Questionnaire on Environmental Problems and the Survival of Humankind

Question 1. In Table 5, “Environmental issues to be taken into account” are shown. Keeping in mind the problems that the environment faces at a global level, please select the three most pressing issues for the country or the region where you reside. Then, please rank them in order of importance. Lastly, for each item, select a time using hours and minutes between 0:10 to 12:00, to indicate the level of crisis for that issue. For the purpose of calculating results, please select your times in units no smaller than 10 minutes.

*Regarding the calculation of the time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock
The time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock will be determined by taking the weighted average of the data. The issue ranked in first place will be weighed at 50%, second place at 30%, and third place at 20%. If a respondent selected only two issues, the first-ranked issue is weighed at 62.5% and second place at 37.5%. If the respondent selected only one issue, the selected issue is weighed at 100%.

Fig. 1 The Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock

3.1.1 The Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock for the World

Table 2 Change in the Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock since 1992

Fig.2 Change in the Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock

• The time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock for the world moved forward by six minutes from the previous year in 2025, and another six minutes in 2026.

Fig.3-1 Regional Times on the Environmental Doomsday Clock

Table 3 Changes in the Regional Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock

Fig. 3-2 Change in the Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock for Selected Countries/Regions with Relatively Large Numbers of Respondents

• The global average among specialists and experts shows a greater sense of crisis for environmental crisis than the previous year. However, different movement was observed across regions, indicating that the entire world did not change in the same direction. This year, the composition of respondents by country and region is different from the previous year, so it should be noted that the change in the global average from the previous year may also reflect the changes in the composition of respondents.
• By region, the Clock moved forward in many regions, namely Asia, Mexico, Central America & the Caribbean, South America, Africa, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe & the former Soviet Union. Notably, the Clock advanced significantly in Mexico, Central America & the Caribbean (20 minutes), Africa (52 minutes), and Eastern Europe & the former Soviet Union (27 minutes). In Eastern Europe & the former Soviet Union, it turned past 10:00.
• The Clock moved backward significantly (17 to 25 minutes) in Oceania, North America, and Western Europe, although it remained past 10:00. Meanwhile, in the open text field for Question 6, many respondents mentioned the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and in the Middle East, and other military tensions. Some respondents offered the opinion that protracted wars and conflicts have brought international cooperation and policy responses to a standstill, forcing national governments to prioritize military and security, rather than environmental measures.
• In addition, some respondents noted that multiple environmental issues—including climate change, biodiversity loss, and resource-related challenges—are interconnected and difficult to address separately.

Table 4 Change in the Time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock by Generation

Fig.4 Change in the Time on the Clock by Generation

• The older age groups tended to select advanced times (e.g., a greater sense of crisis). Meanwhile, looking at changes over time, among respondents in their 20s, 30s, 40s, and 50s, the time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock has moved forward since 2024, indicating a growing sense of crisis.

3.1.2 Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account

Table 5 Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account

Regarding the SDGs listed in Table 5, the icons for each Goal are shown in Figure 5.

Fig. 5 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

3.1.2.1 Distribution of “Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account” Selected as Respondent’s Top Three Choices

Fig. 6-1 2026 Distribution of Important “Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account” (Top 3 Choices)

• As in the previous year, “Climate Change”(33%) was the most often selected category among the “environmental issues to be taken into account,” considered important in determining the time on the worldwide Environmental Doomsday Clock. This was followed by “Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity)” (16%), “Society, Economy and Environment, Policies, Measures” (13%), “Water Resources” (8%), “Biochemical Flows (Pollution/Contamination)” (7%), “Land-System Change (Land Use)” (6%), “Lifestyle (Consumption Habits)” (6%), “Population” (5%), and “Food” (5%). The percentage of each issue has changed little from last year.
• When arranging the “environmental issues to be taken into account” for the entire world in descending order of time on the Environmental Doomsday Clock, “Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity)” (9:52), “Climate Change” (9:45), and “Society, Economy and Environment, Policies, Measures” (9:42) were all ahead of the world’s average time of 9:39. For “Food” (9:01), the Clock moved backward by 22 minutes from last year.

Fig. 6-2 2025 Distribution of Important “Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account” (Top 3 Choices)

Fig. 6-3 2024 Distribution of Important “Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account” (Top 3 Choices)

3.1.2.2 Selection Percentage for “Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account” by Region

Table 6 Selection Percentage for “Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account” by Region

• In most countries and regions, “Climate Change”(33%) was selected as the most pressing environmental issue to be taken into account. Next, “Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity)”(16%) was chosen in many regions.
• Meanwhile, in Japan and the United States, “Society, Economy and Environment, Policies, Measures” was the second most selected issue.
• As a regional characteristic, “Water Resources” remained the most selected issue in the Middle East, as in the previous year. In Oceania (except Australia), “Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity)” was the most selected option.

