Regional Disparities in Public Perceptions of Decarbonization and Bioeconomy Acceptance: Evidence from a Structurally Transitioning Rural Area ^†

Abstract

This study explores spatial disparities in public perceptions of decarbonization and acceptance of the bioeconomy in a transitioning region. A structured survey of 465 residents across Western Macedonia assessed views on environmental, economic, and institutional aspects using Likert-scale items. Statistical analyses, including K-means clustering, revealed significant variation in perceptions, with institutional support, visible investment, enterprise activity, and public sentiment emerging as key predictors of acceptance. Institutional engagement showed the strongest influence. Findings underscore the uneven experience of transition across sub-regions and highlight the need for inclusive, place-sensitive policies to foster trust, enhance communication, and ensure a truly just transition process.

1. Introduction

Decarbonization is reshaping economies worldwide, yet its socio-economic impacts are unevenly distributed, often exacerbating regional disparities [1,2]. The concept of a just transition emphasizes the need for equity and inclusion, ensuring that the shift to a low-carbon economy minimizes harm to affected communities [3]. In practice, however, perceptions of fairness and benefit vary locally, influencing public acceptance and engagement with new development models such as bioeconomy.

Public attitudes are particularly critical in structurally transforming regions. Bioeconomy based on renewable biological resources has been promoted as a sustainable alternative, but its acceptance depends on whether local communities perceive it as beneficial or threatening to their socio-economic wellbeing [2,4]. Without local buy-in, resistance may undermine policy goals.

Western Macedonia, a rural region in northern Greece, offers a compelling case. Historically reliant on lignite mining and coal-fired power, it is among the first European regions undergoing a rapid coal phase-out [5]. While early outcomes include reduced emissions and improved air quality, the region also faces significant economic disruption, including job losses, income decline, and outmigration, especially in lignite-dependent areas [6].

To address these challenges, national and regional authorities have positioned the bioeconomy as a central pillar of diversification, alongside investments in renewables and digital transformation [7,8]. Yet, public support for this vision remains uncertain. Investment and institutional engagement appear uneven across sub-regions: former coal towns may benefit from retraining programs and infrastructure projects, while more peripheral areas risk exclusion. Such disparities influence how communities perceive the transition—either as a source of opportunity or decline [9].

Perceptions of institutional capacity also vary. Some communities report strong governance support, while others experience fragmented or absent engagement. These differences shape whether the transition is seen as empowering or alienating, and whether the bioeconomy is viewed as a pathway to renewal or as an abstract, inaccessible concept [10].

Understanding these localized perceptions is essential for effective, inclusive policymaking. Public acceptance can accelerate the adoption of bio-based innovations, whereas skepticism may hinder progress [11]. Although research underscores the importance of institutional trust and perceived fairness, few studies examine how attitudes vary within transitioning regions themselves.

This study addresses this gap by focusing on Western Macedonia. It explores how perceptions of environmental, economic, and social impacts differ across sub-regions, and identifies key factors influencing acceptance of bioeconomy. Using survey data and cluster analysis, the study investigates how variables such as institutional support, investment visibility, and public sentiment correlate with engagement or skepticism. The goal is to inform place-sensitive policy design aligned with just transition principles.

2. Materials and Methods

This study was conducted in Western Macedonia, a predominantly rural region in northern Greece undergoing a planned transition away from lignite-based energy. Data were collected through a structured questionnaire survey administered to 465 residents across the region’s four prefectures—Kozani, Florina, Kastoria, and Grevena. The sampling strategy combined random selection and purposive outreach to ensure spatial and social diversity, including both core lignite areas and more peripheral agricultural communities [12]. Respondents were balanced by age, gender, and occupation.

The geographic distribution of responses was generally even, with a slight oversampling in Kastoria (42%) to enable detailed sub-regional analysis. The sample included a near-equal gender split (52% male), broad age representation, and a relatively high educational profile, with over half having post-secondary education. Income levels were predominantly low, reflecting the region’s economic challenges. About one-third of participants lived in urban centers, and the remainder in smaller towns or villages, allowing for comparison across spatial and demographic contexts.

The survey assessed public perceptions of the decarbonization process and acceptance of the bioeconomy using a five-point Likert scale. Items covered perceived economic, environmental, and social impacts, as well as institutional support, policy visibility, and overall sentiment. Specific questions addressed regional GDP, employment, renewable energy, biodiversity, migration, and awareness of government strategies and training opportunities. Demographic data were also collected to contextualize responses.

Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics to identify trends and regional variation, with mean scores and agreement levels calculated both overall and by prefecture [13]. To identify latent response patterns, a K-means cluster analysis was conducted [12,14]. Based on the elbow method, a two-cluster solution was selected, distinguishing an “Engaged” group (more accepting of the transition) from a “Skeptical” group (more critical or disengaged). Cluster characteristics were further examined by demographic and geographic variables.

All procedures adhered to ethical research standards, including informed consent and anonymization [15]. The mixed-methods approach—integrating descriptive and clustering—enabled a comprehensive analysis of public attitudes toward the bioeconomy across Western Macedonia’s diverse socio-spatial landscape.

3. Results

3.1. Perceptions of Environmental and Economic Outcomes

Respondents demonstrated a clear and consistent recognition of the environmental benefits resulting from the decarbonization process. Approximately 80% agreed that regional CO₂ emissions had declined, while 72% observed improvements in air quality. These perceptions were reflected in high average Likert scores (~4.2/5), indicating strong agreement. The widespread acknowledgment of environmental improvements—such as cleaner air and reduced emissions—was consistent across demographic and geographic groups.

In contrast, perceptions regarding the economic consequences of decarbonization were overwhelmingly negative. All participants agreed that per capita income had decreased, and over 99% reported increased migration from the region, suggesting widespread concern about socio-economic displacement. A further 66% agreed that unemployment had risen, while 61% believed that the regional Gross Domestic Product (GDP) had been adversely affected. Although the latter two indicators showed some variation across sub-regions, the overall sentiment emphasized substantial economic disruption.

Public perception of new economic opportunities stemming from the transition was notably limited. The majority of respondents disagreed with the assertion that investment in the bioeconomy had increased (mean score ~1.1/5) or that new businesses had emerged within the sector (mean ~1.9/5). Similarly, perceived benefits relating to biodiversity and land use scored poorly (~2.4/5), indicating limited recognition of environmental restoration or land reuse efforts.

Institutional and policy-related perceptions were similarly critical. Respondents expressed low confidence in regional institutional support, with average scores of 2.7/5 for the implementation of bioeconomy policies and subsidies, and 2.3/5 for local government support. A notable exception was the existence of training programs, which received a relatively positive average rating (mean ~3.7/5), suggesting that upskilling initiatives—particularly for former coal workers—were among the most visible forms of institutional engagement.

Crucially, public acceptance of the bioeconomy remained limited. Only 13% of respondents viewed public opinion toward the bioeconomy as positive, and a similar proportion believed the sector was socially accepted. The overall mean score for bioeconomy acceptance (~2.9/5) indicated a general ambivalence, with no sub-group displaying strong enthusiasm. These findings suggest that while environmental improvements are widely acknowledged, the broader socio-economic promise of the bioeconomy remains largely unconvincing to the public.

3.2. Spatial Disparities Across Sub-Regions

Sub-regional analysis revealed notable geographic disparities in perceptions (

Table 1. Average perception scores (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree) by sub-region in Western Macedonia.

Key Perception Statement	Florina	Grevena	Kastoria	Kozani
CO2 emissions decreased (due to decarbonization)	4.2	4.2	4.2	4.2
Air quality improved (due to decarbonization)	4.0	4.1	4.0	4.3
Regional GDP affected (by decarbonization)	4.0	3.6	3.6	4.1
Unemployment increased (due to transition)	4.0	3.9	3.9	4.2
Green tech investments made in region	4.1	3.9	3.7	4.1
Bioeconomy training programs exist in region	3.8	3.6	3.7	4.1
Bioeconomy is accepted (public acceptance)	2.9	2.8	3.0	2.8

Source: author’s own creation.

). While agreement on emissions reductions was uniformly high, perceptions of air quality improvements varied slightly, with Kozani exhibiting the highest average score. This outcome is consistent with the historical concentration of coal-fired power plants in Kozani and the associated air pollution, which has diminished markedly with the cessation of lignite combustion.

Perceptions of economic impacts were more pronounced in Kozani and Florina, the core lignite-producing prefectures. Kozani registered the highest mean score regarding increased unemployment and GDP decline, reflecting direct exposure to job losses and economic contraction. Grevena and Kastoria, with more diversified economies and less direct dependence on coal-related activities, reported lower—though still elevated—levels of perceived economic impact.

Perceptions of green investment and training program availability followed a similar spatial pattern. Kozani and Florina again scored highest, whereas Kastoria and Grevena trailed slightly, suggesting a concentration of transition-related initiatives in the core areas. Despite these differences in visibility and access, bioeconomy acceptance remained consistently low across all prefectures, indicating that tangible benefits have yet to translate into widespread endorsement of the new economic model.

