REPORT SOCIOECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA Attitudes, Interests, and Concerns of Different Social Groups Romanian citizens consider climate change a very important societal issue, placing it significantly above the average level of concern in 19 other European and North American countries. However, environmental protection still ranks behind other societal priorities such as health, education, pensions, and jobs. Among the actors capable of pro tecting the environment, Romanians place the greatest responsibility on the government. Surprisingly, the private sector, despite its significant environmental impact due to largescale resource exploitation, ranks only in third place—just behind individual citizens, a group with a much smaller environmental footprint. Roxana Bucată May 2024 Most people desire changes in both individual behavior and the socio-eco nomic system, though they have reservations about the potential costs. While citizens are open to participating in these changes, they do so with certain conditions.

SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA Attitudes, Interests, and Concerns of Different Social Groups

Table of contents INTRODUCTION 2 METHODOLOGY 3 Research results 1. AWARENESS OF THE PROBLEM 5 1.1 The importance of environmental, nature and climate protection.................. 5 1.2 Relevance of Environmental Policies by Topic................................................. 6 1.3 Relevance of Climate Change......................................................................... 6 1.4 Attitudes Towards Climate Change................................................................ 7 1.5 Consequences of Climate Change – The Anxiety Scale.................................. 7 2 CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTALLYCONSCIOUS BEHAVIOR 8 2.1 Attitudes Towards Climate- and Environmentally-Conscious Behaviours........ 8 2.2 Barriers to Environmentally-Conscious Behavior............................................. 9 2.3 Motivations for Climate- and Environmentally-Conscious Behaviors.............. 10 3. CHANGING LIFESTYLES AND BUSINESS MODELS 11 3.1 Assessing the Need for Change..................................................................... 11 3.2 Taking Responsibilities: Who Does Too Little?................................................. 12 3.3 Taking Responsibilities: Which Actors Can Contribute More To Crisis Management?........................................................................ 12 3.4 Attitudes Towards Environmental Policies....................................................... 13 3.5 Evaluation of Environmental, Nature, and Climate Protection Measures........ 13 3.6 Attitudes Towards the Energy Transition........................................................ 14 4. INTEREST IN INFORMATION AND LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE 16 4.1 Interest in Information and Level of Knowledge: Climate............................... 16 4.2 Interest in Information and Level of Knowledge: Policies................................ 17 5 CONCLUSIONS 18 1

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA INTRODUCTION The entire planet is currently undergoing a socio-ecological transition. The enormous challenges posed by climate change, natural disasters, energy crises, and the deepening of social inequalities are signs of a dysfunctional system in need of change. There is a fragile consensus on the need for a transition to halt global warming, which, however, involves a complex series of economic, political, social, and cultural transformations. Citizens are at the core of this transition, bearing the costs but not always benefiting from these changes. How can we ensure a responsible and fair ecologi cal transition for all? Understanding people’s perceptions and attitudes is a first step. Between May and July 2023, the SINUS Institute conducted a comprehensive survey in 19 countries across Europe and North America, commissioned by the Competence Center for Climate and Social Justice of the Friedrich-EbertStiftung(FES). Romania was one of the countries where the survey took place. This report presents the results of the survey conducted in Romania and contextualizes them within the Romanian political, economic, and social space for a bet ter understanding of their implications. Romania is a member state of the European Union, with a se ries of obligations and rights regarding the ecological transi tion. In addition to obligations such as reducing carbon diox ide emissions, limiting the use of fossil fuels, and protecting natural areas, for example, Romania also benefits from funds like those for a just energy transition in affected regions. Traditionally one of the EU countries dependent on coal, Romania currently has a diversified energy mix but also faces numerous social problems following the closure of polluting industries. Romania faces particular dificulties in implement ing environmental measures and using funds for ecological purposes, due to the influence of the private sector and a lack of government focus on environmental protection. Currently, Romania is facing severe environmental problems such as air pollution, the reduction of green spaces, intensive agriculture, the degradation of natural areas, water pollution, and others. education, and income categories that are positioned for or against measures aimed at ensuring a clean environment, protecting nature, and combating climate change. The re sults offer a broad perspective on the impact of environmen tal measures taken so far on people and how these measures shape their expectations. The data reveal significant concerns among Romanians re garding the socio-ecological transition. Although there is widespread support for environmental protection measures, citizens want these measures to be socially fair and only ap plied after alternatives are created. Regarding the energy transition in affected regions, respondents want jobs to be preserved for as long as possible and financial support for those affected. In addition, the widespread support for a fundamental shift in the system toward environmental protection comes with the condition that it should not make people’s lives harder. Understanding citizens’ perceptions and attitudes is fundamental to developing governmental as well as non-governmental and private strategies and projects. With this report, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung aims to contribute to the devel opment of environmental protection initiatives by stimulat ing public discussions on environmental issues and fostering a better understanding of the conditions under which so cio-ecological transformation can take place. This report presents the perceptions, interests, and fears that Romanians associate with socio-ecological transformation, providing details about the social groups more open or more reluctant to the transformation of the social and economic system in which they live. It also examines the age, gender, 2

METHODOLOGY The survey underpinning this report was conducted on a sample of 1,200 people aged between 18 and 69 years old, based on questionnaires administered online at a na tional level in Romanian. The data was collected across several demographic categories: - Male and female(the„non-binary” catego ry was present in the questionnaire but not evaluated due to the very small number of responses). The re spondents’ distribution was 50-50. - groups: 18-29(18% of respondents), 30-39 (20%), 40-49(23%), 50-59(20%), 60-69 years (19%). - - level(20% of respondents) –“no formal education or vocational training,”“primary school,”“completed 8-year middle school.” - level(64%) –“high school(10-12 years),”“vocational school,”“trade school,” “master craftsmen school,”“technical college.” - level(16%) –“bachelor’s degree,”“comple tion of higher education(short duration),”“high er studies in faculties, academies, universities.” - groups: - level – below 60% of the median income; - level – between 60% and 140% of the median income; - level – above 140% of the median income. - respondents’ incomes were distributed as follows: - 2,500 RON(14%), - 2,500 and 5,000 RON(33%), - 5,000 and 7,500 RON(25%), - 7,500 and 10,000 RON(11%), - 10,000 and 12,500 RON(4%), - 12,500 RON(7%), -(6%) . Additionally, the survey evaluated Romanians’ perceptions 3

