Experience exceeds awareness of anthropogenic climate change in Greenland

Greenland (Kalaallit Nunaat) hosts the world’s largest Indigenous population by percentage and is a critical element of the Earth system due to its ice sheet’s contribution to sea-level rise. The Arctic is warming several times faster than the global average, disrupting sea ice, snow cover, permafrost, precipitation regimes, ice-sheet hydrology, and coastal processes. Despite the scientific focus on Greenland, the climate perceptions of its predominantly Inuit population are underexplored. The study asks: (1) How do Greenlanders’ perceptions and knowledge of climate change compare with those in other Arctic and top oil-producing Arctic countries? (2) What is the prevalence of personal experience with climate change’s effects versus awareness of its anthropogenic causes? (3) How do these perceptions vary regionally and demographically within Greenland? (4) What socio-environmental and cultural predictors—particularly an Inuit cultural dimension—are associated with personal experience and awareness? Understanding this gap is important for effective adaptation policy, science communication, and knowledge co-production between Indigenous knowledge systems and climate science.

The paper situates its inquiry within a decade of multinational climate opinion surveys that have largely omitted Greenland, leaving a gap in understanding Indigenous Arctic perspectives. Prior research documents rapid Arctic environmental change and substantial local impacts on mobility, subsistence, and well-being in Indigenous communities. Meta-analyses link personal experience with climate change perceptions and policy support, while global studies show variability in awareness and attribution knowledge. The literature on co-production of knowledge emphasizes integrating Indigenous knowledge with scientific perspectives. Studies also note that sociopolitical identity and education often shape climate beliefs elsewhere, including Arctic nations. Despite strong scientific consensus on anthropogenic climate change, public awareness and attribution knowledge vary widely, and Indigenous communities often report elevated perceived impacts but may face information deficits due to uneven survey coverage and media exposure.

Design: Two nationally representative surveys of adult residents across all Greenlandic regions were conducted using consistent climate items and harmonized weighting. The Greenlandic Perspectives Survey (GPS) was an in-person field survey (July 2018–January 2019; n=646). The Indigenous Perspectives Survey (IPS) was a national telephone survey (December 2020–January 2021; n=939). Combined, respondents represent about 4% of the adult population. Sampling and fieldwork: GPS employed a stratified multistage cluster design across six geographic regions (Sermersooq split into West/East) with towns (>~500 residents) and settlements as strata. Nuuk and Upernavik were self-representing to ensure coverage. Statistics Greenland randomly allocated respondents using the population registry. IPS randomly dialed from a comprehensive list of landline, mobile, and prepaid SIM numbers across all municipal regions. Surveys were administered in Kalaallisut (Greenlandic), Danish, and English with forward/back translation. Response rates (AAPOR RR4) were ~46% (GPS) and ~47% (IPS). Country-level margins of error were ±3–4 percentage points (GPS) and ±3 points (IPS) at 95% confidence. Measures: Three harmonized items assessed (1) awareness that climate change is happening, (2) attribution of its primary cause (human activities vs other), and (3) personal experience of climate change effects. Awareness of anthropogenic climate change (AACC) was coded as 1 only if respondents answered that climate change is happening and is mostly caused by human activities; otherwise 0. Personal experience (EXP) was coded from the item asking if the respondent had personally experienced effects of climate change (yes=1). Weighting and representativeness: Analyses used probability weights to match the adult population on self-identified gender, age group, and municipal division using Statistics Greenland data (2018 for GPS; 2020 for IPS). Table 1 documents sample composition pre- and post-weighting. Analytical strategy: Population-weighted national and subnational estimates were computed in R (v4.1.3) with the Survey package. Primary and secondary weighted quasi-binomial logit regressions modeled predictors of AACC and EXP. Predictors included an Inuit culture factor (derived via principal components from community scale, Indigenous identity, education, and subsistence occupation), age group, gender, and geographic controls (municipal regions; Sermersooq split West/East). Odds ratios with 95% CIs were reported. Factor analysis: Principal components on community scale, Indigenous identity, education, and subsistence occupation loaded on a single latent dimension (explaining 61% of variance; first component eigenvalue >2). This Inuit culture factor was binned into four levels (low to high) for regression. International survey inclusion analysis: A systematic search (Google Scholar and grey literature, 2010–2020, English-language scope) enumerated international climate opinion survey appearances by country, and extracted Arctic-country estimates on awareness, attribution knowledge, and personal experience where available. Ethics and inclusion: Local researchers participated throughout; results were shared locally. Informed consent was obtained; GPS had ethical approval from Greenland’s Scientific Ethical Committee for Health Sciences Research. Data were anonymized. Robustness checks included adding survey-wave and sociopolitical controls; results persisted.

