think you can reverse the amount of damage that’s already been done. (#3, M, 18)

In terms of expectations, all but one participant had negative expectations about the future of our environment. These tended to take a catastrophic narrative that things will get worse and have serious consequences before they could stop it. Those that did expect positive change generally felt things would have to get worse beforehand:

It’s just full of litter, there’ll be nowhere nice to go to, like ponds just full of water that’s like polluted, got rubbish in, I think, eventually we won’t have sunny days it’ll just be like thick smoke clouds, just not a nice place to be. (#10, F, 14)

I feel like the politicians and the people have got to wake up and see that something is happening when we do start to feel huge effects from it, but I don’t think that will happen before effects are felt and before there is some damage done. (#7, F, 15)

Discussion

This study corroborates previous findings from journalism (Bodkin, 2019; Taylor, 2019) and academic research from a range of countries (Connell et al., 1999; Hickman et al., 2021; Hokka et al., 1999; Kelly, 2017; Strife, 2012; Tucci et al., 2007) which have reported high levels of youth engagement with environmental issues, coupled with fear, anxiety, anger and sadness. As has been observed previously in children and young adults, participants had grim expectations for the future of the world (Strife, 2012; Tucci et al., 2007). Crucially, the majority of the sample did not report any prior mental health problems. This supports the idea that ‘negative responses’ or coping mechanisms with regards to environmental problems should not always be pathologised and could be considered a rational anxiety or a rational anger (Lawton, 2019; Verplanken & Roy, 2013) which is even constructive for bringing about change when motivating action. When coupled with informed and hopeful action, eco-anxiety may be considered an adaptive response to a crisis (Pihkala, 2020a; Verplanken, Marks, & Dobromir, 2020).

Participants reported a belief that their generation is more passionate about environmental issues than older generations but, as has been reported in previous studies, most felt powerless themselves to have a real impact (Connell et al., 1999; Kelly, 2017). The young people’s perceptions of why enough action is not being taken are consistent with some previously identified factors in climate inaction; limited cognition (lack of awareness, denial), ideologies (e.g. capitalism), sunk costs (economy, profit and lifestyle), perceived risk (low perceived personal risk of climate change relative to risks associated with action) and limited behaviour (Gifford, 2011). However, these factors were largely attributed to middle-to-older aged adults and adults with power (those in government and big business), and not described as hindering young people’s motivation to act to the same extent. This perception of a generational gap, associated with feelings of anger and betrayal, has been observed in prior research (Jones & Davison, 2021; Strife, 2012). When describing their personal reasons for not doing more, this was attributed to not knowing what to do, and not having the power to do everything they would want to.

However, participants also commented on progress being made and discussed the benefits of taking action for their sense of hope and their sense of personal wellbeing. This suggests a dual benefit of environmental action for the environment and mental health. They recognised the role of the collective in generating positive outcomes for the planet, presenting higher group efficacy than self-efficacy (Fritsche & Masson, 2021), and described how observing or participating in the actions of a group enhanced their sense of hope, community and wellbeing. This ‘co-benefit’ of pro-environmental behaviours for wellbeing has been observed in prior studies (Chukwuorji, Iorfa, Nzeadibe, & Ifeagwazi, 2017; Kaida & Kaida, 2016). This is in-keeping with Ojala’s observations (Ojala, 2012, 2013) of adolescent responses to climate change and corresponding conceptualisation of constructive hope and meaning-focussed coping (emphasising the capacity for pro-environmental action to influence environmental outcomes) as being the most beneficial for wellbeing and environmental action, compared with denial or a lack of hope.

Stronger levels of concern and powerlessness in relation to global issues over local issues were observed, which is consistent with prior research (Uzzell, 2000). However, participants’ personal environments and spaces were also found to influence their wellbeing, particularly their level of stress and comfort, and how and where they tended to spend their time. Research that focusses upon how people interact with and are influenced (positively and negatively) by their built and natural environments has a longstanding tradition in environmental psychology (Bonnes, Scopelliti, Fornara, & Carrus, 2018; Gifford, 2014). Air pollution, water pollution and biodiversity were found to be of concern, as a study of a previous generation of teenagers found (Hokka et al., 1999), as well as light, uncleanliness and litter, overcrowding, greenspace, fresh air, personal space and safety. The young people seemed to associate stress with urban spaces. Aspects of the local environment which exerted a positive influence were greenspace, nature, fresh air and accessibility to other people, places and activities, which suggests both urban and rural environments have some benefits for young people. The soothing and beneficial effects of greenspace, time in nature and nature-connectedness are well-documented (Barton & Rogerson, 2017; Piccininni et al., 2018; Pritchard, Richardson, Sheffield, & McEwan, 2020). The bonds and attachments youth and other people feel to environments (place-attachments) are associated with stronger intentions to preserve them and higher levels of pro-environmental behaviours (Stedman, 2002; Vaske & Kobrin, 2001). It has been suggested that this could be leveraged in environmental education to influence pro-environmental practices (Kudryavtsev, Krasny, & Stedman, 2012; Walker & Chapman, 2003). Given that younger people are often associated with a preference for cities, accessibility and activity, it is interesting that both urban and rural youth engaged in the same narrative of appreciating the healing aspects of nature and expressing concerns surrounding the complex and lurid nature of urban life, although this positive valuation and respect for nature have been observed in teenagers and young adults in other research (Lekies, Yost, & Rode, 2015; Soga, Gaston, Koyanagi, Kurisu, & Hanaki, 2016).

