Anderson B, Böhmelt T, Ward H (2017) Public opinion and environmental policy output: a cross-national analysis of energy policies in Europe. Environ Res Lett 12:114011

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Armingeon K, Bürgisser R (2021) Trade-offs between redistribution and environmental protection: the role of information, ideology, and self-interest. J Eur Public Policy 28:489–509

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Atzmüller C, Steiner PM (2010) Experimental vignette studies in survey research. Methodology 6:128–138

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Auspurg K, Hinz T (2015) Factorial survey experiments. Quantitative applications in the social sciences, vol 175. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA

Auspurg K, Hinz T, Liebig S, Sauer C (2015) The factorial survey as a method for measuring sensitive issues. In: Engel U (ed) Improving survey methods: lessons from recent research. European Association of Methodology series. Routledge, New York

Auspurg K, Schmiedeberg C, Bozoyan C, Diekmann A, Thiel F, Best H (2023) Umstieg auf öffentliche Verkehrsmittel und finanzielle Entlastung durch das 9-Euro-Ticket. K Z Soziol Sozialpsychol 75:341–363

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Bellani L, Bledow N, Busemeyer MR, Schwerdt G (2021) When everyone thinks they’re middle-class: (mis-) perceptions of inequality and why they matter for social policy. Policy Papers/Cluster of Excellence ‘The Politics of Inequality’ No. 06

Bergquist M, Nilsson A, Harring N, Jagers SC (2022) Meta-analyses of fifteen determinants of public opinion about climate change taxes and laws. Nat Clim Change 12:235–240

Article 
ADS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Bergquist M, Thiel M, Goldberg MH, van der Linden S (2023) Field interventions for climate change mitigation behaviors: a second-order meta-analysis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 120:e2214851120

Article 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar
 

Bernard R, Tzamourani P, Weber M (2022) Climate change and individual behavior. Discussion Paper Deutsche Bundesbank. No 01/2022

Bernauer T, McGrath LF (2016) Simple reframing unlikely to boost public support for climate policy. Nat Clim Change 6:680–683

Article 
ADS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Bouman T, Verschoor M, Albers CJ, Böhm G, Fisher SD, Poortinga W, Whitmarsh L, Steg L (2020) When worry about climate change leads to climate action: how values, worry and personal responsibility relate to various climate actions. Glob Environ Change 62:102061

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Bradley GL, Babutsidze Z, Chai A, Reser JP (2020) The role of climate change risk perception, response efficacy, and psychological adaptation in pro-environmental behavior: a two nation study. J Environ Psychol 68:101410

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Bruderer Enzler H, Diekmann A, Liebe U (2019) Do environmental concern and future orientation predict metered household electricity use? J Environ Psychol 62:22–29

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Büchs M, Bahaj AS, Blunden L, Bourikas L, Falkingham J, James P, Kamanda M, Wu Y (2018) Promoting low carbon behaviours through personalised information? Long-term evaluation of a carbon calculator interview. Energy Policy 120:284–293

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Climate Watch (2023) Historical GHG emissions. https://www.climatewatchdata.org/ghg-emissions. Accessed 7 Sept 2023

Cook J et al. (2016) Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environ Res Lett 11:48002

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Dechezleprêtre A, Fabre A, Kruse T, Planterose B, Sanchez Chico A, Stantcheva S (2022) Fighting climate change: international attitudes toward climate policies. OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1714

Diekmann A, Preisendörfer P (2003) Green and greenback. Ration Soc 15:441–472

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Dietz T, Gardner GT, Gilligan J, Stern PC, Vandenbergh MP (2009) Household actions can provide a behavioral wedge to rapidly reduce US carbon emissions. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 106:18452–18456

Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 

Google Scholar
 

Doherty KL, Webler TN (2016) Social norms and efficacy beliefs drive the Alarmed segment’s public-sphere climate actions. Nat Clim Change 6:879–884

Article 
ADS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Doran R, Böhm G, Pfister H-R, Steentjes K, Pidgeon N (2019) Consequence evaluations and moral concerns about climate change: insights from nationally representative surveys across four European countries. J Risk Res 22:610–626

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Fesenfeld LP, Sun Y, Wicki M, Bernauer T (2021) The role and limits of strategic framing for promoting sustainable consumption and policy. Glob Environ Change 68:102266

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Franzen A, Meyer R (2004) Klimawandel des Umweltbewusstseins?:/Climate change in environmental attitudes? Z Soziol 33:119–137

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Gadenne D, Sharma B, Kerr D, Smith T (2011) The influence of consumers’ environmental beliefs and attitudes on energy saving behaviours. Energy Policy 39:7684–7694

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Gampfer R (2014) Do individuals care about fairness in burden sharing for climate change mitigation? Evidence from a lab experiment. Clim Change 124:65–77

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Gardiner SM (2006) A perfect moral storm: climate change, intergenerational ethics and the problem of moral corruption. Environ Values 15:397–413

