Individuals’ Climate Change and Course of Energy Transition Process Efforts for Local Communities in Rural Poland

Abstract

It is imperative to continuously monitor public awareness, attitudes, and environmental actions to adjust policy to promote and support transition processes given the ongoing phenomenon of climate change. Insights into poorly investigated domains, such as rural areas, are particularly valuable in this context. Responding to this challenge, we aimed to diagnose the efforts in which individuals engage for the benefit of their local communities in rural areas of a selected region of Poland (Małopolskie Voivodeship) in the context of climate change and the energy transition. The study concerns a specific region, one with the most intensive deployment of climate and energy policy in Poland. It is also highly diversified in terms of the environment and population, from the densely urbanised Kraków Metropolitan Area to scattered rural areas where institutional resources are scarce. This diversity affects how local populations engage in climate and energy efforts. The study involves a literature review and an original 2024 survey among 300 people from five rural districts of Małopolskie Voivodeship selected to reflect the region’s diversity. The CAPI (Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing) survey sample was built with chain referral. The in-depth analyses were performed in IBM SPSS, v.25. We employed statistical analyses, including one-way ANOVA to assess between-group variance, χ2 tests, Sidak tests, and Fisher’s tests. The results show that most respondents recognised an association between energy and climate, but the awareness is fragmented and varied. These conclusions call for amplifying environmental awareness, particularly regarding energy transition. We have also confirmed a significant spatial diversification of environmental attitudes and practices among the public regarding the energy transition. It has been confirmed by all indicators, from the state of the environment to the perceived agency to the structure of home heating systems. Additionally, the importance of local governments in pro-climate activities was indicated. This is particularly important in the context of the ‘Anti-smog resolution for Małopolska’, which has been in force in the Małopolska Province since 2019 and plays a leading role in climate policy in the region. What is particularly important is that the vast majority of respondents from all districts declared their support for these changes, for which local governments are responsible.

1. Introduction

Today’s debate on energy transition and local grassroots activities cannot be fully presented without placing it in the context of the climate crisis discourse. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report, which offers a summary of the current knowledge of the climate change impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability of socio-environmental systems, clearly states the ‘interdependence of climate, ecosystems and biodiversity, and human societies’ [1]. Therefore, climate is part of a complex system where the environmental crisis is entwined with societal, economic, and political crises rather than a detached physical reality. The Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), especially its WGII part on effects and adaptation, positions risk as the central category for discussing the issue. It is defined as the outcome of interactions among climate threats, human and ecosystem exposure, and their vulnerabilities [1]. This shift from a purely ‘meteorological’ description towards a framework of risk and vulnerability paves the way for questions about who is at risk, who has the assets to respond, and what the roles of institutions and local communities are.

The climate crisis is a global and multi-level problem. The Roadmap for Climate Neutrality by 2030 for Kraków emphasises that ‘climate crisis is the greatest contemporary challenge’, affecting millions of people and caused mainly by fossil fuel combustion [2]. It also links the climate crisis to the environmental crisis (excess resource consumption) and the social crisis (rising inequalities), indicating that the current development model based on growth and the intensive use of resources is a central driver of climate degradation [2]. This approach corresponds well with the IPCC’s diagnosis, which analyses climate change alongside other global trends, such as biodiversity loss, soil degradation, rapid urbanisation, demographic shifts, and social inequalities [1].

Climate change is not distributed evenly in space or across societies [3]. A growing volume of research demonstrates a particular vulnerability of rural areas to climate change in the Global North and South alike. Authors of Impacts of Climate Change on Rural Communities: Vulnerability and Adaptation in the Global South analysed how dependence on natural resources, limited availability of public services and infrastructure, and poorer political position overlap in rural communities, translating into a specific combination of resilience and limited adaptability [4]. Similarly, IPCC demonstrates that exposure and resilience ‘differ within communities and across societies, regions and countries, also changing through time’ [1], which for all intents and purposes means that groups with smaller economic and social capital, including many rural communities, pay a disproportionately large price regarding the climate crisis. Broadly defined energy security merits mention in this context, as it affects the quality of life in rural communities [5,6,7,8].

International and European policies respond to these challenges by fusing climate goals with their zero-net emission target and the overall transformation of energy systems. The second part of IPCC’s AR6 on mitigating climate change clearly indicates that the 1.5 °C or 2 °C targets are practically beyond our reach if greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are not contained [9]. This approach is embodied in the European Union’s (EU) Green Deal, which is set to transform the EU into a ‘sustainable and climate-neutral economy by 2050’ [10]. The Green Deal is not restricted to the energy sector alone. It also covers transport, construction, agriculture, biodiversity protection, and industry policy, thus providing a framework for a comprehensive and systemic change [10].

As an EU member, Poland aligns with the framework through national strategic documents, specifically the National Energy and Climate Plan for 2021–2030 (NECP) and the 2040 Energy Policy of Poland [11,12]. The updated NECP is explicitly said to ‘guide the Polish transition’ and merge energy security, economic competitiveness, and reduced environmental impact [11,13]. It clearly demonstrates that the WEM scenario (with existing measures), grounded solely in the policies already in place, can achieve only limited reductions and perpetuate a high share of fossil fuels [13]. Therefore, climate goals require both top-down technology and regulatory [14,15,16] changes, as well as addressing social, cultural, and economic barriers at the level of individual households, local communities, and local administrative units [17,18,19].

The Polish National Strategy for Adaptation to Climate Change [20] also contains the multi-level approach. Although the strategy focuses on adapting, it specifically emphasises that the efforts call for engaging ‘many entities and institutions at the national, regional, and local level’, and that the main adaptation effort will be on voivodeship and local governments [20]. The strategy evokes a multi-level governance approach and implies that adaptation axes must be ‘integrated’ into the development strategies of voivodeships and municipalities, taking into account their geographic, environmental, and socioeconomic constraints [20]. Therefore, strategic documents of Poland explicitly expect the climate and energy transition to surpass governments and large stakeholders and become a co-authored process that engages regions, cities, municipalities, and local communities.

The literature on the societal aspect of climate change increasingly associates the success of climate policies with the community-level adaptation and mitigation [21]. This dimension involves justice (who pays for and benefits from the transition) and other aspects, like participation, communication, and local agency. Studies of local community activity show that grassroots initiatives, such as educational campaigns, environmental efforts, the establishment of energy communities, and local infrastructural projects, do not merely ‘complement’ state policies in a symbolic manner. Instead, they are meaningful mechanisms for moulding social practices and norms [22,23,24]. From this viewpoint, individuals’ efforts become a critical link connecting visionary climate goals with everyday choices and the institutional reality of rural areas.

City and regional documents start to demonstrate this mindset in the practice of public planning. The ‘future Kraków’ in the Roadmap for Climate Neutrality by 2030 is defined plainly as founded on ‘active civic participation and widespread public awareness’, and the residents are to ‘co-create the city, nurturing its sustainability and social well-being’ [2]. A similar logic, although in a different territorial context, is exhibited in regional climate and energy action plans in Małopolskie Voivodeship, where the role of local communities and citizen organisations is considered a precondition for success. Thus, the global scientific discourse and strategic documents of the EU, Poland, and Małopolskie Voivodeship shift the focus from a technocratic view of climate policy to an approach in which residents’ and local communities’ actions play a central role in the energy transition, especially in rural areas. These insights provide a basis for investigating public awareness, attitudes, and grassroots environmental efforts that align with the investigative focus of the present article.

However, despite the growing emphasis on community involvement in climate and energy policies, there is still limited empirical knowledge about how individuals in rural areas perceive the energy transition, how they assess their own agency, and how these perceptions translate into concrete efforts for the benefit of local communities.

This article addresses this gap by empirically examining individual awareness, attitudes, and practices related to climate change and the energy transition in rural municipalities of Małopolskie Voivodeship, combining quantitative survey data with an embedded qualitative case study “Ekospołeczni”.

