Exploring Gen Z’s Attitudes Towards Animals And The Environment
Background
Any social movement with longevity needs to court younger generations as potential leaders, advocates, and supporters. It’s therefore vital for both the animal protection and environmental movements to understand how Generation Z (Gen Z) adults view these critical issues and their potential roles in addressing them.
Gen Z is often portrayed as more environmentally aware than older generations, as reflected by large-scale movements like Fridays for Future, sparked by Greta Thunberg, but variation between countries appears to be significant. Studies have found that younger people in Australia, Poland, the U.S., and France are more concerned about climate change than older generations, whereas in Japan, the opposite is observed, and there are no strong trends in the United Kingdom.
When it comes to pro-animal attitudes, young people across 14 geopolitically diverse nations stated that the welfare of companion, farmed, and wild animals matters to them — albeit to varying degrees depending on the species (Sinclair et. al. 2022). Likewise, when comparing the importance of a broad range of social issues, environmental protection, animal protection, and sustainable development ranked the highest for young people across 12 diverse nations (Sinclair et. al. 2017). What still remains unknown are the pro-environmental and pro-animal behaviours that this generation displays, why they choose the behaviors, and to what extent they consider moving deeper into these fields.
This study investigates these gaps — illuminating the perspectives, actions, and career plans of university-educated Gen Z adults (aged 18-26) on environmental and animal protection across four countries: the United States of America, China, Thailand, and Indonesia. These countries were selected for their scale, regional importance, and roles in global animal trade and agriculture, providing a range of perspectives that can offer strategic insights for potential movement leaders in varied contexts. The findings aim to inform global advocacy strategies, messaging, and engagement efforts for young people pursuing careers in these fields.
Key Findings
- University-educated Gen Z respondents across the four countries hold positive attitudes towards animal and environmental protection. A vast majority (93%) expressed concern for these issues, and 86% indicated a preference for purchasing environmentally and animal-friendly products. 84% reported having altered their behaviors to support environmental or animal protection.
- Asian respondents are considerably more likely than U.S.-based respondents to report that they and their societies are doing enough to protect the environment and animal well-being. Over a third of Asian respondents feel their country is doing enough, with over 80% believing they are personally contributing sufficiently. In contrast, U.S. respondents reported more critical views of both their own actions and their culture, with less than half feeling they are doing enough personally, and only about 14% satisfied with societal efforts.
- Environmental actions and concerns are more common than animal actions or concerns, with farmed animals especially neglected. Respondents, particularly those in Asia, rarely mentioned farmed animals. When discussing pro-animal actions or attitudes, they focused more on companion animals and wild animals. This suggests that, without specific prompting, animal protection is more readily perceived as primarily about wild and companion animals, not farmed animals.
- When Gen Z changes their behavior, they tend to focus on mitigating personal harms rather than engaging proactively. Although most respondents reported making adjustments to their behavior to help protect animals or the environment, these were largely actions like recycling, avoiding single-use plastics, and choosing eco- or animal-friendly products to reduce one’s own environmental or animal-related harms. However, a minority described a wide range of more proactive or regenerative actions, such as tree planting, volunteering, advocacy, or adopting stray animals. This active minority demonstrates a potential pathway for others to deepen their engagement with these causes.
- Motivations to act are both anthropocentric (human-focused) and animal/environment-focused. Respondents across all surveyed countries supported environmental action to protect people from ongoing harms, safeguard the lives of future generations, and to preserve nature as a good in itself. However, when specifically discussing action to protect animals, people are more likely to cite benefits to the animals themselves. Regional variations are striking, with Chinese respondents placing greater emphasis on the human-centric benefits of environmental and animal action compared to those in other surveyed nations.
- Gen Z’s barriers to further action are practical and emotional, not ideological. Participants frequently cited practical reasons (like financial barriers) and/or emotional reasons (like despair or futility) over ideological reasons (such as not believing in the cause) as major barriers to action. The near absence of ideological opposition suggests that advocates can have greater impact by identifying and addressing the practical and emotional barriers that prevent action, rather than focusing on changing core values or beliefs.
- Perceived barriers and solutions to environmental and animal issues varied significantly by country. Indonesian respondents almost universally cited lack of education and awareness as a primary barrier, and suggested grassroots advocacy or education-based solutions. Chinese respondents were most likely to highlight cultural attitudes, including apathy, feelings of helplessness, and adherence to harmful traditional norms, as significant barriers to action. In contrast, respondents in the U.S. and Thailand were more likely to emphasize the roles of corporate interests and capitalist structures, often favoring political or top-down approaches to address these challenges.
- Gen Z respondents usually attributed problems more to individual actions and attitudes rather than to systemic factors. Respondents frequently blamed issues on ignorance, individual malevolence, or specific cultural practices, rather than the broader systemic problems inherent in areas like factory farming and extractive industries. This trend was stronger in Asia than the United States.
To view Key Findings by country, please refer to the Country-Level Insights section of this report.
Recommendations
For Advocates
- Focus on addressing emotional and practical barriers to attract more interest in environmental and animal protection cause areas. Emotional barriers (lack of passion) and practical concerns (lack of skills or fears of poor compensation and instability) were the most common obstacles for both respondents who did not take environmental action and those uninterested in these careers. This suggests a range of possible interventions, including strategies to generate enthusiasm and commitment among a broader audience, as well as initiatives to provide skill development and improve job stability, and providing competitive compensation for those considering careers in these fields.
- Expand the narrative from individual to systemic change. While respondents’ perceived barriers and proposed solutions tend to focus heavily on individual action, our data show that some young people recognize barriers at multiple levels and believe in the potential of more impactful approaches, such as movement building and institutional change. By reinforcing this perspective, advocates can foster a broader focus on higher leverage actions and systemic solutions, empowering young people to drive collective action and institutional reforms across diverse cultural contexts.
- Look beyond traditional geographic groupings for knowledge exchange. Unexpected similarities between countries, such as shared U.S.-Thai views on corporate accountability, suggest opportunities for knowledge sharing, and for identifying new patterns on what strategies may work in different contexts.
- Connect farmed animal issues to existing concerns and motivations. Many young people are already concerned about environmental protection or the welfare of wild and companion animals, particularly when these issues feel personally relevant or connected to their daily lives. Positioning farmed animal issues within these existing areas of concern can help tap into pre-existing motivation, making advocacy more resonant and compelling for Gen Z audiences.
- Start advocacy efforts with younger age groups. Our data show that social awareness develops at different ages across regions, but pre-university youth in some Asian countries likely lack sufficient opportunities to develop social, environmental, or animal awareness, making this a critically overlooked area for engagement.
- Leverage belief in education to build a strategic pillar for animal and environmental advocacy. Gen Z’s strong confidence in the power of education, as reflected in our data, may allow them to contribute to positive change. By engaging young people in developing and testing tiered interventions — such as skill-building workshops, policy literacy programs, and public-facing education campaigns — educational approaches can be expanded and tailored to deliver measurable, high-impact outcomes.
