Understanding climate engagement and open recognition in European higher education: A mixed-methods study across four countries

RESEARCH ARTICLE Understanding climate engagement and open recognition in European higher education: A mixed-methods study across four countries [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] Pablo Martín-Ramos 1, Adriana Correa-Guimaraes1, Fatma Fourati-Jamoussi2, Kimberley Burcke-Couchy2, Lucio Alessandro Lo Giudice3, Barbara Tosi3, Frederico Oliveira Pinto4, Luís Veiga Martins4, Luis Manuel Navas-Gracia 1 1ETSIIAA, University of Valladolid, Avenida de Madrid 44, Palencia, 34004, Spain 2InTerACT (UP 2018.C102), UniLaSalle, 19 Rue Pierre Waguet, Beauvais, 60000, France 3Consorzio Scuola Comunità Impresa (CSCI), Via Francesco Sesalli 7, Novara, 28100, Italy 4School of Business and Economics, NOVA University, R. da Holanda 1, Carcavelos, 2775-405, Norway First published: 06 May 2025, 5:121 https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.19909.1 Latest published: 28 Aug 2025, 5:121 https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.19909.2 v1 Abstract Background This mixed-methods study investigates student engagement with climate issues and perceptions of open recognition systems across four European educational institutions in France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain as part of the OpenPass4Climate Erasmus+ project. Against the backdrop of the European Green Deal and UNESCO's call for transformative education, our research addresses the critical need for innovative climate education approaches that bridge knowledge and action. Methods Through a comprehensive approach combining surveys (n=630), individual interviews (n=69), national focus groups (n=45), and a transnational focus group (n=16), we examined students' climate attitudes, educational preferences, and views on digital badge systems for recognizing climate competencies. Results Results reveal a notable disconnect between strong climate concern Open Peer Review Approval Status 1 version 2 (revision) 28 Aug 2025 view version 1 06 May 2025 view Anh Thu Nguyen, Mount Royal University, Calgary, Canada Paul Berger, Lakehead University, Thunder Bay,, Canada 1. Any reports and responses or comments on the article can be found at the end of the article. Open Research Europe  Page 1 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 (mean=4.0/5) and moderate personal responsibility (3.2/5), alongside significant cross-country variations in environmental engagement, with Portuguese students consistently demonstrating the highest climate awareness and Italian students the lowest. While respondents strongly endorsed formal climate curriculum integration (4.1/5) and valued informal learning pathways (3.8/5), they reported limited participation in eco-pedagogical activities (2.3/5), highlighting an implementation gap in environmental education. Students rated their informal climate change education (3.5/5) more highly than formal training (3.2/5), suggesting untapped potential for recognition of nonformal learning experiences. Gender differences emerged consistently, with female respondents showing significantly higher environmental concern and engagement across multiple dimensions. Analysis of open badge perceptions revealed moderate familiarity but substantial interest, particularly when aligned with institutional credentialing systems and employer recognition frameworks. Conclusions Key implementation challenges identified include the need for robust quality assurance mechanisms, institutional endorsement, and enhanced digital infrastructure accessibility. These findings inform strategic recommendations for developing the European Open Badges Passport, emphasizing the importance of balancing standardization with contextual flexibility while facilitating recognition of both formal and informal climate learning across diverse higher education settings. Hintergrund Diese Mixed-Methods-Studie untersucht das Engagement von Studierenden für Klimafragen und ihre Wahrnehmung offener Anerkennungssysteme an vier europäischen Bildungseinrichtungen in Frankreich, Italien, Portugal und Spanien im Rahmen des Erasmus+- Projekts OpenPass4Climate. Vor dem Hintergrund des europäischen Green Deals und des UNESCO-Aufrufs zu transformativer Bildung befasst sich unsere Forschung mit dem kritischen Bedarf an innovativen Ansätzen zur Klimabildung, die Wissen und Handeln miteinander verbinden. Methoden Durch einen umfassenden Ansatz, der Umfragen (n=630), Einzelinterviews (n=69), nationale Fokusgruppen (n=45) und eine transnationale Fokusgruppe (n=16) kombiniert, untersuchten wir die Einstellungen der Studierenden zum Klima, ihre Bildungspräferenzen und ihre Ansichten zu digitalen Badge-Systemen zur Anerkennung Open Research Europe  Page 2 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 von Klimakompetenzen. Ergebnisse Die Ergebnisse zeigen eine bemerkenswerte Diskrepanz zwischen starker Klimabesorgnis (Mittelwert=4,0/5) und mäßiger persönlicher Verantwortung (3,2/5) sowie signifikante länderübergreifende Unterschiede im Umweltengagement, wobei portugiesische Studierende durchweg das höchste Klimabewusstsein und italienische Studierende das niedrigste aufweisen. Während die Befragten die formale Integration des Klimas in die Lehrpläne (4,1/5) nachdrücklich befürworteten und informelle Lernwege schätzten (3,8/5), berichteten sie von einer begrenzten Teilnahme an ökopädagogischen Aktivitäten (2,3/5), was eine Umsetzungslücke in der Umweltbildung verdeutlicht. Die Studierenden bewerteten ihre informelle Klimawandelbildung (3,5/5) höher als ihre formale Ausbildung (3,2/5), was auf ein unausgeschöpftes Potenzial für die Anerkennung nicht-formaler Lernerfahrungen hindeutet. Geschlechterunterschiede traten konsequent zutage, wobei weibliche Befragte in mehreren Dimensionen ein signifikant höheres Umweltbewusstsein und Engagement zeigten. Die Analyse der Wahrnehmung offener Badges ergab eine moderate Vertrautheit, aber ein erhebliches Interesse, insbesondere wenn sie mit institutionellen Zertifizierungssystemen und Anerkennungsrahmen von Arbeitgebern in Einklang gebracht werden. Schlussfolgerungen Zu den identifizierten Hauptherausforderungen bei der Umsetzung gehören die Notwendigkeit robuster Qualitätssicherungsmechanismen, institutioneller Unterstützung und verbesserter Zugänglichkeit digitaler Infrastrukturen. Diese Erkenntnisse liefern strategische Empfehlungen für die Entwicklung des Europäischen Open Badges Passes, wobei die Bedeutung einer ausgewogenen Standardisierung mit kontextueller Flexibilität hervorgehoben wird, während gleichzeitig die Anerkennung von formalem und informellem Klimaelernen in verschiedenen Hochschulkontexten erleichtert wird. Antecedentes Este estudio de métodos mixtos investiga la implicación de los estudiantes con los problemas climáticos y las percepciones de los sistemas de reconocimiento abierto en cuatro instituciones