Sustainable Development Through the Lens of Climate Change: A Diagnosis of Attitudes in Southeastern Rural Poland

Abstract

Climate change today is considered one of the most severe global problems. Additionally, it is inherently linked to sustainable development, particularly considering that it is a widespread problem affecting virtually all regions, countries, and continents. Therefore, it is essential to monitor its perception and behaviours towards it. Hence, there is the need for a diagnosis of climate-change attitudes found in various parts of the world. This premise is the foundation for the original study reported in the article. It offers the results of a survey of 300 adult rural residents from southeastern Poland. The article aims to diagnose the respondents’ attitudes towards climate change in the context of sustainable development premises. Respondents’ opinions on the potential activities their local communities could take to be more sustainable are a substantial part of the results. The most common suggestions were low-emission public transport (in the Wadowice District, it was 55% of responses) and road and street redesign to promote safe cycling and walking environments (in the Kraków and Tarnów Districts, over 50% of responses). The respondents found the promotion of sustainable development among youth and older people to be the least important (in three out of five districts, this percentage did not exceed 20%). The other thematic block was specific environmental protection and sustainable development activities that society should prioritise over a five-year horizon. The participants considered the development of new ways to eliminate waste in total production (in the Tarnów District, over 73% of responses), new technologies to curb the carbon footprint and GHG emissions (over 63% in the Wadowice District), and new technologies to scrape and monitor air pollutants (approx. 70% in the Kraków District).

1. Introduction

The world first heard of the idea of sustainable development in 1987 when the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) published the report Our Common Future, also known as the Brundtland Report after the head of the commission, Gro Harlem Brundtland. It is considered a milestone because of the guiding principles for sustainable development as it is understood today [1,2].

The Brundtland Report was the first to discuss drafting a change policy to such an extensive degree. The United Nations’ ‘global agenda for change’ proposed long-term environmental strategies and indicated the need for intensified international cooperation, including between developing and developed countries. It was also intended to ‘help define shared perceptions of long-term environmental issues and the appropriate efforts needed to deal successfully with the problems of protecting and enhancing the environment, a long-term agenda for action during the coming decades, and aspirational goals for the world community’ [1] (p. 6). The report called for a strategy to reconcile development and the environment through what is commonly referred to today as sustainable development. It offers the following definition of sustainable development: ‘Sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’ [1].

One could assume that the global, social, and economic transition towards sustainable development is the critical challenge today [3]. The diversity of the definitions of ‘sustainable development’ is partially due to the broad context of the use of the term. It can be construed relatively simply as proposed by J.R. Ehrenfeld, who describes it as ‘the possibility that human and other forms of life will flourish on the planet forever’ [4] (p. 5). Still, as the author himself admitted, there are certain barriers to this effect, and people need to change their individual and collective behaviours to overcome them. J.R. Ehrenfeld saw the main problem in ‘the unending consumption’ typical of humanity today. In his view, the cultural transformations necessary to introduce sustainable development should cover how people think and perceive reality. Therefore, sustainable development is feasible, but ‘by focusing on the “being” mode of human existence rather than on the unsustainable “having” mode we cling to now’ [4] (p. 5). Apparently, this interpretation is highly general. Moreover, as A.M. Rosem commented, ‘Although this definition incorporates environmental and societal aspects, the timescale is impractical’ [5] (p. 3).

M. Ben-Eli [3] (p. 3) exhibits just as broad an approach, ‘this challenge is unprecedented in scope. Its context is the planet as a whole. It requires a fundamental shift in consciousness as well as action. It calls for a fresh vision, a new dream and new approaches for shaping evolving new realities.’

Concepts of sustainable development usually concentrate within the specific discipline to which they are applied. The multidimensional nature of sustainable development implies that it is a systemic challenge [4]. Therefore, sustainable development studies should focus on three aspects of reality, namely, environmental, economic, and social. These dimensions are inherently intertwined because the common denominator of the necessary actions is to restrict the adverse human impact on the natural environment (the environmental and economic aspect) by meeting social needs [6]. As T. Kuhlman [7] indicated, the attempt to reconcile development and the environment means ‘needs vs. resources’ or the pursuit of long- and short-term goals, where the challenges of today coagulate around making positive changes in society as D. Lewis [8] proposed, anchoring the socioeconomic dimension of the necessary changes. Hence, sustainable development is usually perceived from the perspective of three dimensions: social, economic, and environmental [5,7,9]. This triad is reflected in the definition of sustainable development adopted by the United Nations Organization in the Agenda for Sustainable Development: ‘Development is a multidimensional undertaking to achieve a higher quality of life for all people. Economic development, social development and environmental protection are interdependent and mutually reinforcing components of sustainable development’ [10]. M. Ben-Eli [3] also emphasised the relationship between the global population and the environment, simultaneously deeming the current definition of sustainable development insufficient. The bone of contention is intergenerational justice, which he considers simultaneously important and problematic because of issues with defining the needs of posterity clearly. Therefore, he finds it more prudent to link the population to the carrying capacity of its environment. The primary reason for this is that these relationships can be investigated with potentially quantifiable variables, such as population size, pace of resource consumption, well-being metrics, and quality-of-life metrics. In light of these premises, he offers a versatile definition of sustainable development: ‘A dynamic equilibrium in the process of interaction between a population and the carrying capacity of its environment such that the population develops to express its full potential without producing irreversible, adverse effects on the carrying capacity of the environment upon which it depends’ [3] (p. 3).