2. Literature Review

2.1. European Energy Transition Framework and the Role of Local Communities

The European energy transition is a strategic process founded on a long-term vision of climate neutrality and a deeply integrated set of policies that serve as a scaffolding for actions taken by member states. The European Green Deal is the core strategic framework in this regard. It is defined as a ‘plan for a sustainable and climate-neutral economy by 2050’ [10]. It covers sector-specific policies (energy, transport, agriculture, and circular economy), as well as financial instruments, support mechanisms, and regulatory schemes to guide member states through the process of deep decarbonisation. At the same time, the Green Deal emphasises the fundamental principle of a just transition, explicitly urging an even distribution of costs and benefits across social groups and territories and protecting regions and communities most at risk of climate and transition impacts [10].

Another central component of the European climate policy is Fit for 55. This package complements the Green Deal with specific legislative instruments, including amendments to the ETS, new energy efficiency standards, and more ambitious targets for renewable energy. European Union directives on renewable energy sources, RED II (Directive (EU) 2018/2001) and RED III (Directive (EU) 2023/2413), have added new actors to the energy transition, underlining the role of community power and renewable energy communities. RED II and RED III have introduced and then amplified the notion of renewable energy communities, setting the rights of residents, local organisations, and local governments to share in energy production and governance. Their definitions emphasise the importance of local ownership, democratic management, and public benefits of energy production, which embodies a shift towards the democratisation of the energy system in addition to its decarbonisation [10].

What is important for local communities is that the EU documents do not consider residents as mere consumers of energy but as stakeholders who can co-author new energy system models [25]. The process is referred to as ‘energy citizenship’ in which citizens become active participants in the system by generating energy, having a say in energy projects, and engaging in climate movements or education [18,26,27,28]. Carrosio considers community energy systems a ‘social movement’, arguing that its growth depends not only on technology and regulations but also on social capital, collaboration culture, and local identity [26,29]. This dimension is particularly relevant in rural areas, where social bonds and the localness of efforts can be stronger than in urban agglomerations.

In addition, EU policies emphasise that the success of climate neutrality goals hinges on both large infrastructure projects and grassroots initiatives. A study by Slee and McMorran shows that rural transition necessitates cooperation between various levels of governance, from the EU to the state, regions, and local communities; should the coordination fail, local efforts go to waste [24]. Kaze and colleagues offered similar conclusions. They analysed the growth of renewable energy communities in the context of multi-level governance. Regulatory compliance, local leadership, and institutional frameworks favouring local action are all necessary for energy projects to succeed [30,31,32].

Notably, EU policies provide more than just regulatory frameworks. They establish a broad ecosystem of financial instruments to support the transition, such as the Modernisation Fund, LIFE, Horizon Europe, or cohesion funds. This facilitated efforts beyond the competencies of municipalities or NGOs in many regions (Małopolskie Voivodeship included). Projects such as LIFE-IP EkoMałopolska emerge directly from the logic of the EU’s climate policy, in which regions act as intermediaries between European policy and populations.

The integration of energy policy and adaptation policy is an important component of the European transformation framework. The Green Deal, IPCC documents, and national adaptation plans, including Poland’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy, follow the same assumption that adaptive efforts have to co-occur with decarbonisation, and their success depends on the inclusion of citizens and local community structures [1,20]. Adaptation is defined as a process that is both technical and societal in nature, requiring changes in behaviour, attitudes, and the ways people coexist with the environment [7,19].

This way, the European policy frameworks put localness at the centre of change, where energy transition assumes a societal and cultural dimension. Renewable energy communities, resident initiatives, climate education, participation, and bottom-up infrastructural projects are not mere ‘soft additions’ to the technology transformation but its integral parts.

2.2. Energy Transition in Poland—Technology Society, Institutions

Poland’s energy transition is under strong structural pressures from the country’s dependence on fossil fuels, substantial inflexibility of the energy system, regional asymmetries, and swelling public expectations towards climate policies [33,34]. The competitive focus of the Polish economy has been on low-cost energy from coal for decades. Even in 2020, fossil fuels accounted for over 70% of its electricity production [8,32,35]. According to national strategic documents—the 2040 Energy Policy of Poland and the National Energy and Climate Plan—the model must be profoundly redesigned over a long horizon [11,12]. Furthermore, the revised NECP shows that the current set of policies is insufficient to achieve the required scale of emission reduction [13]. Therefore, Poland’s energy transition is both necessary and inevitable, but structural constraints weigh it down [36].

Expansion of renewable energy sources is central to the process, and it has gathered significant momentum in recent decades. The change is especially pronounced in the area of prosumer photovoltaics. Thanks to the My Electricity programme, local subsidies, and liberalisation of regulations, microgeneration systems became massively popular. Still, an article by Kozera and others demonstrates that renewable energy projects in rural municipalities vary spatially and depend on the household income, local development dynamics, and availability of public funds [36,37,38]. They have also confirmed that the improving accessibility of funds and grants leads the rural energy transition to be founded mainly on individual microdecisions rather than large-scale infrastructural projects.

Renewable energy communities are another important factor [39]. Even though energy collectives in Poland expand at a slower pace than in Western Europe, the literature reports growing interest in the technology in rural and mixed urban-rural municipalities [40,41,42]. Jasiński emphasised that although legal and procedural barriers impede their expansion, social factors, such as trust, stability of local strategies, and engagement of leaders, are just as important [18,31,32,33,43]. Results by Orłowska and colleagues confirm that people expect affordable energy as well as transparent governance and democratic decision-making [44]. This makes renewable energy communities a platform where technology, law, and society meet. Hence a need for a stable regulatory framework and strong local bonds [45].

Another societal aspect of Poland’s energy transition is energy security and the increasing cost of living [46]. Unstable energy prices often render rural areas particularly vulnerable. Studies on community energy and energy democracy in Poland demonstrate that, despite declarations of support for renewable energy, many municipal communities exhibit significant uncertainty about wind farms or biogas plants for fear of degrading landscapes and due to mistrust in project owners and poor communication among the stakeholders [18,28,47]. These social barriers are just as relevant as technical obstacles.

The literature (such as Chodkowska-Miszczuk et al.) emphasises the local population’s knowledge of energy, costs, sources, and climate impacts as one of the main factors driving change [4,27,28,48]. This knowledge is often incomplete and brokered by local leaders or social organisations, heavily dependent on the availability of reliable sources. Therefore, the transformation requires both infrastructural investments and large-scale education and communication.

Institutional factors play an important role as well. Poland’s energy transition is often considered spotty and spatially varied due to the structural scattering of local governments and differences in their financial capabilities and human capital assets. Smart village research in Poland has identified high innovation capabilities in some rural municipalities (towards renewable energy, transport projects, or digitalisation). In contrast, others struggle with shortages of assets and competencies, which hinders their adaptation to the new energy reality [49,50,51,52,53,54]. Apparently, the energy transition needs not so much technology as institutional capabilities and a ‘collaboration talent’ to understand local constraints and nurture long-term changes.

European literature increasingly accentuates that the energy transition is part of a larger process of shifting from a monolithic model of energy generation towards a partner- and network-based model, with a more pronounced role of citizens, municipalities, and regions. In practice, this makes local communities co-creators of a new value bundle [18,31,54]. They co-author new energy models not as consumers, but also as investors, users, co-producers, and coordinators.

2.3. Characteristics of Rural Areas and the Role of Grassroots Efforts

Rural Poland is a special case of energy transition and climate adaptation due to its socioeconomic structure and the ways people organise everyday lives, social relationships, and land use differently than in urban areas. The literature increasingly points out that the countryside is not a homogeneous territory but a collection of diverse social circles, where demographic, infrastructural, and institutional factors shape opportunities and constraints for transition to a significant degree [3,49,50,55].

The Sixth Assessment Report by IPCC classifies rural communities as particularly vulnerable due to their dependence on natural resources, growing risk of extreme weather events, and limited access to services and infrastructure [1,7,19,56]. Atkinson and Atkinson suggest that ‘rural communities often face climate-related pressures with fewer adaptive resources’, which means that both exposure and vulnerability are often higher in the countryside than in cities [3]. Such occurrences as droughts, flash floods, soil degradation, and shifts in water regimes directly affect agriculture and the everyday functioning of rural populations, including access to water, energy, transport, and public services.

