Australian young people’s perceptions of the commercial determinants of the climate crisis Open Access

Abstract

There is increasing public health focus on how corporate practices impact population health and well-being. While the commercial determinants of the climate crisis pose serious threats to human and planetary health, governments largely seek to balance climate action with economic imperatives. Global stakeholders recognize that young people have important voices in influencing climate responses. However, few studies have investigated young people’s perceptions of the commercial determinants of the climate crisis. A qualitatively led online survey of n = 500 young Australians (15–24 years) investigated their understanding of corporate responses to the climate crisis, factors that influenced these responses and strategies to respond. A reflexive approach to thematic analysis was used. Three themes were constructed from the data. First, young people perceived that corporate responses to the climate crisis focussed on soft options and lacked meaningful action. Second, they stated that these responses were largely influenced by economic imperatives rather than planetary health, with policy levers needed to implement environmentally responsible corporate practices. Third, young people perceived that systems needed change to create demand for a cleaner environment, leading to improved practices. Young people have a clear understanding of the commercial determinants of the climate crisis and associated threats to population health. They recognize that corporate practices (and consumer demand) will not change without significant policy and structural change. Public health and health promotion stakeholders should work alongside young people to influence decision-makers to address harmful corporate behaviours.

BACKGROUND

Climate change has become a climate crisis (Zeldin-O’Neill, 2019), posing significant risks to population and planetary health. Major reports (Beggs et al., 2022; Romanello et al., 2022), frameworks (World Health Organization, 2020; Climate and Health Alliance, 2021), and formal statements (Climate and Health Alliance, 2022) by health organizations and health promotion groups have advocated for urgent government action on climate. Researchers have documented and predicted a range of climate impacts on human health, including increased rates of poor mental health (Majeed and Lee, 2017; Patrick et al., 2022), the spread of existing and novel diseases (McDermott, 2022), food insecurity and hunger (Richards et al., 2021), water insecurity (including the lack of safe drinking water) (Pokhrel et al., 2021), and population displacement and forced migration (Levy, 2019). Despite the clear risks posed by the climate crisis to health, Romanello et al., (2022, p. 1620) comment that ‘oil and gas companies are registering record profits, while their production strategies continue to undermine people’s lives and wellbeing’, describing global public health as being ‘at the mercy of fossil fuels’.

Public health approaches recognize that a range of comprehensive policy actions and strategies are needed to address the population health risks that are caused by the climate crisis (Fox et al., 2019). However, as Masuda et al., (2022, p. 1) argue, there has been little critique from the public health community about the underlying structures and systems that have produced the climate crisis, including that most solutions offered by governments focus on ‘industry-centred’ approaches that prioritize economic growth. Public health researchers argue that the products and practices of some corporations are responsible for ‘escalating rates of avoidable ill health, planetary damage, and social and health inequity’, including the climate emergency (Gilmore et al., 2023, p. 1194). These Commercial Determinants of Health (CDoH) can be defined as ‘the systems, practices, and pathways through which commercial actors drive health and equity’ (Gilmore et al., 2023, p. 1195), and have been identified as a priority area for the World Health Organization (WHO) (World Health Organization., 2023). In a recent commentary, the Director General of the WHO Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus stated that responding to the CDoH (including those related to the climate crisis) involves tackling both harmful products, and the range of practices employed by industries and corporations that may undermine public health policies, and create risks for the health of our populations (Ghebreyesus, 2023).

At the heart of the CDoH is understanding how industries and the corporations that govern them utilize a range of approaches to drive the consumption of products and services, and seek to prevent the impact of health promoting policies and regulations that may impact on their profits (Maani et al., 2020). Examples include how corporations promote their products and maximize profits; exert influence over how the causes and consequences of health are framed; limit access to information about their products; control fundamental structures such as markets and the economy; act against a range of social, economic and political interests; and seek to create favourable regulatory environments for their businesses (through activities such as lobbying and political donations) (McKee and Stuckler, 2018; Lee and Freudenberg, 2022). In relation to the climate crisis and its impact on planetary health, powerful structures serve to maintain the status quo (Friel et al., 2023). Research shows how corporate actors have framed responses to the climate crisis, with some stating that the strategies of fossil fuel industries ‘mimics tobacco industry propaganda’ (Supran and Oreskes, 2021, p. 695). This includes downplaying the risks associated with the climate crisis, focussing on downstream, individualized responsibility responses, framing the fossil fuel industry as a passive supplier responding to consumer demand, greenwashing, lobbying and developing their own definitions of what they consider 'climate aligned' (Supran and Oreskes, 2021; Buse et al., 2022; Energy Transitions Commission, 2023, p. 49).

