The Morality-Effectiveness Disconnect of Pro-environmental Behaviors

Not all pro-environmental behaviors are created equal—some are vastly more effective at mitigating climate change than others. Do people judge the more effective behaviors as proportionally more moral? Five main and six supplemental studies (N = 9,247) across five countries reveal a robust morality-effectiveness disconnect: pro-environmental behaviors that rank better on objective climate-mitigation potential rank worse on individual moral judgments. Laypeople fail to predict this pattern, believing that a positive relationship exists. Further, labeling behaviors by climate impact category reduces the morality-effectiveness disconnect, and detailed impact information reverses the disconnect and increases policy endorsement for more effective behaviors over less effective behaviors. Our results generally suggest that the disconnect stems from effectiveness misperceptions that can be corrected with accurate information, and personal support that favors less effective behaviors. Thus, people's moral intuition for climate action appears miscalibrated: moral cognition can undermine the collective welfare such cognition should presumably promote.