The national Climate Change Adaptation Strategy confirms the diagnoses, highlighting that effective adaptation in rural areas requires both infrastructural and social inputs to build awareness, educate the public, and support local initiatives [7,19,20]. In practice, this means that engineering solutions (e.g., farmland drainage, runoff attenuation, and building energy-efficiency improvements) must be combined with community and NGO efforts.

Simultaneously, some characteristics of the countryside make it highly relevant to the energy transition: open space, high potential for renewable energy infrastructure, and opportunities to establish local energy models [57,58]. Kozera and colleagues have demonstrated that rural municipalities are becoming more active in terms of PV, heat pump, and biogas projects. However, the development varies by region and is correlated with income and institutional capabilities of local governments [36,37,59].

Still, it is in rural areas that renewable energy communities can potentially thrive [60]. ‘Potentially’ because, as Jasiński notes, their growth in Poland is ‘more in potentia than in fact’ because of complex regulations and limited access to social capital in many municipalities [18,31,32,33,43]. Orłowska and colleagues add that social barriers, such as poor trust, insufficient communication, and low participation, often hinder energy collectives more than technical barriers [44].

Transport and mobility are highly relevant to infrastructural issues. Żukowska, Połom et al. consider transport divide among the primary barriers to rural development in Poland, which means limited opportunities to participate in climate action and poor access to education and energy infrastructure [54,61]. Therefore, rural transformation must be a holistic process that involves energy, mobility, digitalisation, and public space quality.

Chodkowska-Miszczuk and colleagues note that low energy competencies are often associated with reduced trust in institutions, leading to opposition to new projects [4,27,28,48]. These barriers are particularly conspicuous in Poland, where energy democracy is budding, and public participation in energy-related processes is limited, according to Puczko [47].

Local social capital remains a critical asset of rural areas. Studies on smart villages in Poland (Adamowicz and Zwolińska-Ligaj; Budziewicz-Guźlecka and Drożdż; Satoła and Milewska) demonstrate that high levels of trust within communities, commitment from heads of villages, activity of NGOs, and cross-sectoral cooperation capabilities are central to the deployment of new energy initiatives in the countryside [49,50,51,52,53].

Zavratnik and others analysed European experiences with smart villages and found that innovations do not grow by themselves in rural areas [62]. They need local leaders, support structures, digital competencies, and joint decision-making mechanisms [54,63,64]. This means that community efforts for climate and energy are not ‘soft additions’ to rural community infrastructure, but an important part of its development, even if not directly.

Literature on community power, local participation, and rural development positions residents as active stakeholders of the climate and energy transition process rather than passive objects of public policies. Authors such as Slee and McMorran [24], Carrosio [26], and Chodkowska-Miszczuk et al. [27] emphasise that community engagement can be considered part of ‘soft infrastructure’ that enables change under limited institutional constraints, which is particularly valuable in rural areas.

First, local populations play the central role in creating and diffusing knowledge about energy, climate, and the environment. Educational efforts at local schools, NGOs, and informal groups, such as eco workshops, information campaigns, school events, and local leaders’ initiatives, help improve public competencies [27]. The knowledge serves as the foundation for informed energy-related decisions taken in households. It also affects the potential to participate in such community activities as public consultations or renewable energy communities. In this frame of reference, residents are treated as actors who support information circulation and contribute to the community’s adaptability and potential for climate action.

The second dimension of community activity is the co-shaping of their members’ surroundings. According to studies on smart villages [49,50,63], improved quality of public space, including green initiatives, community gardens, local cycling routes, educational paths, and recreational activities such as plogging, affects the aesthetic value and functionality of the space, simultaneously contributing to community and environmental resilience. These activities amplify social bonds, integrate communities, improve quality of life, and enhance climate adaptability. The literature often refers to them as ‘placemaking’, whereby individuals jointly create a space that fits their needs and local environmental constraints.

The third domain where citizen activity matters is direct participation in the energy transition. Residents are no longer mere consumers of energy but also its producers, thanks to photovoltaics, heat pumps, and other renewable energy systems, and co-creators of collective energy models, such as renewable energy communities or collectives [43,44]. Residents participate in making energy-related decisions, support the fight against smog, input their opinions on local energy plans, and work with local governments and community organisations towards shared goals. Therefore, citizens make both a practical and political contribution to emission reduction, energy efficiency improvement, and renewable energy development by shaping local energy and environmental policies.

Rural areas have a specific combination of social, spatial, and institutional assets, which often favours grassroots climate and energy activities. Research on smart villages and local rural development indicates that social relationships in the countryside are typically denser and neighbour ties are stronger than in urbanised areas [49,50,51,63]. This means they have more readiness to cooperate, engage in joint initiatives, and support each other, all of which are considered important for climate actions.

A high level of social capital, seen as both trust and readiness to collaborate, promotes resident engagement in educational, spatial, and energy issues. In many rural municipalities, it is residents, local leaders, and NGOs who trigger processes that receive institutional support only later or inspire systemic changes. According to the literature on rural participation, grassroots actions are often the first steps towards changes in attitudes and building local adaptability and mitigation capacity [24,26,27].

The next characteristic of rural areas is the proximity to the natural environment, which both increases exposure to climate change effects and makes them part of daily life for local communities. Such problems as drought, soil degradation, air quality deterioration, or changes in local ecosystems are often more pronounced and impactful in the countryside than in cities [1,3]. This tangibility of environmental changes may promote readiness to take action regarding space (plantings, environmental infrastructure) and energy (renewable energy sources, thermal upgrading).

Local institutions, such as schools, libraries, farm wives associations, or volunteer fire brigades, also play important roles as hubs of local public life. It is there that educational initiatives, integration projects, eco events, and grassroots information campaigns can be born, becoming a foundation for bottom-up climate and energy movements in many municipalities. As evident from research of smart villages, these institutions often serve as ‘local anchors’ that bring together individuals, leaders, and local governments, joining forces towards a better quality of life and climate adaptation [49,63].

Grassroots efforts in rural settings are further amplified by the fact that rural locality is practical rather than symbolic. People are quick to notice investments in public space, recreational events, environmental initiatives, and energy projects, which nourishes their sense of agency and motivation to act. The local nature of efforts typical of the countryside promotes collaboration models in which residents can experience the outcomes of their efforts, and their commitment is more direct than in cities.

As a result, the characteristics of rural areas, including social relationships, rural space, the availability of local institutions, and perceptions of environmental changes, make them particularly receptive to grassroots climate and energy initiatives. It is the countryside that is becoming a laboratory for small-scale community innovations, where residents’ efforts are central to the local response to global climate challenges. In light of this context, it is essential to identify rural residents’ awareness, attitudes, and community-oriented activities to determine the scale and direction of necessary efforts to promote and support social activity. To this end, it is important to determine how local governments’ role in supporting the efforts is perceived. This background exposes the research gap regarding in-depth literature review and empirical studies to determine

• The impact of climate change on the sustainable attitudes and behaviour of Polish rural populations;
• The level of awareness and activity of rural populations in the context of the outlined challenges;
• The role of local governments in efforts towards environmental protection and energy transition.

The literature on climate change awareness, energy literacy, and local engagement reveals considerable conceptual diversity and a lack of uniform operational definitions. Studies variously approach “awareness”, “attitudes”, “perceptions”, and “concerns” as overlapping but not identical constructs, often combining cognitive, normative, and experiential dimensions. As a result, existing empirical research rarely offers a single, standardised benchmark for what constitutes a “high” or “sufficient” level of environmental or energy-related awareness, particularly in rural contexts. In this study, the hypotheses are therefore formulated in an exploratory manner, allowing for the identification of spatial differentiation and internal inconsistencies in perceptions, evaluations, and practices rather than testing narrowly defined knowledge thresholds. Importantly, Hypothesis 1 addresses the current state of awareness and recognition of energy–climate linkages, whereas Hypothesis 4 refers to the normative and policy-relevant implication that this awareness—regardless of its initial level—requires further strengthening to support effective energy transition processes.

These lines of investigation mould the remainder of the article in relation to the proposed hypotheses.