To complete the picture of the pursuit of sustainable development principles, one has to consider the efforts made by European Union institutions and partner states. Broadly speaking, these activities focus on realising the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals in such areas as People (including eliminating various forms of poverty and hunger), Planet (prevention of environment degradation), Well-being (affluent life in harmony with nature), Peace (integration of societies), Partnership (development efforts through global partnership), and Sectoral activities of the EU [11].

Based on the UN’s Agenda, the Sustainable Development Observatory has identified critical policy areas for shifting to sustainable development in the EU. These are

–

‘a fair transition to a low-carbon, circular and resource-efficient economy;

–

Transition towards a socially inclusive society and economy—decent work and human rights;

–

Transition to sustainable food production and consumption;

–

Investing in innovation and long-term infrastructure modernisation and encouraging sustainable businesses;

–

Making trade work for global sustainable development’ [12].

It is a broad response to the current global-scale challenges as identified today [13]. Therefore, development should follow the principles and values whereby care for social and economic interests has to consider environmental goals, as emphasised by such authors as M. Ceccarelli et al. [14].

2. Sustainable Development and Climate Change

Sustainable development is undoubtedly linked to the climate change currently observed on Earth. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [15] ‘sustainable development and climate change are fundamentally connected’ [16]. The hypotheses put forward in recent IPCC reports [15,17,18] leave no room for doubt that there is a relationship between the pursuit of sustainable development goals reported in the latest UN report, The Sustainable Development Goals Report 2024, and climate-change effects. The consequences of climate change can hinder sustainable development goals, while effective countermeasures, like climate-change adaptation, help pursue such goals as the reduction of environmental degradation or poverty amelioration [16]. This enhances public pressure on increasing the efforts promoting sustainability in socioeconomic reality [19] and directing the struggle towards improving existential security [20]. This aspect is vital because, according to the report, ‘It finds that only 17 per cent of the SDG targets are on track, nearly half are showing minimal or moderate progress, and progress on over one third has stalled or even regressed’ [21] (p. 2). Several of the 17 goals in the 2030 Agenda are directly linked to climate and environmental protection in a broad sense:

–

Goal 2. End hunger, achieve food security and improved nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture;

–

Goal 6. Ensure availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all;

–

Goal 7. Ensure access to affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern energy for all;

–

Goal 13. Take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts;

–

Goal 14. Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas, and marine resources for sustainable development;

–

Goal 15. Protect, restore, and promote sustainable use of terrestrial ecosystems, sustainably manage forests, combat desertification, halt and reverse land degradation, and halt biodiversity loss [22].

The 2030 Agenda clearly defines climate change as a substantial component of sustainable development. Furthermore, it focuses on national policy goals related to climate transformations through such means as institutional capacity building.

Considering the selected definitions of sustainable development quoted above, the systemic approach to the process is worth investigating. The specific focal points are the environmental, economic, and social dimensions. They remain relevant in light of progressing climate change and its impact on the perception of sustainable development. The economic aspect of sustainable development emphasises the view that ‘a sustainable society requires long-term economic development rather than just economic growth’ [5] (p. 10), which is supposed to ensure a suitable approach orienting business towards sustainable development [23]. This means that a vision of a sustainable future should determine the spectrum of addressing social needs, modelling the long-term vector for reinforcing the economic performance of actions taken [24]. Some authors differentiate between strong and weak sustainable development [25,26,27]. Strong sustainable development is founded on natural capital, such as the natural resources of the planet, including air, water, soil and rocks, and all living organisms. They all make up ecosystems irreplaceable by human capital in the form of knowledge, skills, habits, work, or creativity. These systems are complementary but not interchangeable. Weak sustainable development is ‘based on the concept of a constant total capital stock, which is the sum of human and natural capital, and allows for human capital to substitute for natural capital’ [5] (p. 10).

The social aspect of sustainable development encompasses many factors, including equality (within and between generations) and social cohesion [28] followed by human health and well-being [29]. The other area, emerging from fundamental human rights [30] is linked directly to environmental protection in such contexts as factors that affect human health directly [31]. This means access to healthy and clean food and drinking water, safe removal and storage of waste, and an environment free from harmful substances that could exhibit diverse adverse effects on living organisms.

The environmental aspect of sustainable development is critical, considering the advancing climate change. In general, it is linked to the ‘ability of the planet to support life’ [5] (p. 8). It is also affected by the loss of biodiversity related to the dynamic economic development as emphasised by M. R. Palombo [32], M. W. Kleespies et al. [33], and E. Lazarus et al. [34]. Other relevant factors include deforestation investigated by D. B. Lindenmayer [35] and Y. Ma [36] and harmful emissions to air, water, and soil, leading to contamination or acidification as pointed out by M. Krstić et al. [37], G. El-Sharkawy et al. [38], and M. Gavrilescu [39]. Yet another aspect that needs to be considered is the extraction and combustion of fossil fuels, emphasised by A. Saxena et al. [40] and H. Hou et al. [41]. Additionally, industrial or agricultural wastewater and runoff are also detrimental to the environment, leading to eutrophication and soil degradation [37] by changing the structure and chemical properties of the latter [5] (p. 8). Curbing the processes leading to permanent degradation in the productivity of resources critical to life and any growth of societies and economies today and in the future is central to this aspect [42]. One more significant aspect in this context of the environmental dimension of sustainable development is the protection of intergenerational heritage rooted in the right of posterity to access the riches of the planet, as stated by O. Spijkers [43]. Still, it is not only Earth’s resources that play an important role but also landscape qualities or the abundance of water ecosystems as emphasised by H. Pan et al. [44] and H. Zou [45].

