Numerous scientific studies coincide regarding the fact that the dominant socioeconomic development model, based on unlimited and accumulative economic growth, is generating serious impacts on the environment and contributing towards increasing the social inequality gap. Also, it is recognised that the climate change crisis, driven by the logic of continuous growth, is putting ecological stability and human well-being at risk.

In 2023, within the framework of the “Beyond Growth” conference, the European Parliament opened up an unprecedented debate to reflect on alternative socioeconomic development models that could help guide the population in response to the climate emergency and eco-social crisis. This was articulated around three major models: firstly, green growth, which could be defined as the uncoupling of economic growth from the use of natural resources and contaminating emissions through technological efficiency, innovation, and the circular economy. In second place, neutral growth, which criticises the central nature of economic growth in public policies, although without any explicit rejection of it, advocating an economic model centred on sufficiency, resilience, and sustainability in the long term. Finally, degrowth, or the planned and equitable reduction of production and consumption levels in order to redirect the economy towards a balance with the Earth’s ecological limits, with a proposal of voluntary and fair transformation of the economic system.

When comparing these three models, different authors argue that degrowth is the model that can contribute most effectively to mitigate the effects of climate change, since it directly tackles its structural causes, such as excessive consumption of resources and dependence on fossil fuels (Hickel, 2021). This model would enable a rapid reduction in greenhouse gases, pressure on the ecosystems, and advance towards a low-carbon economy, focusing on well-being and social justice. Given that the implementation of the model would imply in-depth social and structural transformations, its viability largely depends on the citizens acceptance and on the political support that can be generated around its proposals. This underlines the importance of studying not only the social understanding of this model, but also the affective responses of the population and the individual and collective predisposition towards this.

A comparative study conducted in 2011 by Ančić and Domazet (2015) in different European countries revealed that, in the Spanish case, degrowth could have an ambivalent reception and a low general acceptance. However, a growing interest in this model was already observed. A subsequent study, carried out in Spain in the year 2014 by Drews and Van den Bergh (2016), showed that a third of participants preferred to ignore economic growth or stop it completely. Even so, the majority of people surveyed continued to be in favour of adopting rates of economic growth.

However, uncertainty existed over whether the increase in extreme phenomena associated with climate change, such as heatwaves or flooding, and their consequences had influenced the social perceptions of the Spanish population and their predisposition towards adopting degrowth as a model for tackling the climate crisis. For this reason, the study on which the article is based focused on understanding to what point, in the year 2024, degrowth was present in the mind of the Spanish population as a possible solution to climate change. For this, a survey was conducted among three thousand adult participants in Spain.
 

A high percentage of participants (70%) perceived that climate change was occurring at the time the study was being carried out. This perception was mainly expressed through recognition of an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather phenomena in recent decades, such as droughts (83%), heatwaves (82%), torrential rains (79%), forest fires (77%), intense storms (76%) or flooding (74%). These data converge with recent studies of MITECO in Spain (2021). Thus, in the last decade, social awareness has increased regarding the climate change that is occurring and, with very significant percentages, some of the consequences resulting from it. The results seem to indicate that so-called climate change denial is gradually losing space within the national context. Furthermore, it is interesting to highlight that, when projecting the weather phenomena mentioned into the future, it is observed that the people surveyed perceived to a lesser proportion that in the future, climate change would continue increasing the impact of these phenomena. This tendency could be explained by the presence of feelings such as uncertainty or hope regarding the possible reduction in the intensification of these events, as well as due to the difficulty citizens experience in anticipating future scenarios. In this sense, the results of the study suggest that personal experience, and direct observation of extreme weather phenomena, constitute determining factors in the perception of climate change, and that this perception tends to weaken when it is translated to a future horizon.

The study revealed that 50% of the people surveyed experience an average level of eco-anxiety, understood as psychological (mental and emotional) discomfort linked to the perception of uncertainty and the consequences of climate change, with scores that varied between 3 and 5 on a scale from 1 to 7. On this scale, 1 indicated that they had not suffered these symptoms when thinking of climate change and 7, that they had suffered them very often. This eco-anxiety, linked to the uncertainty and consequences of climate change, was more pronounced in the age groups comprising people aged between 25 and 45 years, and showed a decreasing tendency as age advanced. Equally, the data revealed that women and people with a higher education level presented average levels of eco-anxiety higher than those of other groups. 

These results are in line with data from the Sociological Research Centre Barometer for 2025, which point towards over 75% of the Spanish population expressing a high level of concern for risks associated with climate change. The results highlight that eco-anxiety represents an emerging concern in the sphere of public health, which is an invitation to consider it in the development of strategies geared towards emotional well-being and social adaptation in response to climate change.
 

Of the people participating, 62% perceived that climate change was due to human action and over half (58%) considered that the socioeconomic development model currently in force, based on unlimited growth, is making the impacts of climate change more serious. Within this context, a considerable majority (65%) recognised the need to transit towards development models that respect the Earth’s biophysical limits and guarantee human well-being, versus 35% who manifest doubts or reticence regarding such change. When comparing perceptions regarding other models of alternative development, a significant percentage of participants considered that focuses such as green growth (42%), neutral growth (36%) and degrowth (46%) could also intensify the effects of climate change. These results suggest that, although a broad recognition exists of human responsibility for climate change and of the need to change the current development model, uncertainties persist regarding the rest of the alternative models proposed.

