Environmental Consciousness and Willingness to Pay for Carbon Emissions Reductions: Empirical Evidence from Qatar

Abstract

The individual’s willingness to pay (WTP) for environmental reduction programs is one way of gauging society’s environmental consciousness. We explore the determinants of an individual’s WTP for a product produced from carbon capture and utilization (CCU) technology in Qatar. A representative questionnaire sample was administered to 1012 respondents in Qatar on habits, perceptions, economic and religious attitudes related to environmental consciousness, and WTP. The findings reveal that environmental concern is significantly enhanced by environmental consciousness, awareness, and education, while environmental awareness also positively influences perceived social norms regarding others’ environmental awareness. Further, environmental consciousness, religiosity, and education are significantly positively associated with the WTP for an eco-friendly product. Also, those who earn high incomes have a greater WTP for eco-friendly products with premium prices of 10–75% higher. Respondents motivated by religious obligation have a significantly greater WTP for eco-friendly products with a 10–30% price premium. These findings imply the need for context-specific strategies that leverage cultural values, address income disparities, and effectively communicate the benefits of green choices to drive the adoption of green products.

1. Introduction

According to the Global Footprint Network National Footprint report [1], the planet’s resource stock that can be regenerated in a year was exhausted within just 209 days (This is technically referred to as the earth overshoot day). Earth Overshoot Day marks the date when humanity's demand for ecological resources and services in a given year exceeds what Earth can regenerate in that year. It is a symbolic threshold, illustrating the extent to which human consumption outpaces the planet's ability to replenish its natural resources. It is calculated by dividing the global ecological footprint by the earth’s biocapacity and multiplying by 365, which is three days earlier than the estimate for 2018 [1]. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent global economic slowdown, 2022 overshoot days improved to 212 days [1].

Qatar, a small open economy and a Middle Eastern country, has faced various environmental sustainability challenges due to its rapid economic growth and urbanization in recent years. Qatar’s Earth Overshoot Date is 10 February 2022 [1]. This means that Qatar’s biocapacity can sustain the country for only 41 days out of 365 days. Qatar must notionally depend on the biocapacity of other countries to maintain its ecological footprint. Additionally, Qatar’s CO₂ per capita is the highest in the GCC (see Figure 1). Qatar also faces other environmental challenges, such as water scarcity intensity over the years [2,3] and biodiversity deficit [4]. This highlights the need to prioritize sustainability practices in Qatar.

The main conclusion of the Dasgupta Review on the Economics of Biodiversity is that our economies, livelihoods, and well-being all depend on nature, but these dependencies are not reflected in our economic systems. The review argues that we are degrading the natural systems that support us, and that this degradation will ultimately undermine our well-being and future generations [5].

In the context of escalating global environmental challenges and intensifying climate action, understanding consumer environmental consciousness and WTP for emission-reducing and energy-saving solutions has become an essential area of academic and policy interest. As carbon-intensive sectors such as aviation, hospitality, and manufacturing face mounting pressure to decarbonize, consumer-driven sustainability has emerged as a critical force shaping corporate behavior and environmental policy.

Environmental consciousness refers to awareness, attitudes, and beliefs held by an individual about environmental issues and the environment in general [6]. It involves a concern for the state of the environment and a desire to protect and preserve it for future generations [7]. Public environmental consciousness has grown in recent years as the effects of human activities on the environment have become more apparent and widespread, and environmental issues such as biodiversity loss, climate change, and pollution have gained increased attention and concern [8].

A key indicator of environmental consciousness is the extent to which citizens are willing to actively contribute to environmental protection efforts. One commonly used policy tool in this regard is the implementation of programs that invite public financial participation in environmental initiatives. This is often assessed through individuals’ WTP for measures such as carbon emissions reduction, providing a quantifiable measure of their commitment to sustainability. WTP for carbon emission reductions refers to the amount of money that individuals, households, businesses, and governments are willing to spend to reduce the amount of greenhouse gas emissions being released into the atmosphere [9]. The concept allows policymakers to understand the economic value people place on reducing carbon emissions and determine the most effective and efficient ways to incentivize emissions reduction.

WTP for carbon reductions can be measured through various methods, including surveys (such as Contingent Valuation (CV) surveys), stated preference studies, and revealed preference studies [10]. The results of these studies can inform the design of policy instruments such as carbon taxes, cap-and-trade systems, and other economic incentives that can drive emissions reductions.

Ref. [11] demonstrates that environmental consciousness not only exerts a direct influence on passengers’ choice of airline carriers but also indirectly impacts behavior through attitudes toward carbon offsetting programs. This highlights the importance of psychological and value-driven factors in shaping consumer decisions related to environmental sustainability.

Ref. [12] finds that in the Chinese market, environmental consciousness mediates the relationship between perceived product value and WTP for environmentally certified goods. These findings suggest that consumers who internalize environmental values are more likely to exhibit economic behaviors that align with sustainable consumption principles.

This trend is evident in other sectors as well. Ref. [13], in their investigation of air passengers in New Zealand, reveal a growing readiness among consumers to co-finance sustainability initiatives undertaken by commercial airlines. Their study confirms that individuals with higher levels of environmental awareness are more receptive to cost-sharing models aimed at mitigating carbon emissions.

Citizens’ beliefs and awareness can be crucial in building environmental consciousness, essential for creating a sustainable future. Within this domain, research shows that individuals who are aware of environmental issues and believe in their importance are more likely to act positively towards minimizing their negative impact on the environment and support environmental policies [14]. This can be achieved by applying economic theory’s basic assumptions, “rationality and the marginal decisions,” on both consumption and production, which is consistent with UN-SDG#12. A study conducted in the United States found that individuals with pro-environmental beliefs were more likely to support government policies to protect the environment [15].

