Prevalence and Psychological Correlates of Eco-Anxiety and Coping Strategies: Evidence from a Mixed-Methods Study

Abstract

Eco-anxiety is an emerging public mental health concern linked to climate change and may contribute to significant psychological distress and functional impairment. Objectives: This study aimed to determine the prevalence and psychosocial consequences of eco-anxiety, examine its association with generalized anxiety and depressive symptoms, and identify coping strategies associated with lower distress. Methodology: A mixed-methods study was conducted using a cross-sectional survey and semi-structured qualitative interviews. A total of 86 participants completed questionnaires assessing eco-anxiety and mental health symptoms. Generalized anxiety and depressive symptoms were measured using validated instruments (GAD-7 and PHQ-9). Quantitative data were analyzed to estimate prevalence and associations between eco-anxiety, comorbid symptoms, and coping variables. Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis to explore lived experiences and perceived coping strategies. Results: Overall, 72.1% of respondents reported moderate-to-high levels of eco-anxiety. Eco-anxiety was associated with co-occurring generalized anxiety and major depressive symptoms in 42.3% of participants. Coping approaches involving community/social support and mindfulness-based strategies were associated with significantly lower anxiety levels. Thematic analysis highlighted eco-anxiety as a meaningful source of mental health burden and identified coping as most effective when it was both socially supported and action oriented. Conclusion: Eco-anxiety was common in this sample and was associated with clinically relevant symptoms of generalized anxiety and depression. Community-connected and mindfulness-based coping strategies were linked to lower distress. Public health responses should incorporate mental health–informed climate communication and policy-level interventions, alongside targeted prevention and resilience-building programs for vulnerable populations. Longitudinal research is recommended to clarify long-term impacts and protective factors.