educativas europeas en Francia, Italia, Portugal y España como parte del proyecto Erasmus+ OpenPass4Climate. En el contexto del Pacto Verde Europeo y el llamamiento de la UNESCO para una educación Open Research Europe  Page 3 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 transformadora, nuestra investigación aborda la necesidad crítica de enfoques innovadores de educación climática que vinculen el conocimiento y la acción. Métodos A través de un enfoque integral que combina encuestas (n=630), entrevistas individuales (n=69), grupos de discusión nacionales (n=45) y un grupo de discusión transnacional (n=16), examinamos las actitudes de los estudiantes hacia el clima, sus preferencias educativas y sus opiniones sobre los sistemas de insignias digitales para el reconocimiento de competencias climáticas. Resultados Los resultados revelan una notable desconexión entre una fuerte preocupación por el clima (media=4,0/5) y una responsabilidad personal moderada (3,2/5), junto con variaciones significativas entre países en el compromiso ambiental, mostrando los estudiantes portugueses sistemáticamente la mayor concienciación climática y los estudiantes italianos la menor. Aunque los encuestados respaldaron firmemente la integración formal del clima en el plan de estudios (4,1/5) y valoraron las vías de aprendizaje informal (3,8/5), informaron de una participación limitada en actividades eco-pedagógicas (2,3/5), lo que pone de manifiesto una brecha de implementación en la educación ambiental. Los estudiantes valoraron más su educación informal sobre el cambio climático (3,5/5) que su formación formal (3,2/5), lo que sugiere un potencial sin explotar para el reconocimiento de experiencias de aprendizaje no formal. Las diferencias de género surgieron de manera consistente, mostrando las encuestadas una preocupación y compromiso ambiental significativamente mayores en múltiples dimensiones. El análisis de las percepciones sobre las insignias abiertas reveló una familiaridad moderada pero un interés sustancial, particularmente cuando están alineadas con los sistemas de acreditación institucional y los marcos de reconocimiento de los empleadores. Conclusiones Los principales desafíos de implementación identificados incluyen la necesidad de mecanismos sólidos de garantía de calidad, respaldo institucional y mejora de la accesibilidad a la infraestructura digital. Estos hallazgos informan recomendaciones estratégicas para el desarrollo del Pasaporte Europeo de Insignias Abiertas, enfatizando la importancia de equilibrar la estandarización con la flexibilidad contextual, facilitando al mismo tiempo el reconocimiento del aprendizaje climático tanto formal como informal en diversos Open Research Europe  Page 4 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 entornos de educación superior. Contexte Cette étude à méthodes mixtes examine l'engagement des étudiants envers les questions climatiques et leurs perceptions des systèmes de reconnaissance ouverts dans quatre établissements d'enseignement européens en France, Italie, Portugal et Espagne, dans le cadre du projet Erasmus+ OpenPass4Climate. Dans le contexte du Pacte vert pour l'Europe et de l'appel de l'UNESCO à une éducation transformatrice, notre recherche répond au besoin crucial d'approches innovantes en matière d'éducation au climat qui établissent un pont entre les connaissances et l'action. Méthodes Grâce à une approche complète combinant des enquêtes (n=630), des entretiens individuels (n=69), des groupes de discussion nationaux (n=45) et un groupe de discussion transnational (n=16), nous avons examiné les attitudes des étudiants face au climat, leurs préférences éducatives et leurs opinions sur les systèmes de badges numériques pour la reconnaissance des compétences climatiques. Résultats Les résultats révèlent un décalage notable entre une forte préoccupation climatique (moyenne=4,0/5) et une responsabilité personnelle modérée (3,2/5), ainsi que des variations significatives entre les pays en matière d'engagement environnemental, les étudiants portugais démontrant systématiquement la plus grande sensibilisation au climat et les étudiants italiens la plus faible. Bien que les répondants aient fortement approuvé l'intégration formelle du climat dans les programmes d'études (4,1/5) et valorisé les parcours d'apprentissage informels (3,8/5), ils ont signalé une participation limitée aux activités éco-pédagogiques (2,3/5), mettant en évidence un écart de mise en œuvre dans l'éducation environnementale. Les étudiants ont évalué leur éducation informelle sur le changement climatique (3,5/5) plus favorablement que leur formation formelle (3,2/5), suggérant un potentiel inexploité pour la reconnaissance des expériences d'apprentissage non formelles. Des différences de genre ont émergé de façon constante, les répondantes montrant une préoccupation et un engagement environnementaux significativement plus élevés dans de multiples dimensions. L'analyse des perceptions des badges ouverts a révélé une familiarité modérée mais un intérêt substantiel, particulièrement lorsqu'ils sont alignés avec les systèmes d'accréditation institutionnels et les cadres de reconnaissance des employeurs. Open Research Europe  Page 5 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 Conclusions Les principaux défis de mise en œuvre identifiés comprennent la nécessité de mécanismes d'assurance qualité robustes, d'approbation institutionnelle et d'amélioration de l'accessibilité des infrastructures numériques. Ces résultats éclairent les recommandations stratégiques pour le développement du Passeport Européen des Badges Ouverts, soulignant l'importance d'équilibrer la standardisation avec la flexibilité contextuelle tout en facilitant la reconnaissance des apprentissages climatiques formels et informels dans divers contextes d'enseignement supérieur. Contesto Questo studio a metodi misti indaga il coinvolgimento degli studenti nelle questioni climatiche e le percezioni dei sistemi di riconoscimento aperto in quattro istituzioni educative europee in Francia, Italia, Portogallo e Spagna come parte del progetto Erasmus+ OpenPass4Climate. Nel contesto del Green Deal europeo e dell'appello dell'UNESCO per un'educazione trasformativa, la nostra ricerca affronta la necessità critica di approcci innovativi all'educazione climatica che colmino il divario tra conoscenza e azione. Metodi Attraverso un approccio completo che combina sondaggi (n=630), interviste individuali (n=69), focus group nazionali (n=45) e un focus group transnazionale (n=16), abbiamo esaminato gli atteggiamenti degli studenti verso il clima, le loro preferenze educative e le loro opinioni sui sistemi di badge digitali per il riconoscimento delle competenze climatiche. Risultati I risultati rivelano una notevole disconnessione tra una forte preoccupazione per il clima (media=4,0/5) e una moderata responsabilità personale (3,2/5), insieme a significative variazioni tra i paesi nell'impegno ambientale, con gli studenti portoghesi che dimostrano costantemente la più alta consapevolezza climatica e gli studenti italiani la più bassa. Mentre i rispondenti hanno fortemente sostenuto l'integrazione formale del clima nei programmi di studio (4,1/5) e hanno valorizzato i percorsi di apprendimento informale (3,8/5), hanno riportato una partecipazione limitata alle attività ecopedagogiche (2,3/5), evidenziando un divario di implementazione nell'educazione ambientale. Gli studenti hanno valutato la loro educazione informale sul cambiamento climatico (3,5/5) più Open Research Europe  Page 6 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 positivamente della formazione formale (3,2/5), suggerendo un potenziale non sfruttato per il riconoscimento delle esperienze di apprendimento non formale. Le differenze di genere sono emerse costantemente, con le rispondenti femmine che mostrano una preoccupazione e un impegno ambientale significativamente più elevati in più dimensioni. L'analisi delle percezioni dei badge aperti ha rivelato una familiarità moderata ma un interesse sostanziale, particolarmente quando allineati con i sistemi di accreditamento istituzionale e i quadri di riconoscimento dei datori di lavoro. Conclusioni Le principali sfide di implementazione identificate includono la necessità di solidi meccanismi di garanzia della qualità, supporto istituzionale e una migliore accessibilità dell'infrastruttura digitale. Questi risultati informano raccomandazioni strategiche per lo sviluppo del Passaporto Europeo dei Badge Aperti, sottolineando l'importanza di bilanciare la standardizzazione con la flessibilità contestuale, facilitando al contempo il riconoscimento dell'apprendimento climatico sia formale che informale in diversi contesti di istruzione superiore. Plain language summary Our research investigated how university students across four European countries (France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain) think about and engage with climate change issues, and what they think about using digital badges to recognize climate-related learning. We collected information through an online survey of 630 students, individual interviews with 69 participants, group discussions in each country, and an international group discussion. The study revealed important insights about students' perspectives on climate change and environmental education. While students expressed strong concern about climate change, they felt only moderately responsible for taking action themselves. We found notable differences across demographics and countries: female students and those in advanced degree programs showed higher environmental awareness, and Portuguese students consistently demonstrated the highest climate awareness, while Italian students showed the lowest. Although students valued both formal education and informal learning about climate issues, they reported low participation in actual environmental activities. When it came to recognition of climate-related learning through digital badges, students showed moderate interest but expressed concerns about how employers would view these credentials. These findings are significant because they help us understand how to better engage students in climate education and action. The research provides valuable insights for developing the European Open Badges Passport, a system that will recognize both formal and informal Open Research Europe  Page 7 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 Corresponding author: Pablo Martín-Ramos ([email protected]) Author roles: Martín-Ramos P: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Writing – Original Draft Preparation, Writing – Review & Editing; Correa-Guimaraes A: Investigation, Validation; Fourati-Jamoussi F: Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – Original Draft Preparation; Burcke-Couchy K: Investigation, Project Administration; Lo Giudice LA: Formal Analysis, Investigation; Tosi B: Investigation, Project Administration; Oliveira Pinto F: Formal Analysis, Investigation; Veiga Martins L: Investigation, Project Administration; Navas-Gracia LM: Investigation, Project Administration Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The project has received funding from the European Union through the Erasmus+ program, KA220-HED Cooperation partnerships in higher education, under grant agreement No. 2022-1-FR01-KA220-HED-000089354 (Impact evaluation of eco-pedagogy towards Individual and Collective Engagement through the implementation of a European Open Badges Passport for Climate and Planet [OpenPass4Climate]). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Copyright: © 2025 Martín-Ramos P et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite this article: Martín-Ramos P, Correa-Guimaraes A, Fourati-Jamoussi F et al. Understanding climate engagement and open recognition in European higher education: A mixed-methods study across four countries [version 1; peer review: 1 approved with reservations] Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.19909.1 First published: 06 May 2025, 5:121 https://doi.org/10.12688/openreseurope.19909.1 climate learning achievements. Our results suggest that effective climate education needs to bridge the gap between awareness and action, while recognition systems must balance standardization across Europe with flexibility for local needs. The findings emphasize the importance of ensuring digital badges are credible and valued by employers, while making climate education more accessible through both traditional and innovative learning approaches. These insights will directly inform how European universities approach climate education and recognize students' environmental competencies in the coming years. Keywords Digital credentials, Educational policy, Environmental competencies, European Green Deal, Informal learning, Micro-credentials, Sustainability literacy, Value-action gap This article is included in the Erasmus+ gateway. Open Research Europe  Page 8 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 Introduction The fight against climate change is a cornerstone of the EU Erasmus+ program, with education recognized as a vital tool in confronting this global challenge (European Commission, 2021a). The environmental crisis confronting humanity today transcends scientific boundaries, encompassing profound social and political dimensions (Vare & Scott, 2007). As we approach the mid-2020s, the urgency of climate change and the associated loss of biodiversity necessitate an educational response, yet many schools and systems grapple with effective strategies (UNESCO, 2021). Research consistently shows that merely imparting knowledge about environmental issues is insufficient to spur meaningful change; shifts in attitudes and perceptions of the natural world are essential to catalyzing behavioral transformation (Ajzen, 1991; Bamberg & Möser, 2007; Kollmuss & Agyeman, 2002). The European Union has responded decisively through initiatives such as the European Green Deal, launched in 2019, which outlines a roadmap for sustainable development (European Commission, 2019). Moreover, its commitment has been further reinforced by policy recommendations that stress the importance of education for environmental sustainability and advocate for incorporating youth perspectives in tackling climate and biodiversity challenges—most notably, the Council Recommendation on Learning for the Green Transition and Sustainable Development (Council of the European Union, 2022a) and the Council of Europe Recommendation on Young People and Climate Action (Council of Europe, 2024). Complementing these efforts, the European Commission’s GreenComp framework provides a structured approach to fostering sustainability competencies across educational contexts (Bianchi et al., 2022). Within this framework, the OpenPass4Climate project emerges as an innovative initiative under the Erasmus+ program, introducing an open recognition alliance system to enhance climate education. By leveraging Open Badges and the OpenPass4Climate platform, the project aims to elevate climate-related activities from awareness to actionable commitment and justice. It seeks to evaluate the tangible impacts of these efforts on advancing climate justice and to identify mechanisms that accelerate the adoption of positive behaviors. A core objective is the creation of a lifelong, portable OpenPass4Climate system, empowering individuals to engage actively in climate initiatives. To ensure the system’s efficacy, WP3 focused on understanding students’ engagement with climate issues, assessing key climate commitments, and exploring perceptions of both implicit and explicit recognition mechanisms. This comprehensive study spanned four European countries —France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain— and employed multiple research methods: an online survey, one-to-one interviews, national focus groups, and a transnational focus group. These efforts provide insights into youth perceptions of climate change, educational preferences, and attitudes toward open recognition systems, informing the co-design of an effective Open Badge system. This article details the research methodology, presents findings from all study components, analyzes results within the context of contemporary European environmental and educational frameworks, and offers recommendations for the OpenPass4Climate system’s implementation. The findings aim to support the development of student-centered curricula and flexible learning pathways that bridge knowledge and action, fostering a generation of environmentally conscious citizens. Methods This study adopted a mixed-methods design, integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches across four phases: an online survey, one-to-one interviews, national focus groups, and a transnational focus group. This multifaceted strategy ensured both broad data collection and in-depth exploration of participants’ perspectives on climate education and open recognition systems. Survey design and implementation A 20-question survey (Annex I in the Extended Data) was administered to students from four European countries (France, Italy, Portugal, and Spain). The survey, designed by consortium members and crafted in compliance with the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, collected demographic information including age, gender, education level, and country of study. Gender was determined through self-identification, with participants selecting from options including ‘Male’, ‘Female’, ‘Non-binary’, ‘Prefer not to say’, and an open text option for other gender identities. This approach aligns with best practices in gender-inclusive research design. The survey investigated seven key constructs: ‘Climate change views’ examined students’ acknowledgment of scientific evidence attributing climate change to human activity and their perception of it as a significant threat. ‘Environmental values and identity’ explored the importance students attribute to environmental protection and their self-identification as environmentally friendly (Bogner & Wiseman, 2006; Johnson & Manoli, 2010). ‘Personal responsibility and emotional responses’ investigated students’ sense of responsibility for mitigating climate change effects and their confidence in making a positive impact. ‘Social norms’ explored perceptions of others’ expectations and behaviors regarding environmental issues. ‘Eco-pedagogical activities’ investigated prior formal and informal climate education. ‘Learning interests and training preferences’ assessed interest in climate change learning and preferred approaches. The ‘Open badges system/awareness’ examined familiarity with open badges for recognizing climate-related achievements. Responses were provided on a Likert scale (1–5), with extreme scale values explicitly defined for all questions. The survey instrument was initially pilot tested with a group of students from CSCI to assess clarity, comprehensibility, and response patterns. Feedback from this pilot phase was incorporated into the final version of the questionnaire. Internal consistency and reliability were assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient. Page 9 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 requires careful attention to several critical factors. Policymakers must maintain a delicate balance between standardization and contextual flexibility while ensuring equitable access to recognition systems. Support for technological infrastructure development must be coupled with building credibility through robust quality assurance, such as the European Blockchain Service Infrastructure (EBSI). Furthermore, policies should foster collaboration between educational institutions and industry to enhance the value and recognition of climate-related credentials. Implementation should follow an evidence-based approach while remaining adaptable to emerging needs and technological developments in digital credentialing. The findings from this study suggest that effective policy frameworks must address both the technical aspects of open badge systems and the broader educational and social contexts in which they operate (Bianchi et al., 2022). As climate education evolves and digital recognition systems mature, policies must remain responsive to changing needs while maintaining high standards for quality and accessibility. Limitations and future research directions This study has several limitations that future research should address. The sample’s skew toward higher education students may limit generalizability to other educational contexts. Additionally, the rapid evolution of digital credentialing systems means that attitudes toward open badges may shift as these tools become more widespread. Future research should explore: – Longitudinal impacts of open recognition systems