3.1.2.3 Times on the Clock for Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account by Region

Table 7 Times on the Clock for Environmental Issues to Be Taken Into Account by Region

• Items indicating 11:00 or later were “Climate Change” and “Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity)” in Australia, and “Lifestyle” in Canada.
• Items indicating a time in the 10 o'clock range, which were frequently seen in Oceania, North America, Western Europe, and Eastern Europe & the former Soviet Union, include “Land-system Change,” “Biochemical Flows (Pollution/Contamination),” “Population,” and “Lifestyle,” in addition to “Climate Change,” “Biosphere Integrity (Biodiversity),” and “Society, Economy and Environment, Policies, Measures.” Also, “Water Resources” in India, and “Land-system Change” in South America and Africa showed a time in the 10 o’clock range.
• Items showing times earlier than 8:00 were “Society, Economy and Environment, Policies, Measures” in India, “Population” in the United States, and “Water Resources” in South America.

Question 2. Among the various environmental issues, climate change and biodiversity loss are garnering significant attention. Both issues need to be resolved urgently. We would like to hear your current views on these issues.

Question 2-1: The Paris Agreement was adopted in 2015 to promote efforts against global warming.
Compared to before 2015, please answer the following question from three perspectives shown below. Do you think any progress is being made in a transition to a decarbonized society in your country/region?

• Public Awareness:+0.68
• Policies and Legal System:+0.37
• Social Infrastructure (Funds, People, Technologies, Facilities):+0.28

• In 2026, scores for the transition to a decarbonized society fell below those in 2024 and 2025 across all perspectives.
• The results show that less progress has been made in “policies and legal system” and “social infrastructure” than in “public awareness.”
• In Asia, Japan’s scores remained at a low level across all items compared to other countries and regions. In particular, “public awareness” and “policies and legal system” showed a gradual downward trend. On the other hand, in 2026, South Korea’s scores were higher than those in the previous year across all items.
• The scores for “public awareness” and “policies and legal system” varied by country and region. In Asia, including South Korea, the difference in scores between the two was relatively small. A similar trend was also observed in Mexico, Central America & the Caribbean, South America, Africa, and the Middle East. In contrast, by region, in Oceania, North America, and Western Europe, the difference between the two was large, with progress in “policies and legal system” lagging significantly behind “public awareness.” This trend has remained unchanged for the past five years.
• Particularly in the United States, the scores in “policies and legal system” declined from 0.53 in 2024 to −0.31 in 2025, and to −0.76 in 2026, falling for the second consecutive year.
• By type of organization, corporate respondents reported remarkably lower scores across all items from 2025 to 2026.
• By age group, respondents in their 20s and 30s were more likely than other generations to believe that the transition to a decarbonized society is progressing in all perspectives of “public awareness,” “policies and legal system,” “social infrastructure.”

Table 8 Progress in a Transition to a Decarbonized Society: 　　　　　World Average and Average Scores by Region, Organization, and Age Range

Question 2-2: In 2022, the “Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework” was adopted as a successor to the Aichi Targets, aiming to curb biodiversity loss. Compared to before 2022, please answer the following question from three perspectives shown below.
Do you think any progress is being made in the conservation and restoration of wildlife habitats in your country/region?

• Public Awareness:+0.28
• Policies and Legal System:+0.19
• Social Infrastructure (Funds, People, Technologies, Facilities):±0.00

• Globally, the progress on “Conservation and Restoration of Wildlife Habitats” scored 0.3 or lower across all perspectives, indicating that the scores were lower in all aspects compared to efforts to address climate change. In addition, the scores declined from 2025 across all perspectives.
• Among the three perspectives, scores for “social infrastructure” were lower than those for “public awareness” and “policies and legal system.”
• In Japan, the scores have been negative since 2024, and many respondents believed that the conservation and restoration of wildlife habitats is not progressing.
• In the United States, the scores for “policies and legal system” declined from 0.34 in 2024 to −0.49 in 2025, and to −0.56 in 2026.
• Among respondents from universities/research institutions and NGOs/NPOs, the scores for “social infrastructure” were negative.
• Among corporate respondents, the scores declined across all perspectives from 2025 to 2026.
• While the scores among respondents in their 20s and 30s were positive across all three perspectives, and higher than those among other generations, the scores for “social infrastructure” were negative among respondents in their 40s and older.

Table 9 Progress in the Conservation and Restoration of Wildlife Habitats: 　　　　　World Average and Average Scores by Region, Organization, and Age Range

Question 3-1: Out of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), please select three goals that will have the highest level of realization in 2030. Then, rank them from highest (1st) to lowest (3rd) level of realization, while writing in the Goal numbers.

Table 10 (Respondents’ Own Country/Region) Three Goals (Out of 17 SDGs) That Will Have the Highest Level of Realization in 2030 (multiple answers)

• The top three goals selected as likely to be achieved at a high level in respondents’ own countries or regions by 2030 were: “There are no goals with any material level of realization in 2030” (25%), “9. Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure” (24%), and “4. Quality Education” (23%).
• 2025 was the first year that “There are no goals with any material level of realization in 2030” was the most selected option, and this option was once again selected most frequently in 2026. Especially, more than one-third of respondents chose this option in Japan, Oceania (except Australia), Mexico, Central America & the Caribbean, South America, and the United Kingdom.
• In India, Oceania, Western Europe, and the Middle East, “7. Affordable and Clean Energy” was the most selected option. In India, “13. Climate Action” was the second most selected option.
• “4. Quality Education (23%)” was the second most selected option in Japan and South Korea, tied for the most selected option in Western Europe, the most selected option in Africa, and the third most selected option in the Middle East.

