In Step 3 of the survey (Figure 2), participants were asked whether they knew the term ‘green jobs’ before being provided with a definition: “A green job is any job that contributes to preserving or restoring the environment and our planet”. The survey then assessed participants’ interest in working in a ‘green job’ using a five-point scale. In Step 5 of the survey, participants responded to a series of questions on similar scales. Two of these asked about participants’ interest in working in the assigned green job, and their likelihood of applying for such a job in the future.

Graphs in this report show the average responses of men and women to the five-point questions. For breakdowns showing the percentage of men and women who responded with each of the five options, please consult the Appendix. Finally, given the number of questions participants responded to, we do not include graphs to visualise every result. For results with no corresponding graphs, we include means and p-values in the text.

Awareness of the term ‘green jobs’

More men reported having heard of the term ‘green jobs’ than women (Figure 3). This aligns with the previously mentioned research which identified a similar gender gap in the understanding of a closely related term ‘green skills’.

While the survey showed a notable gender difference in awareness of ‘green jobs’, the general understanding of the term among both groups was relatively limited. For example, many participants – in both previous and current research – were only able to vaguely guess that green jobs “have something to do with the environment”. This suggests that the term may not be very effective or engaging when used in communications with the public. Instead, it may be more effective to refer to specific, tangible jobs or industries to support awareness and understanding.

Interest in working in green jobs

Men and women did not differ in how interested they were in working in a ‘green job’ generally (Figure 4A). This finding diverges from prior research which showed a lower interest among women compared to men in acquiring ‘green skills’. A potential explanation for this inconsistency lies in the definition of ‘green jobs’ provided to participants in this research, which highlighted the social and environmental impact of such positions. Previous research has shown that social impact is a significant motivational factor for women when considering career options. Therefore, the explicit focus on the societal benefits of ‘green jobs’ in the survey may have narrowed the gender gap in the general interest in pursuing these jobs. Another potential explanation for the discrepancy could be that the term green ‘skills’ used in previous research evokes thoughts of technical abilities, therefore widening the gender gap compared to the term green ‘jobs’ used in current research.

A gender gap did become evident when participants were asked about their interest in working in a specific green job. On average, men with a STEM background expressed significantly stronger interest in STEM green jobs included in the survey in comparison to women with a STEM background (Figure 4B). Conversely, for non-STEM green jobs, women with a non-STEM background reported higher levels of interest than men with a non-STEM background (Figure 4C). These findings underscore the importance of distinguishing between perceptions of ‘green jobs’ as a general category versus perceptions of specific green roles. They also suggest that previously documented gender differences in interest in ‘green jobs’ and ‘green skills’ may primarily be gender differences in interest in STEM green jobs and skills. Finally, comparing responses to STEM and non-STEM green jobs, STEM participants were more interested in STEM green jobs (M = 3.59) than non-STEM participants were interested in non-STEM green jobs (M = 3.29, p < .001).

Note. The bars depicted on all graphs illustrate the 95% confidence intervals. To contextualise average values, five-point response options were the following: 1 = “very uninterested”, 2 = “somewhat uninterested”, 3 = “indifferent”, 4 = “somewhat interested”, 5 = “very interested”.

Likelihood of applying for green jobs

Men and women did not differ in their likelihood to apply for the assigned green jobs, whether the role was STEM or non-STEM (Figure 5). The slight to moderate interest in the assigned green job expressed in previous survey questions did not translate into application intentions, with both men and women on average reporting they were “unsure” about whether they would apply for the assigned green job. This uncertainty may stem from insufficient information about the surveyed green jobs or from practical considerations, such as one’s career stage or job circumstances, which likely supersede broader interest when considering applying for a green role.

Finally, STEM participants reported being significantly more likely to apply for STEM green jobs (M = 3.17) than non-STEM participants reported being likely to apply for non-STEM green jobs (M = 2.73, p < .001). This is likely due to lower awareness and understanding of non-STEM green jobs included in the survey. As is described in Section 5, non-STEM participants were significantly less optimistic about the availability of non-STEM green jobs and reported lower knowledge of the qualifications necessary for these jobs than did STEM participants considering STEM green jobs. Increasing awareness and understanding of non-STEM green jobs could, therefore, encourage a wider pool of candidates to take up these roles. However, these findings are based on only two non-STEM job examples and might not fully represent the general perception of all non-STEM green jobs.

Note. Five-point response options: 1 = “definitely not”, 2 = “probably not”, 3 = “unsure”, 4 = “probably yes”, 5 = “definitely yes”.