on learning outcomes – Comparative effectiveness of different badge implementation strategies – Intersection of climate competencies with other key EU competency frameworks – Role of emerging technologies, like blockchain, in credential verification to enhance security and trust Our findings underscore the complex interplay between environmental attitudes, educational preferences, and recognition systems in supporting climate competency development. Success will require carefully coordinated efforts across policy domains and stakeholder groups, with particular attention to maintaining a balance between standardization and contextual flexibility. Conclusions The OpenPass4Climate research reveals critical insights for developing effective climate education and open recognition systems in European higher education. The study across four countries demonstrates that while students show strong climate awareness, there remains a significant gap between knowledge and action. This gap presents both a challenge and an opportunity for the development of open badge systems. The findings suggest three key areas requiring immediate attention for the successful implementation of the OpenPass4Climate initiative: First, educational systems must bridge formal and informal learning pathways. Our research demonstrates that students value both structured academic approaches and experiential learning opportunities, suggesting that open badge systems should recognize and validate both forms of learning. Second, badge system design must prioritize credibility and usability. The focus group findings emphasize that successful implementation requires clear institutional backing, robust quality assurance mechanisms, and user-friendly interfaces. These elements are essential for ensuring that badges hold value for both academic progression and professional development. Third, implementation strategies must account for national and cultural contexts while maintaining European-wide standards. The significant variations in climate attitudes and educational preferences across countries indicate the need for flexible frameworks that can adapt to local contexts while ensuring consistent quality and recognition. Looking ahead, the OpenPass4Climate initiative must work within existing European educational frameworks while pushing boundaries to create innovative recognition systems. The focus should be on developing badges that not only acknowledge learning but actively encourage engagement with climate issues through practical action. The path forward requires a coordinated effort from educational institutions, policymakers, and stakeholders to create meaningful change in climate education. Success will depend on maintaining the delicate balance between standardization and flexibility, ensuring that open badges serve as effective tools for recognizing and promoting climate competency development across Europe. Ethics and consent This research was conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The study was approved by the Technical Directorate for Privacy Matters, with approval from the Data Protection Officer of the University of Valladolid (Reference Number: UVA/26/2023) on September 21, 2023. The study was conducted in accordance with the University of Valladolid’s Ethical Code, approved by the Governing Council on July 22, 2022. Informed consent was obtained from all participants through the online survey platform, where participants were informed that by taking the survey they indicated they had read and understood the data protection and consent statement and agreed to participate. For focus groups and interviews, participants provided verbal consent after reviewing data protection information. All participants were informed of data confidentiality measures and their rights under GDPR requirements, including the right to withdraw from the study at any time without penalty. Data were anonymized during analysis and reporting to protect participant identities. Data availability statement UVaDOC Documentary Repository of the University of Valladolid: Understanding climate engagement and open Page 16 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 recognition in European higher education: A mixed-methods study across four countries. https://doi.org/10.35376/10324/75208 This project contains the following underlying data: – OpenPass4Climate_survey_results.ods (Complete dataset of survey responses from 630 participants across four European countries). Extended data UVaDOC Documentary Repository of the University of Valladolid: Understanding climate engagement and open recognition in European higher education: A mixed-methods study across four countries. https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/75250 This project contains the following extended data: – Annex I: Survey questionnaire – Annex II: Statistical analysis tables including mean Likert scale scores, Kruskal-Wallis test results (mean of ranks) and Conover-Iman multiple pairwise comparisons – Annex III: One-to-one interview questionnaire – Annex IV: National focus group questionnaire All data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero “No rights reserved” data waiver (CC0 Public domain dedication). Reporting guidelines This study follows the Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR) guidelines for the qualitative components and the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) guidelines for the survey component. Additionally, the study adheres to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines for reporting sex and gender information. Author contributions Conceptualization, P.M.-R.; methodology, P.M.-R. and F.F.; formal analysis, P.M.-R., F.F., L.A.L.G., and F.O.P.; investigation, P.M.-R., A.C.-G., F.F., K.C., L.A.L.G., B.T., F.O.P., L.V.M., and L.M.N.-G.; validation, A.C.-G.; writing—original draft preparation, P.M.-R. and F.F.; writing—review and editing, P.M.-R.; supervision, P.M.-R.; project administration, P.M.-R., K.C., B.T., L.V.M., and L.M.N.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. References Ajzen I: The theory of planned behavior. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process. 1991; 50(2): 179–211. Publisher Full Text Bamberg S, Möser G: Twenty years after Hines, Hungerford, and Tomera: a new meta-analysis of psycho-social determinants of pro-environmental behaviour. J Environ Psychol. 2007; 27(1): 14–25. Publisher Full Text Bianchi G, Pisiotis U, Cabrera Giraldez M: GreenComp: the European sustainability competence framework. Punie, Y. and Bacigalupo, M. editor(s), EUR 30955 EN, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, ISBN 978-92-76-46485-3, JRC128040, 2022. Publisher Full Text Breiting S, Mayer M, Mogensen F: Quality criteria for ESD-schools. Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Culture, 2005. Reference Source Bogner FX, Wiseman M: Adolescents’ attitudes towards nature and environment: quantifying the 2-MEV model. Environmentalist. 