Recent discussions about the CDoH provide an important opportunity to focus public health and health promotion efforts towards the commercial drivers of the climate crisis (Friel et al., 2023; Ghebreyesus, 2023; Gilmore et al., 2023; Lacy-Nichols et al., 2023), including to demand meaningful climate action from governments who may find it easier to ‘deflect and blame responsibility onto individuals’ (Buse et al., 2022, p. 1). This also involves investigating public opinions about corporate practices and the factors that shape these opinions (Knai et al., 2018). Understanding how different population subgroups in the community conceptualize the determinants of health provides researchers with important insights for informing public health action (Freudenberg et al., 2021), and assists in promoting public knowledge of commercial practices to help drive movements for better population health (Mialon et al., 2022). While the public are increasingly concerned about the climate crisis, their perceptions about the need for action may vary according to a range of social and economic determinants that differ across geospatial location (Capstick et al., 2015). Researchers have also demonstrated that community members are sceptical that governments (as well as society) may not ‘embrace the “hard choices” required’ to effectively address the climate crisis (Sandover et al., 2021, p. 83).

Amongst those most impacted by the climate crisis are young people (Thiery et al., 2021), who understand that they will inherit increasingly harmful associated health (and social) outcomes (Arnot et al. (2023a)). Stakeholders argue that young people have the right to contribute to discussions and decision-making that impact their futures, particularly regarding the climate crisis (Clark et al., 2020; Dalglish et al., 2021; Arora et al., 2022). The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989) seeks to protect this right in Article 12, stating that young people must have their views taken into account. Despite increasingly reporting experiences of anxiety and distress due to a lack of climate action (Hickman et al., 2021), young people around the globe demonstrate their strength and value as a collective as they persist in advocating for effective climate responses (Boulianne et al., 2020). Engaging young people in discussions about the role of corporate practices and policy responses are important in developing their ability to civically and politically respond to climate policy issues (Boulianne et al., 2020; Hadjichambis and Paraskeva-Hadjichambi, 2020).

While young people have been consulted about individual (Busch et al., 2019) and social (Brügger et al., 2020) determinants of the climate crisis, there is less understanding of their perspectives about corporate practices. This study aimed to gain insights into young Australians’ perceptions of the commercial determinants of the climate crisis. The research was guided by three questions:

1. What do young people perceive are the current corporate responses to the climate crisis?

2. What do young people think are the main influences on these responses?

3. What do young people consider are the levers necessary for creating effective corporate climate responses?

METHOD

Approach

The data analysed for this research was part of a broader qualitatively led online survey investigating the perspectives of n = 500 Australians aged 15–24 years about the climate crisis, including public health and health promotion strategies to respond. One other paper investigating young people’s perspectives on political decision-making about the climate crisis has been published from this data (Arnot et al. (2023a)).

Online surveys are an increasingly utilized tool for collecting a large amount of qualitative data, enabling a broad lens on the subject of interest ‘through capturing a wide range of positions and identities’ (Braun et al., 2021, p. 643). Qualitatively led surveys collect mostly qualitative responses from participants through a series of open text questions that are asked of all participants, and which prioritize interpretivist qualitative values (Braun et al., 2021). Such surveys provide a convenient and accessible way for individuals to participate in qualitative research, and may appeal to individuals who are hesitant to participate in in-depth interviews by providing a level of anonymity not afforded in other types of qualitative research (Braun et al., 2021).