- Customize professional development approaches by region. Strong but varying career interests across countries indicate the need for culturally-specific professional development strategies (e.g., focus on career stability in China, alignment with personal passions in the United States).
- Design advocacy approaches that acknowledge diverse social and economic realities. Data across all surveyed countries highlight consistent, country-specific awareness of socioeconomic differences within and between countries. This underscores the importance of advocates carefully calibrating messaging and strategies to suit different socioeconomic contexts in each country.
For Researchers
- Investigate motivations behind Gen Z’s prioritization of environmental issues over animal welfare. Conduct qualitative studies to explore the psychological, cultural, and educational factors influencing Gen Z’s preference for environmental advocacy. Understanding the narratives, values, and perceived urgency driving this prioritization can inform tailored messaging and strategies for animal protection campaigns.
- Explore the impact of generational change on attitudes towards animal and environmental protection. Conduct broader or more targeted qualitative studies, or longitudinal quantitative studies, to assess how younger generations’ attitudes evolve over time and differ from older cohorts. This can potentially disentangle age and generational effects, offering new insights into the role of education, social movements, and technological influences on these attitudes. This may enable more effective adaptation of advocacy strategies to shifting generational dynamics.
- Analyze cultural differences in perceptions of responsibility. Conduct cross-cultural studies to understand how different regions assign responsibility for environmental and animal harm to corporations and governments. Identifying patterns and underlying drivers can help shape advocacy strategies that resonate with local attitudes and improve public engagement in policy-driven initiatives.
- Explore strategies to elevate the visibility of farmed animals in advocacy efforts. Research can explore how farmed animal welfare can be effectively integrated into existing advocacy narratives, such as those focused on sustainability and food systems. Case studies of successful campaigns in different cultural contexts can provide insights into bridging the perception gap between farmed and companion/wild animals.
- Investigate potential connections between conservation and wild animal welfare messaging. Research should examine how existing concern for wildlife and natural environments might influence attitudes towards both wild animal welfare and conservation, particularly exploring how principles of environmental protection could extend to, or conflict with, animal protection goals.
- Investigate why mitigation dominates over proactive action. Examine why Gen Z focuses more on harm prevention than active contributions, considering influences like education, activism norms, moral underpinnings, and societal expectations. Research can uncover strategies to expand the concept of action, encourage more proactive engagement, and raise awareness of the outsized impact of specific proactive actions.
- Address the gap between interest in and pursuit of environmental and animal careers. Investigate the barriers preventing young people from pursuing careers in these fields, despite their expressed interest. Examine the structural advantages that make environmental careers more accessible and legitimate, such as established pathways and mainstream support. Researchers can collaborate with educational institutions and advocacy organizations to develop and test interventions like mentorship programs or career-pathway initiatives, or identify strategies to create similar infrastructure for animal protection careers, transforming interest into tangible action.
To view country-specific recommendations, please refer to the Country-Level Insights section of this report.
Applying These Findings
This report can be utilized strategically in a few key ways:
- Tailoring messaging to Gen Z audiences to encourage them to make decisions that benefit animals and the environment;
- Planning how to engage Gen Z in the professional movements to benefit animals and the environment; and
- Identifying which interventions may be most effective in engaging Gen Z.
To these ends, we have a few suggested resources that can help.
If you’d like to further examine the role that Gen Z can play in non-profits, check out these reports from Animal Advocacy Careers on bottlenecks in the animal advocacy movement and ideal candidate profiles, as well as this Deloitte survey on Gen Z and Millennial motivations to join the climate movement. You may also be interested in our case study of a food systems education program.
To see which pro-animal actions U.S. Gen Z is interested in taking, use this graphing tool to review 18 options. To read more about the individual versus systemic messaging (a theme of this report), read this Pax Fauna write-up and our library summary of a factory farming messaging study. Further, if you are curious about Chinese Gen Z in particular, review our library summary of a survey of that exact population.
Understanding an entire generation is no easy task. Faunalytics is happy to offer pro bono support to advocates and non-profit organizations who would like guidance applying these findings to their own work. Please visit our virtual Office Hours or contact us for support.
Behind The Project
Research Team
The project’s lead authors were Dr. Michelle Sinclair (A World of Good Initiative), Jack Stennett (Good Growth), and Jah Ying Chung (Good Growth). Dr. Andie Thompkins (Faunalytics) reviewed and oversaw the work.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank several advocates who provided valuable input about this research throughout the process. We would like to thank our funders for their generous support of this research.
Research Terminology
At Faunalytics, we strive to make research accessible to everyone. We avoid jargon and technical terminology as much as possible in our reports. If you do encounter an unfamiliar term or phrase, check out the Faunalytics Glossary for user-friendly definitions and examples.
Research Ethics Statement
As with all of Faunalytics’ original research, this study was conducted according to the standards outlined in our Research Ethics and Data Handling Policy.
U.S. Key Findings
- U.S. young people show the lowest engagement rates in environmental action. 73% have made some lifestyle changes — the lowest percentage among surveyed countries, with only 25% having considered environmental or animal advocacy careers.
- Those who do engage show deeper commitment and understanding. U.S. respondents who take action demonstrate more comprehensive involvement, particularly in dietary changes and detailed career knowledge, suggesting more thorough engagement when committed.
- Respondents are highly critical of their own and society’s environmental efforts. Less than half believe they’re doing their part to protect the environment and animals, and only about 14% think society is doing enough.
- Corporate influence is seen as the primary barrier to progress. Young U.S. respondents particularly emphasize corporate greed and issues with capitalism as major obstacles to environmental and animal welfare advancement.
- U.S. respondents strongly favor institutional solutions over individual actions. While respondents in the U.S. were skeptical of current government efforts, they are politically conscious and show optimism about potential political change, as well as support for systemic solutions through legislation and regulation.
Recommendations For Working With Gen Z In The U.S.
Communications Recommendations
- Frame environmental work as crucial for future generations. Youth concern about long-term climate impacts creates compelling narrative opportunities, while avoiding excessive pessimism.
- Highlight innovation opportunities rather than corporate criticism. Despite negative corporate sentiment, focusing on positive innovation potential may help recruit Gen Z into environmental or animal welfare career paths.
- Present environmental careers as established, respected professions. Desire for well-defined career paths suggests a need for clear, professional framing of advocacy roles that can pay well.
Career Recommendations
- Guide advocates towards institutional change-making roles. Strong recognition of systemic solutions indicates opportunities for policy, legal, and corporate reform careers.
- Promote environmental or animal integration across traditional professions. Clear preference for defined career paths suggests potential for embedding advocacy in established fields like medicine, law, and engineering.
- Position environmental or animal-friendly careers at the forefront of U.S. innovation. The strong innovation ecosystem in the U.S. presents opportunities for impactful tech and entrepreneurship roles.
U.S. Gen Z’s Pro-Environmental And Animal Actions
While U.S.-based Gen Z were less likely than respondents elsewhere to say that they have made lifestyle changes, the majority (73%) still reported having made some changes. As with other countries in the study, individual mitigation actions, predominantly reducing plastic consumption, recycling, and using reusable daily products such as bags and water bottles, were the most common single type of response. However, other actions were distinctive to the United States.
