Gender and Socioeconomic Influences on Ten Pro-Environmental Behavior Intentions: A German Comparative Study

This study examined different PEB intentions in the German population and investigated their association with sociodemographic characteristics. Intentions are among the strongest predictors of behavior [33,34,35]. We assumed SES and female gender to be positively associated with PEB intentions, and these hypotheses were partly supported by the data. For waste reduction, durability, room temperature, green electricity, energy saving, and using a bicycle, all hypotheses had to be rejected, as no group differences were found. However, as can be seen in Table 4, intentions to buy regional products were significantly higher in women with high SES than men with low SES. Intentions of not flying were significantly higher in women with high SES than in men with middle and high SES. Intentions to eat a vegetarian diet were significantly higher in women with low and middle SES than in men with middle and high SES.

As shown in Table 3, across all participants, the highest intentions were observed for waste reduction, regional products, durability, and energy saving. Interventions promoting these behaviors should focus on closing the intention–behavior gap [37] and might consider aspects of habits that can override intentions [61]. The lowest intentions were related to cycling and vegetarianism. To promote these PEBs, interventions should be intention building; for this, factors of the theory of planned behavior [33], as well as values and identities [62], should be implemented. Regardless of gender, a higher SES score went along with more flying and lower room temperature.

Regarding Hypothesis 1, that is, PEB intentions are higher in women, Figure 1 shows significant negative correlations for seven out of ten PEB intentions (waste reduction, regional products, energy saving, no flying, low laundry temperature, cycling, vegetarianism) with male gender. Therefore, we see the male gender as impeding PEB. This is in line with the current literature, e.g., [63,64] and could be explained with social role theory. Social role theory posits that people’s behavior conforms to their gender roles, as they are rewarded for conforming and penalized for deviating from these roles [65]. In a previous study, men who engaged in pro-environmental activities were described as being feminine and mocked for their behavior [66]; thus, it can be assumed that PEB is seen as female rather than male. Deviating from the perceived male role and behavior can lead to social consequences such as social distancing [65]. Hence, the association of PEB with the female gender might hinder men, as they fear social penalties when behaving pro-environmentally. Adding to this interpretation, it has been shown that identity has a high impact on pro-environmental intentions [62].

Another reason for a higher PEB engagement in women might be their higher levels of environmental concern [63], which might be connected to higher risk perception and thus motivate PEB change, in accordance with behavior change theory, which has been empirically proven numerous times, e.g., in [33,34,35]. An additional explanation, though less empirically proven, is social role theory. Following social role theory, it is possible that such concern might activate stereotypes of women being more caring [67] and thus lead to gendered perceptions of PEB. However, this hypothesis requires further research.

Moreover, previous research has investigated gender differences in PEB across the public and private spheres. Accordingly, findings that men engage more in PEB in the public space are rather heterogeneous and inconsistent, whereas the findings that women engage more in PEB in the private sphere are highly consistent [64]. As the PEB intentions of this article are completely in the private domain, our findings are in line with this general trend. For future research, the impact of gender and role perceptions and expectations on PEB in the population deserves more attention, for instance, across policy domains and social context, as women are also underrepresented in places of (political) power and thus have fewer opportunities to demonstrate PEB in these places [64].

Hypothesis 2, i.e., a higher SES being associated with higher PEB, could not be supported. On the contrary, a higher SES was associated with more flying. Flying can provide comfort to consumers, which may make it more appealing if they can afford it. Therefore, an ethical discourse and incentive must be created to compensate for this. Accordingly, environmentally friendly behavior must become “the easy behavior” and be made more appealing [68,69]. Conversely, a higher SES was associated with intentions to lower room temperature. The reason for this might be that participants with a higher SES have more opportunity to do so, because, in general, the GHG emissions of housing were found to be higher in households with a higher income (see Table 2; the only area in which higher income had lower GHG emissions was the food domain [70]). Moreover, higher income provides the opportunity to properly insulate houses to regulate room temperature. Since opportunity is a key component of behavior change theory, this also corresponds to previous research, e.g., [33,34,35].

