Canadians widely recognize the importance of nature in supporting life and habitats, but fewer see its direct connection to their personal physical and mental well-being, a new survey reveals.

It also finds that, similar to their views on climate change, Canadians see nature loss as affecting others more than themselves, which could present broad communication challenges for efforts to protect biodiversity.

Last summer, EcoAnalytics worked with Environics on a National Biodiversity Survey, with a robust sample of 1,517 respondents. Like other research on support for biodiversity protection, the survey found that Canadians overwhelmingly think nature is important, but the awareness of issues and solutions highlights a few areas to better educate and connect.

While most appreciate nature’s value and benefits to society, especially in supporting life on Earth (74%) and habitats (66%), fewer are making the connection between nature and physical and mental well-being (54%). Some are also recognizing that nature loss will have major impacts on human health and well-being (47%), the cost of living (29%) and the economy (27%). 

However, when asked about the impacts of nature loss at a personal level, fewer respondents were able to connect the dots. Only 36% indicated nature loss would have a major impact on access to green space, 27% thought their communities might be adversely impacted, 26% were concerned about impacts on mental health, and 8% were concerned that nature loss might hurt their careers. Respondents under 30 were five to 10 points more likely than the average to indicate concern for major personal and societal impacts. 

This disconnect between perceived societal and personal threats parallels similar perceptions around risks of climate change. EcoA’s 2022 Climate of Change Survey shows that 60% of respondents recognized that climate change will harm other Canadians a great or a moderate amount, but only 42% believed that climate change would harm them personally to that degree. And like those who have personally experienced climate change, those who have noticed nature loss around them are most likely to recognize the personal risks associated with it. Almost 34% said they had definitely noticed nature loss, and 36% that they had possibly noticed it.

Perceptions of Nature’s Health

But more than 80% of Canadians think that Canada’s nature is in good or excellent condition. Those who have observed nature loss are much more likely to rate Canada’s nature as in decline and recognize it as a crisis needing immediate action. Among the most aware are women, Indigenous respondents, left-leaning voters, and seniors, who are more likely to believe that nature in Canada has declined in the last 10 years (all at least five points above the national average of 54%).

Among the least attuned to nature’s decline are residents of Saskatchewan (27%) and Nova Scotia (20%), youth (25%), people of colour (21%) and right-leaning voters (23%), who think nature in Canada has actually become healthier. The national average for this belief is 13%.

Similar demographic differences are seen among those who do and do not recognize biodiversity loss as a crisis. Nationally, 65% see the loss of wildlife and nature as a crisis that demands immediate action.

EcoA’s research found tremendous support for protecting nature across all political stripes, regions, and demographics. About nine out of ten say Canada needs better forestry practices, recognize the importance of strong regulations to protect water, feel stronger regulations for business and industry are important, and agree we need more protected areas. More than 85% want to see tougher rules for pesticides and plastics, stronger regulations to reduce urban sprawl, and more sustainable food production. There is a large gap between experts and public opinion when it comes to the importance of Indigenous conservation and local conservation issues.

Causes of Nature Loss

Canadians’ knowledge about who or what is to blame for nature loss is vague. The vast majority attribute it to deforestation (91%) and urban development (88%), but people are reluctant to blame specific industries like agriculture, mining, or oil and gas.

Misinformation and confusion are also common. EcoA’s 2022 Climate of Change Survey, for example, found that almost 30% of Canadians incorrectly thought that protecting nature would exacerbate the housing crisis and another 30% were unsure.

There are also disconnects between some respondents’ big-picture support for nature protection and their concerns about how it will play out on the ground: In last year’s EcoA/Environics focus groups on the federal government’s conservation policies toward a commitment to protect 30% of lands and waters by 2030, participants frequently raised concerns about the impact on local economies and the details of how exactly land would be designated for conservation. 

Finally, the survey showed that, in certain audiences, talking about protecting biodiversity as a tool to fight climate change was not always helpful. More than half of respondents do not think protecting nature will significantly help fight climate change. 

There is nonetheless a lot of common ground among Canadians when it comes to protecting nature, and perhaps even the makings of a large coalition in support of stronger regulations to protect nature, including many who may not be open to talking about climate action. 

For more details on these surveys, check out our database at https://ecoanalyticscanada.org/documents/