Diet change was a common theme in the U.S., though only two respondents reported being vegan. Many mentioned vegetarianism, meat reduction, choosing cage-free eggs, or boycotting brands linked to animal abuse, such as Fairlife. Interestingly, diet was even noted by those reluctant to change, such as one respondent who said, “I can help animals by being vegan, but I don’t want to make such a big adjustment.” U.S. Gen Z participants have both greater awareness of more ethical diet trends and a belief that diet can be a way of reducing environmental and animal harm, while also indicating they perceive these diets as difficult to enact.
In contrast, dietary changes were rarely mentioned outside the U.S., where responses tended to focus on companion or wild animals. This suggests young U.S. Americans are more likely to consider farmed animal welfare. The trend of reducing meat but not adopting veganism may also support evidence showing the potential for advancing dietary advocacy in the U.S. by prioritizing meat reduction as a more accessible and impactful goal for young people.
Compared to respondents in other countries, U.S. respondents showed the lowest level of interest in environment or animal advocacy careers (25%). Among those who indicated interest, they were slightly more inclined toward environmental careers than animal-focused ones. U.S. respondents, however, were more specific in their career responses, showing a clearer understanding of potential career paths. Several, for example, were studying environment-related fields such as environmental science or law, while two mentioned veterinary medicine. It was also more common for U.S. respondents to mention volunteer or outdoor roles, such as volunteering as a park ranger.
The majority of U.S. respondents who did not indicate interest in pursuing careers in animal- or environment-related fields most frequently cited having other passions and interests as their reason for disinterest. U.S. respondents frequently referenced their plans to have careers in other fields, or commitment to other causes. For example, one respondent shared:
I am pursuing a career elsewhere in a field I am wholly passionate about and devoted to (Bioethics and Clinical Ethics). I am interested in devoting myself to a career that creates change and aids others in other ways.
As with respondents in other countries, some saw these roles as less financially stable or lucrative, noting that they could make a lot more money elsewhere. As U.S. respondents appeared to have clearer career goals by university age — driven by both personal interest and financial reward — interest in these fields might need to be fostered earlier.
U.S. Gen Z’s Reasons For Action And Inaction
For U.S. respondents, ideological and anthropocentric motivations for action were slightly more prevalent than in other regions. Key themes included preserving the environment and animals for future generations, often referencing their own (future) children. While climate change and ecosystem destruction were common concerns across the survey, they were mentioned slightly more frequently in the U.S., accompanied by more pessimistic or fatalistic views about the future. Respondents described concerns such as “our planet’s atmosphere is dwindling which is going to make it harder for us and our children to live,” “the earth will be destroyed for all of us,” and “make the Earth uninhabitable faster.” Some also referenced religious duty, noting, “God has given us this planet, and it is our job to care for it.”
The minority of U.S. respondents who had not taken action to support the environment or animals cited specific barriers, with practical challenges such as time, financial constraints, and convenience being particularly common. One respondent shared that they didn’t “have enough time to think about the environment as a college student with a part-time job who needs to pay rent and tuition,” while others pointed to the high costs of eco-friendly products for the working class. Many U.S. American respondents associated environmental- or animal-friendly actions with middle- or higher-income lifestyles, which discouraged lower-income individuals or those new to the job market from taking action.
Some respondents felt that individual actions were ineffective against the large-scale corporate influence they blamed for most environmental or animal-related harms, discouraging them from making personal lifestyle changes. As one respondent noted, “one person can’t make a difference compared to the corporations and companies.” This emphasizes the need to spotlight the impact of advocacy efforts when engaging young people in the United States.
U.S. Gen Z’s Perceptions Of Societal Efforts And Barriers
Compared to other nations in this survey, young people in the U.S. were less likely to feel that their society was doing enough to protect the environment and animal well-being.
Only 13.6% (environment) and 15.5% (animal well-being) at least somewhat agreed with the statement, compared to 40.1% and 36.5% in the other countries surveyed. Relatedly, only 48.5% and 53.4% of U.S. American respondents believed they were personally doing enough to protect the environment and animal well-being respectively, compared to 87.5% and 79.9% in the rest of the sample. This highlights young U.S. Americans’ awareness of the need for change on both a personal and societal level, suggesting a potential motivation for change at both levels.
U.S. respondents identified specific barriers to progress on environmental and animal issues and, more than respondents in other countries, were notably more likely to point to corporations and companies as obstacles to action. Many respondents attributed this to corporate “greed,” or critiqued capitalism and consumerism as systemic issues, reflecting an image of U.S. society as dominated by these organizations:
[There are] ultra powerful capitalistic monopolies that influence the lives of everyone and siphon immeasurable amounts of money while destroying the environment. It would take very strong regulations to stop their influence.
Some highlighted particular industries, such as “big oil companies” and animal “mega-farms.” While structural issues were also cited, such as the reliance on fossil fuels or poor corporate incentives, U.S. Gen Z are more likely to have particular “villains” to rally against, which could be carefully utilized to motivate action.
Respondents also identified government-related barriers, such as insufficient funding for environmental or animal causes, weak regulations, corruption, and a perception that politicians lack concern for these issues — particularly criticizing conservatives. One respondent described their state as “too conservative and old-fashioned,” which led people to prioritize convenience over potential harms. Another respondent pointed to the difficulty that has arisen from “turning basic conservation into a bipartisan issue,” noting that the politicization of environmental concerns complicates progress. While environmental and animal welfare concerns typically align with left-liberal values, making these concerns natural issues for more politically active members of Gen Z to champion, these responses highlight the challenges of moving beyond partisan divides to find shared solutions. Advocates should consider the impact of potential collaboration and review research on how to navigate conservative political values to advance positive change for animals.
U.S. respondents also highlighted that the political influence of corporate lobbying was a barrier to progress, criticizing lobbying for allowing unchecked pollution and practices that increase animal suffering. Some respondents pointed to “corrupt politicians controlled by lobbyists who prioritize profits over environmental protection” as a key issue. Lobbying is more clearly identified as a barrier than in other countries in the survey, indicating a greater awareness of the lobbying process in U.S. politics.
Finally, U.S. participants also highlighted individual-level barriers. While other countries tended to emphasize a lack of education and awareness as central barriers to action, U.S. respondents pointed more to individual flaws such as selfishness, unwillingness to change in society, a sense of powerlessness, and an inability to generate change. According to Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions Theory, U.S. American culture ranks significantly higher in individualism (“I” culture) compared to the other surveyed countries, which tend to favor collectivism (“we” culture). Specifically, the U.S. scores 60% on the individualism scale, compared to China (43%), Thailand (19%), and Indonesia (5%).
Some respondents linked this individualism to a resistance to change. One U.S. participant observed, “People do not like change, especially changes to food and money in America,” while another remarked, “The consumer has little control over how their products are produced […] and little power as an individual to do much beyond a very small contribution to the net good.” These responses highlight how individual challenges, such as resistance to change and feelings of powerlessness, intersect with structural barriers like political divides and corporate influence — issues advocates may need to address in their messaging.