Lastly, Hypothesis 3, that is, PEB intentions will be higher for women with high SES and lower for men with low SES, was supported for buying regional products and reducing the number of flights per year. Therefore, future PEB-related communication should address both groups differently: women with higher SES should receive support for behavioral implementation since they already report higher intentions, and men and low SES groups might benefit from tailored information to increase PEB intentions first. For vegetarianism, however, women of low and middle SES showed higher vegetarian intentions than men with middle and high SES. It seems that gender-based differences were not equalized by socioeconomic resources, highlighting the need for targeted interventions. This finding is complemented by another study showing that the proportion of vegetarians was highest among women of low SES, while it was lowest among men in this SES group [71]. This indicates that low SES may exacerbate gender-based differences in PEB as opposed to high SES. Nevertheless, looking at education as one aspect of SES showed that as the level of education increased, a higher proportion of both women and men usually ate a vegetarian diet [71]. Taken together, more research is needed to examine the mechanisms that connect different indicators of SES, gender roles, and PEBs in the population and to understand the higher proportion of PEBs, such as practicing a vegetarian diet, in women despite lower SES and how this could be applied to also reach men and support them in enacting dietary behavior change. The exploratory analyses showed that waste reduction, buying regional products, durability, and green electricity correlate with each other. These PEBs, therefore, might build a more general cluster of “conscious consumption”. In consumer psychology, conscious consumption decisions are differentiated from unconscious impulse purchases using either Wason and Evans’ dual process theory [72] or Bittmann’s contingency approach [73], according to which four main goals are relevant for purchasing decisions: (a) making an accurate decision, (b) effort avoidance, (c) good justifiability to oneself and others, and (d) avoiding negative emotions. However, we have not yet found empirical support for such clusters of pro-environmental consumption in the scientific literature.

Most of the PEB intentions in this study showed rather high levels (mean scores above 4 out of 5) except for cycling and vegetarianism. According to the low-cost hypothesis [74], perceived behavioral costs for these two PEBs might be higher than for other PEBs. Regarding cycling, these behavioral costs might mean less comfort in biking, loss of a car as a status symbol, and more dangerous travel due to unsafe or nonexistent bike lanes. Moreover, as bikes are an individual mode of traveling, this also excludes the social aspect of travel by car (e.g., for families). Therefore, future research should examine different aspects of cycling in everyday life, its association with GHG reductions, and how it can be integrated into different living situations, e.g., [75].

Behavioral costs in regard to giving up meat consumption might be taste preferences, culinary traditions (habits), and social norms [76]. However, these behavioral costs might have sunken over the last decades. Although reliable estimates of vegetarians in society before 2000 are rare, it is supposed that this number has been growing since the 1970s. Estimates of the number of vegetarians in Germany between 1990 and 2016 range from 2% to 10%, with a tendency of more people becoming vegetarians within the last 30 years [71]. This might be due to the increased availability, quality, and lower price of vegetarian replacement products in supermarkets [77]. This observation corresponds to the aspect of opportunity in behavior change theory. Moreover, since many replacement products have a similar taste and texture compared to meat products, culinary traditions might be easily continued without meat. However, so far, the visibility and level of self-organization of vegetarians have increased more than the actual number of vegetarians [78]. According to a systematic review, people who are willing to change or have already changed their meat consumption are a minority, showing again the low intentions for vegetarianism [76].

Despite being unpopular, eating a vegetarian diet has a high impact, as livestock farming contributes 5% of yearly human CO₂ production [29], and the phosphorus and nitrogen input caused by livestock causes further environmental problems [79]. Moreover, meat consumption fosters a loss of biodiversity [80]. Reducing meat consumption is accompanied by health improvements [29]. Therefore, more research should focus on meat-related behavior change and find ways to build stronger intentions to reduce meat consumption and encourage a vegetarian diet.