Overcoming the Trade-Off Effect: Environmental or Economic Prioritization and the Propensity for Green Voting

Despite growing environmental awareness, many hesitate to act pro-environmentally. A reason for this is the perceived economic cost of a pro-environmental choice. Such trade-off between environmental and economic prioritization happens through two distinct channels: a pocketbook—sustainability versus personal finances—or a macro-level one—sustainability versus economic growth. Can this trade-off negative effect on pro-environmental behavior be overcome? Facing an electoral choice, when are voters still inclined to opt for a party championing environmental sustainability, even if they are unwilling to prioritize ecological concerns over economic ones? Using survey data representative of the Italian population, we adopt a Propensity for Green Voting measure to assess the likelihood of voting for an environmentally focused party. We find that serious concerns about natural disasters effectively mitigate the trade-off’s negative effect on Propensity for Green Voting (PGV), leading voters holding economic concerns to intend to cast a green vote nonetheless. The same applies to those living with children or having a left-leaning political orientation. However, children in households move the electorate toward a pro-environmental vote only for trade-off evaluations at the macro-level. In contrast, pocketbook evaluations do not hinder voting green for those with a left-leaning orientation.