Carbon footprints of the wealthy are vastly underestimated

Imagine a world where everyone accurately gauges the carbon footprint of the richer and poorer segments of society. It appears such a world is fantastical, according to a recent study.

A common miscalculation surfaces: the carbon footprint of wealthier individuals is consistently underestimated, whereas that of the less privileged sections is drastically overestimated.

This surprising pattern is observed across different socio-economic statuses and nationalities, highlighting a pervasive global misunderstanding of how wealth influences environmental impact.

The credit for this intriguing insight goes to an international consortium of researchers from Copenhagen Business School, the University of Basel, and the University of Cambridge.

The team conducted a survey involving 4,000 participants from Denmark, India, Nigeria, and the United States about inequality in personal carbon footprints.

The survey participants were asked to estimate the carbon footprints for three income groups: the bottom 50%, the top 10%, and the top 1%.

“Poorer people have more immediate concerns, such as how they’re going to pay their rent or support their families,” said lead author Dr. Kristian Steensen Nielsen from Copenhagen Business School. “But across all income groups, people want real solutions to the climate crisis, whether those are regulatory or technological.”

The perception vs. reality gap

The survey results revealed a universal trend. The average personal carbon footprint of the poorest 50% was grossly overestimated, while the footprints of the top 1% and 10% were significantly underestimated.

These findings highlight the profound inequality in carbon footprints and how misperceptions influence public opinion.

“These countries are very different, but we found the rich are pretty similar no matter where you go, and their concerns are different to the rest of society,” said Dr. Ramit Debnath, a professor at the University of Cambridge.

The concept of a personal carbon footprint, which estimates the total greenhouse gases produced by an individual’s activities, has been a popular benchmark for environmental impact since the mid-2000s.

The concept gained attention when BP, a fossil fuel company, ran a large-scale advertising campaign urging people to quantify and reduce their carbon footprints.

“There are definitely groups out there who would like to push the responsibility of reducing carbon emissions away from corporations and onto individuals, which is problematic,” noted Dr. Debnath.

“However, personal carbon footprints can illustrate the profound inequality within and between countries and help people identify how to live in a more climate-friendly way.”

Implications for climate policy

Interestingly, individuals from the top 10% income group were more likely to back climate policies such as taxes on red meat consumption, peak period electricity pricing, and subsidizing carbon dioxide removal technologies.

According to the researchers, this may reflect higher education levels and greater resources among the affluent, along with a preference for technology-driven solutions to the climate crisis.

“Greater awareness and discussion of existing inequality in personal carbon footprints can help build political pressure to address these inequalities and develop climate solutions that work for all,” said Nielsen.

As conversations about climate change grow louder, awareness of personal carbon footprints is evolving.

Historically, the emphasis has been placed on individual actions, such as recycling and using energy-efficient appliances. However, the study highlights that these actions, while important, may not address the larger issue of carbon inequality.

The wealthiest individuals, who often have the largest carbon footprints due to higher consumption levels, remain under less scrutiny.

This imbalance raises critical questions about how climate policies can be made more inclusive, ensuring that the highest emitters take on the largest share of responsibility for mitigating climate impacts.

In order to drive effective change, policies must target the wealthiest individuals and their significant environmental footprints, rather than focusing solely on smaller-scale individual actions.

The research was funded by the Carlsberg Foundation, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Quadrature Climate Foundation, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.

The study is published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

—–

Like what you read? Subscribe to our newsletter for engaging articles, exclusive content, and the latest updates. 

Check us out on EarthSnap, a free app brought to you by Eric Ralls and Earth.com.

—–

_{Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.}