Given increasing calls for public health and health promotion researchers to engage in critiques of the structural determinants of the climate crisis (Buse et al., 2022; Masuda et al., 2022) and the role of power structures in the development or delay of effective public health policies (Harris et al., 2020; Friel et al., 2023), this study took a critical qualitative position (Denzin, 2017). This position takes a transformative approach to social justice, which seeks to challenge existing forms of inequality, oppression and injustice (Denzin, 2017). Within this approach, the researchers acknowledge the power discrepancies between young people and the public of which they are an essential part, and corporations and associated political interests.

Ethical approval was received from the Deakin University Health Ethics Advisory Group (HEAG-H 162_2021).

Sample and recruitment

There are no firm guidelines for sample sizes in research using qualitative online surveys (Braun et al., 2021). The sample size for this study was based on a previous qualitative online survey relating to young people’s broad climate opinions (Arnot et al. (2023b)). A sample of n = 500 participants was considered adequate to enable the research team to represent a diverse range of views, and to give enough ‘information power’ to answer the broad aims of the study, reflect the smaller pieces of textual information gathered in online studies (as compared to the information gathered in in-depth interviews), and to take into account the diverse range of young Australians who were invited to take part in the study (Malterud et al., 2015, p. 1753).

Recruitment was conducted via online survey-hosting platform Qualtrics. Qualtrics were provided with the survey link and demographic criteria and sent this information onto external panel services. External panel services distributed the survey link to complete the survey onto prospective participants who were registered with their panel. While qualitative surveys do not aim for representative samples, soft quotas were set to ensure a relatively even split between age groups (ages 15–24 years) and genders (male and female soft quotas only, with the option to self-describe gender identity) to ensure a diversity of perspectives. After consenting to participate at the beginning of the survey, to continue to the main questions, participants first needed to confirm they were aged between 15 and 24 years, lived in Australia, and agree that climate change was a real phenomenon. The latter question was necessary given that the questions in the survey specifically asked questions about the determinants of the climate crisis.

Data collection

Data was collected between April and June 2022. To test the suitability of the survey questions and identify any technical difficulties, the survey was piloted with n = 30 participants. Data were quality checked and n = 7 participants were removed because their responses were considered inappropriate, incomplete or non-sensical (such as entering randoms letters and words, or responses that did not address the question). The full survey was launched and recruited an additional n = 481 participants, providing a total of n = 504 participants. Data were cleaned once more (n = 96 participants removed), with Qualtrics recruiting n = 98 replacement participants. A final round of cleaning removed n = 6 participants, resulting in n = 500 participants.

The survey took participants an average of 27 min to finish. In relation to this paper, participants were asked a number of discrete choice questions to provide context, including socio-demographics questions (age, gender, education, state and area of residence), and a yes/no response about whether they thought industries were taking responsibility for the climate crisis seriously. These were then followed by open text questions about their perceptions of corporate responses. These questions included: what do you think corporations are doing to reduce the impact of climate change?; What should corporations be doing to take action on climate change?; What influences the decision that corporations make about climate change?; as well as their thoughts about whether corporations would act without government regulation; and one thing they would say to corporations about the need to act on climate change.

Data analysis

Descriptive statistics were used to analyse data related to discrete responses. Open text data responses were analysed using a six-step reflexive approach to thematic analysis (Braun and Clarke, 2021). The process of constructing themes from online qualitative surveys is largely similar to the processes used for in-depth interview data. The relevant survey questions were identified within the data set and the responses to these questions were read multiple times to ensure familiarization with responses. Initial analytical observations about the data were noted to help with identifying deeper meanings within the data and avoid focussing on surface level meanings. Ensuring that the study research questions guided the analysis, data were coded across the questions to help construct common themes and to group these themes together. Themes were revised to ensure that each theme was distinct and had a clear purpose within the narrative of the paper. Established themes were given a brief title and description to ensure comprehension and clarity, and to ensure that the themes that were constructed were relevant to the overall research questions. To strengthen the rigour and trustworthiness of this study, authors reviewed the dataset several times, with the lead author conducting the primary analysis. Initial codes were discussed and themes were constructed in collaboration between the authors via frequent written feedback and face-to-face meetings.