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA from the perspective of the social groups to which they belong. To make this assessment, the Sinus-Meta-Milieus model, a patented model of the SINUS Institute, was used. This model identifies ten social groups. The idea behind this model is that people from different countries often share more affinities with people from other countries than with their compatriots, based on common lifestyle char acteristics. The social groups identified and used in this report are: - Established elite: The conservative elite, driven by status, high self-confidence, a traditional ethic linked to responsibility and performance, a claim to exclusiv ity and status, acceptance of the social order. - Intellectuals: The academic elite with post-materi alist beliefs, a high affinity for pleasure, sensuality, art, and culture, critical of globalization, advocating for justice and the welfare of the population, taking responsibility for themselves and others, an affinity for education and quality of life. - Performers: The modern elite oriented toward effi ciency and progress, liberal and economic thinking, a global vision, a penchant for consumption, mod ern design, interest in technology and digitalization, competitive and career-oriented, engaged in networking, and open to change. - Cosmopolitan avant-garde: Ambitious and indi vidualistic avant-garde, cosmopolitan urbanites, mo bile and flexible, digital nomads, avant-garde in life style, easily expressive, postmodern anti-mainstream lifestyle elite, a desire to stand out, joie de vivre, ambitious and success-oriented. - Progressive realists: The engine of social transformation, a sustainable lifestyle without renunciation, progressive optimists, manage contradictions easily, have fun and protest, are both serious and fun-loving. - Adaptive navigators: Modern mainstream, prag matic, flexible, young middle-class individuals, high adaptability and performance readiness, a modern lifestyle, a digitalization affinity, reliable and loyal, open to trying new but tested things. - Hedonists: Lower middle-class segment, materialist and fun-oriented, living in the present, consumerist and carefree, risk-taking with an anti-bourgeois yet materialistic lifestyle, rejection of political correctness and conventions, seeking fun, action, stimulation. - Conventional mainstream: Older middle class, seeking harmony and safe situations, fear of losing what they’ve gained, seeking community cohesion, social life, support from neighbors, distrust of elites, a feeling of being left out, grounded. - Traditionalists: Older generations, seeking order, small bourgeois culture, the traditional culture of the working class, a desire for social security, harmony, consistency, voluntary disconnection from modern lifestyle and digital culture, a desire for a simple, safe life. - Consumer-materialists: The lower social class, seeking validation, adapting to necessities, desiring a middle-class level of consumption, strong community cohesion, fear of being excluded due to the speed of changes. 4

RESEARCH RESULTS 1. AWARENESS OF THE PROBLEM 1.1 THE IMPORTANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL, NATURE AND CLIMATE PROTECTION Environmental, nature, and climate protection do not constitute a priority for Romanians, ranking eighth among the most urgent societal issues that politicians should address, with only 26% identifying it as a priority. Most Romanians (59%) listed health as their top concern, followed by edu cation(53%). In comparison, data from the 19 countries analyzed also placed health as the top priority(56%), while environmental issues ranked fourth(34%). The countries where environmental problems are among the top five prior ities are Canada, Denmark, France, Italy, Germany, the U.S., and Serbia. The results suggest that there is generally greater environmental awareness in wealthier Western countries, compared to poorer countries like Romania, where other issues, such as access to healthcare and education, and the absence of well-paying jobs, remain constant concerns, along with the fragility of the state pension system and uncertainty surrounding it. The data also show that environmental awareness is not equally distributed among various social groups and demo graphic categories. The social category that ranked environmental issues as a priority above average(39%) was the „intellectuals,” while at the opposite end, only 18% of the „adaptive navigators” considered it a priority. Surprisingly, only 21% of people aged 30 to 39 consider envi ronmental issues to be a political priority, the lowest percent age among all age groups. The highest interest was among young people aged 18 to 29(35%), possibly explained by their earlier exposure to debates and discussions on environ mental issues. The data confirm a significant level of environmental aware ness among Romanian citizens, but environmental problems are perceived as less important compared to health, education, pensions, or jobs. This suggests that the fundamental connections between environmental protection on one hand and public health, education, and general social well-being on the other are not well understood or are misperceived in the public space. Concerns that environmental solutions may 5

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA entail financial and social costs, as will be seen in the analysis of the following questions, may explain why environmental and climate issues have relatively low priority. 1.2 RELEVANCE OF ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES BY TOPIC The top three most relevant environmental topics named by Romanian respondents are the following: As for education, respondents with a low level of education were significantly underrepresented across several topics, in cluding forests, air, water, waste, and climate change, while those with a higher level of education were most concerned with„climate change.” Regarding income levels, there was an over-representation of respondents with low incomes, showing more concern for issues like„green space developments” and„increased consumption of energy and raw materials,” while„the condition of forests” was not a priority for them. • The condition of forests(62%) • Air quality and pollution(56%) • Water quality and pollution(54%) The high relevance given to forest conditions is not surprising. The intensification of media investigations and activist cam paigns against illegal logging over the last decade has made this issue a daily presence in Romanian households. Romania is the only country among the 19 in which the„condition of forests” is ranked as the most relevant issue. Similarly, the importance placed on air pollution is significant, considering the visibility of activist campaigns highlighting the severity of the phenomenon. Romania ranks above the average of the countries surveyed on this issue(56% compared to a 49% average). The least important issue, in the eyes of the respondents, is traffic and traffic-related noise(16%). This is surprising given the significant deterioration of traffic conditions in Romania’s major cities and its contribution to air quality degradation. One explanation could be the growing number of car own ers and a public discourse favoring personal cars as a mode of transport. As seen in Chapter 3 of this report, Romanian respondents also indicate that the lack of infrastructure is a barrier to giving up cars. The relevance of these issues varies according to social environment, gender, age, education, and income. Regarding social groups, those who identified„the condition of for ests” as the most relevant environmental topic include an over-representation of„consumer-materialists”(73%). At the opposite end, only 43% of„adaptive navigators” found it important. The„adaptive navigators,” representing young middle-class individuals, were underrepresented across most environmental topics, including forests, air, water, waste, climate change, industrial agriculture, and green space developments. They gave the lowest priority to these issues. In terms of gender, there are no significant differences be tween men and women, except in the case of„air quali ty and pollution,” where men are underrepresented, and women are overrepresented. Regarding age, the 30-39 age group stands out with significant underrepresentation across several topics, such as forests, air, water, waste, and climate change, aligning with their overall lower prioritization of environmental protection.„The condition of forests” is most important to those aged 60-69(77%) and least important to those aged 18-29(50%), while the younger group is over represented in concerns about traffic-related issues. 1.3 RELEVANCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE On a scale from 0 to 10, Romanians rated the importance of climate change at 8.1. Climate change, which leads to environmental transformations and affects people’s daily lives (e.g., energy prices), is considered very important(between 8 and 10 on the scale) by 74% of Romanians and irrelevant (between 0 and 2) by only 5%. These responses indicate an encouraging increase in awareness of climate change among Romanians. Romania ranks among the countries with the highest levels of awareness about climate change, surpass ing the average score of 7.6 across the 19 countries surveyed. Social group analysis shows that those who rated climate change with the highest importance(10) in the highest percentage(58%) compared to an average of 37% belong to the„hedonists” category, characterized by a hedonistic ma terialism shared by individuals from the lower-middle class who reject political correctness. At the opposite end,„tradi tionalists”—an older generation that prefers order and social security—were underrepresented among those who gave climate change a 10 and recorded the lowest average score of 7.6 among all categories, compared to the general average of 8.1, showing less interest in the subject. As for gender, there are no significant differences between men and women, although women tended to select higher values on the scale. Age-wise, people aged 30-39 are overrepresented among those who rated climate change with a 10, while those aged 60-69 were overrepresented among respondents who considered climate change irrelevant(6% compared to the average of 3% who rated it 0). In terms of education, it is surprising that those with a higher education level were significantly underrepresented among those who rated climate change with a 10(26% compared to the average of 37%). They also recorded the lowest average score—7.7 compared to the general average of 8.1. While it would be expected that more educated individuals would be more aware of climate change and consider it more im portant, the data shows the opposite: a smaller percentage gave it the highest rating, and their average score is below the general population’s. As for income levels, respondents with low incomes were overrepresented among those who gave climate change a 10, and their average score was the highest—8.9 compared to the general average of 8.1. This suggests that individuals with low incomes consider climate change more important and are more aware of its impact than the general population. 6

