氣候變遷的環境問題已成為全球人類不可避免的挑戰，2015 年聯合國提出的永續發展目標 (SDGs) 將「氣候行動」列為目標之一，目前臺灣環境教育亦將氣候行動列為重點學習目標。然而近年世界經濟論壇發布的《全球風險報告》皆指出氣候變遷造成的風險不容小覷，揭示氣候變遷是個跨領域知識、跨地區問題且高度複雜的環境議題。面臨氣候危機，年輕族群將會承擔更多風險，他們該如何採取積極的氣候行動對於人類永續發展相當重要。另外，氣候變遷牽涉到知識理解的正確性和風險的不確定性，在如此高挑戰性的環境下，工作型態樣貌也朝著永續發展在改變。作為即將進入職場且未來將面臨更多氣候變遷風險的大學生，能否堅信自己有能力採取氣候行動，是本研究的目標。
因此本研究將探討以下四項問題：（一）目前臺灣大學生的氣候變遷知識、風險感知、自我效能、氣候行動概況為何？（二）臺灣大學生的氣候變遷知識、風險感知、自我效能、氣候行動在背景變項（性別、地區與科系類別）是否有顯著差異？（三）臺灣大學生的氣候變遷知識、風險感知、自我效能是否對氣候行動有預測力？（四）臺灣大學生的氣候變遷知識和風險感知是否能透過自我效能預測氣候行動？
本研究為相關性研究，選擇臺灣大專校院的大學生做為研究對象之母群體，依照就學地區及就讀學科領域的人數占比進行配額抽樣，搭配滾雪球方式發放問卷，最終收集了 423 份有效樣本數。本研究分析方法採用社會科學統計分析軟體 SPSS 23.0（Statistical Package for the Social Science, SPSS）和 Lisrel 9.3 作為統計工具，為確保題目的適切性，採用項目分析、內部一致信度、難度與鑑別度與探索性因素分析對預試問卷進行分析，接著使用描述性統計回答問題一、獨立樣本t檢定回答問題二、結構方程模型回答問題三與問題四。
研究結果顯示：（一）在臺灣大學生中，自然科學組的學生在「氣候變遷知識、風險感知、自我效能及氣候行動」的得分皆顯著高於非自然科學組的學生。（二）臺灣大學生的「氣候變遷知識、風險感知與自我效能」皆能直接影響氣候行動，其中自我效能是所有變項中最能預測氣候行動的因素。（三）臺灣大學生的風險感知可以透過自我效能間接影響氣候行動，但氣候變遷知識無法透過自我效能間接影響氣候行動。最後本文依據研究結果提出未來研究以及教育實務方面的建議。

The environmental challenges posed by climate change have become unavoidable global issues for humanity. In 2015, the United Nations proposed the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), listing "Climate Action" as one of the primary goals. In Taiwan, environmental education has also prioritized climate action as a key learning objective. However, the Global Risks Report published annually by the World Economic Forum has repeatedly highlighted the severe risks posed by climate change, underscoring its status as a cross-disciplinary, cross-regional, and highly complex environmental issue. Facing the climate crisis, younger generations are expected to bear greater risks, and how they take proactive climate actions is crucial for the sustainable development of humanity. Moreover, climate change involves both accurate knowledge comprehension and the uncertainties associated with risks. In such a highly challenging context, the nature of work and professional practices is also evolving toward sustainable development. For university students who are about to enter the workforce and face increasing climate-related risks in the future, whether they firmly believe in their ability to take climate actions becomes a critical question. This research aims to address that issue.
Specifically, this study explores the following four questions: 1. What are the current levels of Taiwanese university students' climate change knowledge, risk perception, self-efficacy, and climate actions? 2. Are there significant differences in these variables (climate change knowledge, risk perception, self-efficacy, and climate actions) based on students’ demographic backgrounds, such as gender, region, and field of study? 3. Do Taiwanese university students’ climate change knowledge, risk perception, and self-efficacy predict their climate actions? 4. Can Taiwanese university students’ climate change knowledge and risk perception indirectly predict climate actions through self-efficacy?
