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

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.