Moral reasoning and climate change mitigation: The deontological reaction toward the market-based approach

Abstract

The research investigated the relation between the individual's deontological stance about environment and the attitude toward a market-based approach to climate change mitigation. We introduced people to the cap-and-trade program which is expected both to reduce the environmental risk and maximize economic benefits. Study 1 showed that the stronger the deontological mandate people held toward nature, the more likely they were to refuse the cap-and-trade mitigation program regardless of its effectiveness. In Study 2 and in Study 3, a similar win–win scenario was adopted to explore whether deontology and consequentialism consist of mutually exclusive orientations. Our results revealed that the deontological approach per se did not preclude the use of the cost–benefit analysis and that consequentialism moderated the relationship between deontology and the attitude toward the cap-and-trade program. Taken together, our findings have relevant practical implications for environmental politics and contribute to theoretical insights into moral reasoning.