Climate change, including the stabilisation of atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHGs), is undoubtedly a central challenge to sustainable development [46,47,48]. Greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), and nitrous oxide (N₂O), absorb infrared radiation emitted towards the Earth. This causes the greenhouse effect and it follows that the global temperature increases [5,49]. The greenhouse effect affects weather patterns, leading to climate change and impacting ecosystems. The sources of these emissions are mainly electricity generation (from fossil fuels), transport [50], industry (such as concrete production) [51], and agriculture. The latter is problematic primarily due to animal production [52], including the use of nitrogen and fermentation in ruminants [47], and nitrous oxide emissions [53] from field fertilisation, which was discussed by G. Fusco et al. [54]. According to M. Tvaronavičienė [55] (p. 2), ‘Of all the anthropogenic greenhouse gases emitted in 2014, 56% came from carbon dioxide (CO₂), which is caused by the use of fossil fuels, while the second part came from CO₂ from deforestation (17%)’.

Although all countries emit GHGs, the largest polluters include the USA, China, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Japan, Iran, Mexico, and Saudi Arabia. M. Filonchyk [47] reported that, together, these countries account for 64% of the global GHG emissions. L. Kutlu identified a clear association between an economy’s GDP and its GHG emissions, indicating business practices and technology development as factors in good (GDP) and bad (emissions) economic results [49].

The Paris Agreement is critical for efforts to prevent climate change. It is an international treaty from 2015, in which countries of the world undertook to control global warming and mitigate its impact for the first time in history [56]. The agreement provides for curbing the increase in Earth’s temperature to 2 °C in the twenty-first century, and preferably to 1.5 °C, compared to the pre-industrial era [47,56,57,58,59]. The other target requires a more than 40% reduction in GHG emissions by 2030. The authors of the recent 2024 UN report believe there is a mere 14% chance of limiting the warming pace to 1.5 °C globally. The most probable scenario, which takes into account the current national policies, including those in the USA, sets the warming trajectory to about 3 °C [21] (p. 34).

In response to the Paris Agreement, the European Parliament adopted a resolution in November 2019 calling on the EU to establish climate neutrality by 2050 [60]. It was set as a long-term climate goal along with limiting the emission of GHGs by 55% until 2030. The EU was the first large economy with a plan to reduce emissions under the Paris Agreement. In 2021, the European Parliament approved the EU climate law under the Green Deal. It is a strategy aimed at guiding the European economic transition to make it sustainable and climate-neutral by 2050 [61,62,63]. According to the transition monitoring of all member states, emissions are being curbed. In its 2023 resolution, the European Parliament reported an unsatisfactory pace of change and confirmed the UN’s position that, should the current global climate policy be maintained, the global temperature would increase by 2.8 °C by the end of the century [18,21,61].

3. Climate Change in the Context of Poland

Consecutive annual reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) clearly indicate that climate change and its consequences, like the increased intensity of heat waves, are of anthropogenic origin [15,17,18]. The most alarming effect is the growing number of extreme heat waves. Their probability grew 90 times between 1951–1980 and the 2020s [64,65] (p. 7).

Recent years have seen record-breaking temperatures. Measurements indicate that 2024 was the warmest year in the history of measurements [66]. June, July, and August 2024 were about 0.1 °C warmer globally than any other summer in NASA’s records, since 1880.

Moreover, August 2024 ‘set a new monthly temperature record, capping Earth’s hottest summer since global records’ [66].

Growing temperatures lead to other adverse climate events, threatening virtually all continents and global regions. Nevertheless, according to the European Environment Agency [67], Europe is heating up the most, nearly twice as fast as the global average. This has been the case since the 1980s. The main reason is the proportion of the European ice in the Arctic, which is the fastest-warming land on Earth. It is also affected by changes in atmospheric circulation, which promote summer heat waves. The melting ice caps change the precipitation structure. Heavy, extreme rains grow more common. These changes divide Europe into an area at an increasing risk of extreme floods (such as Italy, Greece, Slovenia, Sweden, and Norway in 2023) and a part affected by permanent droughts [68].

The hottest summer in Europe was in 2024. European Environment Agency [69] data show that dangerous floods affected about two million people in Central Europe in September alone, and floods in Valencia in October killed 230 people. Months-long fires engulfed over 370,000 hectares of forest.

Poland is not safe from extreme weather events either. It also suffers from increasing heat waves and other weather anomalies [70,71]. They are forecast to grow even more fierce and frequent. Experts expect increasingly intense heat waves and stronger winds. Droughts already affect farming, mainly in the growing season, and will intensify. Changes in water accessibility will harm crops. It will first hit food producers, and then consumers. Heavy summer rains will cause flooding in the montane tributaries of the Vistula and Odra, followed by a swelling moving down the rivers. Consequently, the Baltic Sea will rise, potentially inundating low-lying areas, such as the Vistula Fens. Places where high cliffs could be eroded are also at risk [72,73]. Cities are in a particularly poor position due to searing heat waves. For example, over the past two decades, the ten largest Polish cities had over 600 heat waves in total. More than sixty per cent of them took place between 2012 and 2022. This is a clear sign that the problems have intensified [65] (p. 7).