Why do people with lower incomes rate climate change as more relevant than other social groups, while those with higher education levels think the opposite? This result would merit further investigation. 1.4 ATTITUDES TOWARDS CLIMATE CHANGE A significant 93% of respondents believe that the destruc tion of nature threatens people and livelihoods, and 78% fear the consequences of climate change. However, there is also a great deal of skepticism among Romanians: 47% think that many things are exaggerated when it comes to the consequences of climate change, making Romania the country with the highest level of skepticism recorded among all 19 countries surveyed. When asked if there are more important problems than climate change in Romania, 61% said yes, and 39% said no. Of these, 28% were“completely in agreement” that there are more important issues, again the highest value recorded among all 19 countries. Regarding the focus on adapting to climate change versus reducing its effects, the results show a polarization: 55% agree that ad aptation is preferable, while 45% disagree. The“progressive realists”—those who lead social change and promote a sustainable lifestyle—are the group that ful ly believes(100%) that the destruction of nature endangers people. On the other hand,“traditionalists” are the least worried(65% compared to the 78% average) about the con sequences of climate change. When it comes to gender, men are more skeptical than women, more often declaring that concerns about climate change are exaggerated. Regarding age, the 30-39 age group is the most convinced that there are more important problems than climate change, that adaptation is preferable to mitigation, and that concerns about climate change are exaggerated. In terms of education, those with lower education levels stand out for expressing greater fear of climate change (86% versus the 78% average) but also for believing that the impact of climate change is exaggerated(69% versus the 47% average) and that there are more important issues than climate change(77% versus the 61% average). Those with higher education levels are less likely to agree that climate change is exaggerated(36% versus the 47% average). The level of awareness about climate change has increased significantly in recent years. A few years ago, environmental communicators faced significant challenges in explaining this global phenomenon with historically-scaled effects, despite its visible impacts worldwide. In Romania, articles about the country’s climate-related effects, as well as conferences and projects on the subject, have contributed to raising aware ness. Nonetheless, there remains a high level of skepticism, likely due to the influence of anti-environmentalist narratives in public discourse and the reluctance to accept certain infor mation, which is often politically charged. 1.5 CONSEQUENCES OF CLIMATE CHANGE – THE ANXIETY SCALE The primary concerns related to the consequences of climate change among Romanian citizens are: the intensification of extreme weather events(62%), forest fires and forest degra dation(46%), and the lack of water in daily life(42%). The least concerning phenomenon, according to Romanians, is migration caused by climate change(9%). In terms of social groups, there is a significant overrep resentation of„intellectuals” among those who are con cerned about the intensification of extreme weather events (77% compared to the 62% average). At the opposite end, „adaptive navigators” are the least worried, with only 38% of them expressing concern compared to the general 62% average. When it comes to gender, women are more worried than men about water shortages and the acceleration of human itarian crises. As for age, young people aged 18-29, as well as those aged 30-39, are significantly less worried about extreme weather events(47% and 46%, respectively, com pared to the 62% average) than people aged 50-59(73%) and 60-69(77%). Another interesting difference is that young people are less concerned about„economic losses” (22% versus the 33% average) than older people(40% com pared to the 33% average). Regarding education, individuals with lower education levels express very little concern about extreme weather events, forest fires, water crises, the reduction of quality of life, the acceleration of humanitarian crises, economic losses, or military conflicts over natural resources. Conversely, those with medium or higher levels of education are more concerned about the intensification of extreme weather events(67% and 72%, respectively, compared to the 62% average). There is little difference between people with low and high incomes regarding their perception of climate change consequences, though those with higher incomes are more worried about extreme weather events. The growing presence of extreme weather events in Romania—heatwaves, tornadoes, droughts—has become increas ingly acknowledged through media reports. Until recently, these phenomena were associated with distant geographic events, such as sinking islands in the Pacific or hurricanes in Southeast Asia. Now, these issues are perceived as closer to home, as indicated by this survey. However, climate migration is still perceived as a less pressing concern in Romania, given the small percentage of respondents who mentioned it. 7