3. Materials and Methods

We aimed to diagnose the efforts in which individuals engage for the benefit of their local communities in rural areas of Małopolskie Voivodeship in the context of climate change and energy transition. The study area exhibits one of the most intensive deployments of climate and energy policy in Poland. This is reflected both in the voivodeship’s strategic documents and the growing number of grassroots initiatives the residents pursue. It is important to consider the significant environmental and social diversity of the area. The highly urbanised Kraków Metropolitan Area is surrounded by scattered villages with limited institutional resources, which affects how and to what extent their residents engage in environmental and energy initiatives.

The central theoretical part of the study is an in-depth literature review of peer-reviewed articles in indexed journals, industry reports, and regulations. The empirical part is founded on an original 2024 survey of residents of rural areas in Małopolskie Voivodeship. The respondents live in five districts that reflect the region’s diversity. These are Miechowski District in the north, Wadowicki District in the southwest, Tarnowski District in the east, Limanowski District in the south, and Krakowski District representing the central part of the voivodeship. The sample of 300 respondents had 60 people from each district. The sampling technique was chain-referral. Survey participation was completely voluntary and anonymous (informed consent).

The gender structure is dominated by women: 175 (58.3%) to 125 men (41.7%). The age of the sample ranged from 15 to 86 years (M = 42.30; SD = 17.59). The most numerous educational background groups were secondary (44%) and higher (about 20%) education. Nearly a quarter of the participants finished vocational or trade schools. Additionally, approx. 63% of the respondents reported being certified professionals. The CAPI (Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing) survey sample was built with chain referral. Survey participation was completely voluntary and anonymous (informed consent).

The survey was based on the following closed questions, which participants answered using a Likert scale:

-

Do you think that energy generation from non-renewable sources (coal, oil) contributes to climate change?

-

Do people in your neighbourhood often dispose of waste by dumping it in the woods, in pits or in the river?

-

How do you evaluate the local government’s efforts to protect the environment?

-

Please assess the extent to which your behaviour can contribute to combating climate change.

The survey also included semi-open questions with multiple-choice options:

-

What environmental problems are there in the area where you live?

-

Please specify how your house/flat is heated.

The survey also included mandatory response fields, which, together with the indicated response scale, enabled logical control of the correctness of the survey completion (a tool for validating survey questions), which was to ensure the quality of the survey process and the obtained survey results—according to the needs specified for the research project and this article.

The answers were analysed in IBM SPSS v.25. We calculated basic descriptive statistics and performed one-way analysis of between-group variance and χ2 tests. Other tests included the Sidak test and Fisher’s exact test for when χ2 test assumptions were not satisfied, assuming not more than 20% of cells with expected counts below 5 and a minimum expected count (greater than 1). An additional χ2 test failed to identify any significant differences among the five districts regarding education: χ2(12) = 9.79; p = 0.635. The same test revealed no statistically significant differences regarding the respondents’ professions: χ2(4) = 7.03; p = 0.134.

The proposed research design has been successfully employed in our other studies.

The article is structured in line with the requirements for research papers. The problem is introduced with a literature review to characterise the central issues that form the background. The starting point for the design of the survey and the survey of specific problems itself was the EIB Climate Survey report [32,46,65]. Section Materials and Methods presents the research concept and hypotheses. It also contains the research techniques and a profile of the sample. We then report findings from the literature and the outcomes of our original survey of southeastern rural Poland, which we juxtapose with literature reports in the Discussion section. The summary offers synthesised conclusions and verifies the hypotheses.

The literature review and our findings allowed us to put forward the following hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1.

Climate change forces Poland’s rural populations to shift their attitudes and behaviour towards a conscientious stance.

Hypothesis 2.

Poland’s rural populations are aware of problems related to the condition of the natural environment in their region and the degree to which their behaviour affects the prevention of climate change.

Hypothesis 3.

Local governments are considered critical to environmental actions and climate change adaptation in rural areas.

Hypothesis 4.

Environmental awareness among Polish rural populations needs to improve, particularly regarding the need for energy transition and climate change adaptation.

To capture not only the distribution of attitudes and behaviours but also the social mechanisms shaping them, the quantitative survey was complemented with an embedded qualitative case study. The case study plays a critical analytical role by revealing how fragmented awareness, limited perceived agency, and predominantly individualised actions identified in the survey may be transformed into collective practices under specific conditions of facilitation, leadership, and local governance. This mixed-method design allows the study to move beyond descriptive patterns and to identify context-dependent mechanisms that are essential for interpreting the empirical results and formulating actionable policy implications.

4. Results

4.1. Individuals’ Efforts for Local Communities Concerning Climate Change and Energy Transition: A Case Study of Małopolskie Voivodeship

This subsection presents an embedded case study used to contextualise and explain selected patterns identified in the quantitative survey. The case of the “Ekospołeczni” initiative is not treated as an independent example, but as an illustrative mechanism showing how local social capital, community leadership, and facilitation practices may respond to the awareness gaps, limited agency, and predominantly individualised actions revealed in the empirical results presented below.

Małopolskie Voivodeship is among the regions with the most intensive deployment of climate and energy policy in Poland [65]. The process is evident in the voivodeship’s strategic documents and the growing number of grassroots initiatives that residents, NGOs, and local institutions pursue. Furthermore, the region is highly diversified in terms of the environment and population: from the densely urbanised Kraków Metropolitan Area to scattered rural areas where institutional resources are scarce. This diversity affects how local populations engage in climate and energy efforts.

Małopolskie Voivodeship was the first region in Poland to adopt such a broad-ranging document as the Regional Action Plan for Climate and Energy (RAPCE) [66]. It defines the emission reduction, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and adaptation targets at the regional and local levels. It emphasises that climate neutrality requires ‘mobilising residents, community organisations, and local leaders’ [66]. The plan calls for amplifying energy competences, encouraging prosumers, supporting low-emission transport, and expanding green infrastructure in municipalities.

LIFE-IP EkoMałopolska is a practical arm that operationalises the RAPCE. Project files and reports on actions emphasise the role of climate and environmental advisors, local information campaigns, educational projects, and cooperation among local governments, institutions, and residents [67]. The project’s outcomes include analyses of renewable energy potential in individual municipalities, air quality improvement campaigns, and initiatives for sustainable mobility [67].

Similar vectors can be found in Kraków’s strategic documents, such as Kraków’s Climate Adaptation Plan [68,69,70,71] and Climate Neutrality Roadmap for Kraków 2030 [2]. Both put emphasis on the role of ‘active participation of residents’ as a precondition for success. They claim that climate transformation cannot be a top-down process only. Instead, it requires solutions developed in collaboration with municipalities, estates, and local communities.

The population of Małopolskie Voivodeship has become significantly more active in climate and energy efforts in recent years, including renewable energy projects and broader community initiatives. The dynamic expanse of household photovoltaic microgeneration systems and heat pumps makes many municipalities in the voivodeship, such as Zielonki, Michałowice, and Wielka Wieś, regional leaders of prosumerism. Regional reports stress such driving forces as the availability of public funds, improving public energy awareness, and activities of local leaders who run information campaigns and facilitate project decisions.

Educational and information efforts by schools, NGOs, libraries, local action groups, and municipalities are also an important part of grassroots efforts in Małopolskie Voivodeship. Eco workshops, climate projects at schools, science fairs, or information meetings hosted by climate and environment advisors from the LIFE-IP EkoMałopolska programme [67] serve a double purpose. They improve public knowledge and stimulate active participation in environmental and energy efficiency activities.

The evaluation materials indicate that a deliberate emphasis was placed on low-threshold forms of engagement, which did not require prior environmental knowledge, financial investment, or formal commitment. Activities such as open workshops, informal meetings, and outdoor events were designed to minimise entry barriers, allowing residents with limited awareness or initial uncertainty to participate. This design choice directly addresses the fragmented knowledge and the high share of “hard to say” responses identified in the quantitative survey.