This study is a correlational study. The target population consists of university students from colleges and universities in Taiwan. Quota sampling was conducted based on the proportion of students in different academic disciplines and regions. Additionally, the snowball sampling method was employed for questionnaire distribution, resulting in a total of 423 valid responses. Data analysis was conducted using SPSS 23.0 (Statistical Package for the Social Sciences) and LISREL 9.3. To ensure the appropriateness of the survey items, a pre-test was analyzed through item analysis, internal consistency reliability, difficulty and discrimination indices, and exploratory factor analysis. Descriptive statistics were used to address the first research question. Independent sample t-tests were employed to answer the second, and structural equation modeling was applied to address the third and fourth questions.
The findings of this study revealed the following: 1. Among university students in Taiwan, students from science disciplines scored significantly higher than those from non-science disciplines in terms of climate change knowledge, risk perception, self-efficacy, and climate actions. 2. Climate change knowledge, risk perception, and self-efficacy directly influenced climate actions, with self-efficacy identified as the most significant predictor of climate actions among all variables. 3. Risk perception indirectly influenced climate actions through self-efficacy, but the study found that climate change knowledge did not indirectly influence climate actions through self-efficacy. Based on these findings, the study provides recommendations for future research and practical applications in education.

行政院環境部（2020）。全民氣候變遷素養調查先導計畫成果報告。(109D054)。https://epq.moenv.gov.tw/ProjectDoc/FileDownload?proj_id=1091612719&group_id=17981
行政院環境部（2021）。我國氣候變遷素養認知調查計畫成果報告。(EPA054110010)。https://epq.moenv.gov.tw/ProjectDoc/FileDownload?proj_id=1100781888&group_id=22234
何仕仁、黃台珠、吳裕益（2007）。科學自我效能量表之發展。科學教育學刊，15(6)，613-626。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.2007.1506.01
余民寧（2022）。教育測驗與評量：成就測驗與教學評量（第四版）。心理。
吳明隆（2009）。SPSS操作與應用：問卷統計分析實務。五南圖書。
吳明隆、塗金堂（2011）。SPSS與統計應用分析（第二版）。五南圖書。
周儒、潘淑蘭、吳忠宏（2013）。大學生面對全球暖化議題採取行動之影響因子研究。環境教育研究，10(1)，1-34。https://doi.org/10.6555/JEER.10.1.001
邱皓政（2006）。統計原理與分析技術（量化研究法二）。雙葉書廊。
邱皓政（2015）。量化研究法（二）：統計原理與分析技術修訂版。雙葉書廊。
邱皓政（2018）。量化研究法（一）：研究設計與資料分析。雙葉書廊。
邱皓政（2018）。量化研究法（三）：測驗原理與量表發展技術。雙葉書廊。
邱皓政（2020）。量化研究與統計分析：SPSS與R資料分析範例解析。五南圖書。
邱皓政（2021）。量化研究法（二）：統計原理與分析技術（二版增修版）。雙葉書廊。
邱皓政（2024）。結構方程模式原理與應用: 使用Mplus, LISREL (SIMPLIS), R, AMOS。五南圖書。
邱皓政、林碧芳（2022）。統計學：原理與應用（四版）。五南圖書。
洪福源、黃德祥、邱紹一（2014）。台中市高中學生學習自我效能量表的測量與現況分析。教育經營與管理研究集刊，(10)，27-66。https://doi.org/10.6713/BEEM.201401_(10).0002
孫志麟（2003）。教師自我效能的概念與測量。教育心理學報，34(2)，139-156。
國泰人壽（2023）。人生風險趨勢調查報告。聯合新聞網。https://udn.com/upf/ubrand/2023_data/climatechange/
張春興（1996）。教育心理學：三化取向的理論與實踐。東華書局。
教育部統計處（2024）。大專校院校別學生數。
梁茂森（1998）。國中生習自我效能量表之編制。教育學刊，14，155-192.