These emerging insights collectively underscore the pivotal role of environmental consciousness in driving pro-environmental behavior and financial support for carbon-reducing innovations. However, there remains a significant research gap in understanding how these dynamics operate in resource-rich, high-income, and carbon-intensive contexts such as Qatar and the broader Gulf region. In such economies, high energy subsidies, cultural consumption patterns, and limited exposure to climate vulnerability may weaken the perceived urgency of environmental action at the individual level.

This study seeks to address this gap by empirically examining the relationship between environmental consciousness and household WTP for products and programs that reduce carbon emissions and promote energy efficiency. By doing so, the study aims to contribute to the broader discourse on demand-side environmental engagement in rentier economies and offer policy-relevant insights for designing effective sustainability interventions.

Our study contributes to literature in three ways. Firstly, we provide further evidence on the WTP for green products by investigating how far consumers are willing to contribute toward green products that keep our environment protected from carbon emissions impact. Secondly, we adduce more empirical evidence to enrich the literature on environmental consciousness and the WTP by adding more variables such as religion. Thirdly, we sample from Qatar, which is a petroleum-based economy, to understand the prevalence of environmental consciousness within a hydrocarbon-based economy among the public. The rest of the article progresses as follows. Section 2 presents the literature review and the development of the study’s hypotheses. Section 3 describes the data and methodology of the study, whereas Section 4 presents the variables. The major findings of the study is presented in Section 5 and the article is concluded in Section 6.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Theoretical Background of CV

CV is an important method applied in environmental economics and other disciplines to estimate the economic value of goods and services deemed non-tradable [16]. The CV method, which originated in 1947 [17] and was first applied in 1963 [18], has undergone extensive methodological testing to evaluate its reliability and accuracy over the years. CV employs various survey designs and methods to elicit respondents’ preferences. These approaches include the referendum format, open-ended questions, bifurcated choice questions, and payment card methods [19]. Researchers have also explored different statistical models, including probit and logit models, to analyze the data collected from CV surveys [20].

This approach (CV) offers several advantages in eliciting information about respondents’ WTP for environmental reduction. Firstly, it allows for the assessment of non-tradable goods and services in conventional markets, such as environmental quality [21]. Secondly, it captures individuals’ preferences and values, accounting for their non-use and passive-use values [22]. Thirdly, it can be used as a channel to gather information on the economic worth of public goods by policymakers to aid decision-making processes [23].

Despite its strengths, CV has faced criticism and encountered challenges. One major concern is the potential for hypothetical bias, as respondents may overstate or understate their WTP or WTA due to hypothetical scenarios [24]. Researchers have attempted to mitigate this bias through various techniques, including follow-up questions, cheap talk scripts, and embedding approaches [25]. Additionally, sample selection bias, strategic behavior, protest responses, sequencing issues, and the “warm glow” effect pose additional challenges for CV studies [20,21,22].

In recent years, CV research has advanced in several directions. Researchers have focused on improving survey design, implementing experimental approaches, and employing advanced econometric techniques [26,27]. Additionally, studies have explored the application of CV in diverse contexts, such as ecosystem services valuation, climate change mitigation, and health-related interventions [28]. The integration of CV with other valuation methods, such as choice experiments and stated preference methods, has also gained attention [29].

Two major hypotheses regarding environmental consciousness within society have been proposed regarding the determinants of the WTP [30,31]. The broadening base hypothesis holds that over time, concern for the environment will spread across the various strata of the public, and many people will begin to show environmental consciousness [32]. A contrasting view is the economic contingency hypothesis, which states that when there is a choice between economic well-being and environmental concern, people will always choose economic well-being [33]. This theorization means that with deteriorating income levels, the low-income population will abandon their concern for the environment and pursue economic goals. The economic contingency hypothesis seems to complement the broadening base hypothesis in understanding the behavior of economic agents towards the environment. When viewed together, these hypotheses may provide an essential perspective to policymaking. Economic well-being is needed for the sustainable diffusion of environmental consciousness into the population. Jones and Dunlop [34] tested the two main hypotheses and concluded differently. They argued that two decades of data showed that the support for the environment remains stable despite varying economic, environmental, and political conditions [34]. They also conclude that environmental consciousness in the US has diffused consistently among a particular group of society more than others. More specifically, liberals, young adults, well-educated ones, and those employed outside of primary industries always showed concern for the environment compared to their counterparts. Ref. [35] echoed the economic contingency hypothesis by indicating that individuals residing in higher-income areas tend to exhibit greater concern for environmental protection and possess a stronger environmental consciousness than those living in less developed areas. Studies conducted in China have established a positive correlation between postmaterialism values and environmental consciousness. Researchers conclude that environmental consciousness levels tend to increase in tandem with economic growth and improved living standards [36]. Similarly, some provinces of China were also studied to understand the WTP for carbon emissions reduction in Shanghai, Beijing, Fujian, and Hondong provinces [37]. The results show that participants were willing to pay more for CO₂ emission reductions if they had higher incomes, were happier in their current lives, and were more aware of environmental issues. Inglehart has highlighted the shift in values from materialism to postmaterialism in advanced industrial societies, where individuals prioritize nonmaterial values such as environmental protection, freedom of speech, and gender equality over economic growth and material security [38]. Environmental sociologists have supported this view, suggesting that people tend to show concern for environmental quality only after their basic material needs have been met [39]. Adaman et al. [40] studied the WTP for CO₂ emission reduction in Turkey using a face-to-face questionnaire with a CV method with 2422 respondents. Findings show that young people who are educated, environmentally engaged, knowledgeable, and materially secure are willing to pay for carbon emission reductions [40]. However, WTP is negatively correlated with the non-involvement of other citizens and weak institutional arrangements.