Smog activities also contribute to the grassroots efforts. They are often the first step on an individual’s path towards climate activism in a region with poor air quality. Such initiatives as local educational campaigns, neighbourhood air quality monitoring, disseminating information about heating replacement schemes, and public discussions promote community mobilisation and support for local anti-smog resolutions. EkoMałopolska reports unequivocally show that grassroots engagement helps implement environmental regional policies [67].

Many municipalities in Małopolskie Voivodeship offer numerous opportunities for sustainable mobility and recreation. Educational cycling trails, nature walks, local initiatives encouraging active leisure, and ideas such as plogging (jogging combined with picking up litter) have become an attractive engagement domain for developing community ties. According to Żukowska, Połom et al. [61], recreational and educational mobility is an important component of the smart village as it promotes integration, amplifies identification with the place of living, and improves community resilience. Although seemingly unrelated to energy, these activities align with a broader trend towards climate adaptation and environmental protection that builds community resilience and supports local ecological practices, which is critical in the context of climate change.

Last but not least, grassroots initiatives include new green infrastructure and improvements to public space quality. Such initiatives as new community gardens, green space revitalisation, tree planting, establishing ecozones, and nature-based landscaping solutions further climate adaptation, which IPCC reports consider a central vector [1]. Such spaces serve an environmental and social purpose as places of gathering, education, recreation, and community building.

One of the most notable grassroots initiatives in Małopolskie Voivodeship is ‘Ekospołeczni’ by the Association for Zielonki Municipality Development, which the Marshal of Małopolskie Voivodeship has recognised as the voivodeship’s ecoHERO. The project demonstrates an integrated and multidimensional effort by the local community, combining education, participation, mobility, and co-creation of public space to build a coherent strategy for local climate transformation.

It has emerged from the appreciation of the need to improve environmental awareness and support climate-friendly attitudes among the residents of a fast-growing suburban municipality. According to the project specifications, it aimed to disseminate knowledge and establish a space for practical action, integration, and engagement among diverse age groups. This broad range of goals is consistent with literature recommendations, which emphasise that community resilience requires combining education and practical activity [24,27].

The project delivered twelve focus workshops on circular economy, zero waste, and sustainable consumption. They improved participants’ environmental knowledge and guided their attitudes. The educational part segues into practical engagement: plogging campaigns attracted various age groups, while improving the local environment and bringing together the local community.

An important mechanism observed in the case study was the gradual transition from individual behavioural change towards collective forms of engagement. While the initial activities focused on personal practices and awareness, subsequent actions increasingly relied on cooperation, shared responsibility, and group-based initiatives. This progression helps explain why individualised actions dominate in the survey results, while collective agency remains limited yet potentially expandable under appropriate facilitation.

Another component of the ‘Ekospołeczni’ project was three cycling trails that combined the municipality’s natural and cultural assets. They encouraged low-emission mobility through local education. Two ecoparks co-created together with local community members in Zielonki and Pękowice exhibited a particularly high level of innovation. Their creators employed infrastructural elements that promote biodiversity in line with placemaking, including plantings, hedges, insect hotels, and park furniture. According to project reports, the spaces have become permanently actively used local resources for recreation and education.

The evaluation highlights that the visibility of tangible outcomes—such as newly created public spaces and improved recreational infrastructure—played a crucial role in reinforcing participants’ sense of agency. Observable and immediately experienced effects provided feedback that collective action produces real change, which is particularly relevant in light of the survey results showing a low perceived impact of individual behaviour on climate change prevention.

Communication is also relevant. The project had a strong social media and local media presence, which improved its reach and amplified its educational outcomes. The high quality of communication reported in project evaluation aligns with literature findings that assign communication a central role in engaging community members in local climate efforts [23,24].

Across all components of the initiative, social capital emerged as a form of soft infrastructure enabling sustained engagement. Trust-based relations, local leadership, and informal networks were identified in the evaluation as key factors supporting participation, particularly under conditions of limited institutional capacity. This observation corresponds with the survey findings, which suggest that individual actions prevail where collective frameworks and facilitation structures are weak.

‘Ekospołeczni’ is an example of a grassroots initiative that successfully supported local climate adaptation through a synergistic combination of environmental efforts, participation, and new public infrastructure. It confirms that when partnered with NGOs and local governments, residents can be actors of change instead of just recipients of climate policies.

These mechanisms provide an interpretative framework for the quantitative findings presented in the following subsection. In particular, they help explain the prevalence of individualised environmental actions, the dominance of locally visible environmental concerns, and the relatively low perceived impact of individual efforts identified in the survey results.

4.2. Analysis and Assessment of Individuals’ Efforts for the Local Community Concerning Climate Change and Energy Transition—Empirical Research

The pace and extent of Poland’s energy transition are directly linked to the public perception of the process. Survey respondents from southeastern Poland shared their opinions on whether energy production from non-renewable sources, such as coal or oil, contributes to climate change. Most respondents acknowledged the association (nearly 62% of affirmative responses across the entire sample). ‘Agree’ was the most common among inhabitants of Krakowski District, while ‘strongly agree’ was the most frequent option in Wadowicki District and Krakowski District (about 36% and nearly 32%, respectively). The association between climate change and non-renewable energy sources is disputable in Limanowski District. Note also that almost one in five respondents from Tarnowski District and Miechowski District opted for ‘hard to say’. There is a clear difference (almost double) in the group of undecided people between these districts and the others (Krakowski, Limanowski and Wadowicki). (

Table 1. Opinions on whether energy generation from non-renewable sources (coal, oil) contributes to climate change by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	Total
strongly disagree	N	3	7	2	8	5	25
	%	5.10%	11.70%	3.30%	13.30%	8.30%	8.40%
disagree	N	11	10	7	8	7	43
	%	18.60%	16.70%	11.70%	13.30%	11.70%	14.40%
hard to say	N	7	12	7	7	13	46
	%	11.90%	20.00%	11.70%	11.70%	21.70%	15.40%
agree	N	17	17	25	22	22	103
	%	28.80%	28.30%	41.70%	36.70%	36.70%	34.40%
strongly agree	N	21	14	19	15	13	82
	%	35.60%	23.30%	31.70%	25.00%	21.70%	27.40%

).

The relatively high share of “hard to say” responses observed in several districts corresponds to the knowledge gaps and low-threshold entry mechanisms identified in the embedded case study (Section 4.1), where engagement strategies were explicitly designed to involve residents with limited or uncertain environmental awareness.

Some insights into the opinions of the rural population of the Małopolskie Voivodeship concerned the state of their local natural environment. Six statistically significant differences were found (

Table 2. Indications of specific local environmental problems by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski
littering	N	40	36	36	40	38	χ2(4) = 1.15 p = 0.887
	%	66.70%	60.00%	60.00%	66.70%	63.30%
air pollution	N	35	26	43	30	25	χ2(4) = 14.64 p = 0.006 V = 0.22
	%	58.30%	43.30%	71.70%	50.00%	41.70%
water pollution	N	28	35	13	23	17	χ2(4) = 21.42 p < 0.001 V = 0.27
	%	46.70%	58.30%	21.70%	38.30%	28.30%
institutional negligence, such as waste sorting	N	18	20	4	13	15	χ2(4) = 14.35 p = 0.006 V = 0.22
	%	30.00%	33.30%	6.70%	21.70%	25.00%
industry, such as land degradation and emissions from farms	N	11	9	4	2	12	χ2(4) = 11.63 p = 0.020 V = 0.20
	%	18.30%	15.00%	6.70%	3.30%	20.00%
lack of greenery	N	15	13	5	1	5	χ2(4) = 20.75 p < 0.001 V = 0.26
	%	25.00%	21.70%	8.30%	1.70%	8.30%
excess traffic	N	18	26	25	13	17	χ2(4) = 9.26 p = 0.055
	%	30.00%	43.30%	41.70%	21.70%	28.30%
other	N	0	3	0	0	0	Fisher’s exact test p = 0.035 V = 0.20
	%	0.00%	5.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
there are no such problems	N	0	1	2	5	3	Fisher’s exact test p = 0.151
	%	0.00%	1.70%	3.30%	8.30%	5.00%

). The strength of all the effects was low. According to Table 2, the most serious problem brought up by the respondents is littering, with over 60% of respondents in each district reporting it. The most important issue for the Krakowski District population is air pollution (nearly 72%), while in Miechowski and Tarnowski Districts, it was chosen by a little over 40%. The problem of air pollution in Krakow and the district area has been a priority for many years. The provisions of the ‘Anti-smog resolution for Małopolska’ have been consistently applied since 2019. And while the situation in the city itself has improved significantly over the last decade, there is still a serious problem on the district area. This is evident in the respondents’ responses in this research.