• Coverage gap: From 2010–2020, no identified international climate opinion surveys included Greenland, making its residents the only unsurveyed Arctic population in those datasets.
• Awareness that climate change is happening: In Greenland, ~89% (average of 2018–2020 surveys) agree, similar to other Arctic countries; Iceland was highest at 98%.
• Awareness of anthropogenic cause: Only ~52% of Greenlanders know climate change is mainly human-caused—slightly above Arctic average (47%) and above top oil-producing Arctic countries (43%). Lowest attribution knowledge in Norway (37%), Russia (38%), Denmark and the United States (44%).
• Personal experience: About 78% of Greenlanders report personally experiencing climate change effects—over twice the average in top oil-producing Arctic countries (36%).
• Regional variation in Greenland: • Personal experience (%): Qeqertalik 85 (±5), Kujalleq 82 (±6), East Sermersooq 82 (±9), Avannaata 81 (±5), Qeqqata 78 (±5), West Sermersooq 71 (±4). • Awareness of human-caused (%): West Sermersooq 60 (±4); Qeqqalik 43 (±7); Avannaata 42 (±5); East Sermersooq 31 (±10). Regions with higher personal experience tend to have lower attribution awareness.
• Demographic and community differences: • Age: Young adults (18–29) have lowest awareness (43 ±6%). Personal experience is lowest for young adults (67 ±5%), rising with age and plateauing around 50 (~85 ±3%). • Education: Post-primary education group awareness 58 ±3% vs 39 ±4% for elementary or less; personal experience similar across education levels. • Community scale: City awareness 61%, experience 71%; Town awareness 47%, experience 80%; Village awareness 40%, experience 83%. • Identity: Kalaallit awareness 49%, experience 80%; Danish/mixed awareness 58%, experience 62%. • Occupation: Hunters/fishers awareness 32%, experience 84%; Non-subsistence occupations awareness 52%, experience 78%.
• Regression results (weighted quasi-binomial logit): • Inuit culture factor: High vs low levels associated with greater odds of personal experience (OR 3.2; 95% CI 2.0–5.2) and lower odds of anthropogenic awareness (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.2–0.5). Effects persist with geographic controls. • Age: ≥65 vs 18–29 increases odds of personal experience (OR 2.8; 1.7–4.8). Age 50–64 vs 18–29 increases odds of anthropogenic awareness (OR 1.8; 1.3–2.5). • When substituting observed variables for the culture factor: Education and older age are strongest positive predictors of anthropogenic awareness; subsistence occupation is the strongest negative predictor. Indigenous identity and older age are strongest positive predictors of personal experience; education is not significant for experience.
• Paradoxes identified: (1) High exposure but low inclusion in international surveys; (2) Those experiencing climate change most are least aware of human causation; (3) Youth in Greenland are relatively less aware of anthropogenic causation, opposite global youth-led trends.

The findings reveal a science–society gulf in Greenland: despite high personal experience with climate change, only about half of the population recognizes its anthropogenic cause, with the largest gaps in regions and communities most exposed. An Inuit cultural dimension strongly predicts greater personal experience while predicting lower attribution to human causes, suggesting that lived experience of Sila and local variability may heighten felt impacts yet distance the perceived anthropogenic signal, especially among subsistence-oriented and less formally educated groups. Youth exhibit lower attribution awareness than older adults, breaking with broader international patterns of youth leadership on climate awareness. These patterns have critical implications for adaptation readiness, policy support, and risk communication in Greenland. Bridging Indigenous knowledge with scientific understanding—through education, media, and institutional engagement—could align high experiential awareness with accurate attribution, which is associated with support for adaptation policies. The persistence of results after controlling for geography, survey wave, and sociopolitical factors indicates robust cultural and educational influences that need targeted, culturally grounded communication strategies.

This study provides the first nationally representative evidence on Greenlanders’ climate change awareness, attribution knowledge, and personal experience, highlighting that experience markedly exceeds awareness of human causation. It documents the omission of Greenland from international climate opinion surveys and identifies an Inuit cultural dimension as a key positive predictor of experience and a negative predictor of anthropogenic awareness. The work underscores a pressing need to bridge Indigenous experiential knowledge with climate science, particularly among youth and subsistence communities. Future research should explore psychosocial drivers (including media and online information ecosystems), extend analyses across Inuit Nunangat, Sápmi, and the Chukchi Peninsula, and employ mixed-methods to elucidate mechanisms linking culture, education, and attribution beliefs. Policy and practice should prioritize co-produced, culturally resonant climate education, integrating Greenland-specific projections and Greenland Ice Sheet science into curricula, along with teacher training, community outreach, and strategic communication (including weathercasters) to support informed adaptation and mitigation.

Inter-regional comparisons are indicative due to differences across countries in survey designs, sampling, wording, administration, and timing. Greenland estimates combine two waves (GPS and IPS); while wave controls show no significant differences, unobserved wave-specific biases may remain. Unmeasured psychosocial or environmental variables (e.g., sociopolitical identity, media use, internet access/quality) could influence beliefs; adding sociopolitical controls did not alter primary results, but further research is warranted. Although geographic controls were applied, more granular media and exposure measures could refine inference. Standard survey limitations apply (nonresponse, recall, and social desirability biases).