Drawing from the CV literature and theoretical perspectives on environmental consciousness, this study examines the validity of two competing hypotheses—the broadening base hypothesis and the economic contingency hypothesis—in explaining individuals’ WTP for carbon emissions reduction and energy-saving initiatives. The following hypotheses are investigated:

• H1 There is a positive relationship between level of environmental consciousness and environmental concern.
• H2 There is a positive relationship between level of education and environmental concern
• H3 There is a positive relationship between environmental awareness and environmental concern.
• H4 Perceived norm of environmental awareness is positively related with individual environmental awareness.
• H5 There is a positive relationship between religiosity and WTP for carbon emission reductions.
• H6 Higher income is positively related to WTP for carbon emission reductions

2.2. Empirical Literature

The literature has discussed the relationship between environmental awareness, consciousness, and environmental concern [41]. There is a significant positive correlation between education and environmental awareness. Several studies have found that individuals with higher levels of education tend to have a greater understanding of environmental issues and are more likely to engage in pro-environmental behaviors than those with lower levels of education [42,43]. Knowledge thus plays a dual role in environmental behaviors by raising consumers’ environmental awareness and providing them with scientific expertise to address environmental problems [44]. An individual’s level of knowledge also influences their attitudes [45]. Furthermore, a study by van Liere and Dunlap [39] discovered that individuals with higher levels of education were more likely to recognize environmental problems and take action to address them [46,47,48].

Another branch of the literature has delved into environmental awareness and environmental concern. Environmental awareness and environmental consciousness are related concepts but have slightly different meanings. Environmental awareness refers to the level of understanding and knowledge that individuals, organizations, and communities have about the environment and the impact of human activities on it. It includes understanding basic concepts such as the importance of conservation, the effects of pollution, and the need to reduce waste [46]. Conversely, environmental consciousness refers to a deeper level of understanding and commitment to environmental issues [47,48]. It involves recognizing the interconnectedness of all living things and the impact of human actions on the natural world. It also consists of identifying the need for action to protect and preserve the environment for future generations.

Research suggests that environmental awareness is directly related to environmental consciousness. As people become more aware of environmental issues, they are more likely to develop a deeper understanding of the importance of protecting the environment and taking action to reduce their impact [49]. For example, a study published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology found that various identities, including environmental identity, pro-environmental self-identity, relationship self-expansion identity, and egoistic identity, were linked to environmental concern. The differences in the strength of these associations were partially explained by two paradigms of societal collectivism and societal individualism, with stronger connections observed between environmental and self-expansion identities and environmental concern in more collectivistic societies and a weaker relationship observed between egoistic identity and environmental concern [50]. Another study found that environmental education programs can increase environmental awareness, leading to increased environmental consciousness and a greater commitment to pro-environmental behaviors [51]. Environmental and climate change awareness is generally associated with positive climate-friendly behavior and environmental quality. A positive view of the environment mediates between climate change awareness and environmental quality [52]. Environmental awareness and environmental consciousness are necessary for understanding and addressing environmental issues. By increasing both factors, individuals and communities can take more effective action to protect and preserve the natural world.

Since religion has played a significant role in shaping social norms throughout human history, some scholars have also dedicated their research to understanding the role of religion in environmental concern. The Abrahamic religions, representing over half of the world’s population (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam), feature morally vigilant deities who reward good behavior and punish selfish actions [53]. In Middle Eastern countries such as Qatar, there is a high percentage of people who identify as Muslims, as noted by [54]. As a result, religion holds a more prominent place in the daily lives of Middle Easterners than in Western countries, impacting social, political, and religious practices [55]. Scholars have studied the connection between religiousness and prosocial behavior extensively, with research by [53] revealing a positive correlation between religiosity and prosocial behavior at individual and group levels. This means that individuals and groups who identify as more religious tend to display more prosocial behavior. Religion can alter individuals’ preferences and establish social norms that encourage prosocial behavior. It also mobilizes a group of peers, known as the ingroup, to enforce adherence to these norms, which is aided by the monitoring opportunities presented by religious rituals. For instance, in 2015, “Pope Francis declared that the science of climate change is clear and that the Catholic Church views climate change as a moral issue that must be addressed to protect the Earth and everyone on it,” as noted by the [56]. Similarly, Islamic leaders worldwide made a comparable declaration in 2019 [57].

The relationship between religiosity and environmental consciousness is a complex and multifaceted one. While some studies suggest that religious beliefs can contribute to environmental awareness and consciousness, others indicate that religiosity may inhibit such attitudes and behaviors. Islamic religious teachings promote environmental justice, which advocates for fair access to natural resources embedded in the environment for everyone [58].

Some research suggests that religion can positively impact environmental attitudes and behaviors. For example, it is found that religiosity is associated with environmental concern and pro-environmental behaviors among Christians in the United States [59]. In a recent field experimental study in Qatar, ref. [60] utilizes two normative interventions to influence identity—a religious message referencing the Qur’an and a national message highlighting. Their findings reveal that interventions result in a 3.8% reduction in electricity usage, with religious and national messages proving equally effective. However, other studies have found that religious beliefs and practices can inhibit environmental attitudes and behaviors. For instance, Eckberg & Blocker found that religious beliefs are negatively associated with support for climate change policies among Christians in the United States [61]. The general takeaway from the literature is that while some studies suggest that religious beliefs can contribute to environmental awareness and consciousness, others indicate that religiosity may inhibit such attitudes and behaviors.