Other issues close to the respondents’ hearts were water pollution in Miechowski and Wadowicki Districts (about 58% and nearly 47% of respondents, respectively) and excess traffic in Krakowski and Miechowski Districts (over 40% each). Industry seems to be the least acknowledged problem, including land degradation, pollution, immissions from animal farms, etc. (about one-fifth of answers in Tarnowski District only), and a shortage of green spaces (over 20% in Miechowski and Wadowicki Districts only). Interestingly, ‘there are no such problems’ was not selected in Wadowicki District, while in Limanowski District, it reached 8%.

The dominance of littering as the most frequently indicated environmental problem reflects the emphasis on locally visible and tangible issues addressed through grassroots activities described in Ekomalopolska case study, particularly those based on direct, observable environmental interventions.

Waste management in local communities is an important environmental issue. The survey participants evaluated their communities for illegal dumping, including in forests and into watercourses. There were statistically significant differences among the districts, F(4, 295) = 4.71; p = 0.001. They were investigated with post hoc Sidak tests. Two statistically significant differences were found. Inhabitants of Limanowski District reported the problem less frequently than respondents from Wadowicki District (p = 0.002) and Miechowski District (p = 0.005). The other differences were not statistically significant (

Table 3. Opinions on how often members of the local community engage in illegal dumping by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	Total
very rarely	N	5	8	13	15	13	54
	%	10.90%	15.70%	29.50%	35.70%	22.80%	22.50%
rather rarely	N	19	19	13	20	26	97
	%	41.30%	37.30%	29.50%	47.60%	45.60%	40.40%
quite often	N	16	18	15	7	16	72
	%	34.80%	35.30%	34.10%	16.70%	28.10%	30.00%
very often	N	6	6	3	0	2	17
	%	13.00%	11.80%	6.80%	0.00%	3.50%	7.10%

). It is interesting that although the problem of dumping rubbish in forests or rivers is widespread throughout Poland, it is mainly noticed by respondents from these two districts. As can be seen, this is a particularly serious problem in the Wadowicki district, as almost half of the respondents pointed it out.

This question was not based on the traditional Likert scale, so the answer ‘I don’t know’ was considered separately. As shown in

Table 4. Opinions on how often members of the local community engage in illegal dumping, percentage of ‘I don’t know’.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	Total
Not selected	N	46	52	44	42	57	241
	%	76.70%	86.70%	73.30%	70.00%	95.00%	80.30%
Selected	N	14	8	16	18	3	59
	%	23.30%	13.30%	26.70%	30.00%	5.00%	19.70%

, its frequency varied across the districts (χ2(4) = 16.12; p = 0.003). The strength of the effects was low, V = 0.23. The majority of respondents who did not know whether anyone in their area was dumping rubbish in unauthorised places or did not want to declare it were in the Limanowski and Krakowski districts (30% and approx. 27%, respectively). The lowest number of such people was in the Tarnowski district (only 5%).

The variation in assessments of illegal dumping frequency, including the presence of “I don’t know” responses, aligns with the observation that local environmental problems are unevenly recognised and discussed, a pattern also noted in the qualitative case study mechanisms focused on visible effects and immediate feedback.

Another matter investigated in the survey was the evaluation of local governments’ activities related to climate change and environmental protection. No statistically significant differences were found among the districts, F(4, 295) = 0.31; p = 0.874 (

Table 5. Evaluation of local government action for environmental protection and climate change by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	Total
very bad	N	0	1	0	0	4	5
	%	0.00%	2.30%	0.00%	0.00%	8.20%	2.20%
bad	N	14	9	14	11	9	57
	%	29.20%	20.90%	28.00%	26.20%	18.40%	24.60%
adequate	N	26	22	28	21	26	123
	%	54.20%	51.20%	56.00%	50.00%	53.10%	53.00%
good	N	8	11	8	10	9	46
	%	16.70%	25.60%	16.00%	23.80%	18.40%	19.80%
very good	N	0	0	0	0	1	1
	%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	2.00%	0.40%

). The ‘very bad’ answers were reported only in Tarnowski District (over 8%), while they were not selected in Wadowicki, Krakowski, or Limanowski Districts. Only 2% of respondents in Limanowski District chose ‘very good’, with none in the other districts. The most common answer in all districts was ‘adequate’, over 50% in each (relevant to hypothesis 3). It can be concluded that respondents are satisfied with the actions taken by local governments to protect the environment. This is particularly true when the ratings “adequate” and “good” are considered together, giving a result of almost 77% in the Miechowski district and over 70% in the other districts. At the same time, it should be remembered that almost no one rated the local government unequivocally positively.

The predominance of “adequate” evaluations of local government activity corresponds with the case study findings that institutional action is often perceived as a background condition, while community-level facilitation and informal leadership play a more prominent role in mobilising environmental engagement.

The participants then assessed the impact of their own behaviour on climate change prevention. No statistically significant differences were found among the districts, F(4, 295) = 2.16; p = 0.074 (

Table 6. Assessment of the impact of one’s behaviour on climate change prevention by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	Total
none	N	9	12	4	11	3	39
	%	17.00%	22.60%	7.80%	22.90%	6.00%	15.30%
little	N	29	24	31	23	24	131
	%	54.70%	45.30%	60.80%	47.90%	48.00%	51.40%
large	N	15	17	16	14	23	85
	%	28.30%	32.10%	31.40%	29.20%	46.00%	33.30%

). The most common answer in Tarnowski District was ‘to a large extent’ (46%), but in Wadowicki District, it was only approximately 28%. Insignificant influence was reported mainly in Krakowski District (over 61%) and Wadowicki District (approaching 55%). No impact of their behaviour on climate change was reported primarily by residents of Miechowski and Limanowski Districts (about 23% of ‘none’ in each). This question was not based on the traditional Likert scale, so the answer ‘I don’t know’ was considered separately. Its frequency was fairly even across the districts, χ2(4) = 3.36; p = 0.500. Most of the people who were unsure or did not want to declare the impact of their behaviour on climate change prevention lived in Limanowski District, where one-fifth of respondents chose ‘I don’t know’.

The limited perceived impact of individual behaviour identified in the survey mirrors the mechanisms observed in the case study, where collective action and shared responsibility were deliberately fostered to counterbalance weak individual agency.

Efforts by the surveyed rural populations in southeastern Poland to protect the environment and prevent climate change were most pronounced in their decisions regarding household heating systems [72]. These decisions are relevant to the energy transition in Poland, particularly considering renewable energy sources. The ‘anti-smog law for Małopolska’ forces districts to take action in areas such as replacing old coal-fired boilers with modern solutions. Therefore, it is interesting to see what the situation looks like in this regard in the households of respondents.

Table 7. Reported heating systems by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski
Coal-fired boilers	N	24	11	13	28	24	χ2(4) = 16.95 p = 0.002 V = 0.24
	%	40.0%	18.3%	21.7%	46.7%	40.0%
Electric heating	N	2	12	4	4	7	χ2(4) = 11.61 p = 0.021 V = 0.20
	%	3.3%	20.0%	6.7%	6.7%	11.7%
Gas heating	N	23	16	33	17	17	χ2(4) = 14.94 p = 0.005 V = 0.22
	%	38.3%	26.7%	55.0%	28.3%	28.3%
Heat pumps	N	8	16	7	8	3	χ2(4) = 12.35 p = 0.015 V = 0.20
	%	13.3%	26.7%	11.7%	13.3%	5.0%
Fireplace with a heat distribution system	N	1	10	1	1	5	Fisher’s exact test p = 0.001 V = 0.25
	%	1.7%	16.7%	1.7%	1.7%	8.3%
Other	N	2	1	3	3	11	Fisher’s exact test p = 0.004 V = 0.24
	%	3.3%	1.7%	5.0%	5.0%	18.3%

demonstrates statistically significant differences across the districts. The strength of all the effects was low. The results show unambiguously that the coal boiler remains the most common heating system in three districts: Wadowicki, Limanowski, and Tarnowski (not less than 40% of answers in each). The answer was the least popular in Miechowski District (merely about 18%). The second-most common heating was the gas boiler, which was the most popular in Krakowski District (55%), followed by heat pumps (mainly in Miechowski District, nearly 27%). The least common heating system in rural Małopolskie Voivodeship was the fireplace with a heat distribution system and electric heating.

