Climate change and environmental degradation are often discussed through technical lenses. Elements such as emission targets, carbon pricing, infrastructure planning, climate models, financing mechanisms, and regulatory frameworks occupy the center of climate change debates. However, one of the most defining dimensions of environmental transformation concerns how these processes resonate within society, how different groups perceive and respond to them, and how transformation reshapes everyday life. For this reason, the topic of environment and society calls for analyzing climate and environmental policies not only through environmental indicators but also through societal perception, awareness, acceptance, participation, justice, and communication. Environmental risks do not produce equal effects across society; vulnerabilities differ along the lines of income level, age, gender, spatial disparities, livelihood sources, and access to services. In this context, environment and society offers a framework that jointly evaluates both the impacts of environmental transformation and the capacity for societal acceptance and implementation.
The first area of focus concerns societal perception, awareness, and expectations. Different segments of society perceive and experience climate change in different ways. Significant variation exists between urban and rural populations, across age groups, between women and men, and among different income levels and political orientations. For a farmer in a rural area who depends on agriculture for a living, climate change can directly mean water stress and yield loss. For a young person in a city, the issue may gain meaning primarily through concerns about the future and debates over global justice. A retired citizen may feel the impact through rising energy bills, while the business community may evaluate the issue in terms of competitiveness and regulatory pressure. These differences directly shape the societal reception and feasibility of climate policies. At the same time, public expectations from climate policies, the level of trust in scientific knowledge, and the place of major international processes like COP31 in public perception all form part of this framework. Research on perception and expectations is gaining increasing importance for understanding how policy design will land on societal ground.
The second area of focus involves climate communication and disinformation. Because climate change is an information-intensive and complex field, how to convey highly technical data and scientific findings to the public constitutes a challenge in itself. The translation problem between science and society represents one of the core issues in climate communication. When technical language fails to find a societal counterpart, the public may perceive the topic as disconnected from everyday life. Additionally, disinformation and the spread of false information in the climate domain are becoming an increasingly visible problem. Across a spectrum that extends from climate denial to delay rhetoric, from greenwashing to the distortion of scientific findings, disinformation can erode public perception and undermine policy support. For this reason, conscious awareness against disinformation, climate literacy, and access to reliable information rank among the critical components of the environment and society agenda. The role of media, social media dynamics, and the quality of the information ecosystem are key factors that determine the effectiveness of climate communication.
The third area of focus addresses awareness efforts targeting different societal groups. While climate change affects the entire population, different groups maintain different relationships with the issue, hold different priorities, and have different information needs. Therefore, rather than a one-size-fits-all awareness approach, communication and education strategies that vary according to the target audience are necessary. Young people, retirees, white-collar workers, those who earn their living from agriculture, SME owners, women, and rural residents each relate to climate transformation differently. For a farmer, adaptation capacity and water management may take priority, while for an urban professional, carbon footprint and consumption patterns may be more visible concerns. In rural areas, where livelihoods depend directly on environmental conditions, reaching these communities through awareness efforts becomes even more critical. Within this framework, awareness-raising activities should function not merely as information transfer but as tools that strengthen the participation of different groups in the transformation process and carry their experiences and knowledge into policy processes.
The fourth area of focus is just transition and societal acceptance. The costs and benefits of environmental transformation do not distribute equally across society. Energy transition, shifts in industrial policy, and new regulatory frameworks can create opportunities for some groups while placing cost pressures on others. The just transition approach promotes managing the transformation in a way that leaves no one behind, ensures equity in cost-sharing, and protects vulnerable groups. This discussion extends beyond the conceptual level and directly determines the societal acceptance and sustainability of policies. When societal acceptance weakens, the feasibility of policy implementation can also suffer. For this reason, just transition constitutes one of the central agenda items under the environment and society heading. Compensating for potential income losses during the transition period, targeting support effectively, and including different groups in the process are among the topics where this agenda takes concrete form.