Potential implications

This research has implications for mental health research and practice, environmental policy and methodologies for working with young people. Regarding mental health research, future research should quantify the prevalence, nature and severity of climate change’s indirect psychological impacts through large scale studies, and explore what factors could protect or alleviate environmental distress (Thoma, Rohleder, & Rohner, 2021). Several preprints in this area suggest this research is already emerging (Hickman et al., 2021; Hogg, Stanley, O’Brien, Wilson, & Watsford, 2021; Lawrance et al., 2021; Wullenkord, Tröger, Hamann, Loy, & Reese, 2021) and the recently developed climate change anxiety scale is a valuable resource for researchers looking to address this (Clayton & Karazsia, 2020). These interviews provide preliminary insights into these factors; on the local level, the young people found time spent in clean and green spaces beneficial, and many talked about how trying to ‘make a difference’ was beneficial for a more optimistic outlook. It should be cautioned, however, that the relationship between action and wellbeing is unlikely to be linear, with potentially high risk of burnout for climate activists (Hoggett & Randall, 2018). Clinically, mental health practitioners and other professionals working with young people should be aware of how environmental problems might figure in their world view and impact their wellbeing, and professional bodies should produce research and guidance to support their members, that is recent work by the Royal College of Psychiatrists (2020).

However, environmental degradation and climate change are higher-level problems and threats to health and mental health which reducing individual distress will not solve. The young people in these interviews were informed, passionate and opinionated, but felt fundamentally disempowered and had a mistrust of, and frustration towards, government and those with power. Policy-makers and politicians should take steps to listen to young people and their grievances, aggregate their views, amplify their voices and give them practical influence, whether it be in terms of local town planning and maintenance, government policy towards energy and transport, or international environmental strategies (Kara, 2007; Thew, Middlemiss, & Paavola, 2021). This research also implies that supporting organisations that encourage collaborations between environmentally engaged young people and include young people in environmental projects would benefit adolescent wellbeing and the environment.

Additionally, social media was the key resource used by participants to gather information, which should be considered when communicating with adolescents about environmental information, campaigns, interventions or projects. The importance of friends and peers as a source of information and influence suggests that youth gatekeepers and ambassadors are valuable ways of working with this age group.

The young people’s experience of climate-related information, especially the news, was that it was lacking nuance, positivity and practical advice, leading to a sense of powerlessness and ‘end of the world’, in turn leading to stress, sadness and avoidance. In keeping with previous research, this suggests that news and information providers and educators have a responsibility to provide accurate information which shows the links between present events and future outcomes (Hicks, 2012, 2013). However, some accurate information may be intrinsically negative in what it predicts, meaning the provision of factual information that is non-distressing may not always be possible. This requires the cooperation of educators, activists, communicators and support services to provide emotion-sensitive environmental material whilst building youth resilience to difficult information, thereby generating a sense of understanding and ‘constructive hope’ which encourages environmental behaviour without provoking unconstructive or excessive anxiety and distress (Moser, 2014; Ojala, 2015; Pihkala, 2020b).

Strengths and limitations

This study has many strengths. Adolescents were involved throughout the project, from initial brainstorming, to designing the interviews, to analysing and interpreting results, according to practices developed by NIHR INVOLVE and Imperial College’s Patient Experience Research Centre (PERC). Their insights greatly affected the course of the study, improving the experience of participants and making findings more relevant and insightful. Crucially, themes, codes and meaning were drawn out by young people, adding validity to the perspective and experience constructed from the data. Their involvement in designing the interview protocol for greeting, explaining, question phrasing and managing distress will have helped to reduce the power dynamic inherent to an interview situation, as will the interviewing researchers’ relatively young age (23) and prior experience working with adolescents. Peer debriefing, reflexivity and triangulation added further rigour to the process of interpreting data. Additionally, participants were from mixed socioeconomic backgrounds and urban/rural residency, and therefore, a variety of adolescent voices were represented. This novel piece of research adds knowledge and understanding to a relatively underexplored but emergent field.

There are also limitations. The project took place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which will have influenced where participants spent their time and could have affected their relationship to their environment. The interviews were conducted remotely, which could have produced different results to a face-to-face interview. Additionally, discussion of these issues may have brought them to mind uncharacteristically and thus elicited a reaction which, although negative, is not typical of their day-to-day state of mind. Although measures were taken to uphold objectivity, some researcher and co-researcher bias cannot be ruled out, notably due to their female gender and their own pro-environmental views and experiences. Additionally, the views of adolescents from countries other than the UK are not represented here, the sample was not very ethnically diverse, and 66.7% of participants were female. Further, although participants varied from very active on environmental issues to entirely inactive, this sample did feel confident enough to respond to the advert, so they may have been especially environmentally aware and/or engaged. Additionally, the interviews varied in length, so some participants were more forthcoming than others which may be related to their knowledge, confidence or engagement. Finally, the interdisciplinary nature of this topic means that it is difficult to consult all relevant resources when contextualising new research.

Reflexive observations

Although the research was not explicitly driven by particular hypotheses, the researchers and co-researchers will have brought prior impressions of good and bad (e.g. climate change and e