The majority of people participating in the study did not clearly identify degrowth as a possible solution with regard to climate change. Some 77% recognised that they were not familiar with this concept, against 23% who affirmed that they had more solid knowledge in this regard. In fact, 58% of the people surveyed indicated that they had never heard of degrowth before participating in the study. This lack of knowledge was translated, furthermore, into an ambivalent emotional perception: nearly 43% manifested that the spontaneous feeling that the word degrowth caused them was somewhat negative, versus 28% who considered that it was somewhat positive, with it being neutral for 29%. These data reflected on the fact that, despite the growing academic and political debate around degrowth, knowledge of it and its acceptance has not yet become socially consolidated. Initial confusion or rejection towards the term could be due to a lack of understanding and knowledge of it. Thus, it could be attributed to an association with the concepts of loss or setback, rather than attending to its deeper meaning, linked to the Earth’s biophysical limits, social justice, and human well-being. 

Of the people surveyed, 60% considered that they could adopt everyday tasks that would reduce their impact on climate change. Meanwhile, 47% stated that, with a certain frequency, they adopt practices geared towards reducing their carbon footprint – such as, for example, reducing plane travel or using renewable energies, while 21% did this occasionally and 33% recognised that they rarely did it. Although many of these practices are consistent with the principles of degrowth, the study results suggested that the majority of people surveyed did not explicitly associate them with this concept. Despite certain advances in individual practices, low involvement was revealed in collective practices linked to degrowth: over 60% of the people surveyed rarely shared or commented on posts on social networks about degrowth as a solution to climate change, promoted events related with this model or participated in similar social movements and campaigns. In fact, only 25% manifested that they frequently shared content linked to simple lifestyles and those geared towards degrowth, and just 18% affirmed that they actively participated in awareness-raising campaigns or social movements that promote this model as a pathway towards tackling the climate crisis. These data suggest that, although incipient advances exist in the adopting of individual practices consistent with the principles of degrowth, it is still necessary to strengthen both understanding of them and the collective commitment to advancing in the implementation of degrowth as a strategy to address climate change.

A high percentage of people surveyed in the study (70%) manifested that they perceive the effects of climate change, especially through the increase in extreme weather phenomena such as droughts, heatwaves, and torrential rainfall. The study identified an eco-anxiety pattern that increased in a sustained way between the ages of 25 and 45 years, with higher average levels of eco-anxiety existing among women and people with a higher education level. Furthermore, over half of the people participating (58%) recognised that the development model currently in force is aggravating the impacts of climate change and 65% manifested the need to transit towards other models that respect the Earth’s biophysical limits. However, the study also highlighted that 77% of the people participating were not very familiar with the concept of degrowth, and over 40% manifested spontaneous negative feelings with regard to the term. This suggests that a certain lack of knowledge and confusion exists regarding this model of alternative development. Despite this, the study revealed that nearly half of all the people participating (47%) adopted practices consistent with the principles of degrowth geared towards reducing their carbon footprint, although the majority did not associate them explicitly with this model. Despite certain advances in individual practices, the study revealed a low level of involvement in collective practices linked to degrowth. In fact, only 25% of the people surveyed manifested that they frequently shared contents linked to simple lifestyles geared towards degrowth, and barely 18% affirmed that they participate actively in awareness-raising campaigns or social movements that promote this focus on tackling climate change. 

The research conducted suggests that, to advance in the implementation of the principles of degrowth, it would be fundamental to develop information campaigns that explain the concept clearly and positively, associating it with specific benefits such as the conservation of nature, social justice and human well-being, to contrast negative perceptions and connect with practices already present among the population. Furthermore, it is recommended that public policies be promoted that recognise and support individual practices geared towards degrowth through incentives, socioenvironmental education and spaces for citizen participation that facilitate joint action to address climate change.

The study carried out presents several limitations that must be considered when interpreting the results. Firstly, although the survey included a brief explanation of the concept of degrowth, a broad majority of people surveyed were not familiar with this concept, which could have conditioned their responses and generated poorly informed perceptions or perceptions based on preconceived ideas. Given the complex and multi-dimensional nature of degrowth, it would be recommendable, in the future, to complement the study with qualitative methodologies – such as in-depth interviews or focus groups – that permit exploration in greater detail of the nuances, ambivalences and possible cultural barriers associated with this concept. It is also worth highlighting that the cross-sectional design of this study offers a view at a particular point in time, without permitting observation of how perceptions and practices evolve over the course of time. In this sense, it is recommended that, in the future, longitudinal research be conducted that examines the evolution of attitudes towards degrowth at different times. Finally, given that the study data were based exclusively on self-affirmations, it is possible that some results were influenced by biases of social desirability, especially with regard to pro-environmental behaviours. Triangulation with other methods that did not fit into this study, such as direct observation or measurements of real behaviours, could help to validate and enrich the findings obtained.

ANČIĆ, B., & DOMAZET, M. (2015). «Potential for degrowth: Attitudes and behaviours across 18 European countries», Teorija in Praksa, 52(3).

CENTRO DE INVESTIGACIONES SOCIOLÓGICAS (2025). Barómetro de febrero 2025: avance de resultados. Madrid: CIS.

DREWS, S., & REESE, G. (2018). «“Degrowth” vs. other types of growth: Labeling affects emotions but not attitudes», Environmental Communication, 12(6).

DREWS, S., & VAN DEN BERGH, J. (2016). «Public views on economic growth, the environment and prosperity: Results of a questionnaire survey», Global Environmental Change, 39, 2016.

HICKEL, J. (2021). Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World. Londres: Windmill Books.

LÓPEZ-RODRÍGUEZ, M. D., LOZANO-DÍAZ, A., RODRÍGUEZ-PUERTAS, R., & FERNÁNDEZ-PRADOS, J. S. (2025). «Generational Climate Engagement in Liquid Modernity: Eco-Anxiety, Environmental Activism and Pro-Environmental Behavior Among Older Adults in Spain», Societies, 15(10). 

MINISTERIO PARA LA TRANSICIÓN ECOLÓGICA Y EL RETO DEMOGRÁFICO (2021). Percepción social del cambio climático en España. Madrid: MITECO.