許世璋（2006）。國立東華大學環境通識課群評估與師生環境素養評量。（科技部專題研究計畫 NSC94-2511-S-259-001）。中華民國行政院國家科學委員會。
黃建皓（2012）。家庭社經地位與班級經營效能對學生自我效能感之影響：階層線性模式分析。教育經營與管理研究集刊，(8)，107-130。https://doi.org/10.6713/BEEM.201201_(8).0005
楊冠政（1997）。環境教育。明文書局。
潘淑蘭、周儒、吳景達（2017）。探究環境素養與影響環境行動之因數：以臺灣大學生為例。環境教育研究，13(1)，35-65。https://doi.org/10.6555/JEER.13.1.035
謝百淇、項文雄、陳繼成、郭哲凱（2021）。臺灣南部某國立大學學生對空氣汙染防制政策支持度之研究。科學教育學刊，29(2)，83-112。https://doi.org/10.6173/CJSE.202106_29(2).0001
Arshad, H. M., Saleem, K., Shafi, S., Ahmad, T., & Kanwal, S. (2021). Environmental Awareness, Concern, Attitude and Behavior of University Students: A Comparison Across Academic Disciplines. Polish Journal of Environmental Studies, 30(1), 561-570. https://doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/122617
Baldwin, C., Pickering, G., & Dale, G. (2023). Knowledge and self-efficacy of youth to take action on climate change. Environmental Education Research, 29(11), 1597-1616. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2022.2121381
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review.
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American psychologist, 37(2), 122.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1986(23-28), 2.
Bandura, A. (1990). Perceived self-efficacy in the exercise of personal agency. Journal of applied sport psychology, 2(2), 128-163.
Bandura, A., & Wessels, S. (1997). Self-efficacy. Cambridge University Press Cambridge.
Böhm, G., & Pfister, H.-R. (2000). Action tendencies and characteristics of environmental risks. Acta Psychologica, 104(3), 317-337. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00035-4
Bostrom, A., Hayes, A. L., & Crosman, K. M. (2019). Efficacy, action, and support for reducing climate change risks. Risk Analysis, 39(4), 805-828.
Boulianne, S., Lalancette, M., & Ilkiw, D. (2020). “School strike 4 climate”: Social media and the international youth protest on climate change. Media and Communication, 8(2), 208-218.
Bouman, T., Verschoor, M., Albers, C. J., Böhm, G., Fisher, S. D., Poortinga, W., Whitmarsh, L., & Steg, L. (2020). When worry about climate change leads to climate action: How values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102061. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2020.102061
Bradley, G. L., Babutsidze, Z., Chai, A., & Reser, J. P. (2020). The role of climate change risk perception, response efficacy, and psychological adaptation in pro-environmental behavior: A two nation study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 68, 101410. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101410
Busch, K. C., Ardoin, N., Gruehn, D., & Stevenson, K. (2019). Exploring a theoretical model of climate change action for youth. International Journal of Science Education, 41(17), 2389-2409. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2019.1680903
Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a New General Self-Efficacy Scale. Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62-83. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442810141004
Di Giusto, B., Lavallee, J. P., & Yu, T.-Y. (2018). Towards an East Asian model of climate change awareness: A questionnaire study among university students in Taiwan. PLOS ONE, 13(10), e0206298. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206298
Doherty, K. L., & Webler, T. N. (2016). Social norms and efficacy beliefs drive the Alarmed segment’s public-sphere climate actions. Nature Climate Change, 6(9), 879-884. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate3025
Estrada, M., Schultz, P. W., Silva-Send, N., & Boudrias, M. A. (2017). The Role of Social Influences on Pro-Environment Behaviors in the San Diego Region. Journal of Urban Health, 94(2), 170-179. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-017-0139-0
Fischer, H., & van den Broek, K. (2021). Climate change knowledge, meta-knowledge and beliefs. In. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800370456.00015
Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., Lichtenstein, S., Read, S., & Combs, B. (1978). How safe is safe enough? A psychometric study of attitudes towards technological risks and benefits. Policy sciences, 9, 127-152.
Fuso Nerini, F., Sovacool, B., Hughes, N., Cozzi, L., Cosgrave, E., Howells, M., Tavoni, M., Tomei, J., Zerriffi, H., & Milligan, B. (2019). Connecting climate action with other Sustainable Development Goals. Nature Sustainability, 2(8), 674-680. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0334-y
Gilbert, C., & Lachlan, K. (2023). The climate change risk perception model in the United States: A replication study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 86, 101969. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2023.101969
Godding, P. R., & Glasgow, R. E. (1985). Self-efficacy and outcome expectations as predictors of controlled smoking status. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 9, 583-590.
