We studied environmental action and its predictors in a multi-scalar context of climate change politics. We asked how belief in climate change, post-materialist values, trust and knowledge predict people’s engagement in environmental action by testing two alternative structural equation models (SEM). In one of these models all these factors directly predicted climate-friendly action, and in the other the effect of political trust, post-materialist values and climate change knowledge on climate-friendly action was mediated by belief in climate change. The models were tested with Eurobarometer 69.2 survey data of adult people living in Finland (N = 1,004). The SEM revealed that belief in climate change mediates the effect of post-material values, trust and knowledge on climate-friendly action. It is therefore important to recognize the role of belief in the public understanding of large-scale environmental problems. These results help political authorities to develop policies to encourage people’s engagement in climate-friendly action.

This study investigated consumers' self-reported past changes and future intentions to change the consumption of beef and alternative, plant- or insect-based protein products. A survey of 18-79-year-old consumers in Finland (N = 1000) was analysed with latent class analysis, and five consumer clusters were identified. The largest cluster (37%) consumed beef, but no alternative protein products; three clusters incorporated alternative protein products in their diets in different ways (in total 55%); and one cluster did not consume beef or alternative proteins (8%). In total 27% of the respondents intended to reduce the consumption of beef in the future, whereas 26% planned to increase the consumption of plant-based and 24% planned to increase the use of insect-based protein products. Multinomial logistic regression indicated that the use of alternative proteins was associated with higher health and sustainability motives, and lower food neophobia. The results suggest that demand for new, more sustainable proteins and protein innovations will grow in the future.

Anonymity – its desirability and perceived difficulty divides the domain of qualitative research. This article shows that such divisions are associated with discrepancies in assumptions about what the power relations between the researcher and the researched, as well as the desired goals of the research, should be. This article questions the assumption that anonymity is necessary only for ethical reasons and identifies three additional functions of it in qualitative research: anonymity as ‘ontology’, anonymity as ‘analysis’ and anonymity as ‘independence’. First, ontologically, anonymity is a way of turning into ‘data’ what someone has said or written. Second, anonymization as ‘analysis’ turns the participants into examples of specific theoretical categories, and as such is a part of the data analysis. Third, anonymity as ‘independence’ enables the researcher to interpret the data irrespective of the participants’ wishes. As a conclusion, this article argues that anonymizing research participants has an influence on the overall quality of research and therefore is also useful when no ethical risks are perceived, when participants wish not to remain anonymous or when their anonymity cannot be guaranteed.