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA 2 CLIMATE AND ENVIRONMENTALLYCONSCIOUS BEHAVIOR While the previous chapter assesses the level of awareness, the second chapter goes deeper and covers the attitudes, barriers and motivations related to climate- and environmen tally aware behaviours. The environment-related behaviour is a controversial topic in Romania, since it is directly related to the environmental responsibility(Chapter 3). Over the past few years, we have seen various environmental campaigns focusing on the individual behaviour of citizens taken as a whole, without distinguishing between social categories and especially without admitting that most of the responsibilities for environmental problems do not fall to the ordinary cit izens. Citizens understood this message in different ways, according to their social group, as illustrated by their answers to the questions below. The underlying survey upon which this report is drawn enables us to distinguish among these differences and find those nuances that make the discourses on Romanians’ behaviour and environmental responsibility stand against each other. 2.1 ATTITUDES TOWARDS CLIMATE- AND ENVIRONMENTALLYCONSCIOUS BEHAVIOURS 88% of Romanians believe that everyone should take action and start changing their lifestyles to maintain the environment for current and future generations. Additionally, 83% of respondents are willing to do more for environmental protection if the associated costs are distributed equitably. Moreover, 64% of respondents say they already take meas ures to contribute to societal change. From the perspective of social groups, unsurprisingly, traditionalists are the least likely to agree with these three statements: 76% agree that everyone should do something for the environment(compared to an 88% average); only 69% are willing to do more if the costs are shared(versus an 83% average); and only 39% impose personal measures to protect the environment(compared to a 64% average). At the other end of the spectrum, hedonists are more likely to agree: 96% believe everyone should act, 93% are willing to do more, and 86% impose personal measures. In terms of gender and age, there are no significant differences between men and women. However, younger individuals aged 18-29(76%) and 30-39(79%) are more likely to impose envi ronmental measures compared to the 60-69 age group(47%). Regarding education and income, respondents with lower education levels are overrepresented(80%) among those who impose personal environmental measures compared to the 64% average. Respondents with higher incomes im pose personal measures at a slightly higher rate than the average(69%). 8

2.2 BARRIERS TO ENVIRONMENTALLYCONSCIOUS BEHAVIOR education levels are more likely to agree that jobs are more important than environmental measures. Romanians are willing to transition from attitudes to be havior change if their efforts are supported by others, do not affect their standard of living, or if environmental protection measures come with no financial costs. This reflects a reasonable expectation that socio-ecological transforma tion should not disproportionately burden citizens, as well as some irritation when they are told by authorities that environmental measures must be implemented. 87% of respondents believe that lifestyle changes are nec essary to protect the environment, but 79% would only do so if their standard of living is not affected. Social group differences include intellectuals, who agree with the necessity of change at slightly above average rates, but agree less that it should be at no personal cost. Respondents aged 30-39 are significantly more likely to say they would only act if their living standards are maintained, while those aged 60-69 are less likely to agree that everyone should act for the environment. 80% of respondents are willing to do more for the envi ronment if others do the same. However, 43% believe that others should take the first step, and 39% feel their indi vidual actions would not make a significant impact. Among social groups, the established elite more often agrees that others should take the first step, while traditionalists disa gree. Adaptive navigators are the most skeptical about the impact of individual behavior on the environment. More men than women, and people aged 30-39, are likely to agree with these sentiments. 66% of respondents associate environmental changes with high personal costs, and 67% say they lack the fi nancial means to contribute. This percentage is the highest among all 19 surveyed countries. Additionally, 57% believe that environmental measures disproportionately burden low-income groups. Adaptive navigators are more likely to associate environmental measures with personal costs, while intellectuals are significantly less likely to say they lack financial means. 61% of respondents express irritation at being told how to live, and 52% believe they will soon be unable to do anything due to environmental regulations. Hedonists are the least willing to be directed in their behavior, while in tellectuals are the most accepting of guidance. Respondents aged 30-39 and those with lower education levels are more irritated by being told how to live and believe that future regulations will limit their actions. 57% of respondents worry that large energy consumers cannot implement stricter regulations, and 56% believe climate change measures harm businesses. Additionally, 46% prioritize job preservation over environmental pro tection. Adaptive navigators and hedonists are more likely to agree, while intellectuals and traditionalists are less concerned. Respondents aged 30-39 and those with lower 55% of respondents believe that the private sector knows best how to implement the necessary changes for environ mental protection, while 38% think that science and tech nology will solve environmental problems without requiring people to change their lifestyles. Adaptive navigators and hedonists have the most confidence in companies knowing how to implement these changes, while intellectuals, performers, conventionalists, and traditionalists agree with this statement to a somewhat lesser extent. These social groups tend to hold similar opinions regarding the capacity of science and technology to save us from the effects of climate change. People aged 30-39 express more confidence that companies know best how to protect the environment and that science and technology will provide solutions. Those over 50 are underrepresented in their trust in science and technology. Men are also more likely than women to express confidence in science and technology. Individuals with low er education levels are more likely to agree with both state ments, as are those with lower income levels, while people with higher education levels tend to be positioned at the opposite end. Almost one in three respondents find it difficult to organ ize their lives to protect the environment, and 67% say it is impossible to give up their cars due to poor infrastructure. About one-third believe they cannot change their lives for something that might happen in the future. Once again, adaptive navigators and hedonists are significantly more like ly to say they cannot change their lives to protect the environment and see no reason to do so for something that might happen in the future, while intellectuals and traditionalists are at the opposite end. Progressive realists are slightly more likely to say,„Poor infrastructure prevents me from giving up my car,” while traditionalists state that it is not that hard to give up a car. Similarly, men are more likely than women to say they cannot give up their cars, and among age groups, those aged 30-39 support this statement much more strongly. These same categories—men and those aged 30-39—also claim that it is difficult to shift their lives toward sustainability and that they see no reason to change their lives for something that might happen in the future. People aged 50-59 are more likely to believe that it makes sense to change their lives because of climate change, while those aged 60-69 believe it is not so difficult to live in an environ mentally responsible way. 2.3 MOTIVATIONS FOR CLIMATEAND ENVIRONMENTALLYCONSCIOUS BEHAVIORS Even when people have positive attitudes toward socio-ecological transformation and are willing to change their behav iors to protect the environment, they still need motivation. The SINUS survey indicates that this motivation largely stems from the belief that environmental protection can improve quality of life, that a healthy environment equates to a 9