U.S. Gen Z’s Perceptions On Solutions To These Challenges
More than other countries, respondents in the U.S. believe in the possibility of political change. When a problem was attributed to politicians themselves, solutions included calls for major political reform, increased government funding for environmental or animal organizations or causes, and improved political leadership. In response to beliefs that older politicians contribute to conservative resistance to meaningful changes, some U.S. American respondents stressed the need for a new generation of environmentally and animal-aware politicians.
Public-sector-led interventions were also widely viewed as crucial for addressing external polluters and companies that harm animals. Many respondents emphasized the need for stronger environmental legislation targeting corporations, stricter enforcement, and limits on lobbying. Compared to other countries, respondents in the U.S. offered more detailed solutions, particularly favoring government action to curb environmentally harmful corporate practices and reduce the influence of large profit-driven businesses. While earlier findings highlight a belief in significant barriers within the government itself, this also demonstrates that young U.S. respondents see government regulation as a key tool for driving change.
Viewing innovation and business as potential positive forces was less common but notable — one respondent highlighted that “investing in renewable energy, sustainable practices, and green infrastructure can create new jobs and economic opportunities,” while another pointed to “explosive new companies that can demonstrate the viability and profitability of cleaner/renewable products.” However, despite the U.S.’s leadership in green technology and industry, these more optimistic perspectives were rare, suggesting that this could be a neglected area in young people’s vision of progress for animal and environmental advocacy.
Individual actions and society-level efforts, like grassroots education, were less frequently mentioned as solutions, aligning with the view that structural challenges require institutional responses. However, when individual action was mentioned, it tended to be political action: voting, protests, and petitions — approaches less commonly emphasized in other countries. This stronger belief in achieving progress through political channels suggests that engaging young people in political action may be a promising approach.
China Key Findings
- Chinese youth show moderate rates of environmental engagement but with distinctive local focus. 77% report making lifestyle changes, with particular emphasis on practical issues like food delivery waste and local environmental concerns.
- Animal protection interests center strongly on companion animals. While some Chinese respondents engage with stray and companion animals, their actions rarely extend to farmed animals.
- Chinese young people act for practical rather than ideological reasons. Chinese Gen Z were the most likely to describe practical, rather than ideological, motivations for action.
- Career interest in environmental/animal fields faces multiple pressures. While 46% of Chinese respondents have considered these careers, family expectations and social status considerations often create tension between personal aspirations and societal pressures.
- Chinese youth are skeptical of national progress. Around 50% believe their country isn’t doing enough, particularly regarding animal protection, which is combined with a pessimistic attitude about their individual ability to make a difference.
- Solutions are seen primarily through institutional channels despite pessimism. While many express doubts about change, they show distinct preference for top-down solutions through government action and policy changes, combined with creative grassroots engagement.
Recommendations For Working With Chinese Gen Z
Communications Recommendations
- Ground advocacy in local, tangible community activities. Strong interest in participatory events suggests opportunities for engaging through hands-on, local initiatives rather than abstract messaging.
- Frame environmental actions through clear, observable outcomes. Chinese youth’s emphasis on seeing concrete results indicates a need for messaging that demonstrates the direct impact of advocacy efforts, and helps counter feelings of powerlessness felt among some young people.
- Leverage authentic social media storytelling for advocacy. High social media use and enthusiasm for creative online actions suggests potential for creative, youth-led digital campaigns, particularly those focusing on relatable issues such as pollution and food safety.
Career Recommendations
- Position animal welfare and environmental roles as solutions to public health challenges. Strong concerns about food safety and pollution create opportunities to frame animal or environmental careers as addressing critical social needs. Direct experience with air pollution and food safety issues may create compelling narrative opportunities for career recruitment.
- Promote relevant roles within established industries. Interest in traditional career stability suggests opportunities to highlight animal or environmental positions in existing sectors (e.g., consulting, or compliance in existing industries) over less-established and new areas.
- Emphasize high-paying opportunities in sustainable industries, such as green, environmental, or food technology. Chinese respondents’ desire for high potential careers indicates potential for promoting well-compensated green sector opportunities.
- Develop animal/environmental content creation career paths. Strong digital media engagement suggests opportunities for online animal advocacy, environmental storytelling, and content production careers.
Chinese Gen Z's Pro-Environmental And Animal Actions
A majority of Chinese respondents (77%) reported making lifestyle changes, slightly lower than in Thailand and Indonesia but similar to the United States.
Among our Chinese respondents, actions to mitigate environmental harms were common, with some distinctive local trends. Alongside widely adopted measures such as litter sorting and using reusable bags, Chinese respondents often highlight concerns about food delivery waste, a specific challenge tied to the popularity of delivery apps like Meituan (美团) and Ele.me (饿了么). These platforms’ heavy plastic use led some respondents to decline disposable cutlery and reduce delivery orders to cut waste. This finding suggests that while young Chinese individuals appear to be responding to environmentally considerate societal trends, their individual efforts may primarily focus on practical, small-scale mitigation.
When Chinese Gen Z respondents described their proactive contributions, they were more likely than other countries in the study to mention helping animals, especially strays, companion animals, and those involved in entertainment or cultural activities. Young people stated that they frequently engage with stray dogs and cats by feeding, caring for, or adopting them — some even working with organizations dedicated to helping these animals. They also reported avoiding certain animal-related practices, such as visiting poorly managed zoos, patronizing dog/cat cafes where animals are viewed as “exploited workers,” consuming animal entertainment, or eating dog meat. This heightened awareness was often driven by online activism and social media exposure. One respondent reflected:
I actively comment on and repost online reports about dog meat festivals and the abuse of dogs and cats. This year, a top-scoring candidate in the college entrance physics exam had their scores cancelled by Fudan University for posting a video of cat abuse online. I think the new generation of Chinese youth is very concerned about the protection of cats and dogs.
This pattern supports evidence suggesting a generational shift in attitudes toward certain animal-related practices in China (Carnovale et al. 2022). However, this concern for animal well-being rarely extends to animals used for food. Few respondents mentioned reducing meat consumption, indicating that the broader conversation about animal protection in China remains largely unconnected to issues in farming practices.
At the career level, Chinese respondents displayed moderate interest in pursuing jobs in environmental and animal advocacy (46%), with a stronger inclination toward animal-related work compared to other countries in the survey. Their career interests covered a wide range of fields, including habitat protection, marine conservation, and animal-related roles like stray animal rescue and shelter work. Some respondents mentioned specific organizations, university majors, or career paths tied to these interests. Notably, many respondents expressed a desire to integrate environmental or animal well-being concerns into existing career paths, such as media and communications, education, and ESG (environmental, social, and governance) consulting. This diversity of career interests highlights an understanding of various professional fields connected to animal and environmental work.