2006; 26: 247–254. Publisher Full Text Council of Europe: Recommendation CM/Rec(2024)6 of the Committee of Ministers to member States on young people and climate action. 2024. Reference Source Council of the European Union: Council Recommendation of 16 June 2022 on learning for the green transition and sustainable development 2022/C 243/01. 2022a. Reference Source Council of the European Union: Council Recommendation of 16 June 2022 on a European approach to micro-credentials for lifelong learning and employability 2022/C 243/02. 2022b. Reference Source Di Battista A, Grayling S, Hasselaar E, et al.: Future of jobs report 2023. World Economic Forum, Geneva, Switzerland, 2023. Reference Source European Commission: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion: The European qualifications framework – supporting learning, work, and cross-border mobility – 10th anniversary. Publications Office of the European Union, 2018. Publisher Full Text European Commission: The European Green Deal. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of the Regions (COM(2019) 640 final). 2019. Reference Source European Commission: Directorate-General for Environment: Special Eurobarometer 501: attitudes of European citizens towards the environment – Report. 2020a. Publisher Full Text European Commission: European skills Agenda for sustainable competitiveness, social fairness and resilience. 2020b. Reference Source European Commission: Erasmus+ programme guide 2021-2027. 2021a. Reference Source European Commission: Digital education action plan (2021–2027). 2021b. Reference Source European Commission: Directorate-General for Communication: Special Eurobarometer 538: climate change. 2023. Reference Source European Commission: Joint Research Centre, Napoli V, Pisiotis U, et al.: The GreenComp community - accountability report 2023/2024. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2025. Publisher Full Text EQAR: European Digital credentials for learning. 2023. Reference Source Griffiths D, Burgos D, Aceto S: Open education and alternative digital credentials in Europe. Int Rev Res Open Dis Learn. 2024; 25(1): 89–108. Publisher Full Text Higgs AL, McMillan VM: Teaching through modeling: four schools’ experiences in sustainability education. J Environ Educ. 2006; 38(1): 39–53. Publisher Full Text Johnson B, Manoli CC: The 2–MEV scale in the United States: a measure of children’s environmental attitudes based on the theory of ecological attitude. J Environ Educ. 2010; 42(2): 84–97. Publisher Full Text Kollmuss A, Agyeman J: Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environ Educ Res. Page 17 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 2002; 8(3): 239–260. Publisher Full Text Leal-Filho W, Sima M, Sharifi A, et al.: Handling climate change education at universities: an overview. Environ Sci Eur. 2021; 33(1): 1–19. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Mathar R: A whole school approach to sustainable development: elements of education for sustainable development and students’ competencies for sustainable development. In: R. Jucker & R. Mathar (Eds.), Schooling for Sustainable Development in Europe. Springer, Cham, 2015; 6: 15–30. Publisher Full Text McCright AM: The effects of gender on climate change knowledge and concern in the American public. Popul Environ. 2010; 32: 66–87. Publisher Full Text Nair-Bedouelle S, (Ed.): Engineering for sustainable development: delivering on the sustainable development goals. UNESCO - International Centre for Engineering Education, 2021. Reference Source Oliver B: Towards a common definition of micro-credentials. UNESCO. 2022. Reference Source Redman E, Wiek A, Redman A: Continuing professional development in sustainability education for K-12 teachers: principles, programme, applications, outlook. J Educ Sustain Dev. 2018; 12(1): 59–80. Publisher Full Text Uitto A, Boeve-de Pauw J, Saloranta S: Participatory school experiences as facilitators for adolescents’ ecological behavior. J Environ Psychol. 2015; 43: 55–65. Publisher Full Text UNESCO: International Commission on the Futures of Education: Reimagining our futures together: a new social contract for education. UNESCO Publishing, 2021. Publisher Full Text UNESCO: Education for sustainable development: a roadmap. UNESCO Publishing, 2022. Publisher Full Text Vare P, Scott W: Learning for a change: exploring the relationship between Education and Sustainable Development. J Educ Sustain Dev. 2007; 1(2): 191–198. Publisher Full Text von Davier M, Kennedy A, Reynolds K, et al.: TIMSS 2023 international results in mathematics and science. Boston College, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, 2024. Publisher Full Text Wastiau P, Looney J, Laanpere M: Portugal’s digital transition strategy for education. System change case studies series. Brussels, European Schoolnet, 2024. Reference Source Zelezny LC, Chua PP, Aldrich C: New ways of thinking about environmentalism: elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. J Soc Issues. 2000; 56(3): 443–457. Publisher Full Text Page 18 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 Open Peer Review Current Peer Review Status: Version 1 Reviewer Report24 July 2025 https://doi.org/10.21956/openreseurope.21536.r53980 © 2025 Nguyen A et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Anh Thu Nguyen Mount Royal University, Calgary, Canada Paul Berger Lakehead University, Thunder Bay,, Canada Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. It touches a very important topic relating to climate change education with a study across four countries in Europe. The introduction clearly sets a context for the research. We strongly recommend adding a literature review section to provide a current landscape of research on the topics and to identify research gaps that justify this research. Also, an outline of the paper structure could be provided at the end of the introduction for clarity. Please write acronyms out in full on their first usage. 1. Methods: The research design is appropriate; however, we suggest stronger justifications as to why this research design was used. The authors could explain more clearly the choice of research methods with support from theories on research methodologies. Additionally, the authors could elaborate on the choice of seven key constructs used in the survey design. 2. More details need to be provided about data collection methods for replication by others and to understand potential biases. For instance, how the authors conducted surveys in four countries (online, email, paper-based, etc), how they recruited students (university and high-school students), and how they recruited participants for the transnational focus group (what were the selection criteria?) 