RESULTS

Sample characteristics

The sample characteristics of the n = 500 participants are provided in Table 1. Participants were aged between 15 and 24 years with an average age of 19.9 years, and approximately two-thirds of the sample identified as female (n = 321, 64.2%). Over half lived in metropolitan areas (n = 294, 58.8%), with participation largely occurring across the three most populated Australian states of Queensland (n = 135, 27.0%), Victoria (n = 132, 26.4%) and New South Wales (n = 130, 26.0%). Two-thirds of participants did not think that corporations were taking responsibility for the climate crisis seriously (n = 354, 70.8%).

Three themes were constructed from the data interpretation Table 2.

Theme 1: Corporate responses focus on soft options and lack meaningful action

Participants described a range of actions that they perceived corporations were taking in response to the climate crisis. They were often sceptical about the intent, credibility or real impact of these actions. Many described a range of environmentally friendly practices that corporations were taking to address their role in the climate crisis. While these actions were often described as ‘a start’, they mostly related to softer options, rather than broader contributions to structural change. For example, a few detailed that corporations were trying to improve their practices to become more sustainable through actions such as increasing recycling, reducing waste, limiting water use, minimizing single-use plastics and committing some funding towards initiatives to protect the environment. However, most participants qualified these responses saying that they were not enough:

A lot of companies are using more biodegradable packaging and ethical resources but more needs to be done.—24 year old female, New South Wales

Some participants claimed that corporate sustainability initiatives were more related to corporate image ‘to make themselves look good’, rather than initiatives that truly impacted on planetary health. For example, some stated that when corporations identified that they were changing their practices to be more ‘eco-friendly’, they largely did this to do ‘whatever makes their company look good, probably’ or ‘to boost their image’. A few commented that these types of responses were simply marketing strategies to increase the sales of products:

I do not believe that they are doing enough because all of the actions they are taking towards the climate crisis has an ulterior motive and they usually do it to improve sales.—15 year old female, Queensland

Some participants commented on ‘widespread greenwashing’, whereby corporations claimed to be making a change to practices to be more environmentally conscious, but were actually doing little to address the climate crisis, and were just doing ‘stuff for show’. A few stated that the marketing strategies used by corporations often hid the true environmental cost of the product or service offered. Participants described that this enabled corporations to create an appearance of action and progress, where little actually existed:

Few companies are introducing policies that are truly helping in a positive way and not greenwashing. I think they can do more.—23 year old female, New South Wales.

Some participants stated that making claims about changing their environmental practices, with little follow up action, was a tactic that corporations used to alleviate public and regulatory pressure to act in the best interests of the climate ‘mostly to avoid scrutiny’, to ‘get people off their backs’, and to convince the community that they are doing something to improve their reputation—‘to people please and make themselves look good’. For example, one young person noted their perception that corporate narratives around the climate crisis often hold empty words:

They tend to just make statements about climate change instead of actually implementing change.—17 year old male, Victoria

By continuing to refuse to take action, some participants stated that corporations were not behaving responsibly in the interests of the planet, but were also damaging the viability of their business success in the future. For example, some commented that benefits of a healthy climate were universal, while others stated that businesses would not survive in the long-term if they continued to exploit and overuse natural resources:

Our world won’t be here if you continue to devastate the lands. There will be no more money to make.—19 year old female, Queensland

Theme 2: Economic imperatives rather than planetary health influence corporate climate responses

Participants described a range of factors that influenced corporations. The majority perceived that economic imperatives had the most impact on corporate decision-making related to the climate crisis. Many stated that corporate climate action was limited because corporations had a primary objective of making money and profit:

I think profit is a big influence in corporations decision-making because that is most of their first priorities.—16 year old male, Victoria

While some participants noted that some corporations were trying to transform their business practices, there was a widespread perception that many corporations would not substantially change their practices voluntarily. They stated that corporations would only voluntarily change their practices if they perceived that there was some economic benefit for doing so, so that they could ‘sustain and continue their wealth’. There was also a perception that corporations would be reluctant to implement any changes to their business practices that may create extra cost for them, or that created a financial disadvantage in relation to their ‘competitors’ and ‘bigger companies’. Some participants stated that corporations were focussed on short-term economic risks and financial costs in switching to environmentally friendly practices, rather than the long-term benefits for sustainability and the climate:

If it makes them money now, they don’t want to spend money to invest in the future if they don’t have to.—22 year old male, Queensland