The predominance of household-level decisions regarding heating systems is consistent with the qualitative observation that environmental engagement in rural areas remains largely individualised, with collective frameworks emerging only where targeted facilitation mechanisms are present.

The presented results show that the response to climate challenges and the associated energy transition process constitute a system of efforts with strong social relevance, within the framework of regulatory and resource constraints, as well as rural community attitudes and actions.

The multifaceted nature of the challenges posed by the energy transformation process shapes the policy in this area, in which social attitudes and actions implemented at every level are of crucial importance.

5. Discussion

The results show that most residents of the municipalities appreciate the association between the use of non-renewable energy sources and climate change. Nearly two-thirds of the respondents believe that energy from coal and oil contributes to the climate crisis. At the same time, the answers clearly vary by location. The most unambiguous declarations were made in Wadowicki and Krakowski Districts, while the link is less obvious in Limanowski District. In Tarnowski and Miechowski Districts, the most common answer was ‘hard to say’. This picture corresponds with IPCC’s AR6, where the climate risk is the analytical focus. It is defined as an outcome of an interaction between threats, exposure, and vulnerability. It is also consistent with approaches that stress that the perceived risk is strongly rooted in the local environmental experience [1,3]. Municipalities with a more extensive public debate on air quality or energy transition seem to exhibit a greater awareness of the link between fossil fuels and climate. Where the discourse is not as marked, cognitive uncertainty is more common.

Considering the literature on energy literacy, these results confirm that people have basic knowledge of the vectors of association between energy and climate, but this knowledge is irregular and fragmented. Chodkowska-Miszczuk and colleagues point out that energy competencies in rural areas depend mainly on local leaders, communication quality, and availability of educational initiatives [4,27,28,48]. The share of ‘hard to say’ responses in some districts and predominance of affirmative answers in others may be interpreted as a sign of a competence gap; the respondents report a general awareness of the problem but are not always able to follow it with a coherent narrative concerning causes and effects of climate change. This finding supports the hypothesis that environmental awareness needs to be further improved (H4) and shows that the expected ‘high level of awareness’ (H1) is true only to a limited extent. The qualitative case study provides an explanatory mechanism for this pattern, showing how low-threshold educational formats and informal community-based activities are used to engage residents who initially remain uncertain or lack a coherent understanding of energy–climate linkages.

Local perceptions are even more evident in answers regarding the state of the local environment. The most common problem in all districts is littering. More than 60% of respondents in each district consider it a serious problem. Water and air pollution, institutional neglect, emissions from industries, and a lack of greenery are considered secondary. This means that, on the one hand, the respondents acknowledge the direct impacts of everyday behaviour: littering, illegal dump sites, and roadside or forest rubbish. On the other hand, this hierarchy of problems shows that, for many people, the climate problem becomes real only after it enters their field of vision through tangible changes in their surroundings. This finding is consistent with research on local communities, which concludes that grassroots initiatives are typically triggered by problems people find the most disturbing and pronounced in their daily lives [7,22,23,54]. This focus on immediately visible problems is mirrored in the embedded case study, where littering became a primary entry point for community mobilisation through collective clean-up and plogging activities, translating abstract environmental concerns into tangible local action.

The answers further demonstrate significant variability of problem themes across the districts. The main reported issue in Krakowski District is air pollution. Nearly three-fourths selected this answer as an important problem, while it reached a little over 40% in Miechowski and Tarnowski Districts. Residents of Miechowski and Wadowicki Districts consider water pollution a grave problem, while the lack of greenery is a concern for the communities in Wadowicki and Miechowski Districts. This map of perceptions aligns with regional analyses of environmental quality and strategic documents of Małopolskie Voivodeship, where smog, water management, and green infrastructure are considered highly relevant [66,67]. Note that only a few respondents reported ‘no such problems’, which suggests that nearly all of them feel affected by some form of environmental degradation. The case study suggests that such spatial variation is not only a function of environmental conditions but also of the intensity of local facilitation and discourse, as community initiatives tend to frame environmental issues through place-specific narratives and visible interventions.

Results on waste management confirm that rubbish is a central issue in which local communities experience and generate environmental problems. The respondents shared their opinions about how often residents engage in illegal dumping. Our analysis of variance found significant differences across the districts, with the population of Limanowski District considering the problem less prevalent than participants from Wadowicki and Miechowski Districts. The percentages of people unable to evaluate the frequency of this behaviour (‘I don’t know’) also varied, which again confirms different levels of knowledge of environmental practices in local communities. According to the literature on climate and environmental empowerment of local communities, such ‘immediate’ problems as waste dumping in forests, watercourses, or other illegal sites often spark grassroots cleaning, educational, and mobilisation activities [22,23]. From a mixed-method perspective, the presence of uncertainty in assessing waste-related practices corresponds with the case study observation that social visibility and informal discussion networks play a key role in transforming individual awareness into shared knowledge and collective norms.

This perspective receives interesting context from the results on the perceptions of local government activities and own behaviour on climate change prevention. In most districts, the local government efforts are considered ‘adequate’, an answer selected by over 50% of respondents. ‘Very good’ reached a very low percentage, and the share of ‘very bad’ was minuscule, although not zero, especially in Tarnowski District. This structure indicates a moderate perception of the role of local government: it is not enthusiastic or evidently hypercritical. It expresses an acceptance of a minimum, ‘technical’ level of effort. In light of the literature on multilevel energy and climate transition governance, this means that local governments are considered an important but not the leading actor in the process, with part of the perceived responsibility shifting to the individual and community level [8,18,24,30,33,38]. Therefore, the hypothesis that local governments play the central role in climate action (H3) cannot be fully confirmed. Communities consider local governments as responsible for some efforts, but they are not the main driving force of change. The embedded case study complements this finding by showing how community-based leadership and civic intermediaries may partially compensate for the perceived ‘technical adequacy’ of institutional action, operating as a form of soft governance at the local level.

The respondents also evaluated how much their own behaviour may affect climate change prevention. Over half of them reported ‘little’ impact, one-third considered their influence ‘large’, and about a dozen per cent reported no influence at all. The answers vary spatially. Respondents from Tarnowski District more often reported a significant impact of their actions, while those from Miechowski and Limanowski Districts tended to believe their actions to be inconsequential. Krakowski and Wadowicki Districts are dominated by ‘little’ environmental impact. This can be interpreted as a classical attitude–behaviour gap: respondents declare that ‘everybody should make an effort’ for the environment, but are more conservative about their agency. The literature on energy democracy in Poland emphasises that a limited sense of empowerment is furthered by a low level of trust in institutions and inexperience in actually co-deciding about energy policies [18,27,47,48,72]. The case study illustrates a potential pathway for addressing this gap, as collective action, co-creation of public spaces, and visible outcomes were used to strengthen perceived agency through shared responsibility rather than individualised effort.

The most ‘concrete’ dimension of environmental behaviour among the respondents is their decisions regarding home heating. The data clearly show that the primary heating system in rural Małopolskie Voivodeship remains coal-fired boilers. They were reported by about 40% of Wadowicki, Limanowski, and Tarnowski Districts, while the share drops below one-fifth in Miechowski District. The second-most common system is gas heating, particularly common in Krakowski District, where it was chosen by over half of the participants. Heat pumps are less common, reaching 27% in Miechowski District, which is an early sign of an evident shift towards new technologies. This is consistent with analyses in the NECP and Poland’s strategic documents, which show that Polish households are accustomed to fossil fuels despite the growing share of renewable energy [11,12,13]. The results are consistent with the findings by Kozera and colleagues that renewable energy projects vary across rural municipalities and depend on local government resources, advisory services, and the availability of incentive programmes [37].