Question 3-2: Out of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), please select three goals that will have the lowest level of realization in 2030. Then, rank them from lowest (1st) to highest (3rd) level of realization, while writing in the Goal numbers.

Table 11 (Respondents’ Own Country/Region) Three Goals (Out of 17 SDGs) That Will Have the Lowest Level of Realization in 2030 (multiple answers)

• In terms of goals considered least likely to be achieved in respondents’ own countries or regions by 2030, the most frequently selected were the following three goals: “1. No Poverty” (35%), “10. Reduced Inequalities” (31%), and “13. Climate Action (31%).” Also, many respondents chose “16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions” (29%). These four goals have consistently been selected as goals that will have the lowest level of realization.
• Respondents who chose “2. Zero Hunger” accounted for over 30% in Australia, Canada, South America, and Africa.
• Particularly in Asia (except Japan, India, and South Korea), Oceania, and Eastern Europe & the former Soviet Union, many respondents chose “12. Responsible Consumption and Production” as a goal considered least likely to be achieved by 2030.
• In Japan, North America, Western Europe (except UK), and the Middle East, over one-third of respondents chose “13. Climate Action” as a goal considered least likely to be achieved.
• In Japan, along with “1. No Poverty,” “16. Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions” was selected as a goal that will have the lowest level of realization.

Question 4: Based on your understanding, how much progress do you think has been made towards achieving the 17 SDGs by 2030 overall as of now?
Question 4-1: For the world as a whole, please provide a number from 5 to 100 (in increments of 5), where 100 represents the complete achievement of all goals.
Question 4-2: For your country or region of residence, please provide a number from 5 to 100 (in increments of 5), where 100 represents the complete achievement of all goals.

Figure 7 Distribution of the average perceived level of all SDGs achievement as of 2026

Fig.8 Average perceived level of all SDGs achievement (%) by generation

• By age group, across all age groups, average perceived progress is higher for respondents’ own countries/regions than for the world. However, there are differences in this trend across countries and regions. Respondents in Japan and Western Europe rated perceived progress for their own countries/regions higher than for the world, whereas those in the United States rated that for their own country lower than for the world (source: Data).
• While 10% or more of respondents rated the level of achieving SDGs at 0% for both their own country/region and the entire world, very few rated it at 75% or higher.
• For both their own country/region and the world, respondents in their 20s to 40s perceive greater progress toward achieving the SDGs than those in their 50s and older.

Question 5: To address global environmental issues, which factors do you consider particularly important? Please select up to three options from the list below.

Fig.9-1 To address global environmental issues, which factors do you consider particularly important? (by region)

• In all regions, the highest percentage of respondents selected “Government environmental policies and leadership,” reaching 60% to 79%. In response to Question 5 “Who do you think plays the most important role in solving environmental issues?” asked in 2025, the proportion of those who chose central governments was also the highest in all regions.
• Likewise, 40% to 50% of respondents in many regions chose “International cooperation and global governance.”
• To list distinctive responses by region, many respondents selected “Renewable energy and infrastructure transition” in Oceania, North America, and the Middle East, and “Economic system reform and market mechanisms” in Mexico, Central America & the Caribbean, Western Europe, and Eastern Europe & the former Soviet Union.
• In contrast, only limited proportions of respondents chose “Technological innovation” in many regions. In the open text field, there were several comments that, while recognizing the importance of technological innovation, emphasized factors other than technological innovation, such as implementation of governance and policies, transformation of social and economic structures, and a shared vision for the future. Furthermore, some respondents also pointed out that existing technologies are not fully utilized.
• The percentage of respondents who selected “Education and public awareness-raising” was high in Africa at 56%, and was also high in Mexico, Central America & the Caribbean (46%) and the Middle East (48%).

Figure 9-2 shows the percentage of respondents by organization and their selected option in response to the question.

Fig. 9-2 To address global environmental issues, which factors do you consider particularly important? (by affiliation)

• Regardless of affiliation, the highest percentage of respondents selected “Government environmental policies and leadership.”
• Corporations and respondents in journalism who selected “Economic system reform and market mechanisms” accounted for 47% and 56%, respectively. Meanwhile, the percentage of corporate respondents who selected “Corporate environmental responsibility and ESG management” was 33%, and that of respondents in journalism who chose “Quality and reliability of the media and information” was 38%.
• University or research institution respondents who chose technological innovation accounted for 22%.

Figure 9-3 shows the percentage of respondents by age group and their selected option in response to the question.

Fig. 9-3 To address global environmental issues, which factors do you consider particularly important? (by age group)

• In all age groups, the percentage of respondents who chose “Government environmental policies and leadership” was the highest, followed by “International cooperation and global governance” and “Economic system reform and market mechanisms.”
• The percentage of respondents in their 20s and 30s who selected “Technological innovation” was lower, while those who chose “Renewable energy and infrastructure transition” was higher, compared to other age groups.

4 Closing Comment