They've been investigating Croatian attitudes to climate change and AI, and one thing's for sure, they've gotten a surprising amount of sympathizers.

A recent survey conducted by the Crobarometar, an ongoing monthly research initiative carried out by the agency Ipsos and exclusively shared with Dnevnik Nove TV, has revealed intriguing insights into how Croatians perceive climate change and artificial intelligence. The findings highlight a surprising trend among supporters of the political party “Možemo!” who appear to have a more positive outlook towards these topics than other groups. The survey, which forms part of the broader Crobarometar series, was analyzed by reporter Sabina Tandara Knezović alongside guest commentator Boris Jokić. It focuses on the personal experiences and attitudes of Croatian citizens regarding climate change and their views on artificial intelligence. According to the data, nearly two-thirds of respondents—69%, reported feeling the effects of climate change personally, while almost a third—31%, believed they did not experience such impacts. Jokić noted that these figures suggest that climate change is already affecting everyday life in Croatia. He pointed out regional differences, stating that residents in areas such as Slavonia and northern Croatia tend to feel the impact more acutely compared to those in regions like Lika and Gorski Kotar. This variation underscores the uneven distribution of climate-related challenges across different parts of the country. Supporters of the Social Democratic Party (SDP) were found to be the most aware of the effects of climate change, whereas supporters of the ruling party Most were the least affected. Jokić explained this could be attributed to the SDP's historical stance on environmental issues, suggesting that political affiliations influence public perception of climate change. When asked where they felt the effects of climate change most strongly, over 87% of respondents cited extreme heat during summer months as the primary concern. Other notable concerns included mild winters and frequent storms, each mentioned by around 43% of participants. A similar number, 42%, highlighted increasing droughts, while 27% noted heavy rains and flooding as consequences. Only 26% mentioned rising temperatures in water bodies and lakes. Jokić emphasized that while individual hot days or cold winters might not necessarily indicate climate change, the overall pattern of increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events does. He stressed that these changes reflect long-term trends rather than isolated incidents, pointing out that such conditions have become more common in recent years. The survey also explored how significantly climate change affects daily life. Over half of the respondents—54%, said the impact was noticeable but not severe, while an additional 27% described the effect as substantial. A smaller percentage, 16%, claimed that climate change had no effect on their lives, and three percent expressed uncertainty. The results reveal a complex picture of public awareness and engagement with climate change, highlighting both the growing recognition of its impacts and lingering skepticism or indifference among certain segments of the population. As the discussion continues, further analysis will be needed to understand the implications of these findings for policy and public discourse.