Interestingly, peripheral prefectures were marginally more likely to perceive that strategic transition plans were in place. This may reflect greater reliance on official discourse in the absence of observable action, whereas residents in core areas may adopt a more critical stance based on direct experience with implementation.

3.3. Cluster Analysis: Differentiating Engaged and Skeptical Respondents

To further elucidate underlying patterns, a K-means cluster analysis identified two distinct respondent groups: the “Engaged” cluster (66%) and the “Skeptical” cluster (34%). These clusters transcended geographic boundaries but exhibited distinct perceptual profiles (

Table 2. Mean perception scores (1–5) for key factors in the two clusters identified (Engaged = respondents with higher acceptance, Skeptical = respondents with lower acceptance).

Perception Factor	Engaged Cluster	Skeptical Cluster
Regional GDP affected (decreased)	4.3	2.6
Unemployment increased	4.4	3.2
Air quality improved	4.3	3.6
Green tech investments made	4.4	2.9
New bioeconomy businesses observed	2.0	1.8
Bioeconomy training programs exist	4.3	2.8
Local government support is sufficient	2.5	2.1
Bioeconomy is accepted (overall)	3.1	2.6

Source: author’s own creation.

).

The Engaged cluster demonstrated higher acceptance of the bioeconomy and more favorable views regarding institutional support, green investment, and training program availability. Members of this group also acknowledged the negative economic impacts of decarbonization (e.g., unemployment and GDP decline) more acutely than their Skeptical counterparts, suggesting a nuanced awareness of both the costs and potential pathways for recovery.

Conversely, the Skeptical cluster was characterized by lower acceptance of the bioeconomy and more critical evaluations across nearly all indicators. Notably, this group expressed less agreement even on economic impacts—reporting lower scores for increased unemployment and GDP decline—despite residing primarily in regions that experienced fewer direct disruptions. Their skepticism appears to stem not from an overestimation of economic harm, but rather from a perceived lack of visible progress or institutional support.

Both clusters agreed that the emergence of new bioeconomy enterprises was minimal (means ~1.8–2.0/5), highlighting a shared perception that private sector development remains nascent. However, Engaged respondents reported significantly higher recognition of public investments and training initiatives, which appeared to sustain cautious optimism about the transition’s direction.

The cluster analysis also emphasized the importance of institutional trust. Variables related to training, policy implementation, and government support exhibited the strongest statistical associations with acceptance of bioeconomy. Belief in visible green investment also positively predicted acceptance, as did—even to a lesser degree—the perception that new businesses were emerging. Public sentiment was found to be self-reinforcing: those who believed their communities viewed the transition positively were more likely to adopt an accepting stance themselves.

Environmental benefits alone were not sufficient to drive acceptance. While nearly all respondents recognized improved air quality and reduced emissions, only those who perceived meaningful institutional and economic action were likely to express acceptance of the bioeconomy. This underscores the centrality of co-benefits—such as training, investment, and strategic planning—in fostering public support.

Geographically, the Engaged cluster was more prevalent in Kozani (81%) and Florina (72%), aligning with areas where transition initiatives were most visible. In contrast, Skeptical respondents were more common in Grevena and Kastoria (approximately 40% in each), where fewer concrete developments had occurred. A chi-square test confirmed that cluster membership was significantly associated with geographic location (p < 0.01), underscoring the influence of place-based experience on public attitudes.

4. Discussion

This study sheds light on the multifaceted nature of public perceptions during periods of significant economic and environmental transformation. Despite a shared policy framework, local interpretations within Western Macedonia vary notably, underscoring the challenges inherent in designing a just transition strategy. A key finding is the widespread recognition of environmental improvements. Across the region, respondents consistently acknowledged enhanced air quality and reduced emissions, suggesting a strong collective awareness of the ecological benefits linked to decarbonization. This near-universal environmental recognition indicates that the rationale for change is broadly understood, even appreciated, by the public.

However, these environmental gains have not translated into corresponding public support for the new economic model. The findings reveal a deep-seated concern about the socio-economic repercussions of the transition, including job losses, declining incomes, and regional depopulation. The perception that decarbonization has, at least in the short to medium term, undermined the local economy is prevalent. Such sentiments mirror global experiences, where communities affected by industrial decline express resistance or apathy toward transition policies perceived as socially or economically neglectful. The imagery of youth outmigration and shrinking towns evokes a powerful sense of regional abandonment and social decline, further complicating efforts to foster acceptance.