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Giugni M, Grasso M (eds) (2021) Youth and politics in times of increasing inequalities. Springer International Publishing, Cham

Gough I (2013) Carbon mitigation policies, distributional dilemmas and social policies. J Soc Pol 42:191–213

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Gravert C, Shreedhar G (2022) Effective carbon taxes need green nudges. Nat Clim Change 12:1073–1074

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Graves C, Roelich K (2021) Psychological barriers to pro-environmental behaviour change: a review of meat consumption behaviours. Sustainability 13:11582

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Greenwood P (2019) Letter to the Editor on: “The climate mitigation gap: education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions” by Wynes and Nicholas, 2017. Ann Geogr Stud 2:29–31

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Hallegatte S, Rozenberg J (2017) Climate change through a poverty lens. Nat Clim Change 7:250–256

Article 
ADS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Hanss D, Böhm G, Doran R, Homburg A (2016) Sustainable consumption of groceries: the importance of believing that one can contribute to sustainable development. Sust Dev 24:357–370

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Harrington LJ, Frame DJ, Fischer EM, Hawkins E, Joshi M, Jones CD (2016) Poorest countries experience earlier anthropogenic emergence of daily temperature extremes. Environ Res Lett 11:55007

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Hertwich EG, Peters GP (2009) Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. Environ Sci Technol 43:6414–6420

Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Homburg A, Stolberg A (2006) Explaining pro-environmental behavior with a cognitive theory of stress. J Environ Psychol 26:1–14

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Hornsey MJ, Harris EA, Bain PG, Fielding KS (2016) Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nat Clim Change 6:622–626

Article 
ADS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Huang H (2016) Media use, environmental beliefs, self-efficacy, and pro-environmental behavior. J Bus Res 69:2206–2212

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Huang Y, Warnier M (2019) Bridging the attitude-behaviour gap in household energy consumption. IEEE: 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISGTEurope.2019.8905660

Ivanova D, Barrett J, Wiedenhofer D, Macura B, Callaghan M, Creutzig F (2020) Quantifying the potential for climate change mitigation of consumption options. Environ Res Lett 15:93001

Article 
CAS 

Google Scholar
 

Jacobs K, Petersen L, Hörisch J, Battenfeld D (2018) Green thinking but thoughtless buying? An empirical extension of the value-attitude-behaviour hierarchy in sustainable clothing. J Clean Prod 203:1155–1169

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Jenny MA, Betsch C (2022) Large-scale behavioural data are key to climate policy. Nat Hum Behav 6:1444–1447

Article 
PubMed 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Jorgenson AK, Clark B (2011) Societies consuming nature: a panel study of the ecological footprints of nations, 1960–2003. Soc Sci Res 40:226–244

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Keuschnigg M, Kratz F (2017) Thou Shalt recycle: how social norms of environmental protection narrow the scope of the low-cost hypothesis. Environ Behav 50:1059–1091

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Klar S, Leeper T, Robison J (2020) Studying identities with experiments: weighing the risk of posttreatment bias against priming effects. J Exp Polit Sci 7:56–60

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Knill C (2003) Europäische Umweltpolitik (Governance Ser v.4). VS Verlag fur Sozialwissenschaften GmbH, Wiesbaden

Lacroix K (2018) Comparing the relative mitigation potential of individual pro-environmental behaviors. J Clean Prod 195:1398–1407

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Lee Y, Kim S, Kim M, Choi J (2014) Antecedents and interrelationships of three types of pro-environmental behavior. J Bus Res 67:2097–2105

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Liebe U, Gewinner J, Diekmann A (2021) Large and persistent effects of green energy defaults in the household and business sectors. Nat Hum Behav 5:576–585

Maestre-Andrés S, Drews S, van den Bergh J (2019) Perceived fairness and public acceptability of carbon pricing: a review of the literature. Clim Policy 19:1186–1204

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Maki A, Carrico AR, Raimi KT, Truelove HB, Araujo B, Yeung KL (2019) Meta-analysis of pro-environmental behaviour spillover. Nat Sustain 2:307–315

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Mayerl J, Best H (2019) Attitudes and behavioral intentions to protect the environment: How consistent is the structure of environmental concern in cross-national comparison? Int J Sociol 49:27–52

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Moran D, Wood R, Hertwich E, Mattson K, Rodriguez JFD, Schanes K, Barrett J (2018) Quantifying the potential for consumer-oriented policy to reduce European and foreign carbon emissions. Clim Policy 20:S28–S38

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Nielsen KS, Cologna V, Lange F, Brick C, Stern P (2021) The case for impact-focused environmental psychology. J Environ Psychol 74:101559

Nyborg K et al. (2016) Social norms as solutions. Science (New York, NY) 354:42–43

