Cutting or offsetting emissions: how political ideology shapes consumer preferences for firms’ carbon emission mitigation strategies

• Internal carbon emission mitigation solutions entail modifying operational systems to reduce emissions. • External carbon emission mitigation solutions entail offsetting emissions without altering current systems. • Liberals prefer brands offering internal (vs. external) solutions, whereas conservatives show no inherent preferences. • Liberals’ preference is driven by the perceived fit between the internal carbon solution and their climate change beliefs. • Price-based promotions increase conservative consumers’ preferences for brands implementing internal solutions. As brands increasingly adopt carbon emission mitigation strategies, it remains unclear how consumers respond to these green investments. We categorize these strategies into two types: internal solutions (modifying operational systems to reduce emissions), and external solutions (offsetting emissions without altering current systems). Since internal solutions are generally more costly, understanding consumer preferences for these approaches is critical. Three experiments indicate that liberal consumers prefer brands employing internal (vs. external) solutions, driven by the fit between internal solutions and liberals’ tendency to attribute climate change to their own human activities (internal attribution). In contrast, conservatives exhibit no inherent preference, but show a stronger preference for brands offering internal solutions when these brands provide superior economic value than brands offering external solutions. These findings highlight the importance of tailoring carbon emission mitigation messaging to target markets with different political ideologies, offering practical insights for brands on promoting their green initiatives to maximize appeal across ideological lines.