Engaging high-income earners in climate action: Policy insights from survey experiments

The lifestyle and consumption patterns of the wealthy exceed our planet's ecological limits. Surprisingly, little experimental research explores the effectiveness of choice architecture interventions targeting the lifestyles and consumption behaviours of the affluent. Addressing this gap, our study investigates the extent to which the top income decile in Sweden can be motivated to take climate action. Three randomised survey experiments ( N = 1600) were conducted, involving: 1) an injunctive social norm; 2) anticipated guilt and pride priming; and 3) the framing effects of communicating a Pigouvian pricing mechanism. Results showed that neither the injunctive social norm nor guilt and pride priming yielded significant moderating effects. However, a ‘sustainability contribution’ label, as opposed to an ‘eco-tax’ label, had a positive effect. Furthermore, we found a preference for economic incentives and maintaining the status quo, along with evidence of self-deception (‘I am not a high-income earner’) that possibly limited the treatment effects. Regardless of the intervention, biospheric values, outcome efficacy, and personal norms emerged as significant predictors of climate action, while concerns about hedonistic consequences and reductions in subjective well-being seem unwarranted in policymaking. With due limitations, our study provides critical policy insights about the challenges and opportunities of engaging the affluent in urgent climate action. • We investigated choice architecture interventions targeting high-income earners. • Results show limited effects on motivating engagement in climate action. • Preference for economic incentives and status quo likely limited treatment effects. • Biospheric values, outcome efficacy, and personal norms predict climate action. • Hedonistic concerns and reductions in well-being seem irrelevant for policymaking.