The fifth area of focus concerns readiness for change in everyday life. Climate transformation takes shape not only through large-scale policy decisions but also through shifts in everyday practices across society. Energy consumption habits, transportation choices, consumption patterns, waste management practices, and food preferences represent concrete areas that make up the societal dimension of transformation. However, behavioral change cannot be explained through individual choices alone; infrastructure availability, economic conditions, the regulatory environment, and information levels directly affect how ready individuals are for change. At the same time, the extent to which the discourse of "green living" remains accessible to different segments of society also deserves scrutiny. For lower-income groups, access to energy efficiency investments or alternative transportation may be limited, while higher-income groups may have greater capacity to adapt. For this reason, readiness for change in everyday life requires evaluating individual responsibility alongside societal conditions and policy design.
The sixth area of focus involves establishing the balance between central and local governance in climate management. The implementation of climate policies closely relates to the distribution of authority, resources, and capacity between the central government and local administrations. In areas such as energy, water, waste management, transportation, and disaster preparedness, local governments stand among the primary actors of implementation; yet each of these areas raises distinct questions about how to establish central-local coordination, allocate resources, and build capacity. The role of local governments in climate action, their planning capacities, and their data production and monitoring infrastructure rank among the essential conditions for climate policies to produce results on the ground. At the same time, how participation mechanisms function at the local level and how citizens and civil society engage in decision-making processes determine the quality of governance. For this reason, the environment and society heading addresses climate governance not solely through the lens of central policy frameworks but together with local implementation capacity and the need for multi-actor coordination.
The seventh area of focus examines the relationship between politics and climate transformation. Climate issues are increasingly becoming part of the political agenda. Public expectations, the priorities of different societal groups, and the distributional effects of transformation policies shape how climate registers in the political arena. The risk that climate policies become a polarizing agenda item can weaken societal consensus and long-term policy coherence. For this reason, how the political sphere addresses climate issues, the framing of debates, and how different actors participate in the process all carry significance. The contributions of civil society, academia, the business community, and media to policy processes serve as elements that can broaden the societal base of the climate agenda and reduce the risk of polarization. Within this framework, the environment and society heading treats the political dimension of climate transformation as part of societal dynamics, without making normative judgments.
The eighth area of focus is climate education and skills transformation. The place of climate topics in formal education curricula, the climate literacy levels of students, and the quality of educational materials lay the foundations for long-term societal awareness. At the same time, non-formal education, vocational transformation, and lifelong learning mechanisms are important for building the new skills that the energy and industrial transition requires. During the transformation process, new job areas emerge in some sectors while employment structures may shift in others. For this reason, education policies function as tools that reduce the social costs of transformation and expand its opportunities. The climate anxiety and environmental consciousness of younger generations stand out as a significant dynamic that influences societal demands and the public agenda; the intergenerational dimension forms a natural extension of the environment and society heading.
The environment and society heading generally takes shape around the following set of questions: How do different societal groups perceive and experience climate change? How can scientific knowledge reach the public and how can societies combat disinformation? How should awareness efforts targeting different groups be designed? How do costs and benefits of transformation distribute across society and how can a just transition be achieved? What is the level of readiness for change in everyday practices? How should the balance between central and local governments be established in climate governance? How does the political sphere address climate issues and how can societal consensus be strengthened? How can education and skills transformation support societal adaptation capacity? The common thread across these questions is that environmental policies require consideration not only of environmental targets but also of the everyday needs of society, expectations of justice, and participatory capacity.
In this framework, Türkiye and the Mediterranean basin provide a societal context where climate impacts are becoming increasingly visible. At the same time, the environment and society heading does not remain confined to a single country perspective but aims to evaluate common trends and diverging dynamics across different country experiences. The aim is to build a framework where environmental sustainability and societal resilience are understood not as competing priorities but as mutually reinforcing pillars that must advance in tandem.