Malleable Preferences and the Normative Desirability of Demand‐Side Solutions to Climate Change

ABSTRACT Demand‐side solutions to climate change have been ascribed significant mitigation potential, but their uptake remains limited, often due to normative concerns about individual welfare when conceptualized as preference satisfaction. Here, we address the normative desirability of demand‐side mitigation by reviewing work that raises questions about key assumptions underlying standard welfare analysis and their normative implications. Departing from the assumption that observed behavior reliably reflects individuals' underlying fixed preferences and their hedonic well‐being, we show how preferences are context‐sensitive, constructed, and endogenous to environments. Drawing on novel decision‐making frameworks better equipped for sustainable transformation, we argue that conceptualizing preference as malleable is crucial for the broader adoption of demand‐side solutions and their embedding into sustainable transformation efforts. This article is categorized under: Climate Economics > Economics of Mitigation Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Behavior Change and Responses Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change
Published
2026-06-29
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.70079
Primary Topic
Climate Change Policy and Economics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Malleable Preferences and the Normative Desirability of Demand‐Side Solutions to Climate Change

Sebastian Berger, Felix Creutzig
Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate Change
Climate Change Policy and Economics
article

Malleable Preferences and the Normative Desirability of Demand‐Side Solutions to Climate Change

Sebastian Berger, Felix Creutzig
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Demand‐side solutions to climate change have been ascribed significant mitigation potential, but their uptake remains limited, often due to normative concerns about individual welfare when conceptualized as preference satisfaction. Here, we address the normative desirability of demand‐side mitigation by reviewing work that raises questions about key assumptions underlying standard welfare analysis and their normative implications. Departing from the assumption that observed behavior reliably reflects individuals' underlying fixed preferences and their hedonic well‐being, we show how preferences are context‐sensitive, constructed, and endogenous to environments. Drawing on novel decision‐making frameworks better equipped for sustainable transformation, we argue that conceptualizing preference as malleable is crucial for the broader adoption of demand‐side solutions and their embedding into sustainable transformation efforts. This article is categorized under: Climate Economics > Economics of Mitigation Perceptions, Behavior, and Communication of Climate Change > Behavior Change and Responses Climate and Development > Sustainability and Human Well‐Being

Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate ChangeVol. 17(4)
University of Bern (CH), Bern University of Applied Sciences (CH), Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (DE)
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Climate Change Policy and Economics
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.