Are Parents More Focused On Earth’s Future?

In my article over at The Atlantic, I describe an interesting trend in the University of Texas at Austin Energy Poll data. Parents appear to be more likely to express concern about critical environmental issues like climate change and more interested in changing their behavior to be smarter consumers when it comes to purchasing energy [...]

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


In my article over at The Atlantic, I describe an interesting trend in the University of Texas at Austin Energy Poll data. Parents appear to be more likely to express concern about critical environmental issues like climate change and more interested in changing their behavior to be smarter consumers when it comes to purchasing energy efficient products and services.

For example, here's a comparison of parents and non-parents who say they are likely to purchase a hybrid car within five years:

And a look at who is interested in installing solar panels:


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


And finally, this chart considers attitudes on climate change:

These trends hold for far more topics than I have room to share here. And it may sound intuitive that parents are more likely to feel they have a bigger stake in the future, but what's driving these differences between parents and non-parents is more difficult to pinpoint...

Perhaps parents hear more about global challenges because of what their children learn about in school. Or it could the reverse - that parents are more likely to become actively engaged in teaching their kids about these topics. Or maybe parents are more focused on the legacy we will leave behind for future generations. There are many possibilities and none are mutually exclusive. So what do you think is going on?

Sheril Kirshenbaum is executive director of Science Debate, a nonpartisan org working to get presidential candidates on record on science policy. She co-directs Michigan State University's Food Literacy and Engagement Poll and hosts the NPR podcast Serving Up Science.

More by Sheril Kirshenbaum

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe