ABSTRACT Why do many individuals remain in climate-vulnerable areas despite escalating environmental hazards and, for some households, financially feasible relocation options? This study examines mobility decision-making among residents of two climate-risk-prone areas in Bangladesh. It develops a three-stage framework – appraisal & awareness, aspiration & intention, and action – to examine how cognitive and emotional considerations relate to im(mobility) preferences. The paper contributes to behavioural climate science by examining whether mechanisms usually studied in lower-stakes settings – selective information avoidance, sunk-cost sensitivity, time preferences, risk tolerance, and self-efficacy – are observable in consequential mobility decisions under climate risk. It also qualifies place-attachment accounts of immobility by asking whether attachment to place is linked not only to valued relationships and identities, but also to how people process uncomfortable risk information and evaluate prior investments. Study 1 (N = 247) used conflicting but factually correct satellite-based information: one video highlighted sea-level-rise risks such as erosion and migration pressure, while another highlighted geomorphic resilience such as land accretion and in-situ adaptation potential. Approximately 40% of respondents recommended ignoring one of the two evidence-based messages, consistent with selective information avoidance. In Study 2 (N = 385), about one-third referred to past investments in homes and land when evaluating relocation, consistent with sensitivity to sunk costs. Both tendencies appear more pronounced among individuals with strong emotional attachment to place. Across studies, stronger place attachment is associated with shorter time horizons and lower confidence in being able to adapt locally. Groups with different stay-or-move profiles also differ in willingness to take risks, including among households that appear able to afford relocation. The evidence is correlational, but it suggests that immobility cannot be understood through financial constraints, information deficits, or place attachment alone. Place-based ties may interact with behavioural frictions that shape risk appraisal, perceived feasibility, and the translation of intentions into action. Long-term adaptation support may therefore need to address not only resources and information, but also the cognitive and emotional processes through which people evaluate staying, moving, and adapting.

ABSTRACT Paris pledges have yet to translate into effective climate policy as global warming approaches 1.5°C. A major political obstacle to the green transition is the ‘job-killing’ argument, which persists due to public concerns about job losses and the inevitable decline of some sectors. To examine how this challenge varies across sectors, this paper analyses the emission intensity of employment (CO2eq/job), complementing the traditional indicator – emissions per value added. Using final goods-based accounting, we estimate the domestic emissions and employment in each sector as well as in their supply chains. This reveals the need for policies that balance emission reductions with job losses not just in targeted sectors but throughout the economy. Results show sectors vary widely in job generation and emission intensity of jobs, implying distinct policy challenges. In response, we propose a sector-specific policy framework with four strategies: Protect & proceed; Keep & decarbonize; Decarbonize or decline; and Let live. These strategies combine three kinds of climate policy to match sector characteristics: carbon pricing, green industrial policy, and just transition measures. By addressing decarbonization and employment in a balanced way, these strategies can improve public acceptability and enhance the political feasibility of climate action.