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA healthy life, and that spending time in nature brings signif icant benefits. Environmental protection is also perceived as a civic duty, which partially explains why respondents assign such a high level of responsibility to individual citizens. This may be a message coming from both private sector and pub lic institutions. 91% of respondents believe that spending time outdoors improves their quality of life. Furthermore, 81% say they feel strongly connected to nature. While most social groups align with the average in terms of improving their quality of life outdoors, adaptive navigators stand out with a significantly lower percentage. Regarding connection with nature, the established elite and progressive realists express higher levels of connection, while traditionalists and consumer-materialists feel less connected. Young people aged 18-29 are less likely to believe that spending time outdoors improves their quality of life. Respondents with lower incomes also feel less strongly connected to nature compared to the general population. sustainability, while traditionalists are less convinced. More progressive realists and intellectuals believe that sustainable practices improve competitiveness. Progressive realists and hedonists also tend to believe that sustainability fosters job creation, while traditionalists and consumer-materialists are less likely to agree. Respondents aged 30-39 are more likely than other groups to believe that sustainability creates jobs. 91% of respondents also agree that every individual is re sponsible for leaving a liveable environment for future gen erations, while 90% believe environmental protection is a matter of decency and civic duty. Additionally, 89% believe environmental protection improves both quality of life and health for all. 72% feel personally responsible for protect ing nature and the environment. It is noteworthy that 100% of progressive realists responded that“every individual is responsible for leaving a liveable environment for future generations.” Adaptive navigators scored below average in associating environmental protection with civic duty and better life quality, while the established elite, intellectuals, and progressive realists linked environmental protection to life quality at slightly higher rates. These groups also feel a stronger-than-average sense of responsibility for nature and environmental conservation. Young respondents aged 1829, however, agree significantly less with the statement that „each individual is responsible for leaving a livable environ ment for future generations.” 85% of respondents believe that industrialized countries bear greater responsibility for environmental protection since they have contributed more to climate change. Additional ly, 81% say they feel better when buying products with a low environmental impact. There are no significant social group differences on the question of industrialized countries’ responsibility, though hedonists and progressive realists are more likely to feel good about buying environmentally friend ly products, while traditionalists show slightly lower agreement. Men are slightly more likely than women to agree that industrialized countries are responsible for climate change. 80% of respondents believe that companies need to do more to protect the environment, otherwise they risk economic losses. 85% believe that consistent environmental protection policies will enhance companies’ competitiveness, and 70% believe that the transition to green products and production processes will create new job opportunities. Hedonists and progressive realists are more likely to believe that companies could suffer losses if they do not embrace 10

3 CHANGING LIFESTYLES AND BUSINESS MODELS There is near-universal consensus(93%) among Romani ans surveyed that change is necessary. However, responses regarding the details of this change—how it should be implemented, who should bear the costs, and other fac tors—reveal several nuances. Although the environmental crisis is largely driven by the unsustainable exploitation of resources by private companies, the private sector is not seen as the primary actor responsible for managing the crisis. Instead, the government is held responsible, reflect ing a neoliberal public discourse that portrays the state as inefficient. Romanians believe that both companies and citizens must do more for the environment(75% and 73%, respectively), though the responsibility attributed to these actors is disproportionate to their impact. Notably, young respondents aged 18-29 believe that all actors are already overburdened, which may reflect the low politi cal involvement of Romanian youth and limited participation in environmental movements like Fridays for Future, which have seen much higher youth participation in other countries. Low-income respondents are particularly noteworthy for their responses, which reflect internalized neoliberal narratives. They are the least likely to support public trans portation subsidies, financial support for employees affect ed by the energy transition, and assistance to communities impacted by the closure of industrial facilities. 3.1 ASSESSING THE NEED FOR CHANGE When asked if there is a need for a fundamental change in the way we live and do business in Romania, 93% of respondents answered“yes, definitely”(56%) or“rather yes”(37%). In contrast, 5% believe that there is rather no need for such a radical change. While it is clear that the vast majority of Romanians desire a fundamental change, there are variations between different social groups: among the 93% who answered „yes” or„rather yes,” the“consumerist materialists” are the least in agreement with the statement, with only 85%. Among those who said“yes, definitely,” the“hedonists” and“progressive realists” are more categorical, with 68% and 72%, respectively, compared to the average of 56%. The“adaptive navigators” are at the opposite end. 11

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA People aged 30-39 are more convinced than others that there is a need for fundamental change, with 97% agree ing, compared to the average of 93%, while those over 60 are at the lower end. Among those who say„yes, definite ly,” young people between 18-29 years old are the most determined, with 68% compared to the average of 56%. Those over 60 are again at the opposite end. From an income perspective, among those who give a categorical„yes” to the need for radical change, those with low incomes are the most convinced, with 78% compared to the average of 56%. Regarding education, those with a high level of educa tion are slightly below the average in giving a strong“yes” to the need for change. least not doing too little. Another variation is observed in the age group over 50 and 60, where representatives of this category consider that politicians are doing too little at a rate above average. From the perspective of education level, a slightly above-av erage percentage of individuals with a low level of education believe that companies are already doing too much, but the EU is doing too little. From the same category, a significantly above-average percentage thinks that the government, po litical parties, and unions are not doing enough. In terms of income, those with low incomes are the only ones who be lieve that non-governmental organizations and the scientific community are not doing enough. 3.2 TAKING RESPONSIBILITIES: WHO DOES TOO LITTLE? Most respondents believe that politicians and the govern ment bear the greatest responsibility for combating climate change, with 82% stating that they are doing too little. Ad ditionally, 76% feel that local administrations are doing too little, 75% expect more accountability from companies and unions, and 73% believe that citizens should do more. Fur thermore, 57% of respondents think that the European Un ion should also do more. Non-governmental organizations and the scientific community were mentioned by 52% and 49% of respondents, respectively. Romania stands out among the other countries in the survey by assigning significantly greater responsibility to the govern ment than to the private sector(82% versus 75%) compared to the average across the 19 countries included in the survey: 71% versus 70%. It is important to note that the percentages of those who said the listed actors are doing too much to combat climate change are extremely low, indicating a general expectation for all public actors to contribute to environmental protection. 3.3 TAKING RESPONSIBILITIES: WHICH ACTORS CAN CONTRIBUTE MORE TO CRISIS MANAGEMENT? When it comes to managing the ecological crisis, the government is by far the most frequently mentioned actor by re spondents, at 53%, followed by the European Union(38%), local communities(35%), the scientific community(32%), local administrations(30%), companies(20%), NGOs(19%), political parties(8%), and unions(5%). Adaptive navigators stand out with significantly lower per centages than the average, indicating much lower expectations of the government, citizens, local administrations, and NGOs, and lower expectations from the EU and companies compared to other social groups. The only actor from whom adaptive navigators expect more is unions. Other social groups have, in some cases, only slightly higher expectations from certain categories: intellectuals expect more from the EU, companies, and NGOs; traditionalists expect more from local administrations; consumer-materialists expect more from the scientific community; and progressive realists ex pect more from NGOs. Most Romanian respondents indicated the government as an actor that does too little. The„established elite” and„intel lectuals” believe this at a slightly above-average rate, while „adaptive navigators” are not as convinced(66% compared to the average of 82%).„Intellectuals” and„adaptive navi gators” align similarly regarding politicians. Local administra tion ranks second among actors perceived as doing too little for the environment, and„adaptive navigators” again stand out with a significantly lower percentage, while„intellectu als” believe slightly more than the average in this response. „Adaptive navigators” are also positioned below average concerning the responsibility of the private sector, while„in tellectuals” and the„established elite” slightly above average believe that companies are not doing enough. From a gender perspective, there are no significant variations between women and men regarding any of the actors listed in the survey. However, in terms of age, young people aged 18-29 stand out for their belief that all actors in the survey are already doing too much for the environment or are at By age category, young people generally expect less from the government and companies, while older individuals expect more from these two categories of actors. Specifical ly, those aged 18-29 expect less from companies and local administrations but more from politicians and the EU, while those over 50 expect significantly more from companies, and those over 60 expect much more from the government and companies. The polarization between young and older indi viduals is more evident here than on any other subject. There is also partial polarization between individuals with lower education levels and those with higher levels: those with lower education expect much less from the majority of actors listed in the survey: government, EU, citizens, local administrations, companies, and NGOs. Those with higher education have significantly higher expectations of the gov ernment and local administrations and slightly lower expectations of unions and politicians. In terms of income, there are no significant variations, with one exception: those with low incomes have much lower expectations of the government. 12

