³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾

In recent years, the climate emergency has sparked a global response from children and young people. The movement is a prominent example.

Through this activism, children express their frustration at political systems that exclude their voices. This situation is particularly important because children will bear the brunt of future climate catastrophes.

It seems their message might be getting through. Our demonstrates adults in Australia and New Zealand generally support children being heard in government decisions about the environment.

So what has prompted this support, and how can it be turned into action?

Our study

Despite ongoing political debate about whether and how children’s voices should be incorporated in environmental decisions, we know surprisingly little about general public attitudes.

To address this, we added a question to national surveys in both New Zealand and Australia as part of the 2020 . The surveys included roughly 1,000 respondents each, and sampling weights were applied for the results to be nationally representative.

We asked how strongly respondents support children and young people’s views being included in government decision-making about the environment. The question was asked in relation to four different age groups: 3-5-year-olds, 6-10-year-olds, 11-14-year-olds and 15-18-year-olds.

What we found

We found a majority of surveyed adults in both countries support 11-14-year-olds (62% in Australia and 59% in New Zealand) and 15-18-year-olds (79% in Australia and 80% in New Zealand) having opportunities to influence government decisions on the environment.

Our analyses also revealed that various population groups agreed more than others to children’s voices being included in environmental decisions. For example, across all child age groups, women were consistently more likely than men to express support.

Historically, women have felt the brunt of exclusion from political participation, while also being key in nurturing children via mothering and teaching roles. This context may mean greater respect and empathy from women and therefore greater support for children’s views being heard.

Green party voters, members of environmental organisations and 18-30-year-olds were also more likely than other population groups to support children’s views being included.

Attempts to be heard

Our finding of a high degree of public support for young people being heard aligns with lobbying to lower the voting age to 16 in both countries.

Young people in Australia launched the in June 2023. In New Zealand, the current ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾-led coalition government recently to progress legislation to extend the voting age. This had been introduced by the previous government in response to a successful Supreme Court case taken by the New Zealand Make it 16 campaign to .

Rejecting this ruling is an undemocratic breach of human rights, as outlined in the United Nations on the Rights of the Child.

The UN in response to children’s calls for action. It clearly outlines what governments must do. It states that governments must ensure that children’s views are heard at all stages of environmental decision-making processes. This applies to decisions being made at the local, national and international level.

Winds of change

Our findings indicate the public in Australia and New Zealand is responsive to calls for greater involvement of children in environmental decision-making.

Indeed, our results reflect greater levels of public support than those observed in earlier focused on a broader question seeking adult views on children and young people’s involvement in government decision-making.

School climate strikes may be having a positive influence on adult attitudes towards including children in the political sphere. Media coverage of young people being could also be shifting adults’ beliefs on young people’s political engagement.

In other words, the more adults hear and see stories of children and young people’s concerns and restorative actions for the environment, the greater potential there is for adults to understand and support their perspectives.

The way forward

How can we move towards greater consideration of children’s views in government decisions regarding the environment? There are some foundational courses of actions that could be pursued.

Members of parliament could do this by listening to children and youth in their electorates. Early childhood education centres, schools and arts, cultural and sports centres can support MPs’ access to child and youth forums.

Further, youth parliamentary programs such as the could be officially embedded in the Australian parliamentary system. This would ensure that bills that youth table are heard and voted on. Similarly, the parliamentary system in New Zealand could take more heed of the triennial .

Children and young people deserve to have their concerns heard and influence policies that will greatly impact their future lives – well beyond those of current politicians.

Louise Phillips receives funding from Australia Research Council, Queensland Education Department, Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, Spencer Foundation and Swedish Research Council. She is the Vice-President of the Australian Council for Human Rights Education. Louise acknowledges the significant work of the Australian Consortium for Social and Political Research in conducting the Australian Survey of Social Attitudes (AuSSA) 2020 survey. The views expressed here are not intended to represent those of any of these organisations.

Jenny Ritchie is a Research Associate with the Child Poverty Action Group, Aotearoa and with He Whenua Taurikura | A Land at Peace. She is a past co-president of the New Zealand Association for Research in Education. Jenny has previously received research funding from the New Zealand Teaching and Learning Research Initiative, the New Zealand Ministry of Education, the Spencer Foundation, and the New Zealand ³Ô¹ÏÍøÕ¾ Commission for UNESCO. She gratefully acknowledges support of COMPASS at Auckland University Waipapa Taumata Rau in conducting the New Zealand iteration of the International Social Survey Programme (ISSP). The views expressed here are not intended to represent those of any of these organisations.

Francisco Perales does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.