The need for action for the climate is emphasised more and more in Poland. Poles’ awareness of the necessary trajectory of changes is evolving [74]. The climate-policy efforts in Poland align with the EU’s environmental stewardship approaches. Poland is pursuing the National Energy and Climate Plan 2030. This is the central document for the transition in the Polish energy sector and other industries [75]. Similar to the plans of other EU member states, the Polish national plan covers a 10-year horizon for climate, from 2021 to 2030. National plans are part of the Clean Energy for all Europeans package adopted in 2019. They indicate how EU countries intend to address five dimensions of the energy union:

–

‘decarbonisation

–

energy efficiency

–

energy security

–

internal energy market

–

research, innovation and competitiveness’ [75].

All member states are obliged to report on the progress of their national plans every other year. The reports concern technicalities and the process leading to the targets. This approach necessitates coordinating operations across all governmental institutions, affecting public and private development projects [75].

Poland has numerous programmes and projects concerning climate and environmental protection. One of them is the National Air Protection Programme 2025, a strategic document of the Minister of Climate and Environment. Its mid-term horizon is 2030, and its long-term horizon spans until 2040. The programme’s main objectives include improving air quality, preventing climate change, and setting new guidelines for these efforts. The operational coordination under the programme involves integrating other policies into the air-quality policy framework, including the housing and municipal sector, transport, clean energy, and renewable energy sources [76].

Another relevant programme is the Energy Policy of Poland until 2040 (EPP2040). It is aligned with the National Energy and Climate Plan for 2021–2030, but it covers new goals as well, mainly to limit coal use in residential buildings. ‘The Energy Policy of Poland until 2040 takes into account changes in the energy mix, as well as the need to ensure: energy security, fair transformation, recovery after the COVID pandemic, stable labour market, sustainable development of the economy and strengthening its competitiveness with optimum use of Poland’s own energy resources’ [77].

Just like in other parts of the country, climate policy is among the main areas of activity for local governments in southeastern Poland. The actions local governments take are consistent with EU and national guidelines. The local governments are executing the Regional Climate and Energy Action Plan for Małopolskie Voivodeship 2021–2030 (2023). Its primary objective is to integrate such areas as energy, transport, construction, economy (including industry and waste management), agriculture, forests, and land use. They are central to the regional climate policy. These sectors coincide with those covered in the EU Strategy 2050 [78].

The Małopolska Voivodeship still consumes relatively little energy from renewable sources. On the other hand, hard coal is used the most—it accounts for over half (51%) of all raw materials used to produce electricity and district heating. In turn, hard coal and natural gas are mainly used for energy production in the economy. In contrast, the share of renewable energy sources in 2020 in the Małopolska Voivodeship was only 6% of final energy consumption [79]. RES installations dominate in construction, mainly biomass boilers and photovoltaic panels. At the end of 2022, there were nearly 550,000 RES installations with a total capacity of 10,380 MW operating in the Voivodeship. It is indicated that biomass boilers accounted for 47% and photovoltaic panels for 40% of all RES installations in the region [80].

Another important scheme in the Małopolskie Voivodeship is the Strategic Programme Environmental Protection for 2021–2027, with 2030 prospects. It aligns with the content and time frame of Strategy ‘Małopolska 2030′ [81]. The programme pursues the strategy’s strategic goal towards climate neutrality and a high-quality environment. The programme’s actions include the protection of biodiversity and landscape, water management, environmental education, and the advancement of the circular economy [82].

Another noteworthy project in the Małopolskie Voivodeship is LIFE-IP EkoMałopolska 2021–2030. It aims to realise the Regional Action Plan for Climate and Energy for Małopolskie Voivodeship. The project attracted nearly all districts of the Małopolskie Voivodeship, and many partners, two of whom are from Germany: the Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy and the Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus–Senftenberg. The primary objectives of LIFE-IP EKOMAŁOPOLSKA are to mobilise EU and state funding to pursue the plan’s priorities, develop the institutional capabilities and tools that can promote the implementation of the climate policy programmes and projects, conduct a low-emission transition of the heating equipment market, create green workplaces, change public attitudes to more environmentally minded, and transfer good practices to other regions in Poland and Europe [83].

Climate action in southeastern Poland is important due to the specific nature of the changes taking place there. One of the basic indicators used to diagnose climate change in the region is changes in air temperature. Based on observations over the last 50 years, it can be concluded that there is a strong upward trend in the region. During this period, the increase in average values can be estimated at around 2 °C (i.e., around 0.4 °C/10 years). They are highest in the eastern part (Tarnów) and slightly lower in the southern areas of the Voivodeship. The second indicator is precipitation, which is unpredictable due to the varied terrain. It is predicted that in the coming decades, the uneven distribution of precipitation will intensify. This will lead to floods and droughts. In addition, extreme storms and strong winds are becoming more frequent in the region. These phenomena will also intensify [84].