Chinese young people’s career choices are strongly shaped by family expectations and social status, particularly for only children, who are relatively common because of China’s one-child policy (Li et al, 2020). While U.S. respondents tend to mention personal passion as a motivation for career choice, Chinese youth are more likely to mention tensions between external pressure and individual aspirations. As one respondent explained:
I do hope my career can be more meaningful and can positively contribute to society. But I’m an only child, and my parents want me to become a successful person with a higher social status. So it’s not realistic to work in environmental and animal protection.
Chinese Gen Z's Reasons For Action And Inaction
In China, motivations for environmental and animal actions tended to be practical rather than ideological, compared to more balanced motivations in the other surveyed countries. Chinese participants indicated that observed harm to human well-being, economic development, food safety, and public health was a key reason for action. Some respondents also described the direct impacts these issues have had on themselves and their families:
There are factories near my home that emit a foul smell from time to time. In recent years, my mother has developed a rare cancer caused by a gene mutation. The blue sky I used to see often as a child has turned gray, and the roadside plants are covered in dust. Everything is connected.
These concerns, also described in Thailand and Indonesia, demonstrate how some Chinese young people’s environmental awareness has been impacted by personal experiences with environmental degradation.
Chinese youth also feel more motivated to act on environmental and animal well-being issues when they can clearly see the results and effectiveness of their efforts. Respondents mentioned that they value seeing “concrete results,” want to see their actions as “useful and necessary,” and feel able to act because of their understanding of how their actions made a difference. This may be augmented by a sense of urgency and desire for purpose in making a meaningful difference that some respondents reported. One respondent reported their pressing need to take advantage of their youth to “cherish [animals and the environment] and act fast to take some positive actions.” Framing messages around the effectiveness of certain actions, combined with themes of urgency and purpose, could be an effective way to engage young Chinese people in animal and environmental initiatives.
Chinese Gen Z’s Perceptions Of Societal Efforts And Barriers
Most Chinese respondents felt that they were personally doing enough for environmental and animal well-being but were less confident in their country’s efforts, especially in animal protection. Only 7% of respondents felt they were personally not doing enough for the environment, and 13% felt the same about animal well-being. In contrast, 50% believed China was not doing enough for the environment, and 54% felt the same about animal protection. Notably, Chinese respondents expressed a slightly stronger belief that their country is not adequately addressing animal well-being compared to environmental issues. This discrepancy may reflect China’s governmental priorities — environmental protection receives far more attention in national policy-making (Oxford Energy, 2024; Li, 2021).
In China, young people identified institutional barriers at both private- and public-sector levels as key obstacles to progress. While in the U.S. the focus was often on “selfish corporations,” Chinese respondents were more likely to target the capitalist system and systemic governance issues. Respondents pointed to “capitalist expansion” and “capitalist market” forces as problems, while also highlighting the “lack of enforcement measures,” “lack of institutional oversight,” and “government’s lack of support” for both animal and environmental protection. Such concerns reflect a broader critique of China’s regulatory and enforcement capabilities, which may be surprising in a country where criticism of the government is discouraged. The absence of criticism toward specific corporations, also notable in Indonesia, suggests a different way of interacting with private sector animal/environmental concerns than the U.S. and Thailand. In China, this may reflect less critical perceptions of the role of corporations, potentially due to China’s state-owned enterprise structure, where major companies are often not distinguishable from the government, or it could reflect lower rates of awareness of the connections between corporations and animal or environment harms due to media limitations — as one respondent noted: “the press in China is dead.”
Some respondents also indicated that environmental and animal well-being concerns were connected to socioeconomic class. Multiple respondents frame sustainable consumption as a “lifestyle choice for comfortable middle-class families/individuals to consider,” while also noting that their status as educated urban residents means that they are less directly impacted by environmental harms. This class dynamic is captured by one respondent:
People who care about these things are on two ends of the spectrum. Some are so middle-class that people (we) may think [concern about environmental or animal harms] is entertainment for the rich. Some are less privileged people whose interests are directly affected, yet they seem too distant from us.
This class divide suggests a potential barrier to building broader support in China, which may be linked to high levels of inequality in the country. University-educated respondents show some awareness of these issues but may be less directly affected by environmental harms compared to less privileged groups, and therefore do not feel a pressing urge to act. On the other hand, they do not perceive themselves as part of an elite who have the capacity or freedom to prioritize these concerns.
Traditional cultural attitudes and social norms were also perceived as barriers to environmental and animal protection in China. Many respondents pointed to widespread apathy and negative attitudes toward collective action, alongside deeply held beliefs about human superiority over animals. These societal limitations were reflected in comments about “harmful culture and customs” and the observation that “it is difficult to change people’s thoughts and perceptions, such as the belief that animals are subordinate to humans and do not need rescue.”
Personal barriers to environmental and animal-friendly action among Chinese respondents are predominantly practical, centered on perceived lack of knowledge and ability to make meaningful change. One respondent specifically mentioned the low transparency of animal welfare-related information, and the “lack of direct and effective cheaper alternatives for specific products.” Chinese respondents also expressed uncertainty about causal chains of impact and trade-offs they have to make between environmental protection with a quality lifestyle. The lack of clear pathways to impact, combined with structural barriers in Chinese society, may contribute to feelings of powerlessness among young people to act on these issues.
Some note that their own generation is more pessimistic: “Gen Z generally have a negative outlook” and describe how the intense pressure of their lifestyles creates additional obstacles to engagement. Respondents frequently cite exhaustion and stress as barriers to caring about environmental and animal issues, with one noting that:
Everyone is too busy and tired […] making it really hard to care about long-term problems like the environment and animals. Many people might feel like intensively farmed animals themselves.
Unlike youth in the U.S. who often express pessimism about specific environmental trends, young Chinese people’s negativity appears to stem more from feeling overwhelmed by societal pressures and their own lack of influence. As one respondent summarizes: “In a society where people feel a strong sense of powerlessness, it’s impossible to spare any effort to care for other groups.”
Chinese Gen Z’s Perceptions On Solutions To These Challenges
This trend of pessimism extends to discussions of solutions, where negative responses were common. One respondent doubted the effectiveness of both top-down and bottom-up approaches, stating: “Top-down changes are the most effective, but they are unlikely,” and that no “bottom-up actions […] [have] been strong enough to drive policy or systemic structural change.” Similarly, multiple respondents expressed the belief that no solutions exist for these animal and environmental problems, highlighting a pervasive sense of powerlessness that must be taken into account when engaging with Chinese young people.
However, this negativity is far from universal and respondents described a range of potential solutions. As with the U.S., many Chinese respondents saw solutions through institutional channels, emphasizing the need for stricter laws, enhanced enforcement, and corporate engagement in environmental protection. Many respondents advocated for specific policy measures such as anti-animal abuse laws, recycling mandates, and subsidies for eco-friendly products, believing these would create necessary structure and incentives for both individuals and businesses. Despite earlier concerns about public-sector barriers, there is some evidence of cautious optimism about China’s potential for institutional change. One respondent, for example, pointed to the implementation of trash sorting in Shanghai, noting that personnel were initially on duty to oversee compliance and impose fines, which led them to believe that “the national government should be able to impose stricter penalties through legislation.” This example suggests that it may be easier to implement such initiatives in wealthier, more liberal cities like Shanghai or Guangzhou, rather than on a national basis. These solution-oriented responses highlight that young Chinese people may view institutional changes as promising, recognizing China’s strong state capacity for implementing reforms when the political will exists.
