Pathways to conventional and radical climate action: The role of temporal orientation, environmental cognitive alternatives, and eco-anxiety

Abstract

Motivating climate action is challenging because the worst consequences of climate change are in the future, triggering a conflict between short- and long-term interests. Prior research suggests that orienting to the future facilitates pro-environmental behavior whereas orientation to the present inhibits it; however, we consider whether different temporal orientations simply make some kinds of climate action more attractive than others. The present study tests this using structural equation modeling with two Australian samples. In a first exploratory model (N = 967), followed by a direct, pre-registered replication (N = 953), we examine how two facets of temporal orientation – consideration of future and immediate consequences – predict intentions to engage in three kinds of climate action at individual and collective levels: conventional private-sphere, conventional public-sphere, and radical public-sphere climate action. Consistent with past research, higher consideration of future consequences and lower consideration of immediate consequences are associated with intentions to take conventional action directly and indirectly via eco-anxiety and/or access to environmental cognitive alternatives. In contrast, consideration of future and immediate consequences are only indirectly related to intentions to take radical action.