IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/climat/v177y2024i3d10.1007_s10584-024-03695-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Morality meets menu: investigating the impact of moral appeals on vegetarianism through a conjoint survey experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Nela Mrchkovska

    (Vienna University of Economics and Business)

  • Nives Dolšak

    (University of Washington Seattle)

  • Aseem Prakash

    (University of Washington)

Abstract

Can moral appeals motivate individuals to choose less carbon-intensive diets? In a survey-embedded forced-choice conjoint experiment involving 1520 US respondents, we asked participants to compare two menus across six dimensions: (1) burger/sandwich patty type and its corresponding carbon footprint value, (2) calories, (3) protein, (4) price, (5) ingredient origin, and (6) farming method. Within each menu, the values for these dimensions varied randomly. Further, respondents were randomly assigned to three frames: a reference frame that highlighted the scientific rationale for pro-climate action, and treatment frames with a moral-secular and a moral-religious framing of pro-climate action. We found that moral appeals did not influence individuals to make low-carbon food choices. Across the entire sample, respondents tended to favor non-vegetarian options with higher carbon footprints. Those who prioritized taste were less inclined to choose the vegetarian menu. However, some subgroups did show a preference for the vegetarian menu, including women, those with pro-climate attitudes and prior exposure to a vegetarian diet, and those who considered the health impact of their food choices. In conclusion, it appears that moral appeals are unlikely to drive significant changes in individual food choices toward a more climate-friendly food system. Instead, dietary preferences are primarily shaped by individuals’ pre-existing climate attitudes and demographics.

Suggested Citation

  • Nela Mrchkovska & Nives Dolšak & Aseem Prakash, 2024. "Morality meets menu: investigating the impact of moral appeals on vegetarianism through a conjoint survey experiment," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 1-19, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:177:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-024-03695-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10584-024-03695-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10584-024-03695-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10584-024-03695-5?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Harden, Jeffrey J. & Sokhey, Anand E. & Runge, Katherine L., 2019. "Accounting for Noncompliance in Survey Experiments," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 6(3), pages 199-202, December.
    2. Bryngelsson, David & Wirsenius, Stefan & Hedenus, Fredrik & Sonesson, Ulf, 2016. "How can the EU climate targets be met? A combined analysis of technological and demand-side changes in food and agriculture," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 152-164.
    3. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara B. & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring Subgroup Preferences in Conjoint Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 207-221, April.
    4. Olabi, A.G. & Abdelkareem, Mohammad Ali, 2022. "Renewable energy and climate change," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 158(C).
    5. Franco, Annie & Malhotra, Neil & Simonovits, Gabor & Zigerell, L. J., 2017. "Developing Standards for Post-Hoc Weighting in Population-Based Survey Experiments," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 161-172, July.
    6. Sriya Iyer, 2016. "The New Economics of Religion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 54(2), pages 395-441, June.
    7. Blair Kidwell & Adam Farmer & David M. Hardesty, 2013. "Getting Liberals and Conservatives to Go Green: Political Ideology and Congruent Appeals," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 40(2), pages 350-367.
    8. Jonathon P. Schuldt & Adam R. Pearson & Rainer Romero-Canyas & Dylan Larson-Konar, 2017. "Brief exposure to Pope Francis heightens moral beliefs about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 141(2), pages 167-177, March.
    9. Poortinga, Wouter & Spence, Alexa & Demski, Christina & Pidgeon, Nick F., 2012. "Individual-motivational factors in the acceptability of demand-side and supply-side measures to reduce carbon emissions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 812-819.
    10. Quirin Schiermeier, 2019. "Eat less meat: UN climate-change report calls for change to human diet," Nature, Nature, vol. 572(7769), pages 291-292, August.
    11. Henrik Saxe & Thomas Larsen & Lisbeth Mogensen, 2013. "The global warming potential of two healthy Nordic diets compared with the average Danish diet," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 116(2), pages 249-262, January.
    12. Sharma, Swati & Ang, James B. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2021. "Religiosity and climate change policies," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    13. Klaudia Modlinska & Dominika Adamczyk & Dominika Maison & Wojciech Pisula, 2020. "Gender Differences in Attitudes to Vegans/Vegetarians and Their Food Preferences, and Their Implications for Promoting Sustainable Dietary Patterns–A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(16), pages 1-17, August.
    14. David McCollum & Volker Krey & Peter Kolp & Yu Nagai & Keywan Riahi, 2014. "Transport electrification: A key element for energy system transformation and climate stabilization," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 651-664, April.
    15. Adam Corner & Ezra Markowitz & Nick Pidgeon, 2014. "Public engagement with climate change: the role of human values," Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 411-422, May.
    16. Dan Kahan, 2010. "Fixing the communications failure," Nature, Nature, vol. 463(7279), pages 296-297, January.
    17. Hobolt, Sara B. & Leeper, Thomas J. & Tilley, James, 2021. "Divided by the Vote: Affective Polarization in the Wake of the Brexit Referendum," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(4), pages 1476-1493, October.
    18. Janis L Dickinson & Poppy McLeod & Robert Bloomfield & Shorna Allred, 2016. "Which Moral Foundations Predict Willingness to Make Lifestyle Changes to Avert Climate Change in the USA?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-11, October.
    19. Gadema, Zaina & Oglethorpe, David, 2011. "The use and usefulness of carbon labelling food: A policy perspective from a survey of UK supermarket shoppers," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 815-822.
    20. Hainmueller, Jens & Hopkins, Daniel J. & Yamamoto, Teppei, 2014. "Causal Inference in Conjoint Analysis: Understanding Multidimensional Choices via Stated Preference Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 22(1), pages 1-30, January.
    21. Jonathon P. Schuldt & Adam R. Pearson & Rainer Romero-Canyas & Dylan Larson-Konar, 2017. "Erratum to: Brief exposure to Pope Francis heightens moral beliefs about climate change," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 141(2), pages 179-179, March.
    22. Leeper, Thomas J. & Hobolt, Sara & Tilley, James, 2020. "Measuring subgroup preferences in conjoint experiments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 100944, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    23. Marco Springmann & Michael Clark & Daniel Mason-D’Croz & Keith Wiebe & Benjamin Leon Bodirsky & Luis Lassaletta & Wim Vries & Sonja J. Vermeulen & Mario Herrero & Kimberly M. Carlson & Malin Jonell & , 2018. "Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits," Nature, Nature, vol. 562(7728), pages 519-525, October.
    24. Alexander W. Severson & Eric A. Coleman, 2015. "Moral Frames and Climate Change Policy Attitudes," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 96(5), pages 1277-1290, November.
    25. Kristian S. Nielsen & Cameron Brick & Wilhelm Hofmann & Tina Joanes & Florian Lange & Wencke Gwozdz, 2022. "The motivation–impact gap in pro-environmental clothing consumption," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 5(8), pages 665-668, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    2. Tukiainen, Janne & Blesse, Sebastian & Bohne, Albrecht & Giuffrida, Leonardo M. & Jääskeläinen, Jan & Luukinen, Ari & Sieppi, Antti, 2024. "What are the priorities of bureaucrats? Evidence from conjoint experiments with procurement officials," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    3. Chu, Haoran & Liu, Sixiao, 2021. "Light at the end of the tunnel: Influence of vaccine availability and vaccination intention on people’s consideration of the COVID-19 vaccine," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    4. Yuko KASUYA & Hirofumi MIWA & Yoshikuni ONO, 2022. "Why are There More Women in the Upper House?," Discussion papers 22094, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    5. Tellez,Juan Fernando & Balcells,Laia, 2022. "Social Cohesion, Economic Security, and Forced Displacement in the Long-Run : Evidence from Rural Colombia," Policy Research Working Paper Series 10019, The World Bank.
    6. Christensen, Henrik Serup, 2020. "How design features affect evaluations of participatory platforms," SocArXiv 4ubwh, Center for Open Science.
    7. Raman, Shyam & Kriner, Douglas & Ziebarth, Nicolas & Simon, Kosali & Kreps, Sarah, 2022. "COVID-19 booster uptake among US adults: Assessing the impact of vaccine attributes, incentives, and context in a choice-based experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    8. Brian Burgoon & Theresa Kuhn & Francesco Nicoli & Frank Vandenbroucke, 2022. "Unemployment risk-sharing in the EU: How policy design influences citizen support for European unemployment policy," European Union Politics, , vol. 23(2), pages 282-308, June.
    9. Pieter Vanhuysse & Michael Jankowski & Markus Tepe, 2021. "Vaccine alliance building blocks: a conjoint experiment on popular support for international COVID-19 cooperation formats," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(3), pages 493-506, September.
    10. Michael J. Frith, 2021. "Analysing conjoint experiments in Stata: the conjoint command," London Stata Conference 2021 14, Stata Users Group.
    11. Lim, Sijeong & Dolsak, Nives & Prakash, Aseem & Tanaka, Seiki, 2022. "Distributional concerns and public opinion: EV subsidies in the U.S. and Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 164(C).
    12. Faradj Koliev & Karin Bäckstrand, 2025. "Citizen preferences for climate policy implementation: the role of multistakeholder partnerships," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 41-59, March.
    13. Jialing Huang & Janet Z. Yang & Haoran Chu, 2022. "Framing Climate Change Impacts as Moral Violations: The Pathway of Perceived Message Credibility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-19, April.
    14. Akira IGARASHI & Hirofumi MIWA & Yoshikuni ONO, 2022. "How Do Racial Cues Affect Attitudes toward Immigrants in a Racially Homogeneous Country? Evidence from a survey experiment in Japan," Discussion papers 22091, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    15. Henrik S Christensen & Marco S La Rosa & Kimmo Grönlund, 2020. "How candidate characteristics affect favorability in European Parliament elections: Evidence from a conjoint experiment in Finland," European Union Politics, , vol. 21(3), pages 519-540, September.
    16. Liam F. Beiser-McGrath & Thomas Bernauer & Jaehyun Song & Azusa Uji, 2021. "Understanding public support for domestic contributions to global collective goods," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 166(3), pages 1-20, June.
    17. Knotz, Carlo Michael & Gandenberger, Mia Katharina & Fossati, Flavia & Bonoli, Giuliano, 2021. "Public attitudes toward pandemic triage: Evidence from conjoint survey experiments in Switzerland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    18. Janne Tukiainen & Ilona Lahdelma & Mika Maliranta & Risto Rönkkö & Juho Saari, 2024. "The TikTok factor: Young voters and the support for the populist right," Working Papers 351, Työn ja talouden tutkimus LABORE, The Labour Institute for Economic Research LABORE.
    19. Barceló, Joan & Sheen, Greg Chih-Hsin & Tung, Hans H. & Wu, Wen-Chin, 2022. "Vaccine nationalism among the public: A cross-country experimental evidence of own-country bias towards COVID-19 vaccination," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 310(C).
    20. Becker, Malte & Krüger, Finja & Heidland, Tobias, 2022. "Country, culture or competition: What drives attitudes towards immigrants in Sub-Saharan Africa?," Kiel Working Papers 2224, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:climat:v:177:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s10584-024-03695-5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.