Beyond institutional solutions, young Chinese people tended to see potential in both individual and society-level actions, particularly through creative engagement and youth-led initiatives. Individual solutions that respondents suggested frequently focused on participatory events and creative media that brings people closer to animals and nature. Examples of creative engagement involve social media — such as producing “authentic content that’s relatable to the public” rather than manufactured or overly polished content — and engaging people in real-life activities. At the societal level, respondents emphasized the importance of advocacy organizations and grassroots movements, suggesting the need to “mobilize the small number of people” who care and help them “start with small things they can do in their communities.” The emphasis on events and volunteer activities appeared distinct to Chinese responses, perhaps reflecting the prevalence of government-organized volunteering in China, and a belief in the importance of community action for triggering social change.
One respondent gave a more complex description of a grassroots theory of change, indicating that some Gen Z in China have thought carefully about how to produce change, bypassing the challenging task of engaging the government directly:
I don’t think it’s practical to rely solely on the government, as this is a very complex process that takes a considerable amount of time to develop from scratch. If more vocal activists can leverage a single point to influence more people during community activities or outreach campaigns, they can convey a deeper awareness of environmental protection and educate more people. This chain of communication of ideas can embed such awareness in the hearts of the public, which can then lead to real actions. Therefore, we actually need more people to speak up. Especially with the unprecedented development of online social media, everyone can have a voice.
Thailand Key Findings
- Thai youth show both high engagement rates and deeper commitment to environmental action. 92% report making changes, with actions extending beyond basic mitigation to include proactive behaviors like sustainable shopping and ethical product choices.
- Career interest in environmental/animal fields is the highest among surveyed countries at 74%. Thai respondents show more specific career planning and existing involvement in these fields, though many face economic barriers to pursuing these paths.
- Consumer choices are uniquely viewed through an ethical lens. Thai youth stand out in their attention to cruelty-free products and eco-friendly alternatives, possibly reflecting Buddhist values and cultural norms.
- Environmental and animal concerns are motivated by multiple perspectives. Thai respondents demonstrate sophisticated understanding of both environmental challenges and corporate and governance issues, often citing media exposure as a key motivator.
- Solutions are viewed through a strategic lens rather than an ideological one. Despite criticizing capitalism, Thai youth focus on practical solutions like targeted communication strategies and influencing key decision-makers rather than calling for systemic overhaul.
Recommendations For Working With Thai Gen Z
Communications Recommendations
- Harness the power of Thai social media for animal advocacy campaigns. Young Thai people are highly engaged on social platforms, offering opportunities to connect animal welfare with existing environmental narratives.
- Promote cruelty-free products and ethical consumption choices. Growing awareness of animal testing in cosmetics indicates potential for expanding ethical consumer movements.
- Build bridges between advocates, businesses, and local communities. Tensions within the Thai population suggest a need for young advocates to build relationships with people from other parts of society.
- Design socially conscious environmental campaigns. Thai sensitivity to class and social issues suggests a need for inclusive, culturally aware advocacy approaches.
Career Recommendations
- Develop roles focused on cross-societal relationship building. Social divisions indicate the need for professionals who can connect advocacy efforts across different communities and classes.
- Create positions focused on business-advocacy partnerships. Growing corporate influence suggests opportunities for professionals who can navigate both advocacy and business worlds.
- Launch strategic campaigns targeting influential Thai corporations. Youth interest in challenging monopolies presents opportunities for effective corporate animal welfare campaigns.
- Connect farmed animal welfare to existing wildlife conservation career interest. Strong Thai interest in careers in wildlife protection and climate action offers opportunities to bridge conservation with broader animal advocacy initiatives.
Thai Gen Z’s Pro-Environmental And Animal Actions
92% of young Thai people reported changing their habits to help the environment and animals, and most of these changes focused on mitigating individual harms. While Indonesian respondents focused mainly on basic mitigation actions like avoiding littering, Thai youth (similar to U.S. respondents) stated that they engaged in more active behaviors such as waste separation, recycling, and reducing food waste. Some respondents also described choosing sustainable fashion brands and shopping second-hand. Combined with their more frequent reporting of lifestyle changes, this extended range of proactive actions may indicate both broader participation and a deeper commitment to environmental actions among Thai youth compared to Chinese and Indonesian respondents. This may suggest greater potential for significant behavioral change in this population.
Thai respondents also stood out as the most likely to mention choosing cruelty-free or non-animal-tested personal care products, as well as eco-friendly options like coral-friendly sunscreen. The frequent mention of ethical product choices among Thai respondents could reflect that Thai values (such as Buddhist philosophy) or societal norms towards gentleness have generated a market for ethical products. It may also indicate that Thai young people are more likely to view consumer choices through an ethical lens.
Beyond individual actions, Thai youth showed some limited involvement in broader community-level environmental and animal welfare initiatives. Respondents reported participating in organized activities such as beach clean-ups and tree planting, while some made conscious choices about sustainable travel. Some also supported stray animal care organizations or donated to environmental foundations. This community engagement and support for non-profits suggest opportunities for young people to build on collective action initiatives.
Thai respondents demonstrated the highest level of interest (74%) in environmental and animal advocacy careers. Many expressed interest in specific career paths, including veterinary medicine, government environmental departments, conservation work, and advocacy work such as campaign participation for environmental protection legislation. There was also a greater number of individuals already working or studying in these fields, as compared to the other countries in this study. The higher level of interest combined with detailed career planning suggests greater acceptance of environmental and animal advocacy roles in Thai society. It may also indicate improved awareness among Thai youth about various career opportunities in these fields and a more developed understanding of how to pursue these career paths.
Thai Gen Z’s Reasons For Action And Inaction
Thai respondents demonstrated a high awareness of environmental and wildlife crises, drawing on both animal/environment-focused and anthropocentric perspectives to justify their concerns. They cited concerns about habitat loss, species extinction, and widespread animal harm, reflecting empathy for animals, while also pointing to the risks to humans of rising temperatures, erratic weather patterns, and direct economic impacts. Respondents noted that “people are more motivated to act when they experience the impact themselves” and expressed concern about when “the environment begins to come back and destroy humans.”
While environmental concerns dominated responses, Thai youth also expressed more specific concerns about animal cruelty than those in other countries, particularly in response to media exposure. Many described being motivated by witnessing animal cruelty through news and social media, including harm to marine life and instances of animal testing.
Watching pictures or videos of animals being disturbed or dying due to human waste [motivates me to act]. It has a significant impact on the psyche and makes you want to better protect the environment.
Thai media, including both conventional and social media, frequently discusses harm to animals, whether through environmental damage or individual acts of cruelty. This may demonstrate the potential effectiveness of media-based approaches in generating awareness in Asian countries.