Institutional support emerges as a decisive factor in shaping attitudes toward the transition [16]. Where citizens perceive active involvement from authorities—through training programs, regional planning, or investment initiatives, they are more likely to express optimism and a willingness to engage [2,17]. This finding supports existing literature on procedural justice and institutional trust as key drivers of public buy-in. However, the uneven perception of such support within the same region highlights gaps in communication and implementation. For instance, differing levels of awareness between Kastoria and Florina suggest a need for more consistent and localized outreach strategies.

The visibility of new investments and enterprise activity also plays a critical role. Survey respondents who observed tangible economic developments—such as renewable energy projects or infrastructure works—demonstrated higher acceptance levels. This points to the importance of early, regionally distributed investments that make the transition perceptible and credible. The relative absence of new private sector initiatives, while perhaps unsurprising at this early stage, underscores the urgency for public sector action to catalyze visible change and counteract narratives of stagnation. Media coverage and community engagement could further reinforce a sense of momentum and opportunity.

The identification of Engaged and Skeptical clusters provides a valuable analytical lens for understanding community responses. The Engaged group, while acknowledging hardships, retains a degree of hope and recognizes institutional efforts—suggesting that proximity to both the challenges and early-stage remedies fosters conditional support. In contrast, the Skeptical group appears disconnected from both the adverse impacts and the potential benefits, resulting in a more alienated and inert stance. This divergence points to the necessity of differentiated outreach strategies: enhancing participatory processes for the Engaged while addressing information deficits and inclusion for the Skeptical, especially in less visibly affected or supported sub-regions.

A further insight is that equitable distribution of transition benefits across all localities is essential. Concentrating resources in historically coal-dependent areas may be justified, but ignoring peripheral communities risks exacerbating regional disparities and perceptions of injustice [18]. Interestingly, those most affected by job loss often displayed greater openness when accompanied by visible compensatory measures, while those less directly impacted but overlooked in engagement efforts tended toward disengaged skepticism. This suggests that perceived fairness and presence of institutional action, rather than degree of loss alone, shape public attitudes.

Finally, the study highlights the current ambiguity surrounding the concept of bioeconomy. While central to regional transition plans, the term remains abstract for many residents. To improve acceptance, the bioeconomy must be communicated through concrete, place-based examples that resonate with local identities and sectors, such as forestry, agriculture, or artisanal industries. Realistic messaging and visible success stories are necessary to bridge the current belief gap and to foster a more constructive and hopeful public narrative around the transition.

5. Conclusions

This study highlights the crucial role of place in shaping public perceptions of decarbonization and the acceptance of emerging economic paradigms such as the bioeconomy, particularly in transitioning regions like Western Macedonia. Although the region is advancing under a unified sustainability policy, the lived experiences of this transition vary significantly across localities. In some areas, visible investments—such as solar installations and bioeconomy initiatives—have fostered cautious optimism. In others, where the decline of traditional industries has not yet been met with tangible alternatives, skepticism and disillusionment prevail.

These disparities underscore the need for transition policies that are sensitive to local contexts. Uniform, region-wide strategies should be complemented by targeted interventions tailored to the specific needs and opportunities of each sub-region. Ensuring equitable distribution of projects, enhancing institutional visibility at the local level, and maintaining consistent community engagement are essential steps in addressing uneven perceptions. Strengthening local governance capacities and improving communication about ongoing efforts can help build trust and counter misinformation. Furthermore, inclusive reskilling initiatives and support for local entrepreneurship, especially for underrepresented groups, can promote broader participation in the emerging green economy.

Importantly, public perception should be recognized as a core metric of transition success, alongside traditional economic and environmental indicators. Monitoring attitudes over time and incorporating community feedback into policy implementation can enhance responsiveness and legitimacy. The Western Macedonian case illustrates that technical achievements, such as emissions reductions, are insufficient in the absence of social acceptance and equitable benefit-sharing. Spatial equity—ensuring that all towns and villages feel included in the transition—is integral to the concept of a just transition.

Ultimately, while challenges remain, the presence of a significant segment of the population that remains open and engaged suggests that trust can be built through inclusive, place-based policymaking. If economic benefits become more visible and widely distributed, the current hesitancy observed among parts of the population may gradually give way to broader acceptance. The experience of Western Macedonia offers valuable insights into other coal-dependent regions: justice in transition must be locally grounded and socially inclusive to be genuinely sustainable.