3.4 ATTITUDES TOWARDS ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES 91% of respondents believe that politicians need to do more to ensure that the social and economic system is fair. 88% agree with financial support for low-income individuals to cover increased costs related to electricity, heating, and transportation due to environmental policies. At the same time, 66% of Romanians do not feel comfortable with the idea of a fundamental change in living and economic conditions, as they believe that many people will struggle more than before. 77% of respondents agree that low-income communities, indigenous groups, or ethnic minorities should not suffer more than other groups due to environmental pollution. 90% of Romanians support subsidies to help businesses tran sition to environmentally protective production and products. 83% believe that clear regulations from the state are needed for companies, and 79% say that politicians should exert much more pressure on the private sector to adopt sustainable production methods. Additionally, 65% believe that politicians are too influenced by industry and companies, while 87% think that strict and consistent laws are needed to protect the environment for ourselves and future generations. However, 74% believe that there are already regula tions in place that could bring about a fundamental change in society, and if implemented, we would be on the right track toward environmental protection. 87% of respondents support a faster transition to renewable energy sources. compared to the average of 91%, believe that politi cians need to restructure the system, 76%, compared to the average of 86%, think that stricter laws are need ed, and 73%, compared to the average of 79%, believe that companies need regulations to become climate neutral. In contrast, the same respondents respond above average that we already have the necessary reg ulations to protect the environment, that the EU does not take Romania’s specificities into account, and that the idea of structural changes is concerning because many people would struggle more as a result. This reluctance toward change can be interpreted as a fear of the financial costs that these transformations entail. - terms of age, young people aged 18-29 are much less likely to agree that we need strict and consistent laws to protect the environment for ourselves and future generations. Those in the 30-39 age group are more worried than the average respondent about a structural change that would make people struggle afterward, but they respond above average affirma tively to the statement,„Structural change should be implemented even if jobs are lost.” Those aged 50-59 are annoyed that the EU does not take Romania’s specificities into account and are less likely to agree with a structural change that would endanger jobs. Individ uals over 60 also believe that jobs put at risk by the transition should be maintained for as long as possible if there are currently no alternatives. 3.5 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL, NATURE, AND CLIMATE PROTECTION MEASURES 68% agree with the statement,„It annoys me that environ mental policies are controlled by the EU, because that means that Romania’s specificities are not adequately considered.” 54% believe that measures should be implemented to cre ate structural changes, even if this means losing some jobs. However, 72% of respondents say that jobs affected by structural changes should be maintained for as long as possi ble, provided that no alternatives are created. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE: - respondents largely agree that a fair restructuring of the social and economic system in which we live is necessary(91%), the percentage of those in agreement decreases if jobs are at risk(54%). In tellectuals agree with restructuring the system(99%) at a slightly higher rate, while traditionalists agree at a much lower rate(81%). Responses are consistent regarding change at the risk of job loss: intellectuals support change even in this case(67% compared to the average of 54%), while traditionalists are even less likely to agree with change if there is a risk of losing jobs(37% compared to the average of 54%). - with low incomes stand out for their reluctance toward societal and economic change: 79%, Mobility: 92% of respondents agree with reducing prices for local public transport, and 92% want an expansion of the public transport network and increased frequency. A large portion of respondents(83%) desire more charging stations for electric vehicles, 78% support greater promotion of elec tric cars, 54% agree with a climate tax included in the price of airplane tickets, and 48% agree with a car tax that would make those who drive more pay more. Reducing the price of public transport is particularly support ed by the„established elite” and„consumer-materialists,” and much less by„adaptive navigators.” The car tax, the least popular transport-related measure, is supported well above average by„intellectuals” and„adaptive navigators,” while„conventionals” support it significantly below average. Men are more likely to agree with the introduction of a tax on airplane tickets and the car tax than women. Young people aged 18-29 do not strongly support reducing the price of public transport or expanding it. Those aged 30-39 do not support reducing the price of public transport either, but they support the car tax above average. Those over 60 are the least supportive of the car tax. Surprisingly, low-income individuals do not strongly support(77% compared to the average of 91%) reducing public transport prices nor expanding the public transport network(75% compared to the average of 91%). 13

