Climate Risk Perception and Support for Cost-Bearing Environmental Action: A Social Constraint on Sustainability Transitions in Türkiye’s Mediterranean Region

Abstract

Sustainability transitions depend on public willingness to carry the costs they impose, yet recognition of climate risk does not necessarily extend to support for measures that place those costs directly on households. This exploratory cross-sectional study examines that distinction among urban respondents in Adana, Mersin, and Osmaniye in Türkiye’s Mediterranean Region. The analytic dataset comprised 214 adult urban respondents. Because no sampling frame or respondent-level inclusion probabilities are available, the achieved sample is treated as an unweighted non-probability sample and no claim of population representativeness is made. Principal-axis exploratory factor analysis with oblimin rotation and parallel analysis identified three dimensions: personal climate–environmental risk, support for cost-bearing environmental action, and an exploratory environmental concern. An in-sample three-factor confirmatory sensitivity model showed acceptable fit (comparative fit index (CFI) = 0.970, Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = 0.958, root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) = 0.057, standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR) = 0.057). Personal risk (mean (M) = 8.70) and environmental concern (M = 8.62) were much higher than cost-bearing support (M = 4.27). The within-person risk–cost support gap was 4.43 points (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.99–4.87; d_z = 1.36). Risk and concern were not significantly correlated with cost-bearing support, and their addition to a heteroskedasticity-robust (HC3) adjusted model increased explained variance by only 1.2% (p = 0.210). Provincial differences were substantial: Mersin had the widest gap, whereas Osmaniye had the highest cost-bearing support. The results do not estimate public opinion for the provinces; rather, they show that climate-policy legitimacy cannot be inferred from high risk perception alone. Policy-specific research should test fairness, effectiveness, trust, revenue use, and distributive safeguards in representative samples. For sustainability governance the implication is direct: the social pillar of sustainability—perceived fairness, affordability, and distributive protection—has to be designed into climate and environmental measures rather than assumed to follow from environmental awareness.