Many Thai respondents expressed strong interest in pursuing careers in environmental and animal advocacy but ultimately decided against it, citing low pay, risks, and social pressures. One respondent reflected on this conflict, saying:
I really wanted to do a job that was useful to society and the environment, but in the end, I became a slave to the capitalist market.
Another respondent highlighted the specific challenges of working in conservation, explaining:
I once considered becoming a conservation officer, but in Thailand, this profession is highly risky and the compensation is not worth it. Moreover, it does not receive enough recognition or support from the government, so I gave up on the idea.
These responses underscore the tension between mission-driven personal values and economic realities, suggesting a need for advocacy to focus on reducing financial and social barriers to make such careers more accessible and sustainable.
Another challenge to pursuing pro-environment and pro-animal protection careers may stem from delayed awareness, with another respondent observing that:
The current generation […] has too little awareness about this issue, so by the time people start considering it, they often lack the time, ability, or opportunity to fully pursue careers in that area.
This claim, combined with the fact that many expressed regret at their non-mission-driven career choices, suggests that Gen Z in Thailand may develop a social and environmental consciousness slightly later in life, potentially after making critical career decisions. In addition to engaging younger people before they make these choices, this may highlight opportunities for advocates to encourage those already in established roles or career paths to contribute in different ways. It may also indicate an opportunity to present career path opportunities to Thai youth before the stages of critical career path choices are presented (i.e., earlier in their schooling).
Thai Gen Z’s Perceptions Of Societal Efforts And Barriers
Unlike their Indonesian counterparts, Thai respondents were more likely to see barriers to action as rooted in the public and especially private sectors. Many mentioned capitalism, corporate greed, and monopolies, often paired with criticism of inadequate government regulation. Like counterparts in the U.S, Thai respondents critiqued capitalism as a system and made direct references to capitalists “who prioritize financial gain over environmental and animal welfare benefits” or are “sitting on private jets with large carbon emissions.” Some responses highlight systemic issues involving governance and capital, such as “capitalism and large-scale production that are not regulated or held accountable for their impacts, despite reaping enormous benefits.” This focus may reflect a level of opposition to the significant role of large corporations in Thai society — illustrated elsewhere by the popularity of the Move Forward Party among the youth, which champions “demonopolization” as a core policy (CNN, 2023).
Thai respondents were also likely to identify individual and societal barriers to progress on environmental and animal issues, with a stronger focus on human behavior as a whole. Many Thai respondents simply state that “humans” are the central barrier, pointing to traits such as individual greed, “lifestyles focused on convenience,” ignorance, and persistent harmful behavior even when laws are in place. A lack of cooperation among people was also frequently highlighted, with some responses also highlighting the challenges of the Thai information environment, seeing “people who do not have access to various news sources” as a barrier.
Thai Gen Z's Perceptions On Solutions To These Challenges
Thai respondents proposed various approaches to the barriers they presented, integrating private- and public-sector-level interventions. Some emphasized the need for stronger state oversight and regulation, while others mentioned cooperative solutions between sectors, such as public-private partnerships. One respondent pointed to successful examples like China’s approach to air pollution, suggesting that the public and private sector must work together to implement and enforce environmental policies gradually. Some proposed a more government-led perspective, including proposals for regulated production rates, progressive environmental taxation, and income-based environmental responsibilities where wealthy individuals bear greater environmental obligations. Interestingly, while respondents criticized capitalism’s overall role in environmental degradation, these proposed solutions generally stay within existing political frameworks rather than calling for fundamental systemic change.
Thai respondents demonstrated sophisticated thinking about how to influence environmental behavior change, emphasizing targeted communication strategies over broad public awareness campaigns. Some respondents specifically highlighted the importance of focusing on younger generations through media channels, giving examples of existing influencers, with one respondent noting the greater potential in “instilling awareness in the younger generation” rather than trying to change the established behavior of older people. Some also portrayed a strategic emphasis on influencing high-impact individuals, with suggestions to “focus on raising environmental awareness among capitalists and those in power” rather than pursuing minor behavioral changes from the general public.
Indonesia Key Findings
- Indonesian youth report high environmental engagement (92%), but actions tend to be minor. Most reported changes focused on basic mitigation like avoiding single-use plastic and not littering, suggesting a lower threshold for what constitutes environmental action.
- Environmental and animal concerns often reflect rural connections. Unlike other countries, Indonesian respondents uniquely mentioned agricultural activities, wildlife interactions, and local environmental maintenance, indicating stronger ties to natural environments.
- Career interest in environmental/animal fields is high but lacks clear direction. While 59% expressed interest in these careers, most lacked specific plans or clear understanding of career pathways, suggesting a need for better guidance.
- Young Indonesians show surprising satisfaction with national environmental and animal protection efforts. Despite acknowledging environmental challenges, they expressed the highest satisfaction with both personal and national efforts among surveyed countries.
- Solutions are seen through a community-based lens rather than institutional reform. Neglecting the importance of systemic change, Indonesian youth emphasized grassroots education and community-level initiatives as primary pathways to progress.
Recommendations For Working With Indonesian Gen Z
Communications Recommendations
- Redirect advocacy from individual actions to systemic solutions. Data shows Indonesians focus heavily on personal changes, indicating opportunities to shift attention toward higher-impact policy and corporate campaigns.
- Spotlight the role of the private sector in both problems and solutions. Limited focus on corporate accountability and potential suggests a blindspot with regards to the importance of large businesses in the animal/environmental sectors.
- Leverage belief in the interconnected relationship between humans and nature. Strong cultural values around humans, nature, and community indicate opportunities for holistic environmental or animal-related messaging.
- Use social media to reshape the perception of environmental and animal activism. Run positive, relatable campaigns that counter the perception of activism as “excessive.” Highlight stories of young Indonesians making impactful contributions in their communities to position advocacy as mainstream and practical.
- Address awareness around animal cruelty in agriculture. Tap into reactions to well-known cases of animal cruelty to raise awareness about the prevalence of similar issues within agriculture. This may enable broader recognition and empathy.
Career Recommendations
- Clarify career pathways in environmental and animal protection. Indonesians show openness to careers in these fields, yet many lack a clear understanding of available career paths and opportunities for impact.
- Foster animal/environmental startup initiatives and training. Interest in founding organizations suggests potential for entrepreneurship support programs.
Indonesian Gen Z’s Pro-Environmental And Animal Actions
Indonesian respondents frequently reported making lifestyle changes for environmental and animal protection — 92% reported taking action. However, these actions were more likely than in the other countries to be minor mitigation measures such as avoiding single-use plastic and not littering. Many respondents simply described avoiding harmful behaviors, such as “not littering in the river” or “not hunting wild animals.” The frequency of this level of response is suggestive of a relatively low threshold for what constitutes environmental action or lifestyle changes in Indonesia. Encouraging more significant changes may therefore be a greater challenge there.
Some unique Indonesian examples of pro-environmental/animal actions were often related to rural life and nature. Respondents mentioned not burning agricultural waste, planting trees, and maintaining their local rural environments, while others discussed caring for their own livestock or fish ponds and avoiding interference with wild animals. This range of responses, though representing only a minority of responses, illustrates how some educated youth in Indonesia maintain connections to agricultural activity and wildlife, in contrast to China and Thailand, where no respondents mentioned rural connections to animals or the environment.