Goldberg, M. H., van der Linden, S., Leiserowitz, A., & Maibach, E. (2019). Perceived Social Consensus Can Reduce Ideological Biases on Climate Change. Environment and Behavior, 52(5), 495-517. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916519853302
Hagedorn, G., Kalmus, P., Mann, M., Vicca, S., van den Berge, J., van Ypersele, J., Bourg, D., Rotmans, J., Kaaronen, R., & Rahmstorf, S. (2019). The concerns of the young protesters are justified: A statement by Scientists for Future concerning the protests for more climate protection. GAIA 28/2: 79–87. In.
Harries, T., & Penning-Rowsell, E. (2011). Victim pressure, institutional inertia and climate change adaptation: The case of flood risk. Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 188-197. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.002
Hoskins, B. L., & Mascherini, M. (2009). Measuring Active Citizenship through the Development of a Composite Indicator. Social Indicators Research, 90(3), 459-488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-008-9271-2
Hurst Loo, A. M., & Walker, B. R. (2023). Climate change knowledge influences attitude to mitigation via efficacy beliefs. Risk Analysis, 43(6), 1162-1173. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14026
Huxster, J. K., Uribe-Zarain, X., & Kempton, W. (2015). Undergraduate Understanding of Climate Change: The Influences of College Major and Environmental Group Membership on Survey Knowledge Scores. The Journal of Environmental Education, 46(3), 149-165. https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.2015.1021661
Jöreskog, K. G. (1996). LISREL 8 user's reference guide. Scientific Software International.
Kaiser, F. G., & Fuhrer, U. (2003). Ecological Behavior's Dependency on Different Forms of Knowledge. Applied Psychology, 52(4), 598-613. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/1464-0597.00153
Kiel, E., & Rost, F. (2002). Einführung in die Wissensorganisation: grundlegende Probleme und Begriffe. Ergon Verlag.
Kolenatý, M., Kroufek, R., & Činčera, J. (2022). What Triggers Climate Action: The Impact of a Climate Change Education Program on Students’ Climate Literacy and Their Willingness to Act. Sustainability, 14(16), 10365. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/16/10365
Landmann, H., & Rohmann, A. (2020). Being moved by protest: Collective efficacy beliefs and injustice appraisals enhance collective action intentions for forest protection via positive and negative emotions. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 71, 101491. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101491
Libarkin, J. C., Gold, A. U., Harris, S. E., McNeal, K. S., & Bowles, R. P. (2018). A new, valid measure of climate change understanding: associations with risk perception. Climatic Change, 150(3), 403-416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-018-2279-y
Lubell, M., Zahran, S., & Vedlitz, A. (2007). Collective Action and Citizen Responses to Global Warming. Political Behavior, 29(3), 391-413. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-006-9025-2
Meinhold, J. L., & Malkus, A. J. (2005). Adolescent Environmental Behaviors: Can Knowledge, Attitudes, and Self-Efficacy Make a Difference? Environment and Behavior, 37(4), 511-532. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916504269665
Meira-Cartea, P. A., Gutiérrez-Pérez, J., Arto-Blanco, M., & Escoz-Roldán, A. (2018). Influence of academic education vs. common culture on the climate literacy of university students / Formación académica frente a cultura común en la alfabetización climática de estudiantes universitarios. PsyEcology, 9(3), 301-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/21711976.2018.1483569
Mooney, M. E., Middlecamp, C., Martin, J., & Ackerman, S. A. (2022). The demise of the knowledge–action gap in climate change education. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 103(10), E2265-E2272. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1175/BAMS-D-21-0256.1
Muroi, S. K., & Bertone, E. (2019). From Thoughts to Actions: The Importance of Climate Change Education in Enhancing Students’ Self-Efficacy. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 35(2), 123-144. https://doi.org/10.1017/aee.2019.12
Norton, T. A., Zacher, H., Parker, S. L., & Ashkanasy, N. M. (2017). Bridging the gap between green behavioral intentions and employee green behavior: The role of green psychological climate. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 38(7), 996-1015. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2178
Pidgeon, N. (2012). Climate Change Risk Perception and Communication: Addressing a Critical Moment? Risk Analysis, 32(6), 951-956. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2012.01856.x
Postmes, T., & Brunsting, S. (2002). Collective Action in the Age of the Internet: Mass Communication and Online Mobilization. Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 290-301. https://doi.org/10.1177/089443930202000306
Priya, B. K., & Thenmozhi, S. (2021). Study on Self-efficacy and Pro-Environmental Behavior among School Students. International Journal of Indian Psychȯlogy, 9(2).