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA Energy: 91% of respondents support the construction of new wind turbines, 88% are in favor of energy communities, and 83% agree with mandatory solar panels on public build ings and new private buildings. The„established elite” and„intellectuals” agree slightly above average with the construction of wind turbines, while the„cosmopolitan avant-garde” and„adaptive navigators” are somewhat less in agreement, with the latter showing significantly lower support. Young people aged 18-29 show minimal support for wind turbines, whereas individuals aged 40-49 are in favor. Those with low incomes also do not strongly support wind energy. Regarding energy communities and solar energy, variations are minor to non-existent. Technology/Innovation/Business: 93% of Romanian re spondents support additional assistance for the development of environmentally friendly products and technologies, while 89% desire certification and labeling of sustainable prod ucts. 71% of Romanians want a reduction in harmful climate subsidies, and 62% want harmful environmental products to cost more. „Intellectuals,” more than other social groups, agree with all the technology measures mentioned in the survey.„Adap tive navigators” are less supportive of promoting environ mentally friendly products and technologies, as well as labeling eco-friendly products, while„consumer-materialists” are less likely than others to agree with increasing the cost of unsustainable products. Young people aged 18-29 are less supportive of promoting sustainable products and technol ogies, as well as labeling eco-friendly products, while those over 60 are less supportive of reducing harmful subsidies. Individuals with low incomes are not necessarily in favor of promoting sustainable products and production or labeling sustainable products, which would increase costs. Those with lower education levels agree above average with reduc ing harmful environmental subsidies and increasing the cost of unsustainable products. Education: 95% of respondents support improving envi ronmental education in schools, and 90% want employees whose jobs will disappear in the future to receive additional training or education, as well as re-skilling. The„cosmopolitan avant-garde” is less supportive of provid ing financial aid for efficient heating systems, while„adap tive navigators” are less supportive of subsidies for private homes using renewable energy. Young people aged 18-29 are less supportive of providing financial support for efficient heating systems, state funding for the thermal rehabilitation of buildings, as well as regulations for household appliances. Those aged 50-59 are more likely to agree with state funding for thermal rehabilitation. Low-income individuals are less supportive than the average for all three types of support for efficient housing. 3.6 ATTITUDES TOWARDS THE ENERGY TRANSITION There is widespread support for protective measures for people and communities affected by the energy transition; however, analysis of variations by social group indicates sur prising results, particularly that low-income individuals show very little support for providing financial compensation for re-skilling, adopting renewable energy, or supporting affect ed communities. Their position can be explained by reduced solidarity among people facing financial difficulties but with different issues, as well as a consequence of internalizing neoliberal messages in the public space against state support measures. Energy Transition 93% of respondents say that employees affected by job loss due to the transition to renewable energy should be sup ported to re-skill for alternative jobs, while 90% believe that affected employees should receive financial support. 92% of Romanians who responded to the survey believe that pri vate homes wishing to use renewable technologies should receive financial support. In addition, 92% say that the de velopment of energy communities should be supported by the government. According to 90% of respondents, new in dustries should be established in those regions and counties affected by the conversion to renewable energy, and 88% believe that the affected regions should receive financial sup port. 87% think that citizens should participate in public and political life to form communities. „Adaptive navigators” and the„cosmopolitan avant-garde” are very much in agreement, with slightly less agreement about the need for ecological education in schools. Similarly, young people aged 18-29 and those aged 30-39 show slightly lower percentages(91%) than the average(95%). Low-in come individuals are significantly below the average of re spondents regarding the need for environmental education in schools and training/re-skilling for those who lose their jobs. Housing: 94% of respondents agree with providing finan cial support for efficient heating systems, 92% support state aid for renovating buildings to improve heating efficiency, 92% support state aid for private homes that use renewable energy, and 88% agree with regulations regarding energy efficiency for household appliances. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE: - few social groups position themselves below average regarding agreement with the stated measures:„tradi tionalists” are less likely to agree that the government should support the development of energy communities, as well as that citizens should participate in the public and political life of their communities.„Adaptive navigators” are much less likely to agree that regions affected by the transition, such as mining regions, should receive financial support and less likely to agree that affected employees should receive financial sup port, such as compensation. - age group, young people aged 18-29 stand out for being significantly below the average in agreeing with 14

most statements in the survey: supporting employees for re-skilling or financial help, supporting regions in transition, subsidizing homes that use renewable en ergy, or relocating new industries to areas affected by the transition. They are also slightly below average re garding citizens’ participation in political life. - again, low-income individuals show surprising percentages: they score significantly below average in supporting affected employees through re-skilling and also in agreeing that regions affected by the transition should receive financial support. They are also slightly less likely to agree that the government should support energy communities and that citizens should participate in political life. Renewable Energy 76% of respondents can imagine participating in deci sion-making regarding their community’s energy source, with 29% of them saying they would definitely get involved. When asked if they could imagine generating the energy they need themselves, 52% say they can definitely imagine it, 34% state they would probably imagine it, and 4% say they already produce energy. 62% would agree to the construction of a solar park in their community if the profit were used for the benefit of the com munity, 35% would accept the solar park unconditionally, and only 3% would oppose it. In the case of a wind farm, 58% would agree if the profit returned to the communi ty, 36% would accept without conditions, and 6% would be opposed. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE: - are the most willing to get involved in an energy supply project, such as an energy cooperative, in their community, answering„yes, definitely” at a rate of 43% compared to the average of 29%. Among those who answered„yes, definitely” and„probably yes,”„adaptive navigators” and„progressive realists” are slightly above average, while„traditionalists” are much below average. Men are more likely to get in volved than women in an energy supply project, and younger individuals are more likely than older ones. In terms of education, those with a lower education level would be more willing to participate, and low-income individuals responded well above average(50% com pared to the average of 29%) with„yes, definitely.” - social groups, responses to the question„Can you imagine generating your own necessary energy?” show little variation. Only„progressive realists” answered„yes” at a slightly higher percentage. The „established elite” and„consumer-materialists” re sponded„no” above average. In terms of age groups, individuals aged 30-39 are slightly above average, while those over 60 envision producing their necessary energy at a lower rate than the rest. Regarding income, low-income individuals responded slightly above aver age with„yes, definitely.” - established elite” and„performers” claim above average that implementing a solar energy generation project in their community would be a good thing, but the percentage of„adaptive navigators” who be lieve that such a project would be beneficial for their community is much below average, stating they are „more likely to accept” it.„Adaptive navigators” and „performers” position themselves similarly regarding a wind project. Those aged 30-39 are less likely to agree that a solar project would be a good idea but still more likely to accept it at an above-average rate. Individuals aged 50-59 are more likely to agree. The same positions are maintained regarding wind energy. In terms of education, the positions are similar for solar and wind: those with a lower education level are less likely to agree that a renewable energy production pro ject would be a good idea but would still accept it at above-average rates. Energy 73% of respondents believe that the energy transition re garding heating should occur through more subsidies for cli mate-neutral technologies and the replacement of heating sources. Only 12% agree that this transition should occur through more prohibitions, and 4% would agree to price in creases for oil, gas, and coal. The rest of the respondents do not agree with any of the options. When asked if renewable energy has become more impor tant since the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, 31% are sure it has, while 37% lean toward yes. Only 7% say no, and 25% lean toward no. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE: - is the most desired solution by Roma nians for the transition of heating sources, especially among“intellectuals,” but less so among“adaptive navigators,” who support prohibitions as well as price increases for fossil fuels at a higher rate than average. Increasing prices is not desired at all by“consumer-ma terialists.” Men are more likely to agree with prohibi tions than with technology as a solution. In terms of age groups, young people are slightly below average regarding technology as a solution but support prohi bitions and price increases for fossil fuels more. Those in the age groups over 50 are in avour of technologies and are less supportive of prohibitions and price increases. -“adaptive navigators,” and“progres sive realists” believe at above-average rates that the war in Ukraine has increased the importance of renewable energy. Less convinced are“conventionals,”“tra ditionalists,” and“consumer-materialists.” Those aged 30-39 are more convinced of this, while those over 60 are less so. Individuals with a lower education level be lieve above average that the war has made renewable energy more important, and those with low income respond above average with a definitive“yes.” 15