3. The analysis is good, with results reported clearly. However, we strongly recommend the authors to clearly explain the measures used to overcome methodological limitations; for example, what are some inherent limitations in the sample’s composition and how they were accounted for in the analysis. What categories had limited sample sizes? Please specify them. Quantitative results are typically reported with more detail, such as the effect size and confidence level; is there a reason why your results omitted details? Perhaps these are in Annex II. 4. The discussion could be improved by providing a more robust synthesis with the existing literature. As a literature review is not provided, it is difficult for the reader to see ‘significant’ findings, in comparison with what is known in literature. Some discussion is 5. Open Research Europe  Page 19 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 needed to help readers understand how Likert averages can be compared to percentages in the Eurobarometer findings and to speculate on comparisons between student and general population results. References to the Eurobarometer findings are needed. It is unclear why political action is not highlighted in this study; why emphasise individual actions such as eating less meat and asking about government responsibility, without asking whether participants have taken part in climate protests, signed petitions or contacted elected officials? 1. Thank you again for the opportunity to review the manuscript. We hope our comments help improve the work. We wish the authors the best of luck with the research! Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it engage with the current literature? Partly Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly Are all the source data and materials underlying the results available? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Sustainable consumption, sustainability education, climate change education We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however we have significant reservations, as outlined above. Author Response 09 Aug 2025 Pablo Martín-Ramos Thank you for the opportunity to review the manuscript. It touches a very important topic relating to climate change education with a study across four countries in Europe. Response: Thank you for your thorough and constructive review of our manuscript. We appreciate the interdisciplinary perspectives you bring from sustainability education and climate change pedagogy. We have carefully addressed each of your comments with substantial revisions Open Research Europe  Page 20 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 to strengthen the manuscript. Below, we provide a detailed point-by-point response with specific changes made. Reviewer comment 1: The introduction clearly sets a context for the research. We strongly recommend adding a literature review section to provide a current landscape of research on the topics and to identify research gaps that justify this research. Also, an outline of the paper structure could be provided at the end of the introduction for clarity. Please write acronyms out in full on their first usage. Response: We appreciate this suggestion and have added a new Literature Review section following the Introduction. As this manuscript is part of the OpenPass4Climate project, which includes a comprehensive scoping review published separately, we provide a focused synthesis that highlights key gaps our empirical study addresses while directing readers to the full review for detailed analysis. Changes made: (1) A new paragraph providing an outline of the paper structure has been added at the end of the Introduction. (2) A new section 2 (Literature review) has been added after the Introduction. (3) “European Union (EU)", "United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)", "Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM)”, "General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)", and "Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS)" are now written in full at first use. Reviewer comment 2: Methods: The research design is appropriate; however, we suggest stronger justifications as to why this research design was used. The authors could explain more clearly the choice of research methods with support from theories on research methodologies. Additionally,the authors could elaborate on the choice of seven key constructs used in the survey design. Response: We have substantially expanded the Methods section to provide theoretical justification for our methodological choices and elaborate on the survey constructs' theoretical foundations. Changes made: (1) The first paragraph of the Methods section has been rewritten, and a new subsection on “Research design and rationale” has been added. (2) The original “Survey design and implementation” subsection has been divided into two subsections. The survey design has been expanded to a new “Survey design and theoretical framework” subsection. Reviewer comment 3: More details need to be provided about data collection methods for replication by others and to understand potential biases. For instance, how the authors conducted surveys in four countries (online, email, paper-based, etc), how they recruited students (university and high-school students), and how they recruited participants for the transnational focus group (what were the selection criteria?) Response: We have comprehensively revised the data collection section to provide full operational details, enabling replication and bias assessment. Open Research Europe  Page 21 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 Changes made: The original “Survey design and implementation” subsection has been divided into two subsections. The survey implementation has been expanded to a new “Data collection procedures” section, with “Survey administration, Interview recruitment and selection”, and Focus group recruitment” subsection. Reviewer comment 4: The analysis is good, with results reported clearly. However, we strongly recommend the authors to clearly explain the measures used to overcome methodological limitations; for example, what are some inherent limitations in the sample’s composition and how they were accounted for in the analysis. What categories had limited sample sizes? Please specify them. Quantitative results are typically reported with more detail, such as the effect size and confidence level; is there a reason why your results omitted details? Perhaps these are in Annex II. Response: We appreciate the reviewers' attention to methodological rigor and statistical reporting. We have expanded our discussion of limitations and clarified our statistical approach. Regarding effect sizes and confidence intervals: We acknowledge that these measures are not included in Annex II. Our analytical approach employed non-parametric methods (Kruskal-Wallis tests with Conover-Iman post-hoc comparisons) appropriate for ordinal Likert data that violated normality assumptions. For such non-parametric analyses, effect size measures are less standardized than for