The tension between the energy potential of rural areas and the actual pace of transformation is unmistakable against this backdrop. The literature on citizen energy and renewable energy communities emphasises that rural areas offer relatively favourable conditions for local renewable energy models. However, renewable energy collectives and communities still remain a potential rather than a reality in Poland [18,31,43,44,54]. The results confirm the diagnosis; residents’ decisions and attitudes indicate readiness for a change, but individual household decisions remain the dominant area of engagement (boiler replacement, photovoltaics), not yet replaced by collective efforts. These findings are consistent with Puczko’s reports on the early developmental stage of energy democracy in Poland and limited participation in energy processes [47]. The hypothesis concerning significant spatial diversification of attitudes and practices (H2) is undoubtedly confirmed; from heating systems, through perceptions of environmental problems, to the evaluation of one’s agency, each dimension demonstrates the patchwork of the energy and climate transformation in the region.

Although the study is strongly embedded in the regional context of Małopolskie Voivodeship, several of the identified patterns appear to be structural and may therefore be relevant to other rural areas in Poland and across Central and Eastern Europe. This applies in particular to the fragmented nature of energy and climate awareness, the predominance of individualised actions over collective forms of engagement, and the moderate perception of local governments as “adequate but not leading” actors in climate and energy transition processes. These characteristics are typical of rural regions where the energy transition is primarily experienced through household-level decisions—such as heating system replacement or photovoltaic installations—rather than through well-developed collective or community-based energy initiatives.

At the same time, Małopolskie Voivodeship exhibits a set of context-specific features that distinguish it from many other rural regions in Poland and Central and Eastern Europe, as described in Section 4.1. These include a relatively high intensity of regional and local climate and energy policies, the presence of extensive advisory and support programmes (e.g., LIFE-IP EkoMałopolska), a strong and active non-governmental sector, and pronounced internal territorial differentiation ranging from peripheral rural municipalities to suburban areas functionally connected to Kraków. Together, these factors create favourable conditions for the emergence of grassroots initiatives with a higher degree of organisation, visibility, and durability, such as the analysed “Ekospołeczni” project.

In rural regions characterised by weaker institutional capacity, limited access to public funding, and a smaller presence of intermediary actors—such as environmental advisors, community animators, or third-sector organisations—similar social mechanisms may emerge in more fragmented, informal, or short-lived forms. This suggests that while the barriers and needs identified in the quantitative analysis are likely to be widespread, the scale, stability, and effectiveness of community-level responses remain strongly conditioned by local institutional and social capital resources.

The findings should therefore not be interpreted as a directly transferable model of rural climate and energy transition. Instead, they provide an empirically grounded illustration of social processes operating under relatively favourable governance and policy conditions. From a comparative perspective, the results may serve as a reference point for studies of other rural regions, helping to distinguish between broadly shared social mechanisms of transition and those amplified—or constrained—by specific regional contexts.

It demonstrates that community efforts can respond to a knowledge gap, a shortage of green infrastructure, waste management issues, and a limited sense of agency. The series of workshops on circular economy, zero waste, and sustainable consumption directly address the energy and climate gap in line with the need to improve energy literacy [24,27]. The association’s plogging campaign focuses on littering, which respondents identified as the most common problem, thus integrating the community and operationalising the diagnosis. Ecoparks and cycling routes are examples of nature-based solutions and placemaking found in the literature on smart villages [47,50,53,54,61,63], while the way they are established by engaging community members in the design process contributes to a sense of ownership and empowerment. The high quality of communication acknowledged in the project’s evaluation aligns with the research on the role of communication and participation in successful transformation [23,24,26]. Therefore, ‘Ekospołeczni’ shows that local projects can serve as ‘community infrastructure’ for transformation, bringing together education, environmental action, and energy practices into a single, seamless process.

6. Conclusions

Rural Poland is a special case of energy transition and climate adaptation due to its socioeconomic structure and the ways people organise everyday lives, social relationships, and land use differently than in urban areas. It is true for neighbourhood efforts by local governments and rural community members that compose a coherent system, furthering the climate and energy transformation. By participating in emission reduction, energy efficiency improvement, and expansion of renewable energy sources, residents shape local energy and environmental policies.

Małopolskie Voivodeship, one of the regions with the most intensive deployments of climate and energy policy in Poland, is of particular value. The process is evident in the voivodeship’s strategic documents and the growing number of grassroots initiatives that residents, NGOs, and local institutions pursue. The region is also highly diversified in terms of the environment and population: from the densely urbanised Kraków Metropolitan Area to scattered rural areas where institutional resources are scarce. This diversity affects how local populations engage in climate and energy efforts. We aimed to diagnose the efforts in which individuals engage for the benefit of their local communities in rural areas of the region in the context of climate change and energy transition.

Considering the hypotheses, the empirical analyses yield several synthetic conclusions. The hypothesis positing a high level of environmental awareness in rural areas has been partially confirmed; most respondents acknowledge a relationship between energy and climate, but the number of ‘I don’t know’ answers and differences among districts suggest that knowledge is incomplete and unevenly distributed across space (H1). This suggests that policies should prioritise continuous, locally embedded forms of energy and climate education rather than short-term information campaigns, as fragmented knowledge remains a key barrier to coherent understanding. The hypothesis of significant spatial diversification of attitudes and practices has been confirmed by all indicators, from the state of the environment to the perceived agency to the structure of home heating systems (H2). From a policy perspective, this finding supports the need for territorially differentiated instruments that allow municipalities and local communities to adapt climate and energy actions to locally perceived problems rather than applying uniform solutions. The hypothesis that local governments are central to climate efforts has not been fully confirmed; people consider local governments to be ‘adequately’ active but not the main driving force of change (H3). This indicates that strengthening the energy transition in rural areas requires complementing formal local government action with intermediary actors capable of mobilising residents and coordinating bottom-up initiatives. The hypothesis that environmental awareness needs to be improved, particularly regarding the energy transition, has been confirmed unambiguously, supporting the argument for investing in long-term education, communication, and participation (H4). From a policy perspective, this implies a need to complement household-level financial incentives with instruments that strengthen local facilitation capacities, such as long-term funding for community animators, environmental advisors, or civic intermediaries operating at the municipal and inter-municipal levels.

The present results align with the literature, which interprets the climate and energy system transformation as a social process grounded in local relationships, resources, perceptions, and actions of rural communities, rather than a solely technical mechanism. They offer up-to-date insights into awareness, attitudes, and behaviours in the areas of interest related to the transition. In this regard, the article complements the body of knowledge with relevant, detailed observations, helping decision-makers guide policies towards improving the conditions for smooth transformation processes, especially in rural Poland.

The findings suggest that policies focused exclusively on technological subsidies for individual households are unlikely to fully address the social dimensions of the energy transition in rural areas. While such instruments support individual investment decisions, they do not directly strengthen collective agency, shared learning, or long-term engagement. In contrast, the results indicate that relatively low-cost interventions aimed at facilitation—such as supporting local leaders, animators, and participatory formats—may significantly enhance the effectiveness of existing climate and energy policies by bridging the gap between individual action and community-level transformation.

Importantly, the empirical results indicate that the effectiveness of policy instruments is likely to vary across different rural contexts. In areas characterised by higher environmental awareness and stronger public discourse—often located in suburban or functionally urbanised rural zones—policy measures may build more effectively on collective initiatives, participatory formats, and local leadership structures. In contrast, in more peripheral rural areas, where uncertainty, lower perceived agency, and dependence on individual household decisions remain dominant, priority should be given to strengthening basic facilitation capacities, locally embedded education, and trust-building mechanisms before more advanced collective energy solutions are promoted. This differentiation suggests that territorially sensitive policy design, rather than uniform support schemes, is essential for enhancing the social effectiveness of climate and energy transition policies in rural regions.