Further, an individual’s perception of societal norms regarding environmental awareness influences their environmental consciousness. Perceived norms are social constructs representing an individual’s beliefs about the attitudes and behaviors endorsed by their social group. When individuals perceive that their peers value and practice environmental awareness, they are more likely to adopt similar behaviors. Several studies have found a positive relationship between perceived norms of environmental awareness and individual environmental consciousness [62,63]. Social influence plays a significant role in shaping individuals’ environmental consciousness. When individuals perceive that environmental awareness is the norm within their social groups, they experience social pressure to conform to those standards. The desire to fit in and avoid social disapproval motivates individuals to adopt pro-environmental behaviors. This social influence mechanism has been supported by studies investigating the relationship between perceived norms and environmental consciousness [64,65].

Perceived norms also operate through informational influence, where individuals seek and share knowledge about environmental issues and behaviors. When individuals perceive that environmental awareness is the norm, they are more likely to engage in information-seeking and knowledge-sharing activities. This behavior helps spread environmental awareness and fosters a collective consciousness about environmental issues. Research has shown that individuals who perceive higher environmental awareness norms are more likely to actively seek information and share knowledge with others [66]. The literature reviewed consistently supports the positive relationship between perceived norms of environmental awareness and environmental consciousness. Individuals who perceive higher environmental awareness norms are more likely to adopt pro-environmental behaviors, driven by social influence and conformity as well as informational influence and knowledge sharing.

In the GCC, some studies have also documented environmental behavior touching on system-level transition dynamics and policy levers [67,68]; the role of civil society and knowledge diffusion via NGOs [69]; household- and individual-level behavioral and socioeconomic drivers of renewable energy (RE) adoption in Qatar [68]; and campus-scale pro-environmental behaviors (PEB) in Bahrain’s higher-education context [70]. Hydrocarbon wealth weakens direct cost feedback for energy and water, reducing behavioral responsiveness to price but creating fiscal space for incentive programs. Behavior-change strategies may need to rely on non-price motivators (values, norms, prestige technologies) unless accompanied by subsidy reforms [58,59]. Income, education, and (in some datasets) gender differentiate awareness levels and willingness to engage in pro-environmental action [58,61]. Universities and NGOs can function as intermediaries that translate high-level sustainability visions into everyday practices, bridging awareness gaps [70]. Expressed support for sustainability goals often exceeds observed behavior, underscoring the need for better measurement (revealed vs. stated) and contextual facilitators [58,61]. National visions, green initiatives, and international climate commitments serve as framing devices that can legitimize and motivate behavioral interventions when communicated effectively [69].

Environmental behavior and awareness research in the GCC is evolving from descriptive surveys toward more integrated, policy-linked, and context-sensitive analyses. The literature argues that behavioral change in the Gulf cannot be divorced from the structural conditions of resource wealth, governance arrangements, cultural norms, and rapid development. Advancing the field will require cross-scalar designs that connect national transition strategies, civil-society knowledge pathways, socioeconomic differentiation, and the everyday infrastructures that permit or constrain sustainable action.

3. Data and Methodology

3.1. Survey Data

A survey was conducted by telephone interview in August 2019 by a group of skilled surveyors who distributed questionnaires to a randomly chosen group of households in Qatar. This survey represented the first attempt to capture and understand the attitudes and behaviors related to environmental consciousness among urban households in Qatar. Representatives from Qatar University conducted a telephone survey on 1012 Qatari residents to investigate their perceptions of environmental consciousness and WTP. The sample households were randomly selected from a master dataset of all households in Qatar obtained from Kahramaa, Doha, Qatar (Qatar General Electricity and Water Corporation). The participants did not receive any compensation for participating in the survey (QU-IRB 1108-EA/19). For the estimation process, we have used Stata 16.1 software

3.2. Household Survey Design

A random selection of 3000 observations was made from the national database, utilizing questionnaires in both English and Arabic. Furthermore, cognitive interviewing techniques were employed to identify the causes of response errors and to ascertain whether the participants interpreted the questions as the researchers intended.

3.3. Sampling Frame and Target Population

The initial step in the survey design involves establishing a sampling frame, essentially a comprehensive list used to identify all members of the intended demographic. For this particular survey, the focus group comprises individuals aged 18 and above who reside in residential households in Qatar during the specified survey period. It notably excludes residents of collective living spaces such as labor camps and institutional settings like military barracks, hospitals, dormitories, and prisons.

3.4. Sample Design

Qatar is segmented into seven administrative municipalities, with each city comprising various zones that are further subdivided into blocks. For this survey, housing units within each zone are organized according to their geographical location, ensuring a widespread sampling of residences across different regions and one person from the selected households was interviewed

3.5. Calculating Survey Design Weights

Data weights are generated to account for selection probability, nonresponse, and potential under-coverage. The weight for each sampled individual is the reciprocal of their selection probability in the sample. This probability is determined by multiplying the household’s selection probability in the sample with the individual’s selection probability within the household. Nonresponse weights are computed using propensity scores, which gauge the likelihood of households completing the interview. Subsequently, the ranking method is applied to align these weights with the most recent Census data, addressing potential under-coverage or residual nonresponse errors. Factors incorporated in the ranking process include municipality, nationality, gender, and age. These weights allow substantive analyses to generalize to the target population accurately.

3.6. Sample Size and Margin of Error

Given that Qataris make up a smaller segment of the population than expatriates, using proportionate sampling would lead to a relatively low number of Qataris in the sample, diminishing the precision of subgroup analyses focusing solely on Qataris. Additionally, the Qatari demographic displays more diversity in individual and household characteristics (like age, household size, and income) than the expatriate group, necessitating a larger sample size for Qataris to achieve comparable precision. Consequently, the survey employs disproportionate sampling to oversample the Qatari group. The survey achieved a 30% response rate, yielding 1004 completed interviews, with 269 Qataris and 735 expatriates participating. While the 30% response rate reflects typical engagement levels for utility surveys in Qatar [71], we assessed potential non-response bias through demographic comparisons with census data and early-late respondent analysis. Results suggested no systematic differences between respondents and the target population in key characteristics.

