The negative relation between right-wing ideologies and environmentalism constitutes a relatively classic finding in environmental research. Despite this, the mechanism (or mechanisms) behind such an effect are still unclear. Here, we argue that given the importance of the economic sphere in most political-environmental issues, political ideologies related to economic beliefs could be one of the underlying mechanisms that drive this classic effect. Two correlational studies were carried out to test this hypothesis. Study 1 explored the relation between political ideology and economic liberalism, partially ruling out an alternative explanation. Study 2 tested the mediational role of economic liberalism on the relationship between political ideology and pro-environmental behaviour. Results gave support for full mediation. Results are discussed in line with research on environmental politics and psychology.
BerghR.SidaniusJ.SibleyC. G. (2015). Dimensions of social dominance: Their personality and socio-political correlates within a New Zealand probability sample. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 44(2), 25–34.
3.
CárdenasM.MezaP.LaguesK.YanesS. (2010). Adaptación y validación de la Escala de Orientación a la Dominancia Social (SDO) en una muestra chilena. Universitas Psychologica, 9, 161–168.
4.
DunlapR. (1975). The impact of political orientation on environmental attitudes and actions. Environment and Behavior, 7, 428–454.
5.
DunlapR.Van LiereK. (1978). The “new environmental paradigm”. The Journal of Environmental Education, 9(4), 10–19.
6.
DunlapR.Van LiereK.MertigA. G.JonesR. E. (2000). New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: Measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425–442.
7.
DunlapR.XiaoC.McCrightA. (2001). Politics and the environment in America: Partisan and ideological cleavages in public support for environmentalism.. Environmental Politics, 10, 23–48.
8.
EverettJ. A. C. (2013). The 12 item social and economic conservatism scale (SECS). PLoS One, 8(12), e82131.
9.
GiffordR.NilssonA. (2014). Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: A review. International Journal of Psychology, 49, 141–157.
10.
HardinG. (1968). The tragedy of the commons. Science, 162, 1243–1248.
11.
HayesA. F. (2009). Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical mediation analysis in the New Millennium. Communication Monographs, 76, 408–420.
12.
Hernández-RuizB.Suárez-RodríguezE.Martínez-TorviscoJ.HessS. (1997). Actitudes y creencias sobre el medio ambiente en la conducta ecológica responsable. Papeles del Psicólogo, 67, 48–54.
13.
HornseyM. J.HarrisE. A.BainP. G.FieldingK. S. (2016). Meta-analyses of the determinants and outcomes of belief in climate change. Nature Climate Change, 6, 622–626.
14.
HunterL. M.HatchA.JohnsonA. (2004). Cross-national gender variation in environmental behaviors*. Social Science Quarterly, 85, 677–694.
15.
InglehartR. (1977). The silent revolution: changing values and political styles among western publics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16.
JacquesP. J.DunlapR. E.FreemanM. (2008). The organisation of denial: Conservative think tanks and environmental scepticism. Environmental Politics, 17, 349–385.
17.
JylhäK. M.CantalC.AkramiN.MilfontT. L. (2016). Denial of anthropogenic climate change: Social dominance orientation helps explain the conservative male effect in Brazil and Sweden. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 184–187.
18.
KilbourneW. E.BeckmannS. C.ThelenE. (2002). The role of the dominant social paradigm in environmental attitudes: A multinational examination. Journal of Business Research, 55, 193–204.
19.
KilbourneW. E.PolonskyM. J. (2005). Environmental attitudes and their relation to the dominant social paradigm among university students In New Zealand and Australia. Australasian Marketing Journal (AMJ), 13(2), 37–48.
20.
LiuX.VedlitzA.ShiL. (2014). Examining the determinants of public environmental concern: Evidence from national public surveys. Environmental Science & Policy, 39, 77–94.
21.
LongoS. B.BakerJ. O. (2014). Economy “versus” environment: The influence of economic ideology and political identity on perceived threat of eco-catastrophe. The Sociological Quarterly, 55, 341–365.
22.
LyubomirskyS.LepperH. S. (1999). A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. Social Indicators Research, 46, 137–155.
23.
Marquart-PyattS. T.McCrightA. M.DietzT.DunlapR. E. (2014). Politics eclipses climate extremes for climate change perceptions. Global Environmental Change, 29, 246–257.
24.
McCrightA.DunlapR. (2011). The politicization of climate change and polarization in the American public’s views of global warming, 2001–2010. The Sociological Quarterly, 52, 155–194.
25.
MilfontT. L.RichterI.SibleyC. G.WilsonM. S.FischerR. (2013). Environmental consequences of the desire to dominate and be superior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 1127–1138.
26.
Moyano DíazE.Palomo-VélezG.Moyano CostaP. (2015). Creencias ambientales e ideología en población chilena. Universum (Talca), 30(2), 219–236.
27.
Moyano-DíazE.CornejoF.GallardoI. (2011). Creencias y conductas ambientales, liberalismo económico y felicidad. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 14(2), 69–77.
28.
NawrotzkiR. J. (2012). The politics of environmental concern. Organization & Environment, 25, 286–307.
29.
NeumayerE. (2003). Are left-wing party strength and corporatism good for the environment? Evidence from panel analysis of air pollution in OECD countries. Ecological Economics, 45, 203–220.
30.
NeumayerE. (2004). The environment, left-wing political orientation and ecological economics. Ecological Economics, 51, 167–175.
31.
PiragesD.EhrlichP. (1974). Ark II: Social response to environmental imperatives. New York, NY: Viking.
32.
PrattoF.SidaniusJ.StallworthL. M.MalleB. F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
33.
SchnaibergA. (1980). The environment: From surplus to scarcity. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
34.
SchnaibergA.PellowD.WeinbergA. (2002), The treadmill of production and the environmental state. In A. P. J. Mol & F. H. Buttel (Eds.), The Environmental State Under Pressure(Research in Social Problems and Public Policy, Volume 10, pp. 15-32) Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
35.
SilverN. C.DunlapW. P. (1987). Averaging correlation coefficients: Should Fisher’s z transformation be used?Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 146–148.
36.
SoyezK. (2012). How national cultural values affect pro‐environmental consumer behavior. International Marketing Review, 29, 623–646.
37.
StanleyS. K.WilsonM. S.SibleyC. G.MilfontT. L. (2017). Dimensions of social dominance and their associations with environmentalism. Personality and Individual Differences, 107, 228–236.
38.
Van LiereK.DunlapR. (1980). The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 181–197.
39.
WeigelR.WeigelJ. (1978). Environmental concern. Environment and Behavior, 10, 3–15.
40.
ZeleznyL. C.Chua-P.-P.AldrichC. (2000). New ways of thinking about environmentalism: Elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 443–457.
