During Europe’s hottest stretches, the political effects of the heat may reach beyond the thermometer: people who experience unusually high temperatures become more likely to support green parties, a study across 25 countries found.
The findings matter because national legislatures shape climate policy. They set rules, track their effects and decide how taxes and public spending can support the shift to cleaner energy. For that shift to last, governments need to understand how real-world climate events affect voters—and whether those effects are shared equally.
Published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the study is the first large-scale analysis of how personal exposure to extreme temperatures relates to climate attitudes and national election choices across 25 countries over 10 years. The researchers used individual responses from the European Social Survey, gathered between 2012 and 2022.
They found that unusually high temperatures were linked to stronger feelings of personal responsibility for climate change, more worry about its effects and greater support for green parties. Support also rose for parties that had said before an election that they planned to join a coalition with green parties. The research examines the relationship between temperature experiences and political choices; it does not mean heat alone determines how anyone votes.
The shifts were not the same for everyone. Women and people with more education were generally more likely to express pro-environmental views and vote for green parties. But less-educated men showed the biggest changes in attitudes and voting after extreme weather. Study author Jonas Peisker, a research scholar with the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA), said firsthand experience can influence groups that are usually less concerned about climate change, and can shape real political decisions.
Work and local economic conditions also mattered. People working in services showed a stronger voting response to temperature extremes than those in agriculture or manufacturing. The effect of heat was weaker in regions with lower incomes or economies more dependent on greenhouse gas–intensive industries. Residents in these areas were already less likely, on average, to be concerned about the environment or support green coalitions.
That finding points to a challenge for climate policy: communities that rely on high-emission industries may face greater costs as economies change, while heat alone may do less to build support there. Roman Hoffmann, who leads IIASA’s Migration and Sustainable Development Research Group, warned that allowing inequalities to grow during the transition could push people further from environmental goals.
The researchers say governments can build support by explaining the local, everyday effects of climate change, especially to people who are less engaged. They also call for targeted economic support for disadvantaged regions as they move toward a low-carbon economy. The study, by Jacopo Bassetto and colleagues, offers evidence that extreme heat can shift public opinion—but lasting backing for climate action will also depend on whether the transition feels fair.