With Qatar’s population estimated at around 2,773,885 [72] and an average household size of 5.5 (8.7 for Qataris and 4.3 for non-Qataris), it is estimated to be over 500,000 households. The survey’s 1004 household responses represent approximately 0.2% of the population, leading to a Margin of Error (MOE) of ±0.036%. This MOE is calculated using the formula:

$$MOE=z\times {\displaystyle \frac{\sqrt{p\times (1-p)}}{\sqrt{\left(N-1\right)\times \frac{n}{(N-n)}}}}$$

where z = 2.576 for a confidence level of 99%, p = the proportion of the sample size to the entire population (expressed as a decimal), N = population size, and n = sample size.

MOE indicates the maximum potential deviation of the sample results from the actual population values, largely due to the survey’s design not including every individual from the entire population. This level of MOE is deemed acceptable for our study, balancing the trade-off between the desired sample size (and its consequent MOE) and the costs associated with conducting the survey. Opting for larger sample sizes would reduce the MOE but significantly increase survey costs.

Pilot Testing

Prior to launching the main survey, a pilot test was conducted to evaluate the clarity, comprehensibility, and cultural appropriateness of the questionnaire items. A sample of 30 respondents, reflective of the study’s target population in terms of demographics and socioeconomic characteristics, was selected to participate in the pilot phase.

The pilot survey served multiple purposes:

• To ensure that respondents clearly understood the wording and intent of each question.
• To identify any ambiguous, misleading, or culturally inappropriate language.
• To assess the average completion time and flow of the questionnaire
• To test the reliability of scaled items related to environmental attitudes and WTP.

Based on feedback from the pilot participants and subsequent analysis, minor revisions were made to improve question phrasing and layout. For example, certain technical terms were simplified, and examples were added to enhance clarity. The pilot also confirmed that the questionnaire length was appropriate and did not lead to respondent fatigue.

The improved version of the instrument was then finalized and used for full-scale data collection. This pilot phase helped enhance the overall validity and reliability of the survey instrument.

3.7. Description of Survey Questionnaire

The survey consisted of 85 items that used different formats to gather data on various aspects of participants’ household water usage and conservation, social and religious attitudes towards the environment, and general household composition. The survey included questions presented in the form of 5-point Likert scales, binary and categorical formats, and open-ended inquiries.

The first section, Section A, pertained to the participants’ demographic information, encompassing inquiries about their age, gender, nationality, religion, and educational attainment. Section B revolved around the characteristics of the participants’ households and contained several inquiries, such as the type of housing they resided in, the number of adults and children living in the household, and the monthly income of the family. Finally, Section C focused on soliciting information on the environmental consciousness of the participants, touching on whether participants are concerned about the environment and the reason for the concern. This section also tries to determine the level of knowledge of environmental issues by the participants and the social norm regarding environmental consciousness. Also, the WTP for environmental reduction through eco-friendly products is covered in this section, as participants are asked whether they are willing to buy eco-friendly products and at what premium.

4. Variables

4.1. Environmental Concern

This variable represents how concerned participants are about the environment and is measured using a Likert scale with four possible values: not concerned at all, slightly concerned, very concerned, and extremely concerned.

4.2. Environmental Consciousness Variable Construction

Environmental consciousness is the main explanatory variable for environmental concern. In this study, the revised 15-item New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) was used. (The NEP is a theoretical framework that represents a fundamental shift in how people perceive their relationship with the environment). Introduced by Riley E. Dunlap and Kent D. Van Liere in the 1970s [73], it was developed as an update to the earlier Human Exceptionalism Paradigm, which posited that humans were separate from and superior to nature, with a right to dominate and use it without constraints. The scale served as the instrument for measurement of environmental consciousness [15]. The acceptance level of the NEP was assessed by examining the percentage distribution of responses for each item as well as their average scores. Respondents rated the items on a scale from 1 to 5, with 1 signifying ‘disagree’, 3 ‘neutral’, and 5 ‘agree’. For even-numbered questions, ‘agree’ was scored as a 1, ‘neutral as a 3, and ‘disagree’ as a 5. For each observation items with odd numbers on the scale represented viewpoints supportive of the NEP, while even-numbered items reflected those supportive of the Dominant Social Paradigm (DSP) (The concept of the DSP was introduced by Dennis Pirages and Paul R. Ehrlich [74]. They describe the DSP as the prevalent mental image of social reality that guides societal expectations. It represents the culturally significant portion of a society's overall culture, helping to make sense of the universe and enabling organized activity). For all statistical analyses, barring percentage calculations, the rating scale was inverted for even-numbered items. For each observation, we took the average score over the 15 questions. The environmental consciousness variable is therefore defined as the average score of the 15 questions (with a min possible value of 1 and max possible value of 5).

4.3. Environmental Awareness

This variable represents how environmentally aware participants are and is measured using a Likert scale with four possible values: not informed at all, slightly informed, somewhat informed, and very informed.

4.4. WTP

This variable measures the willingness of participants to pay for carbon emission reductions with a price premium on eco-friendly products and is coded as a binary variable that equals 1 if the respondent reported being willing to buy eco-friendly products at each of the specified levels of price premium and 0 otherwise.

4.5. Econometric Model

An ordered logit model was used to study the relationship between environmental consciousness and environmental concern, controlling for environmental awareness, education, perceived social norm, gender, and household income. Given the ordinal nature of our dependent variable, ordered logistic regression was determined to be the appropriate method, as the use of non-interval outcome variables violates the assumptions of Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) regression. It is also preferred over multinomial logistic regression for ordinal outcome variables, as it preserves and leverages the information contained in the inherent order of the categories.