Participants in this study often commented that those who exerted the most influence over the decisions that were made about responses to the climate crisis were those with ‘money and the people in positions of power’ and ‘the rich and powerful’, including corporations themselves (such as CEOs, directors and board members), investors and shareholders, and lobbyists. The financial imperative to satisfy investors and shareholders meant corporations had a vested interest in maintaining their profits, which some participants perceived meant that they could not be trusted to make decisions that would be in the best interests of planetary health:

Some corporations are not to be trusted because they care more about investors and what they want rather than what the majority wants.—20 year old female, Queensland

Instead, participants argued that a range of government policy levers were needed to create new systems to mandate and encourage environmentally responsible corporate practices. In order to create change, many participants in this study stated that corporations needed to be ‘pushed’ and ‘forced’ into climate action by government policies and regulations, with one participant stating that ‘government regulation is crucial to ensure a future world’. They stated that, ultimately, governments needed to stimulate corporate action on climate, stepping in when corporations did not take the appropriate voluntary action.

Participants described that there were a range of mechanisms that were needed to change corporate behaviour, with one participant stating that ‘Corporations are usually profit driven and without regulation there is no motivation to act’. Suggested mechanisms included increased taxation on high-polluting corporations, laws and policies that would incentivise corporations to change practices and strong penalties for those corporations that did not adhere to minimum standards in relation to minimizing the impact of their business practices on the climate:

[Corporations] will not [act] as they need to be pushed. Industries only care about money, therefore the government needs to regulate them.—18 year old male, New South Wales

Participants perceived that, at present, governments were reluctant to take strong action on corporations, with some stating that both corporations and the government share a vested interest in the success of corporations for the economy. These responses illustrated participants’ general awareness of the reciprocal dynamic between corporations and the government, with corporate practices and government responses largely linked:

They are in it together.—24 year old, non-binary, New South Wales

Theme 3: Changing the system to create corporate demand for a cleaner environment, and responsibility for planetary health

Participants recognized that in order to create an environment in which corporations would change their business practices, there needed to be support for structural changes that would lead to improved, ethical, and eco-friendly practices and actions. This included the need for ‘innovative thinking’ to create solutions, with one participant calling on corporations to:

Think of ways that they can better offset the impacts of climate change from the root of producing.—16 year old female, New South Wales

Others suggested that in order to implement effective climate action, corporations needed to rapidly reduce their reliance on carbon-intensive energy production methods. Strategies for achieving this goal include corporations committing to net zero carbon emissions by 2030, transitioning to renewable energy and creating products that require less environmental degradation to manufacture and distribute, with a small group highlighting fast fashion/textile and animal agriculture industries. Other participants provided strategies that related more to general planetary health, but with significant implications for creating system change. For example, a few noted the need for a shift within corporate culture to prioritize sustainability, with some calling for transparency around corporate practices, suggesting that corporations should begin ‘releasing statements on the topic and providing information on their figures and processes’.

Participants also highlighted the necessity of overhauling the energy production industry, specifically fossil fuel sectors, with a handful describing the need for funding and support to aid this transition. While highlighting the benefits of these structural changes, participants’ appeals often touched on corporate morality and ethics. For example, they asked corporations to ‘think of others’, ‘please start looking within’, ‘care about the world’ and ‘use your power to do some good’. This included holding themselves to account over their own actions:

Corporations, you must hold yourselves and your operations more accountable and consider the future detriments of your actions rather than just considering your profits.—21 year old female, New South Wales

Some warned that the consequences of not implementing these system changes would lead to significant short- and long-term costs for humanity:

Their capitalist activities will cost the future of millions of lives. Not just now, in the future.—18 year old male, New South Wales

While participants generally perceived that corporations would not take serious action without government regulation, they often implored corporations to consider the impacts of their actions on young people and future generations. They regularly stated that corporate practices were significantly contributing to the climate crisis and ‘fuelling the end of the earth’. Some questioned how those with influence over corporate decisions in relation to climate action were able to continue creating harm, despite knowing how it impacts their children’s futures:

Do none of you have kids? Or their kids? One day this will come back and ruin their lives.—18 year old male, New South Wales

