Adaptation versus mitigation: Does goal-framing influence the appeal of climate-relevant behaviors?

Behavioral research on climate change often treats mitigation and adaptation as discrete behaviors. However, some climate-relevant behaviors can promote both mitigation and adaptation goals. Here, we demonstrate a comparative approach where identical climate-relevant behaviors can promote either climate-change mitigation or adaptation goals and present the 10-item Comparable Adaptation and Mitigation (CAM) list of behaviors. In two between-subjects online studies (total N = 1,474), we test whether framing these behaviors as promoting mitigation versus adaptation influences individuals’ willingness to engage in them and their perceived efficacy. Across both studies, we find willingness to engage in climate-relevant behaviors is not significantly influenced by goal-framing. Participants were more willing to engage in climate-relevant behaviors with either frame when the behaviors mainly influenced the individuals’ private (vs. public) sphere. Study 2 also provides initial evidence that framing climate-relevant behaviors as serving a climate-change goal (either mitigation or adaptation), as compared to presenting the same behaviors with no goal-framing, reduced the perceived efficacy of these climate-relevant behaviors and, subsequently, reduced participants’ willingness to engage in these behaviors. We discuss the results in the context of existing literature on mitigation and adaptation and describe the potential of this novel comparative approach to improve scholars’ understanding of the motivation to engage in climate-relevant behaviors. • CAM list compares equivalent acts framed as serving mitigation or adaptation goals. • Both goal specifications may lower behavior willingness and response efficacy. • Reduced willingness was observed mainly in conservatives and homeowners. • Response efficacy mediated effects of goal-specification on willingness. • Private-sphere CAM behaviors were preferred over public-sphere behaviors.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Environmental Psychology
Published
2026-01-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2026.102934
Primary Topic
Climate Change Communication and Perception
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Adaptation versus mitigation: Does goal-framing influence the appeal of climate-relevant behaviors?

Atar Herziger, Liat Levontin, Joseph G. Guerriero, Janet K. Swim
Journal of Environmental Psychology
Climate Change Communication and Perception
article

Adaptation versus mitigation: Does goal-framing influence the appeal of climate-relevant behaviors?

Atar Herziger, Liat Levontin, Joseph G. Guerriero, Janet K. Swim
article en

Abstract

Behavioral research on climate change often treats mitigation and adaptation as discrete behaviors. However, some climate-relevant behaviors can promote both mitigation and adaptation goals. Here, we demonstrate a comparative approach where identical climate-relevant behaviors can promote either climate-change mitigation or adaptation goals and present the 10-item Comparable Adaptation and Mitigation (CAM) list of behaviors. In two between-subjects online studies (total N = 1,474), we test whether framing these behaviors as promoting mitigation versus adaptation influences individuals’ willingness to engage in them and their perceived efficacy. Across both studies, we find willingness to engage in climate-relevant behaviors is not significantly influenced by goal-framing. Participants were more willing to engage in climate-relevant behaviors with either frame when the behaviors mainly influenced the individuals’ private (vs. public) sphere. Study 2 also provides initial evidence that framing climate-relevant behaviors as serving a climate-change goal (either mitigation or adaptation), as compared to presenting the same behaviors with no goal-framing, reduced the perceived efficacy of these climate-relevant behaviors and, subsequently, reduced participants’ willingness to engage in these behaviors. We discuss the results in the context of existing literature on mitigation and adaptation and describe the potential of this novel comparative approach to improve scholars’ understanding of the motivation to engage in climate-relevant behaviors. • CAM list compares equivalent acts framed as serving mitigation or adaptation goals. • Both goal specifications may lower behavior willingness and response efficacy. • Reduced willingness was observed mainly in conservatives and homeowners. • Response efficacy mediated effects of goal-specification on willingness. • Private-sphere CAM behaviors were preferred over public-sphere behaviors.

Journal of Environmental PsychologyVol. 110
Pennsylvania State University (US), Technion – Israel Institute of Technology (IL)
Climate action
Openalex Percentile: Top 77%
Climate Change Communication and Perception
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.