VANCOUVER, BC – A groundbreaking study conducted by researchers at the UBC Sauder School of Business has found that political ideology plays a crucial role in shaping how people assess the environmental impact of their actions and products. The findings, published on May 21, 2026, offer insights into why certain climate-friendly behaviors remain contentious in Canada and the United States.
The research, co-authored by UBC Sauder Professor Dr. Kate White, alongside Dr. Aylin Cakanlar of the Stockholm School of Economics and Dr. Remi Trudel of Boston University, involved seven studies examining how individuals of different political leanings evaluate the environmental impact of their own behaviors. The paper, titled "The politics of impact: How political ideology shapes perceptions of the environmental impact of individual actions," highlights significant discrepancies.
Key takeaways from the study reveal that individuals with conservative political views tend to underestimate the environmental impact of sustainable behaviors such as recycling, reducing food waste, cutting back on meat consumption, and avoiding transatlantic flights. Conversely, those with liberal views sometimes overestimate the positive impact of their own actions.
Dr. White noted, "Especially for the more meaningful, higher impact actions, conservatives tended to underestimate their impact, which ultimately led them to show lower sustainable intentions and behaviors." While liberals generally exhibited a more accurate understanding, they occasionally overstated the efficacy of smaller, more symbolic actions.
Another related study from the UBC Sauder School of Business, involving Associate Professors Yann Cornil and David Hardisty, and Associate Professor Yitong Wang, further explored this phenomenon with over 3,000 U.S. participants. This research found that when products are associated with a 'liberal' cause, conservative participants perceived them as having a lower environmental impact. For instance, an identical energy-efficient lightbulb labeled with a message about carbon emission reduction (a liberal-coded value) was deemed less effective by conservatives compared to liberals.
Dr. David Hardisty explained that "social identity" and "motivated reasoning" are key drivers, as people often "dismiss or downplay information that threatens their identity or worldviews." This suggests that perceptions of environmental benefit are filtered through a political lens, not solely based on factual information.
The researchers emphasize that these insights are vital for businesses, policymakers, and non-profits aiming to broaden the adoption of sustainable behaviors. To effectively encourage conservatives to engage in greener practices, the studies suggest reframing messaging to focus on neutral or 'conservative-aligned' benefits, such as economic savings, personal health, family well-being, self-sufficiency, or national security, rather than politically charged environmental rhetoric. Additionally, clearly communicating the tangible benefits and demonstrating that sustainable actions are common within their social circles could increase engagement.