Eco-paradox USA: The relationships between economic growth and environmental concern generally, and by different income groups

Environmental values are commonly explained through three theories: post-materialism suggests affluence enables environmental concern, materialism argues environmental harm drives concern, while disconnection theory posits economic growth creates both concern and degradation. We test these frameworks at two levels. First, using aggregate U.S. time-series data (1990–2021), and Vector Autoregression Analysis (VAR) analysis to examine how resource use and environmental impact, economic growth and concern are related. We show that these three theories can complement each other. Both material and carbon footprint growth lead to subsequent GDP growth, supporting materialist views. GDP growth then increases environmental concern, aligning with post-materialist predictions. This causal chain supports disconnection theory: the very process that generates environmental concern - economic growth - simultaneously intensifies environmental degradation. Second, at the individual level (2000−2023), we examine how income relates to environmental preferences and impacts. Contrary to post-materialist expectations of wealthy groups showing greater environmental concern, logistic regression analysis controlling for sociodemographic variables reveals lower-income groups consistently prioritize environmental protection over economic growth. Carbon emissions analysis reveals that carbon footprint inequality among income groups has been rapidly increasing, with the p99/p50 income ratio rising since 1990. By 2019, top1% of income emitted 250 COeq/t per capita and bottom 50 % only 10 COeq/t per capita, while lower-income groups consistently rate environmental conditions as poor and worsening, further supporting materialist theories linking environmental harm to concern. At the societal level, our findings reveal that environmental concern is structurally intertwined with economic growth—a process that simultaneously drives environmental degradation and poses significant challenges for degrowth transitions. In contrast, at the individual level, lower-income groups consistently prioritize environmental protection over economic growth while exhibiting a lower environmental impact. This pattern suggests the potential for a “degrowth from below,” initiated by low-income individuals whose heightened preference for environmental protection directly reflects their experience of poor and worsening environmental conditions. • At the societal level: Growth fosters environmental concern yet boosts footprints. • VAR analysis indicates: Footprints drive GDP, which spurs concern but doesn't curb harm. • At the individual level: Wealthier individuals pollute more and favor growth; poorer push protection. • Notably: Lower-income groups highly harmed prioritize environment, spurring ‘degrowth from below’.