A recent study published in Nature Sustainability suggests that climate policies aimed at promoting sustainable lifestyles may inadvertently weaken public support for environmental initiatives. The research, led by Katrin Schmelz, a postdoctoral fellow at the Santa Fe Institute, reveals that policies such as urban car bans could undermine individuals’ green values, potentially hindering broader environmental efforts.
Schmelz, a behavioral economist and psychologist, collaborated with SFI Professor Sam Bowles to survey over 3,000 Germans. The study compared responses to climate policies with those related to COVID-19 measures, uncovering surprising insights into public reactions. The findings indicate that mandates intended to encourage carbon-neutral behaviors might provoke negative responses, even among environmentally conscious citizens.
Understanding the Crowding-Out Effect
The research highlights a psychological phenomenon known as the “crowding-out effect,” where external controls diminish intrinsic motivations. According to Schmelz, “Policies don’t just spur a target behavior. We find that they can change people’s underlying values: leading to unintended negative effects, but also possibly cultivating green values.”
Bowles further explains, “A person’s aversion to control ‘crowds out’ their pre-existing motivation to follow a green lifestyle — for example, riding their bike, walking, and taking public transportation, or being more mindful when heating or cooling their home.”
“These crowding-out effects are big enough that policymakers should worry,” says Bowles.
Comparative Reactions to Climate and COVID-19 Mandates
One of the study’s most striking revelations is the stronger negative response to climate mandates compared to COVID-19 restrictions. Bowles notes, “We saw incredible hostility in the U.S. and other countries towards controls during the COVID-19 pandemic, hindering the implementation of much-needed public policies. It looks like the climate case could be much worse.”
The study suggests that while the technological solutions for a low-carbon lifestyle are nearly in place, the social and behavioral sciences lag in developing effective and politically viable climate policies.
Designing Effective Climate Policies
In April, policy experts and researchers gathered at the Santa Fe Institute to discuss the study’s preliminary findings and explore strategies for designing policies that nurture green values. The discussions emphasized the importance of creating mandates that are perceived as effective, non-intrusive, and respectful of personal freedoms.
“We found three conditions that minimize opposition to mandates, and may even cultivate, rather than crowd out, green values,” says Schmelz. “People are more open to policies that they think are effective (in reducing CO2 emissions), and that they don’t perceive as privacy-intrusive.”
Schmelz highlights the importance of providing viable alternatives, such as Germany’s extensive train network, which reduces resistance to short-haul flight limitations. This contrasts with the U.S., where such alternatives may not be as readily available.
Looking Forward: Implications and Next Steps
The study’s insights offer a roadmap for policymakers aiming to balance the necessity of climate action with public acceptance. By understanding the psychological impacts of mandates and designing policies that align with public values, there is potential to foster a more supportive environment for sustainable practices.
As the world grapples with the urgent need for climate action, this research underscores the importance of integrating social and behavioral insights into policy design. The findings encourage a reevaluation of how mandates are structured, aiming to cultivate green values rather than inadvertently eroding them.
For those interested in exploring the full details of this study, the paper titled “An empirically based dynamic approach to sustainable climate policy design” is available in the December 30 issue of Nature Sustainability (DOI: 10.1038/s41893-025-01715-5).