Animal welfare concerns were relatively common among Indonesian respondents. Many respondents emphasized feeding stray animals and frequently mention avoiding products tested on animals or made from animal skins. Similar to respondents in China, Indonesian youth tended to focus on caring for stray or companion animals. A larger proportion, however, also mentioned actions related to wild animals, such as protecting environments, or refraining from feeding or hunting them. As with respondents in China and Thailand, farmed animals and diet are seldom mentioned, indicating a potential oversight of their welfare in Indonesian discussions on animal protection.
Despite their relatively limited individual actions, Indonesian youth were particularly likely to express interest in environmental or animal welfare careers. 59% had considered such careers, with some expressing ambitious goals like founding their own organizations. However, the majority did not have specific plans, instead saying that they were interested in working in broad areas like environmental protection, forestry, wild animal conservation (e.g., elephants and orangutans), or unspecified government and NGO work. This suggests that while interest is widespread, many young people may lack clear role models or pathways to pursue these careers in Indonesia. More research needs to be done in order to identify how these pathways can be unlocked for young Indonesians.
Indonesian Gen Z’s Reasons For Action And Inaction
When discussing reasons for acting for the environment or animal protection, Indonesians were most likely to emphasize the interconnectedness of all issues rather than focusing solely on animal/environment or anthropocentric concerns. Participants described links between human health, sustainability, biodiversity, and natural ecosystems, of which they consider animals an integral part. Respondents mentioned various connections, from the food chain and food security to how environmental damage, such as ocean pollution, also creates animal suffering. Some also described the connections between local communities:
Habitats and their ecosystems must be protected, and attention should be given to the interconnection of actions undertaken by local communities living around wildlife areas.
This perspective may reflect how Indonesians conceptualize nature, ecology, and ecosystems in their worldview, possibly due to more connections with nature in their lifestyle than in other countries. Bringing neglected issues, such as factory farming or palm oil production, into these interconnected perspectives could enhance young Indonesians’ engagement with environmental or animal protection causes.
Indonesians often emphasized that animals, like humans, are “living creatures” (Indonesian: makhluk hidup) deserving of care and consideration. Some respondents explicitly mentioned animals’ “rights to life” in this context. However, this framework is rarely extended to the mistreatment of farmed animals. Advocates could build on these existing motivations to expand Indonesians’ moral circle to include more neglected animals and highlight their connections to broader ethical concerns.
Indonesian Gen Z’s Perceptions Of Societal Efforts And Barriers
Indonesians are particularly satisfied with both national and personal efforts on environmental and animal welfare issues. Indonesia was the only country where more than half of respondents felt their country was doing enough. Just 40% and 41% of Indonesian respondents believed their country was not doing enough to protect the environment and safeguard animal welfare, respectively, while only 2% and 4% believed they were not doing enough personally, respectively. This is surprising, given widespread acknowledgement among respondents of Indonesia’s environmental challenges. This may reflect differing cultural standards, an economic context that shapes expectations, or a tendency to attribute responsibility for environmental harm elsewhere.
Indonesians were less likely than other countries’ respondents to cite public- and especially private-sector barriers as a main obstacle to environmental and animal welfare action. Respondents cited barriers such as a “lack of political initiative” and “weak implementation of adequate policies and regulations” for the protection of animals and the environment. Interestingly, Indonesia’s Gen Z didn’t mention much about the private sector: notably absent are concerns about factory farm owners, palm oil companies, or other corporate actors.
Instead, in contrast to other countries like the U.S., the core barriers to progress in Indonesia were seen as centering on a lack of public education and awareness, rather than systemic obstacles. Education and awareness emerged as by far the most commonly cited barrier, with respondents noting that many people may not fully understand the importance of environmental protection and animal welfare, or the impact of their personal behavior.
[The greatest barrier is the] lack of awareness and lack of education about the importance of environmental and animal protection. Ignorant human activity causes negative impacts to the environment and unfair treatment of animals.
This perspective may stem from broader recognition of educational disparities — particularly among poorer and more rural Indonesians. It may also result from specific gaps in education on these topics and their role in shaping attitudes, or from Indonesian students’ own experiences.
Indonesian respondents often attributed animal welfare and environmental issues to specific “bad actors” and cultural practices. They described communities with uncaring attitudes towards animals, citing examples like cooking cats, separating monkeys from mothers, and keeping pets merely for entertainment or security without regard for their well-being. This focus on unusual cases suggests that Indonesians attribute problems to individual malevolence or cultural practices rather than everyday or systemic harms in areas such as factory farming. While these responses indicate increasing awareness of specific cases of animal cruelty, they may suggest a limited understanding of the true distribution of animal suffering, which advocate messaging may need to address.
Finally, activism in Indonesia may face hurdles stemming from perceptions of advocates and, by extension, societal views about the legitimacy and value of animal and environmental concerns.
The biggest hurdle is the societal stigma surrounding animal or environmental activists, who are often seen as over-the-top in their love for animals or the environment.
Responses indicate that animal and environmental advocacy may be seen as less serious in comparison to other problems, such as Indonesia’s ongoing poverty issues. It also supports other evidence suggesting that perceptions of advocates as extreme or unbalanced may be particularly challenging in Asia (Faunalytics, 2021). Advocates face the challenge of countering these perceptions, while making a case for the significance and urgency of their work.
Indonesian Gen Z’s Perceptions On Solutions To These Challenges
Indonesian respondents believed that solutions to environmental and animal welfare challenges would emerge at multiple levels, with the public sector playing a role in addressing both higher-level governance issues and educational challenges. With environmental regulation, some believed that the government needed to be “more assertive” and stricter with implementation. Others specifically pointed to addressing Indonesia’s issues with funding and state capacity, with one respondent noting the importance of obtaining “sustainable sources of funding through environmental taxes, international funds, and public-private partnerships.” Adding educational programs into school-level education was a common example of how the public sector could tackle education challenges.
Alongside institutional solutions, respondents emphasized the importance of grassroots and civil society initiatives, particularly focusing on community education and movement building. They described various approaches to grassroots education, including social media campaigns, community awareness building, and targeted local solutions. One respondent highlighted the need to create a community-based social movement to “provide the surrounding communities an understanding of how important it is to take care of their surroundings and urge them to protect the living environment.” This emphasis on community-level interventions likely reflects an awareness of Indonesia’s limited state capacity compared to other countries. Their responses suggest a belief that, if aligned with community beliefs and needs, social movements can generate significant change.
Let us know what you think!
We conduct research to help advocates like you, so we really value your input on what we’re doing well and how we can do better. Take the brief (less than 2min) survey below to let us know how satisfied you were with this report.
Citations:
Sinclair, M., Stennett, J., & Chung, J. Y. (2025). Exploring Gen Z’s Attitudes Towards Animals And The Environment. Faunalytics. https://faunalytics.org/exploring-gen-zs-attitudes-towards-animals-and-the-environment/