All of these phenomena certainly have an impact on the region’s inhabitants and their activities, particularly agricultural activities. Extreme weather events cause erosion and the loss of soil biodiversity, a significant decrease in soil moisture, and, as a consequence, a decrease in crop yields. At the same time, agriculture has a major impact on climate change. This is important for a region where agriculture plays a major role. It is worth noting that, according to data from the 2020 General Agricultural Census, farms in the Małopolska Voivodeship cover 664,277 ha, which accounts for 43.7% of its area [85].

4. Materials and Methods

This article aims to diagnose the attitudes towards climate change among the southeastern Polish population in the context of sustainable development premises.

The respondents were 300 randomly selected adult residents of rural areas in the Małopolskie Voivodeship. The research results presented in this article were obtained as part of the implementation of the project “Climate change—diagnosis of attitudes and behaviour of inhabitants of Malopolska’s rural areas”. The selection of the districts reflects the regional diversity of the voivodeship: 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 survey design reported in the article covers the research areas referred to in the EIB Climate Survey report [86].

The collected survey responses were statistically analysed in IBM SPSS v. 25. The authors calculated basic descriptive statistics and performed the Shapiro–Wilk test, one-way analysis of variance, χ² tests, Fisher’s exact tests, and Kruskal–Wallis tests.

The significance level was set at a typical α = 0.05. These tests are

–

Used to compare proportions of answers across groups;

–

Fisher’s exact tests are employed when χ² test assumptions are not satisfied:

(a)

No more than 20% of cells have expected counts below 5;

(b)

The minimum expected count is greater than 1.

5. Results

The survey involved 300 rural residents from five districts in the Małopolskie Voivodeship: Wadowicki, Miechowski, Krakowski, Limanowski, and Tarnowski, with 60 persons from each. The sample consisted of 125 men (41.7%) and 175 women (58.3%) aged 15 to 86 (M = 42.30; SD = 17.59).

Their educational structure is relatively favourable. It means that 44% of the respondents had secondary education, and nearly one quarter were university graduates. Another quarter had finished vocational or trade schools. Over 63% of the respondents reported being certified professionals. 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 respondents from the selected districts shared their opinions on two aspects of the climate-change policy: its impact on economic growth and the rural standard of living. No statistically significant differences were found among the opinions of residents of different districts on the impact of the climate-change policy on economic growth: χ² (4) = 1.81; p = 0.771. The data are presented in

Table 1. Impact of the climate-change policy on economic growth by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	TOTAL
slow down or curb economic growth	N	33	39	38	34	36	180
	%	55.0%	65.0%	63.3%	56.7%	60.0%	60.0%
drive economic growth	N	27	21	22	26	24	120
	%	45.0%	35.0%	36.7%	43.3%	40.0%	40.0%

Source: original work based on The EIB Climate Survey. Citizens call for green recovery. European Investment Bank. (2022). Luxembourg [86].

. All respondents tended to point out economic growth slowdown or limitation in the context of the policy. Sixty per cent chose this answer. Those from the Miechowski and Krakowski Districts indicated negative effects of the climate-change policy slightly more often. Respondents from the Wadowicki and Limanowski Districts appreciated the policy outcomes a little more.

No statistically significant differences were found among the opinions of the residents of different districts on the impact of the climate-change policy on the standard of living: χ² (4) = 1.45; p = 0.836. The data are presented in

Table 2. Impact of the climate-change policy on standard of living by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski	TOTAL
deteriorate standard of living	N	25	25	27	28	22	25
	%	41.7%	41.7%	45.0%	46.7%	36.7%	41.7%
improve standard of living	N	35	35	33	32	38	35
	%	58.3%	58.3%	55.0%	53.3%	63.3%	58.3%

Source: original work based on The EIB Climate Survey. Citizens call for green recovery. European Investment Bank. (2022). Luxembourg [86].

. The difference is clear in the aggregate sample. The climate-change policy will improve the standard of living, according to over 58% of the respondents. Residents of the Tarnowski District are slightly more optimistic (63%), while a deteriorated standard of living is expected mainly in the Limanowski and Krakowski Districts.

A significant portion of the results is opinions of the rural population on the actions their local communities should take to improve their sustainability. Four statistically significant differences were found (

Table 3. Shares of respondents indicating specific actions local communities should take to be more sustainable by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski
introduce water-consumption limits	N	23	27	22	19	14	χ2 (4) = 6.89 p = 0.142
	%	38.30%	45.00%	36.70%	31.70%	23.30%
introduce and enforce local emission limits for buildings and vehicles	N	19	28	17	9	17	χ2 (4) = 14.60 p = 0.006 V = 0.22
	%	31.70%	46.70%	28.30%	15.00%	28.30%
establish local recycling centres	N	26	22	27	28	27	χ2 (4) = 1.49 p = 0.828
	%	43.30%	36.70%	45.00%	46.70%	45.00%
introduce low-emission public transport	N	33	24	23	20	27	χ2 (4) = 6.64 p = 0.156
	%	55.00%	40.00%	38.30%	33.30%	45.00%
require/build energy-efficient buildings	N	13	14	12	12	14	χ2 (4) = 0.39 p = 0.983
	%	21.70%	23.30%	20.00%	20.00%	23.30%
promote public transport or eco-friendly vehicles	N	25	19	27	11	24	χ2 (4) = 12.02 p = 0.017 V = 0.20
	%	41.70%	31.70%	45.00%	18.30%	40.00%
redesign streets/roads to encourage safe travel by bicycles and on foot	N	26	22	30	29	32	χ2 (4) = 4.08 p = 0.396
	%	43.30%	36.70%	50.00%	48.30%	53.30%
create local composting centres or household waste-collection programmes	N	14	25	13	10	15	χ2 (4) = 11.29 p = 0.024 V = 0.20
	%	23.30%	41.70%	21.70%	16.70%	25.00%
promote sustainable development among youth and older people	N	11	11	14	9	21	χ2 (4) = 8.63 p = 0.071
	%	18.30%	18.30%	23.30%	15.00%	35.00%
other	N	0	2	0	0	2	Fisher’s exact test p = 0.222
	%	0.00%	3.30%	0.00%	0.00%	3.30%
I don’t believe my community should do anything to be more sustainable	N	1	11	3	6	4	χ2 (4) = 12.66 p = 0.013 V = 0.21
	%	1.70%	18.30%	5.00%	10.00%	6.70%

Source: original work based on The EIB Climate Survey. Citizens call for green recovery. European Investment Bank. (2022). Luxembourg [86].

). The strength of all the effects was low. Only a few answer options were selected by more than 50% of the respondents in individual districts. These were the deployment of low-emission public transport (55% in the Wadowicki District) and the redesign of roads/streets to encourage safe cycling and walking as methods of travelling (50% in the Krakowski District and about 53% in the Tarnowski District). The respondents were not as fond of water-consumption limits (45% in the Miechowski District), introduction and enforcement of local emission limits for buildings and vehicles (nearly 47% in the Miechowski District), or the promotion of public transport or eco-friendly vehicles (45% in the Krakowski District). The answer concerning establishing local recycling centres is a category in and of itself because it was appreciated in all districts except the Miechowski District. In the other districts, it was selected by 43% in the Wadowicki District to nearly 47% in the Limanowski District. Apparently, the promotion of sustainable development among youth and older people was the least important to the respondents (from a mere 15% in the Limanowski District to 35% in the Tarnowski District). Note that over 18% of respondents from the Miechowski District did not believe their community should do anything to be more sustainable. In the Wadowicki District, this answer was chosen by less than 2% (Table 3, Figure 1).

The representatives of rural southeastern Poland were asked to indicate specific environmental-protection and sustainable-development activities that should be prioritised for the public in the five years to come in order to determine their attitude towards the issues investigated in the study. Four statistically significant differences were found (

Table 4. Shares of respondents indicating specific environmental protection and sustainable development activities that society should prioritise over a five-year horizon by district.

		Wadowicki	Miechowski	Krakowski	Limanowski	Tarnowski
new ways to eliminate waste in the entire production industry	N	43	33	38	35	44	χ2 (4) = 6.77 p = 0.149
	%	71.70%	55.00%	63.30%	58.30%	73.30%
new technologies to curb carbon and GHG emissions	N	41	31	34	33	39	χ2 (4) = 4.92 p = 0.296
	%	68.30%	51.70%	56.70%	55.00%	65.00%
new technologies for scraping and monitoring air pollutants	N	38	29	40	26	29	χ2 (4) = 10.28 p = 0.036
	%	63.30%	48.30%	66.70%	43.30%	48.30%
solutions to address the impact of extreme-weather events	N	18	23	22	17	20	χ2 (4) = 1.95 p = 0.745
	%	30.00%	38.30%	36.70%	28.30%	33.30%
fuel-efficient vehicles available and affordable to all	N	36	25	40	24	30	χ2 (4) = 12.81 p = 0.012 V = 0.21
	%	60.00%	41.70%	66.70%	40.00%	50.00%
harvesting clean drinking water from rainwater and fog	N	34	21	27	19	21	χ2 (4) = 10.44 p = 0.034 V = 0.19
	%	56.70%	35.00%	45.00%	31.70%	35.00%
support for popularisation of public electric transport	N	33	26	28	17	19	χ2 (4) = 11.93 p = 0.018 V = 0.20
	%	55.00%	43.30%	46.70%	28.30%	31.70%
prediction of the best time and place for planting and seeding to prevent food waste	N	14	21	20	11	19	χ2 (4) = 6.07 p = 0.194
	%	23.30%	35.00%	33.30%	18.30%	31.70%
support for research on life in space and other planets to address environmental protection challenges (such as overpopulation and climate change)	N	7	4	4	9	7	χ2 (4) = 3.38 p = 0.496
	%	11.70%	6.70%	6.70%	15.00%	11.70%
other	N	1	1	0	1	2	Fisher’s exact test p = 0.961
	%	1.70%	1.70%	0.00%	1.70%	3.30%
I don’t know	N	1	14	3	10	3	χ2 (4) = 22.09 p < 0.001 V = 0.27
	%	1.70%	23.30%	5.00%	16.70%	5.00%

Source: original work based on The EIB Climate Survey. Citizens call for green recovery. European Investment Bank. (2022). Luxembourg [86].

