Overcoming the Challenge of “Green Enough”: Exploring the Dark Side of Incremental Green Options

Abstract

Previous research has predominantly focused on transitioning individuals’ behavior from environmentally unfriendly to environmentally friendly, ignoring the challenge of how to replace incremental green options with the most green ones. Contrary to the widely held belief that all “green” options are beneficial, this study investigates when and how incremental green options— options offering some environmental benefits but not fully pro‐environmental—can reduce individuals’ willingness to choose the most green option. We discovered that individuals tend to forgo the most green options when incremental green options are available (Study 1, Study 2 & Study 3). Furthermore, by informing participants about the adequacy of different levels of environmental friendliness, we found that the options just surpassing the designated threshold were the most popular (Study 2). Additionally, the anticipated guilt mediates the negative effect of incremental green options (Study 2, Study 3, and Study 4). Study 3 reveals that when individual environmental efficacy is activated, the negative impact of presence of incremental green options on consumer choice of the most green ones is mitigated. Study 4 finds that more consumers chose the most green option over the incremental green option when the latter was presented with negative framing or two‐sided framing (compared to positive framing). This study offers a new perspective on pro‐environmental behavior research and enhance our understanding of the role of incremental green options in green marketing.