Article 
ADS 
CAS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

OECD (2013) Effective carbon prices. OECD Publishing, Paris

Ogunbode CA (2022) Climate justice is social justice in the Global South. Nat Hum Behav 6:1443

Article 
PubMed 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Otto IM et al. (2020) Social tipping dynamics for stabilizing Earth’s climate by 2050. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 117:2354–2365

Article 
ADS 
CAS 
PubMed 
PubMed Central 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Oxfam (2020) Confronting carbon inequality: putting climate justice at the heart of the COVID-19 recovery. Oxfam

Pearson AR, Tsai CG, Clayton S (2021) Ethics, morality, and the psychology of climate justice. Curr Opin Psychol 42:36–42

Article 
PubMed 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Pickering GJ, Schoen K, Botta M, Fazio X (2020) Exploration of youth knowledge and perceptions of individual-level climate mitigation action. Environ Res Lett 15:104080

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Plehwe D (2022) Reluctant transformers or reconsidering opposition to climate change mitigation? German think tanks between environmentalism and neoliberalism. Globalizations 20(8):1–19

Povitkina M, Carlsson Jagers S, Matti S, Martinsson J (2021) Why are carbon taxes unfair? Disentangling public perceptions of fairness. Glob Environ Change 70:102356

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Quitzow L, Canzler W, Grundmann P, Leibenath M, Moss T, Rave T (2016) The German Energiewende —what’s happening? Introducing the special issue. Util Policy 41:163–171

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Rees JH, Klug S, Bamberg S (2015) Guilty conscience: motivating pro-environmental behavior by inducing negative moral emotions. Clim Change 130:439–452

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Rockström J, Gaffney O, Rogelj J, Meinshausen M, Nakicenovic N, Schellnhuber HJ (2017) A roadmap for rapid decarbonization. Science (New York, NY) 355:1269–1271

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Rüttenauer T (2023) More talk, no action? The link between exposure to extreme weather events, climate change belief and pro-environmental behaviour. Eur Soc 26(4):1–25

Schaffer LM, Oehl B, Bernauer T (2022) Are policymakers responsive to public demand in climate politics? J Pub Pol 42:136–164

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Sheagley G, Clifford S (2023) No evidence that measuring moderators alters treatment effects. Am J Political Sci 69(1):49–63

Shi J, Visschers VHM, Siegrist M, Arvai J (2016) Knowledge as a driver of public perceptions about climate change reassessed. Nat Clim Change 6:759–762

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar
 

Steg L, Vlek C (2009) Encouraging pro-environmental behaviour: an integrative review and research agenda. J Environ Psychol 29:309–317

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Taconet N, Méjean A, Guivarch C (2020) Influence of climate change impacts and mitigation costs on inequality between countries. Clim Change 160:15–34

Article 
ADS 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Thiel F (2020) Die low-cost-hypothese. Ein empirischer Test am Beispiel der Befürwortung einer City-Maut. K Z Soziol Sozialpsychol 72:429–453

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Tjernström E, Tietenberg T (2008) Do differences in attitudes explain differences in national climate change policies? Ecol Econ 65:315–324

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Tobler C, Visschers VH, Siegrist M (2012) Addressing climate change: Determinants of consumers’ willingness to act and to support policy measures. J Environ Psychol 32:197–207

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

Tschötschel R, Schuck A, Schwinges A, Wonneberger A (2021) Climate change policy support, intended behaviour change, and their drivers largely unaffected by consensus messages in Germany. J Environ Psychol 76:101655

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Tschötschel R, Schuck A, Wonneberger A (2020) Patterns of controversy and consensus in German, Canadian, and US online news on climate change. Glob Environ Change 60:101957

Article 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

van de Ven D-J, González-Eguino M, Arto I (2018) The potential of behavioural change for climate change mitigation: a case study for the European Union. Mitig Adapt Strateg Glob Change 23:853–886

Article 

Google Scholar
 

van Valkengoed AM, Abrahamse W, Steg L (2022) To select effective interventions for pro-environmental behaviour change, we need to consider determinants of behaviour. Nat Hum Behav 6:1482–1492

Article 
PubMed 
MATH 

Google Scholar
 

van Zomeren M, Spears R, Leach CW (2010) Experimental evidence for a dual pathway model analysis of coping with the climate crisis. J Environ Psychol 30:339–346

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Whitmarsh L, Poortinga W, Capstick S (2021) Behaviour change to address climate change. Curr Opin Psychol 42:76–81

Article 
PubMed 

Google Scholar
 

Wynes S, Nicholas KA (2017) The climate mitigation gap: education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions. Environ Res Lett 12:74024

Article 

Google Scholar
 

Wynes S, Nicholas KA, Zhao J, Donner SD (2018) Measuring what works: quantifying greenhouse gas emission reductions of behavioural interventions to reduce driving, meat consumption, and household energy use. Environ Res Lett 13:113002

Article 
ADS 

Google Scholar