). The strength of all the effects was low. The respondents seem to have considered the development of new methods for waste elimination in production the most important (over 73% of answers in the Tarnowski District and nearly 72% in the Wadowicki District). Furthermore, they considered it necessary to develop new technologies to curb carbon and GHG emissions (over 68% of answers in the Wadowicki District and 65% in the Tarnowski District) and new technologies for scraping and monitoring air pollutants (about 67% in the Krakowski District and 63% in the Wadowicki District). Moreover, nearly 67% of the respondents in the Krakowski District and 60% in the Wadowicki District indicated the need to make fuel-efficient vehicles available and affordable to all. Notably, almost 57% of the respondents from the Wadowicki District believed harvesting clean drinking water from rainwater and fog to be important in the future. The importance of the creation of solutions to address the impact of extreme weather events ranged from about 28% of the respondents from the Limanowski District up to about 38% in the Miechowski District. The share of the answer concerning support for research on life in space and other planets to address environmental protection challenges (such as overpopulation and climate change) is interesting. It was selected mainly by the Limanowski District population (15%) and the Wadowicki District and the Tarnowski District (about 12% each). Nearly a quarter of the respondents from the Miechowski District chose ‘I don’t know’, while in the Wadowicki District, it was less than 2% (Table 4, Figure 2).

6. Discussion

The problem of global climate change today attracts attention in many countries and circles, also in the context of sustainable development. The issues were combined under the CD-LINKS project (Linking Climate and Development Policies—Leveraging International Networks and Knowledge Sharing), for example. Studies under the project yielded action strategies for low-emission schemes [87]. The starting point was to identify the relationship between climate policy and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The project concluded that most countries probably would not be able to deliver their NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions) and that ‘the global reduction expected from all NDCs is inconsistent with the policy efforts to limit warming to well below 2 °C’ [88]. Moreover, it paved the way for a better understanding of the relationships between climate change goals and Sustainable Development Goals in the context of national and local priorities.

Another example of such activity is the sustainable development and climate-change reports of the International Union of Concerned Scientists [89].

The 2023 Climate Action and the Environment; Energy report for the European Commission [90] demonstrates that over three-fourths (77%) of EU citizens today consider climate change a serious issue. Citizens of Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Malta, the Netherlands, Austria, Finland, and Sweden perceive climate change as the primary global problem in many aspects. For most EU citizens, the responsibility for climate-change prevention and sustainable development lies primarily with the European Union (56%), followed by national governments (53%). Only 35% of EU residents believe they themselves are responsible for addressing climate-change impacts. For an overwhelming majority of the respondents (86%), energy efficiency in general requires EU and national efforts, also to further sustainable development. This means the introduction of incentives for thermal performance improvement of buildings and integration with renewable-energy sources. The supposed objective is to improve energy efficiency and advance the green economy [90].

Such a high level of interest in climate action in the field of energy efficiency is not confirmed by the authors’ research conducted in rural areas of southeastern Poland. Only slightly more than 20% of respondents indicated the need to take such action for the sustainable development of their local community by designing and constructing energy-efficient buildings. On the other hand, respondents were significantly more likely to consider the promotion of public transport or environmentally friendly vehicles as important for their community (approx. 35% of responses).

The latest report for the European Commission from 2024 addresses the attitudes of European citizens towards the EU’s energy policy. A substantial majority of the participants (81%) believe the pursuit of climate neutrality to be a method for Europe to counteract climate change and further sustainable development. Most of the European population perceives the EU energy policy as a prioritisation of affordable energy prices for consumers. Almost every third believes the policy means investments in innovative energy technology or the reduction of energy consumption in Europe as a whole [91].

Analysis by X.M. Chen et al. [92] identified significant aspects of relationships between the dynamics of climate change and human environmental conditions (including a growing mortality rate). The authors argue that human capital is central to the development and maintenance of a sustainable socioeconomic world. They propose creating a global climate-change human-mortality-rate database. It could support the process of drafting environmental impact strategies and policies, helping with climate-change adaptation, resilience, and sustainable economic development.

The awareness of climate change and its social impacts among the general Polish population is regularly monitored in surveys by the Centre for Public Opinion Research. Its 2018 report [93] demonstrates that many Poles (37%) are aware of the global and local risks of climate change. For over half of the sample, it is only one of many dangers. When asked about what actions should be taken to counteract climate change, more than half of the respondents believed that ‘the problem of climate change has to be addressed, but the countermeasures should be introduced gradually to control the costs’ [93] (p. 7), and about one-third expected immediate action. In 2018, a vast majority of the respondents (72%) considered it a good idea to phase out coal, while every fifth respondent believed the future of Polish energy generation to be founded on coal.

Poles’ opinions, also regarding the latter issue, changed in the CPOR report 2021 [94]. According to this report, most Poles (77%) consider climate change a threat, and just as in the survey mentioned above, more than half perceive it as one of many dangers. Overall, Poles did understand the need for energy transition from coal to RES at the time. Interestingly, a similar share of the respondents supported a coal phase-out (74%), and similarly to 2018, one-fifth believed that ‘energy generation should be founded mainly on national bituminous coal resources’ [94] (p. 6).

At this point, the attitudes of the respondents from rural areas of southeastern Poland participating in the authors’ research about energy transition are important. For almost 60% of respondents in the entire sample, the direction of change should include the development of new technologies that reduce carbon dioxide and greenhouse-gas emissions. In addition, more than half of the respondents consider it important to develop new technologies for cleaning and monitoring air pollutants.