Others called on corporations to act without waiting for government intervention, asking them to make decisions based on science and evidence rather than profit. For example, one young person stated that corporations just needed to listen to the ‘proof that the climate crisis is real and is very scary’. A few stated that corporations themselves would benefit from changing their practices to become less harmful to the climate. For example, one young person noted that while the public would benefit from climate action, so too would corporations that also relied on environmental health—‘A good environment benefits everyone, including corporations’. Others spoke less about the health impacts that might motivate corporations to act, opting rather to speak directly and present corporations with the bottom line of what the climate crisis means for humanity:

They do not realise that saving the planet saves them as well.—15 year old female, Queensland

However, a few stated that the community also had a role to play in creating a strong message to corporations about their practices. While they were unsure about the overall impact that individuals could have on corporate behaviour, they stated that there was a need to boycott certain corporations, and create more noise and ‘pressure from society’ about corporate behaviours that were particularly damaging for the environment:

Mostly no but if enough consumers create a demand for a cleaner environment, then perhaps.—23 year old female, Victoria

DISCUSSION

This study aimed to qualitatively investigate young Australians’ perceptions of current corporate responses to the climate crisis, the main influences on these responses and strategies that could be used to create effective corporate climate action. The findings from this study raise a number of points in relation to how young people conceptualize corporate responses to the climate crisis, and the strategies that public health and health promotion practitioners, researchers and advocates can use to support young people in their efforts to advocate for urgent action on climate.

Researchers have sought to understand young people’s views about the climate crisis, including developing education programs that can shift behavioural outcomes in relation to their own climate practices (Trott, 2019; Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020). However, the findings from the present study show that young people have an important voice in discussions about the role of commercial determinants on the climate crisis. This is important from a public health perspective as it demonstrates young people’s ability to critically engage with corporate narratives that promote individual action as a solution to the climate crisis. This study demonstrates that not only do young people understand that corporate practices have a potentially negative impact on the climate and health of populations, but they are able to identify how corporations use a range of largely tokenistic tactics (such as greenwashing) to create an appearance of action (Supran and Oreskes, 2021), and to drive further consumption of their products. Young people had a clear understanding of how relationships between key power structures, specifically corporations and governments, influenced climate policies that ultimately impact on populations. Many of the corporate tactics that were mentioned by young people were similar to those commonly identified in broader public health literature about the CDoH, including how corporations use their power to influence government policy and prevent regulatory reform (Buse et al., 2022; Friel et al., 2023); develop corporate responsibility strategies to deflect attention from harmful practices (Supran and Oreskes, 2021); use marketing to drive the consumption of products, and develop a range of ‘soft’ approaches to create a perception of action while protecting their corporate profit (Kickbusch et al., 2016; Sula-Raxhimi et al., 2019; Freudenberg et al., 2021).

Young people in this study also conceptualized that profit motives, rather than an overall commitment to improving planetary health, influenced corporate climate responses. This again mirrors public health commentaries describing the ‘fundamental tension between the profit maximising drive of corporations’ and the importance of effective climate responses to ‘advance human health’ (Sula-Raxhimi et al., 2019, p. 12). Young people’s understanding of how corporations could use a range of strategies such as marketing to deflect and delay climate action, as well as some scepticism about whether governments would be willing to act, led to a sense of frustration. Feelings of frustration, powerlessness and hopelessness have been documented in multiple studies with young people who perceive that there is a clear generational gap between their own perspectives of the need for urgent climate action, and the profit-based motivations and priorities of corporations and political actors that stall effective policy action (Corner et al., 2015; Thompson et al., 2022). Consequently, they may avoid thinking about the climate crisis due to the complexity of developing solutions to address a problem of such magnitude and severity (Gallagher and Cattelino, 2020). Conversely, many young people in this study appeared motivated by their frustration to advocate for action. The perception that corporations were acting on profit-based motives seemed to increase young people’s demands and expectations that corporations should act with morality, integrity and urgency to protect future generations—even in the absence of government action.