For the ordered logit model, the following specification was used:

$$Y_i^{*}={{\beta }^{\prime }x}_i+{\epsilon }_i$$

(1)

where $Y_i^{*}$ is the measure of environmentally concerned for individual $i$, $x_i$ is a vector of independent variables, $\beta$ is a vector of parameters to be estimated, and ${\epsilon }_i$ is a random error term (assumed to follow a standard normal distribution).

The observed and coded environmental concern variable, $Y_i$, is determined from the model as follows:

$$\begin{array}{l}{Y}_i= \{0 \mathrm{if} -\infty \le Y_i^{*}\le {\mu }_1 (\mathrm{not} \mathrm{concerned} \mathrm{at} \mathrm{all}),\\ 1 \mathrm{if} {\mu }_1\le Y_i^{*}\le {\mu }_2 (\mathrm{slightly} \mathrm{concerned}),\\ 2 \mathrm{if} {\mu }_2\le Y_i^{*}\le {\mu }_3 (\mathrm{very} \mathrm{concerned}),\\ 3 \mathrm{if} {\mu }_3\le Y_i^{*}\le \infty (\mathrm{extremely} \mathrm{concerned}),\end{array}$$

where ${\mu }_i$ represents thresholds to be estimated (along with the parameter vector $\beta$).

Independent variables include environmental consciousness and control variables, including environmental awareness, perceived social norm, female (which is coded as a binary variable), and education and household income (which are coded as categorical variables). The same model specification is applied to study the relationship between environmental awareness and multiple variables of interest where $Y_i^{*}$ is the measure of environmental awareness for individual $i$.

Ordinary Least Square (OLS) was conducted to study the relationship between WTP for eco-friendly products and multiple variables of interest.

For the OLS regression, the estimated equation is as follows:

$$Y_i={\beta X}_i+{\epsilon }_i$$

(2)

where $Y_i$ represents a binary dependent variable that equals 1 if the respondent reported being willing to buy eco-friendly products at each of the specified levels of price premium, and 0 otherwise, $X_i$ are the independent variables of interest (environmental consciousness, being religiously obligated, education, and household income (which are coded as categorical variables)), $\beta$ is a vector of regression coefficients, and ${\epsilon }_i$ is the error term.

Building on the estimated models, we conducted further analysis by calculating the marginal effects of environmental attitudes on environmental concern and awareness.

5. Results and Discussions

The demographic data revealed that the sample had an average age of 46 years, 16% had completed high school, 53% had a Bachelor’s degree, and 12% held a Master’s degree, which indicates a high literacy rate of the respondents (see

Table 1. Summary and descriptive statistics.

	N	%
Female	1003	7.78
Qatari	1001	26.77
Islam	983	85.35
Monthly income:
Less than US $2740	691	14.33
US $2740–less than US $5479	691	32.42
US $5479–less than US $8200	691	16.79
US $8200–less than US $11,000	691	11.87
US $11,000 or more	691	24.60
Education:
None	996	0.80
Elementary school	996	3.31
Middle School	996	3.41
High School	996	15.86
Diploma after high school	996	6.83
Bachelor’s	996	52.91
Diploma after bachelor’s degree	996	2.51
Masters	996	11.75
Ph.D.	996	2.61

). Also, 73.2% of the respondents are non-Qataris and 26.8% are Qataris, with 85.4% identifying as Muslims. Finally, 24.6% of the sample earns above US $11,000, and 32.4% earns between US $5500 and US $8200. Females in the sample are only 7.8%, which is explained by the fact that most households are headed by males, and the KAHRAMAA data are thus skewed towards males.

As shown in

Table 2. Environmental Concern.

		(1)
		Environmental Concern
Environmental consciousness		0.779 ***
		(0.197)
Environmental awareness		1.362 ***
		(0.254)
Monthly water consumption		0.001 *
		(0.001)
Perceived norm		0.036
		(0.186)
Education
Elementary school		14.585 ***
		(0.894)
Middle School		14.207 ***
		(0.956)
High School		15.169 ***
		(0.791)
Diploma after high school		14.063 ***
		(0.830)
Bachelor’s		15.138 ***
		(0.767)
Diploma after bachelor’s degree		15.699 ***
		(0.888)
Masters		15.889 ***
		(0.792)
Ph.D.		15.785 ***
		(0.903)
Income
10,000-less than 20,000 QR		−0.302
		(0.309)
20,000-less than 30,000 QR		0.186
		(0.341)
30,000-less than 40,000 QR		0.003
		(0.377)
40,000 QR or more		−0.390
		(0.327)
Observations		448
(A) Environmental Concern Marginal Effects
	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)
Variables	Marginal Effects (Environmental Consciousness)	Marginal Effects (Environmental Awareness)	Marginal Effects (Monthly Consumption)	Marginal Effects (Perceived Norm)
Not concerned at all	−0.119 ***	−0.207 ***	−0.00022 **	−0.005
	(0.030)	(0.036)	(0.00010)	(0.028)
Slightly concerned	−0.050 ***	−0.087 ***	−0.00009 **	−0.002
	(0.013)	(0.022)	(0.00004)	(0.012)
Very concerned	0.045***	0.078 ***	0.00008 **	0.002
	(0.013)	(0.016)	(0.00004)	(0.011)
Extremely concerned	0.123***	0.216 ***	0.00023 **	0.006
	(0.030)	(0.043)	(0.00011)	(0.029)
Observations	448	448	448	448
(B) Environmental Concern Predicted Probabilities
		(1)
Variables		Predicted Probabilities
Not concerned at all		0.205 ***
		(0.0198)
Slightly concerned		0.354 ***
		(0.0246)
Very concerned		0.253 ***
		(0.0214)
Extremely concerned		0.188 ***
		(0.0184)
Observations		448

Standard errors in parentheses *** p < 0.01, ** p < 0.05, * p < 0.1.