The results published in the report by the CEM Market and Public Opinion Research Institute, Perception of Climate Change in Lesser Poland [95] can be interestingly juxtaposed with the results of the present survey of southeastern rural Poland. The participants were aware of their limited knowledge of climate change; nearly one-fourth declared poor insight into the topic. Half of the population, both rural and urban, admitted they would like to know more about climate change. The respondents were asked to indicate actions that have been or might be taken in the Małopolskie Voivodeship to control climate change. Their primary choices were using renewable energy and replacing coal-fired boilers and furnaces with more environmentally friendly systems. Moreover, they considered waste curbing and increasing the number of green spaces important directions as well. Other actions to combat climate change, according to the Małopolskie Voivodeship population, include reducing coal consumption (every fourth respondent), promoting public transport, and ‘banning old diesel cars from the roads’ [95]. Water- and energy-consumption limits ranked last among the efforts to control climate-change impacts. A comparison of these results with the results of the survey conducted by the authors could offer interesting insights. The shares of respondents from the five selected districts in the Małopolskie Voivodeship who indicated water-consumption limits and the promotion of public transport or eco-friendly vehicles as the actions to make their communities more sustainable were about 35% each.

The respondents also pointed out the impact that climate-change policies will have on the standard of living of residents. For more than half (58%) of respondents, these policies will improve the standard of living of rural residents. For comparison, the report “Climate change in the perception of the residents of Małopolska” from a 2023 study shows that residents’ opinions tend to be cautious about measures to combat climate change. At the same time, almost one in ten respondents believe that climate change does not affect them personally at the moment, but that in the future the impact of the climate crisis on their lives will be significant or very significant (a total of almost 70% of responses) [96].

The evolution of sustainable development in Poland has been analysed over the years in numerous studies, including by A. Raszkowski et al., A. Barsza et al., and M. K. Widomski [97,98,99,100]. To a somewhat narrower extent, this issue is explored at the level of rural areas in Poland, e.g., in studies by K. Smedzik-Ambroży et al. and P. Dziekański et al. [100,101]. They discuss the scope of necessary development and explore the key aspects of insufficient progress in this process, emphasising economic and demogaphic reasons [102], which are also pointed out by the authors of the presented study. Moreover, studies on the pace and scope of the equal development of rural areas in Poland and in other countries, providing a comparison with the general situation in rural areas in the studied country, are valuable in this respect [103,104,105], which, against the background of the existing literature, this paper also develops. Importantly, studies addressing this issue point to the diversity of rural areas and their differentiated approach to selected aspects of sustainable development—both in Poland and abroad [106,107]—often combining the sustainable development of rural areas with the development of new dimensions of rural functions in relation to sustainable spatial development [108], emphasising new value [109].

Another approach in this field is research focused on sustainable rural turystics [110,111], which is being developed to an important extent [107]. In this respect, the literature organises and explains the idea of sustainable rural development, which this paper also realises. In doing so, it is important to present the evolution of the paradigm of sustainable rural development, which, with its integration into agricultural policy, has become a necessity [108] but also a particular challenge, as the authors highlight in this paper. The constitution of the research proposed in the present paper provides detailed findings realised for the adopted area of Poland, which has been performed with close reference to the available reports published in this field [109,110,111,112,113], which distinguishes the present paper from the others. Furthermore, in this context, the study supplements the literature with the latest empirical findings.

The scope of the presented study complements and develops the key themes addressed in the literature published so far, and subjects them to a multifaceted discussion based on an in-depth literature review, which is an added value of the presented study. Importantly, the findings presented provide a basis for drawing conclusions regarding the overall assessment of the balanced consciousness of the social group living in the studied rural areas in Poland. This is a particular determinant of sustainable rural development.

7. Conclusions

Climate change today is considered one of the most severe global problems. Its impact is especially widespread because virtually all regions, countries, and continents are affected. Obviously, the future of humanity will involve dynamic climate change and any kind of consequences it may have. Therefore, as climate change affects our daily lives, it is essential to monitor its perception and behaviours towards it, hence the need for a diagnosis of climate-change attitudes found in various parts of the world. This premise is the foundation for the original study reported in the article.

The respondents from the five southeastern rural districts of Poland emphasised the expectation of economic-growth slowdown or limits as a result of climate-change policy. Still, they also considered it an opportunity to improve the standard of living (over 58%). Respondents’ opinions on the potential activities their local communities could take to be more sustainable are a substantial part of the results. Some priorities emerge from the answers. The most common options were low-emission public transport (in the Wadowice District, it was 55% of responses) and road and street redesign to promote safe cycling and walking environments (in the Kraków and Tarnów Districts, over 50% of responses). Less popular answers were water-consumption limits, the introduction and enforcement of local emission limits for buildings and vehicles, and the promotion of public transport or eco-friendly vehicles. Apparently, the respondents found the promotion of sustainable development among youth and older people to be the least important (in three out of five districts, this percentage did not exceed 20%).

They also pointed out specific environmental protection and sustainable-development activities that society should prioritise over a five-year horizon. The participants considered the development of new ways to eliminate waste in total production (in the Tarnów District, over 73% of responses), new technologies to curb carbon footprint and GHG emissions (over 63% in the Wadowice District), and new technologies to scrape and monitor air pollutants (approx. 70% in the Kraków District).

The opinions of rural residents on climate change in the context of sustainable development presented in the article can serve as a guideline for local authorities. The changes that respondents consider most important are mainly related to improving the quality of life of residents. These include, for example, local governments investing in low-emission transport or the construction of bicycle paths. In turn, the tasks for local authorities in the future are primarily to take measures to ensure that residents can live in a clean, ecological environment.