The Geneva Charter highlights the co-benefits of health promotion in helping to empower citizens, including young people, to engage in advocacy for public health (World Health Organization, 2021). This is in line with other major reports that have argued the urgent need to empower and equip young people (and children) to have a voice in the major policy issues that impact them (Clark et al., 2020; Dalglish et al., 2021). However, we would argue that, to date, public health and health promotion practitioners and advocacy initiatives have not effectively engaged, consulted and supported young people in raising their collective voices to those in positions of power. This study shows that young people must be engaged by those in positions of influence and power (including the public health and health promotion community) in thinking critically about how to respond to the underlying structures and systems that have produced the climate crisis. This may involve working alongside the public health and health promotion communities to help guide productive media framing of the climate crisis (Harrison et al., 2020) and reframe and counter the powerful narratives about individual responsibility that come from fossil fuel industries and governments; exposing the strategies of corporations that are harmful to health; countering corporate spin and misinformation, and advocating for a greater focus on structural changes to support and enforce sustainable corporate behaviours. Even with broad questions, young people were able to critically consider and recommend a range of strategies relating to problematic structures and practices—particularly in relation to fossil fuels—with many of their suggestions aligning with public health perspectives.

Researchers have argued that policymakers and politicians should ‘listen to young people… amplify their voices and give them practical influence’ (Thompson et al., 2022, p. 10). In doing so, the public health and health promotion communities must create authentic strategies to empower, engage and collaborate with young people. As noted by Ross et al., (2015, p. 36), young people should feel ‘a sense of ownership over programs and policies intended to serve them’. For example, in relation to the climate crisis, the United Nations Youth Delegate Program engages a group of young people around the globe for their input into youth issues through ‘meetings and informational negotiations’ (United Nations, 2023). Part of this engagement requires the public health and health promotion communities to understand key concepts relating to intergenerational justice. It involves reframing youth participation from simply having a voice, to enabling their participation in setting the agenda, and championing their right to have a seat at the decision-making table (Conn et al., 2021). If we are truly committed to changing structures and systems, this also means advocating for changes in the way young people are able to engage in decision-making, including supporting suggestions to substantially lower the voting age, to ensure that governments take young people’s concerns about the climate crisis seriously (O’Neill, 2022).

LIMITATIONS

The survey was conducted during the 2022 Australian Federal Election, often referred to as the ‘climate election’ due to climate policy action being a key discussion point for voters and politicians (Armstrong et al., 2022; Hare, 2022). The election saw a change to the major left leaning party in Australia (Labour) from the conservative coalition (Liberal/Nationals). As such, young people’s responses around climate action may vary depending on which political party was in power at the time of participation. As noted in the methods, researchers are unable to prompt participants in online surveys for more detailed reflections or explanations. While this may have limited the depth of response from participants, it does show that young people are able to discuss and reflect on the commercial determinants of the climate crisis even without being provided with definitions or specific information. Thinking about how simple diagrams or videos could be used within surveys to prompt further reflection on more nuanced concepts associated with the CDoH may help young people engage in further detailed reflections about corporate practices not only in relation to climate, but in other areas of public health.

CONCLUSIONS

Young people are able to critically engage in discussions about how commercial practices drive the climate crisis. Given that young people demonstrate a high degree of knowledge about the key causes of the climate crisis; are widely considered to be insightful and passionate advocates for climate action; and will be most impacted by the climate crisis, it is crucial to equip and support young people in having a seat at the table in relation to the decisions that are made about climate responses. Public health and health promotion researchers, practitioners and advocates should build on young people’s awareness of the importance of corporate behaviours, and should develop systems and structures with young people which empower them and platform their knowledge and ideas for action.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors would like to thank the young people who participated in this study for taking the time to share their opinions.

FUNDING

G.A. is funded by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. Research for the online survey was provided by a research support account held by S.T. and H.P.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST STATEMENT

Prof Samantha Thomas holds the position of Editor-in-Chief for Health Promotion International and was involved neither in the review process nor in any decision-making on the manuscript. Dr Hannah Pitt holds the position of Editorial Board Member for Health Promotion International and was involved neither in the review process nor in any decision-making on the manuscript.

ETHICS DISCLOSURE

This study required the participation of human subjects. Ethical approval was granted by Deakin University’s Human Ethics Advisory Group for the Faculty of Health HEAG-H 162_2021.

REFERENCES