, there is a significant positive relationship between environmental consciousness and environmental concern. Respondents who are environmentally conscious are more likely to show concern for the environment. This finding confirms a more recent one by [52]. This implies that to shift the mindset of people towards caring for the environment, there is a need for building environmental consciousness of the citizens. It is also observed that environmental awareness and education are positively associated with environmental concern. Respondents who are environmentally aware and more educated are significantly more likely to have greater concern for the environment, which concurs with prior studies by [39,47]. We also controlled for water consumption by household, which shows a marginally significant positive relationship with environmental concern.

Ordered logit models rely on the proportional odds assumption and may produce misleading estimates when the assumption is not met. A likelihood ratio test indicates that the proportional odds assumption was not violated in our estimation (chi-square statistic = 17.17; p-value = 0.143).

Table 3. Environmental Awareness.

	(1)
	Environmental Awareness
Perceived norm	1.026 ***
	(0.190)
Education controls	Yes
Income controls	Yes
Observations	459
(A) Environmental Awareness Marginal Effects
	(1)
Variables	Marginal Effects (Perceived Norm)
Not informed at all	−0.030 ***
	(0.009)
Slightly informed	−0.085 ***
	(0.019)
Very informed	−0.115 ***
	(0.020)
Extremely informed	0.230 ***
	(0.038)
Observations	459
(B) Environmental Awareness Predicted Probabilities
	(1)
Variables	Predicted Probabilities
Not informed at all	0.0244 ***
	(0.00664)
Slightly informed	0.0941 ***
	(0.0132)
Very informed	0.407 ***
	(0.0244)
Extremely informed	0.475 ***
	(0.0249)
Observations	459

Standard errors in parentheses *** p < 0.01.

shows a positive significant relationship between environmental awareness and perceived social norms about others’ environmental awareness. Respondents who think that others are environmentally aware are more likely to be environmentally aware themselves. This suggests the importance of social norms in shaping people’s positive behavior towards the environment. These results further lend credence to the broadening base hypothesis. The more herd behavior towards environmental awareness, the more diffused environmental awareness gets into society, as argued by Buttel and Flinn [32]. The later findings by [34] that contrast [32] can also be reconciled with these findings. People share social norms within the same group, and intra-group beliefs and codes shape behavior, and that explains why some groups may consistently experience diffusion of environmental awareness more than others, as concluded by Jones and Dunlup [34]. These findings highlight the importance of environmental policymaking that caters to both intra-group and inter-group behaviors to achieve inclusivity in impact. A likelihood ratio test indicates that the proportional odds assumption was not violated in our estimation (chi-square statistic = 6.76; p-value = 0.344).

Our marginal effect estimations show how changes in key predictors influence the probability of each outcome category for environmental concern. As shown in Table 2A, a one-unit increase in environmental consciousness significantly increases the probability of being “extremely concerned” (by 0.123) and being “very concerned” (by 0.045) while decreasing the probability of being “not concerned at all” (by −0.119) and being “slightly concerned” (by −0.05). Similarly, we found that an increase in environmental awareness significantly increases the probability of being very and extremely concerned, while decreasing the probability of being not concerned at all and slightly concerned.

As shown in Table 2B, our predicted probability estimations show that, assuming all predictors are held at their mean values, there is a higher probability of respondents being “slightly concerned” (around 0.35) and “very concerned” (around 0.25).

With regard to environmental awareness (see Table 3A), a one-unit increase in perceived norm significantly reduces the probabilities of being “not informed at all”, “slightly informed”, and “very informed” while increasing the likelihood of being “extremely informed” (by 0.230). This underscores the importance of perceived norms in raising environmental awareness.

As shown in Table 3B, our predicted probability estimations show that, assuming all predictors are held at their mean values, there is a higher probability for respondents to be “extremely informed” (0.475) and “very informed” (0.41), indicating that respondents are, in general, more likely to have greater environmental awareness.

These findings suggest that efforts to increase environmental concern could benefit from fostering greater environmental consciousness and awareness, while bolstering perceived norms could help increase environmental awareness.

As shown in

Table 4. WTP for eco-friendly products with a price premium.