Schunk, D. H., & Pajares, F. (2009). Self-Efficacy Theory. In Handbook of motivation at school (pp. 49-68). Routledge.
Schwarzer, R., Jerusalem, M., Weinman, J., Wright, S., & Johnston, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale. Measures in Health Psychology: A User's Portfolio. Causal and control beliefs Windsor.
Sherer, M., & Adams, C. H. (1983). Construct Validation of the Self-Efficacy Scale. Psychological Reports, 53(3), 899-902. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.1983.53.3.899
Shi, J., Visschers, V. H. M., Siegrist, M., & Arvai, J. (2016). Knowledge as a driver of public perceptions about climate change reassessed. Nature Climate Change, 6(8), 759-762. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2997
Situmorang, R. O. P., Liang, T.-C., & Chang, S.-C. (2020). The Difference of Knowledge and Behavior of College Students on Plastic Waste Problems. Sustainability, 12(19), 7851. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/19/7851
Sjöberg, L. (2004). Explaining individual risk perception: The case of nuclear waste. Risk Management, 6, 51-64.
Slovic, P. (1987). Perception of risk. science, 236(4799), 280-285.
Stevenson, R. B., Nicholls, J., & Whitehouse, H. (2017). What Is Climate Change Education? Curriculum Perspectives, 37(1), 67-71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41297-017-0015-9
Steynor, A., Pasquini, L., Thatcher, A., & Hewitson, B. (2021). Understanding the Links Between Climate Change Risk Perceptions and the Action Response to Inform Climate Services Interventions. Risk Analysis, 41(10), 1873-1889. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13683
Sundblad, E.-L., Biel, A., & Gärling, T. (2009). Knowledge and Confidence in Knowledge About Climate Change Among Experts, Journalists, Politicians, and Laypersons. Environment and Behavior, 41, 281 - 302.
Taddicken, M., & Reif, A. (2016). Who participates in the climate change online discourse? A typology of Germans’ online engagement. Communications, 41(3), 315-337. https://doi.org/doi:10.1515/commun-2016-0012
Taddicken, M., Reif, A., & Hoppe, I. (2018). What do people know about climate change ― and how confident are they? On measurements and analyses of science related knowledge. Journal of Science Communication, 17. https://doi.org/10.22323/2.17030201
Tobler, C., Visschers, V. H. M., & Siegrist, M. (2012). Consumers’ knowledge about climate change. Climatic Change, 114(2), 189-209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-011-0393-1
Tosun, J. (2022). Addressing climate change through climate action. Climate Action, 1(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44168-022-00003-8
van der Linden, S. (2015). The social-psychological determinants of climate change risk perceptions: Towards a comprehensive model. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 41, 112-124. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.11.012
van Valkengoed, A. M., Perlaviciute, G., & Steg, L. (2024). From believing in climate change to adapting to climate change: The role of risk perception and efficacy beliefs. Risk Analysis, 44(3), 553-565. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.14193
Xie, B., Brewer, M. B., Hayes, B. K., McDonald, R. I., & Newell, B. R. (2019). Predicting climate change risk perception and willingness to act. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 65, 101331. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2019.101331
Zhang, N., Yang, H., Hong, D., Huang, X., & Wang, L. (2022). Risk Perception, Self-efficacy, Lay Theories of Health, and Engagement in Health-Protective Behaviors Among Hospital Pharmacists During the COVID-19 Pandemic. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 29(2), 247-252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-021-10004-2
Zhu, Y. (2015). An assessment of environmental literacy among undergraduate students at two national universities in Hubei Province, China. Florida Institute of Technology.