parametric tests. The mean ranks and rank differences provided in Tables S2 and S4 serve an analogous interpretive function: larger rank separations indicate stronger practical effects. For example, the 145.6-point rank difference between Italy and Portugal on climate concern (mean ranks: 260.0 vs. 405.6, p<.0001) clearly indicates a substantial effect beyond mere statistical significance. Confidence intervals, typically calculated assuming interval data properties, would be inappropriate for our rank-based analyses of ordinal data. However, recognizing that some researchers may wish to apply parametric interpretations, we have made our complete dataset available in the repository, enabling alternative analytical approaches, including effect size calculations or confidence interval estimation, for those who consider Likert data to possess interval properties. Changes made: (1) The “Data analysis” subsection has been updated (second paragraph). (2) A new subsection on “Methodological limitations and mitigation strategies” has been added as a separate subsection after “Data analysis”. (3) A new sentence has been added to the existing "Limitations and future research directions" section to briefly acknowledge the technical details of limitations detailed in the methods subsection while keeping the focus on broader implications and future research needs. Reviewer comment 5: The discussion could be improved by providing a more robust synthesis with the existing literature. As a literature review is not provided, it is difficult for the reader to see ‘significant’ findings, in comparison with what is known in literature. Some discussion is needed to help readers understand how Likert averages can be compared to percentages in the Eurobarometer findings and to speculate on comparisons between student and general population results. Response: We appreciate the reviewers' suggestion to strengthen literature integration in the Discussion. As noted in response to Comment 1, we have added a Literature Review section that Open Research Europe  Page 22 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 establishes the theoretical context. We have now enhanced the Discussion with additional literature synthesis and methodological clarifications about our comparisons. Regarding the comparison of Likert scale means with Eurobarometer percentages, we acknowledge this methodological challenge and have added explicit clarification of our interpretive approach. We interpret scores above 4.0 as indicating that approximately 80% of respondents lean toward agreement (since 4.0 represents the "agree" point on our scale), while scores around 3.0 suggest neutral or mixed responses. This interpretation allows approximate comparison with Eurobarometer's binary percentage findings, though we explicitly acknowledge these are different measurement approaches. We have also clarified that our student sample represents a specific subpopulation (younger, currently engaged in education) and comparisons with general population surveys should be understood as exploratory rather than definitive. Furthermore, we have integrated additional literature throughout the Discussion to contextualize our findings within established research on environmental attitudes, educational effects on climate concern, and motivational dynamics in recognition systems. Changes made: (1) Added clarification paragraph in Discussion section (after first paragraph) (2) Added methodological justification paragraph (after the above) (3) Enhanced literature integration throughout the Discussion, including: discussion of educational effects on climate concern, analysis of generational differences, education perception gap, and cross-national variations. Reviewer comment 6: References to the Eurobarometer findings are needed. Response: We thank the reviewers for noting this. The Eurobarometer references are provided in the manuscript at first mention ('Building on prior European research, such as the Special Eurobarometer 501 (European Commission, 2020a) and 538 (European Commission, 2023)...'). Throughout the Discussion, specific findings are attributed to their source surveys with question numbers (e.g., 'Eurobarometer 538, QC2') to ensure precision while maintaining readability. We believe this approach (full citation followed by abbreviated references with question identifiers) follows standard academic practice while providing complete traceability to specific data points. Reviewer comment 7: It is unclear why political action is not highlighted in this study; why emphasize individual actions such as eating less meat and asking about government responsibility, without asking whether participants have taken part in climate protests, signed petitions or contacted elected officials? Response: We thank the reviewers for this important observation about political action. This represents a significant limitation of our study design that we now explicitly acknowledge. The OpenPass4Climate survey instrument was developed collaboratively by the project consortium with a primary focus on individual behavioral changes and educational preferences rather than political engagement. This reflects both the project's educational focus and, admittedly, an oversight in not adequately capturing the full spectrum of climate action, particularly collective political engagement that has become increasingly prominent through youth movements like Fridays for Future. While our qualitative data (interviews and focus groups) did capture some political dimensions spontaneously raised by participants—such as the importance of voting for climate-conscious politicians (Portuguese focus group), activism approaches (French focus group), and the role of Open Research Europe  Page 23 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025 collective pressure in driving policy change (Spanish focus group)—we acknowledge that the absence of systematic data collection on political action represents a significant gap. This is particularly relevant given that our target demographic (18-24 year-olds) has been at the forefront of climate activism globally. We have added this limitation to our Discussion section and recommend that future research on climate education and recognition systems should explicitly incorporate measures of political engagement, including participation in protests, petition signing, contacting elected officials, and involvement in climate justice movements. This would provide a more complete picture of how educational interventions relate to both individual and collective forms of climate action. Changes made: A new paragraph has been added to the "Limitations and future research directions" subsection to clearly acknowledge the limitation, and a new future research bullet point has been included. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Open Research Europe  Page 24 of 24 Open Research Europe 2025, 5:121 Last updated: 14 OCT 2025