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA 4 INTEREST IN INFORMATION AND LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE Interest in information is high, correlating with the level of awareness assessed in the first chapter. However, there is a significant difference between the level of interest in the topic and the level of knowledge about environmental policies, the latter indicating a greater need to explain and popularise environmental policies that affect people’s everyday life. 4.1 INTEREST IN INFORMATION AND LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE: CLIMATE 85% of Romanians express a fundamental interest in the topic of climate change. Among them, 33% are very inter ested, 12% are less interested, and 3% are not interested at all. 75% assess their level of knowledge regarding ecological relationships and environmental issues as„high.” Of these, only 11% claim that their level is„very high.” 25% declare a relatively low level of knowledge, of which 3% say they know very little. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE: - and progressive realists show above-aver age interest in climate change—97% compared to the 16 average of 85%. Conventionals and consumer-materi alists exhibit below-average interest, at 75% and 70%, respectively. In terms of age groups, those aged 3039 express slightly more interest than the rest, while among individuals with low incomes, a significantly above-average percentage(48%) identify as„very in terested” compared to the overall 33%. - the level of knowledge about ecological re lationships and environmental issues, the established elite report a„high” level at a rate above the average of respondents, while traditionalists and consumer-materialists consider themselves knowledgeable, but below average. Men consider themselves more knowledgeable, and the only age group that reports a level of knowledge slightly above average is those aged 50-59.

Low-income individuals report a knowledge level be low average(52% compared to the average of 75%). 4.2 INTEREST IN INFORMATION AND LEVEL OF KNOWLEDGE: POLICIES Only 8% of respondents consider themselves„very well” informed regarding policies for a more environmentally friendly and climate-conscious private sector. 42% consider themselves„relatively informed.” A similar percentage, 43%, consider themselves„relatively uninformed,” while 7% do not consider themselves informed at all. 69% say that policies for an environmentally friendly and cli mate-conscious private sector are not explained and clarified well enough. Only 31% disagree with this: 5% say that the policies are explained sufficiently, while 26% say they are rather well explained. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE: - navigators and hedonists consider themselves knowledgeable about environmental policies at a much higher rate than the average respondents. At the opposite end are conventionals, traditionalists, and consumer-materialists. Men consider themselves more knowledgeable, and among the age categories, the percentage of individuals aged 30-39 who report a„high” level of knowledge about environmental pol icies is above the average of respondents. Those with lower education levels declare themselves knowledgeable at a higher percentage than average, while low-in come individuals report knowledge at a lower percentage than average, and high-income individuals report knowledge above average. - cosmopolitan avant-garde, adaptive navigators, and hedonists report above-average percentages that environmental policies are explained sufficiently, while at the opposite end are conventionals, traditionalists, and consumer-materialists. Men are more likely to think that environmental policies are well explained, as do young people aged 18-29 and those aged 3039. Those aged 50-59 and 60-69 report much lower percentages that environmental policies are sufficiently well explained: 21% and 20%, respectively, compared to the average of 31%. Those with lower education levels consider environmental policies to be well ex plained at a higher percentage than average(56% compared to 31%). 17

ROXANA BUCATĂ – SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA 5 CONCLUSIONS The present report makes a significant contribution to the knowledge and understanding of Romanian attitudes, expectations, and fears regarding socio-ecological transformation. The results indicate areas for improvement in environmental strategies and communication. On one hand, the findings reveal something somewhat already known—that environmental protection is still a topic reserved for elites, while the general population is primarily concerned with health, education, pensions, jobs, and other issues. However, perceptions are changing, and there is a growing openness to correlate environmental protection with the core problems of society. This understanding presents an opportunity to develop strategies that address the everyday challenges faced by Romanians in an integrated manner. highest percentage of those who categorically say that there are more important issues than climate change and the highest percentage of those who say that the severity of these changes is being exaggerated. To better understand where these perceptions and expectations come from, further qualitative and quantitative research is needed to explore how Romanian attitudes continue to evolve. Romanians understand that environmental protection means a better quality of life, with the ability to spend time in nature serving as a strong motivation to protect the environment. Despite a high level of awareness and interest in environmental issues, the prospect of change—both in their own be havior and in the economic system—raises concerns about additional costs. Therefore, Romanians agree with environmental protection measures, but conditionally: if others do the same, if costs are distributed fairly, if compensations are provided, etc. Another contribution of the study is that it provides a nuanced perspective on social categories. The data offer the opportunity to look beyond the stereotypes of“young people prefer change” and“older people are against change,” revealing a complexity of perspectives that sometimes surprises. Young people stand out in this survey as the age group with the lowest expectations of the government, companies, local administrations, NGOs, and other actors, and they believe at a lower rate than average that citizens should engage in political life. Such results not only explain the low participation of young people in Romania in environmental movements but also provide an opportunity to communicate with young people and involve them more in environmental projects. Romania stands out among the 19 countries where the SINUS survey was conducted due to a very high percentage of individuals who consider climate change to be very im portant, with Romanians giving the second-highest score on a scale from 0 to 10 among the countries surveyed. Romanians also exhibit a high degree of skepticism: they have the 18

AUTOR IMPRINT Roxana Bucată is a researcher in environmental sciences and policies, a former environmental journalist, and a communicator on environmental issues. She is currently conducting doctoral research on the political and social transformations driven by the energy transition at the Central European University in Vienna. In the past, she has collaborated with media outlets where she published reports and analyses on just energy transition, land grabbing, the social effects of en vironmental issues at the periphery of major cities, and more. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Romania Str. Emanoil Porumbaru| nr. 21| apartment 3| Sector 1| Bucharest| Romania Responsible: Anna-Lena Koschig Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Romania Tel:+40 21 211 09 09 82| Fax:+40 21 210 71 91 https://romania.fes.de For orders/Contact: office.romania@fes.de Without the express written permission of Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung(FES), the commercial use of pub lications and media products published under the aegis of FES is prohibited. The views expressed in this publication are not necessarily those of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung(FES). 19

SOCIO-ECOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION IN ROMANIA Attitudes, Interests, and Concerns of Different Social Groups A large percentage of Romanians value spending leisure time in nature, highlighting their awareness of the connection between environmental protection and quality of life. Respondents also view environmental protection as a civic duty, emphasizing the need to safeguard natural resources for future generations. Greater citizen involvement in public and political life—though not yet fully appreciated by respondents—could help drive a shift toward a more equitable and sustainable society. More information can be found here: https://romania.fes.de