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	Willing to Buy Eco-Friendly Products (Q86)	Willing to Pay for Eco-Friendly Products if the Price Increases by
		0–10% More (Q88_1)	10–30% More (Q88_2)	30–50% More (Q88_3)	50–75% More (Q88_4)	75% or More (Q88_5)
Environmental	0.0474 *	0.00441	−0.00253	−0.0914 *	−0.0677	−0.0590
consciousness	(0.0214)	(0.0201)	(0.0398)	(0.0407)	(0.0372)	(0.0370)
Religiously obligated	0.0696 **	0.0616 **	0.0911 *	0.0383	0.0251	0.0225
	(0.0243)	(0.0237)	(0.0400)	(0.0385)	(0.0359)	(0.0358)
Education
Elementary School	0.838 ***	0.360	0.566 ***	0.419 ***	0.275 *	0.283 *
	(0.0951)	(0.305)	(0.116)	(0.124)	(0.120)	(0.119)
Middle School	0.914 ***	0.563	0.628 ***	0.285 **	0.210 *	0.173
	(0.0746)	(0.293)	(0.104)	(0.106)	(0.102)	(0.0974)
High School	0.907 ***	0.528	0.586 ***	0.310 ***	0.207 ***	0.215 ***
	(0.0398)	(0.290)	(0.0626)	(0.0665)	(0.0559)	(0.0556)
A diploma after high school	0.848 ***	0.490	0.487 ***	0.194 *	0.181 **	0.186 **
	(0.0616)	(0.293)	(0.0811)	(0.0754)	(0.0661)	(0.0658)
Bachelor’s	0.935 ***	0.530	0.565 ***	0.254 ***	0.183 ***	0.182 ***
	(0.0259)	(0.289)	(0.0533)	(0.0568)	(0.0460)	(0.0457)
Diploma after a bachelor’s degree	0.911 ***	0.612 *	0.496 ***	0.357 **	0.164	0.168
	(0.0708)	(0.288)	(0.146)	(0.138)	(0.111)	(0.112)
Masters	0.894 ***	0.542	0.572 ***	0.190 **	0.131 *	0.143 *
	(0.0381)	(0.290)	(0.0737)	(0.0697)	(0.0597)	(0.0596)
Ph.D.	0.888 ***	0.575 *	0.697 ***	0.170	0.190	0.197
	(0.0758)	(0.289)	(0.101)	(0.128)	(0.122)	(0.121)
Income
US $2740-less than US $5479	−0.0378	0.0500	−0.0398	−0.0222	−0.0239	−0.0241
	(0.0358)	(0.0417)	(0.0635)	(0.0567)	(0.0513)	(0.0512)
US $5479-less than US $8200	0.00504	0.0827	0.0721	0.106	0.0569	0.0561
	(0.0342)	(0.0427)	(0.0689)	(0.0656)	(0.0592)	(0.0593)
US $8200-less than US $11,000	−0.00222	0.0641	0.0495	0.178 *	0.124	0.0980
	(0.0377)	(0.0472)	(0.0774)	(0.0744)	(0.0693)	(0.0682)
US $11,000 or more	−0.0272	0.0728	0.151 *	0.304 ***	0.275 ***	0.266 ***
	(0.0366)	(0.0415)	(0.0636)	(0.0627)	(0.0596)	(0.0596)
Constant	−0.153 *	0.292	−0.0159	0.259	0.199	0.171
	(0.0761)	(0.299)	(0.132)	(0.137)	(0.124)	(0.123)
Observations	573	645	644	645	645	644

Standard errors in parentheses (* p < 0.05 ** p < 0.01 *** p < 0.001).

, environmental consciousness, religiosity, and education are significantly positively related to the WTP for an eco-friendly product when respondents were asked, “if eco-friendly products such as cement, plastic, asphalt, etc., that are made from recycled carbon materials and CO₂ emissions were available to you, would you buy it”. Regarding the price premium on eco-friendly products that respondents are willing to bear, our findings show that respondents motivated by religious obligation have a significantly greater WTP for eco-friendly products with a 10–30% price premium. These findings add to the literature of [59,60] and others on the significance of religion in influencing positive environmental behavior. Further, educational level is positively associated with WTP, even at a higher premium for eco-friendly products, as it is significant for all the different premium price thresholds. It is also observed that those who earn a high income (i.e., US $132,000 per annum) have a greater WTP for eco-friendly products with a premium price of 10–75%. Appendix A and Appendix B show that WTP decreases as price premiums increase for environmental consciousness but remains relatively similar for all percentage increases in the level of education. This further confirms the economic contingency hypothesis espoused by Buttel (1975) [33] and empirically verified over the years by many studies, including [37,40,46,75]. Appendix C provides details of the spread of respondents across the scales.

Discussions

This study provides valuable insights into the determinants of household environmental awareness and WTP for eco-friendly products in Qatar. One of the key findings is that household income is positively associated with both environmental awareness and WTP for products offered at a premium price. Specifically, we observe that respondents earning higher incomes—particularly those in the upper bracket (approximately US $132,000 per annum)—demonstrate a greater WTP a premium of 10–75% for environmentally friendly products. This suggests that financial capacity plays a significant role in shaping both awareness and pro-environmental consumer behavior in the Qatari context.

Given Qatar’s status as one of the world’s wealthiest nations by GDP per capita, this finding must be interpreted within the context of its unique economic structure. The country’s oil-rich economy, high public-sector employment, and subsidized utilities have historically created conditions where the environmental consequences of consumption are often externalized, and price signals for conservation are relatively weak [71]. In such a context, higher income may reduce price sensitivity, thereby making financial considerations a less significant barrier to adopting green technologies or sustainable products. Regional literature underscores the duality of hydrocarbon economies in environmental governance: while low energy prices hinder conservation incentives [76], state-led green investments (e.g., Lusail smart city) reframe sustainability as a strategic priority [71]. However, it also raises questions about whether higher WTP in affluent groups reflects genuine environmental concern or simply economic convenience.

Moreover, while income appears to be a key determinant, it is important to acknowledge that the association between income and environmental behavior may be mediated by other factors such as environmental values, access to information, and policy awareness. In this study, the income categories used were aligned with national income distributions based on available data from Qatar’s Planning and Statistics Authority. Nevertheless, we recognize that further refinement—particularly through the use of purchasing power-adjusted thresholds or more granular income bands—could yield deeper insights.

Finally, while affluent households show a greater WTP, this may not necessarily translate into widespread behavioral change unless supported by systemic policy interventions and cultural shifts. Given the relatively high income baseline in Qatar, future research may need to explore the non-monetary motivators—such as religious values; social norms; and perceived personal or national responsibility—that drive sustainable behavior beyond income.

These findings underscore the importance of embedding environmental awareness campaigns and green product promotion within the broader economic and cultural realities of society. In Qatar’s case, interventions must consider both the privileges and challenges that come with economic affluence and resource dependency.

6. Conclusions and Policy Recommendations

Our paper investigates the determinants of individuals’ WTP for carbon emission reductions through a representative sample from Qatar. We find that environmental consciousness, religiosity, and education positively relate to WTP for an eco-friendly product. Also, those who earn high incomes have a greater WTP for eco-friendly products with premium prices of 10–75% higher. Also, respondents motivated by religious obligation have a significantly greater WTP for eco-friendly products with a 10–30% price premium. Further, our findings show a significant positive relationship between environmental consciousness, environmental awareness, and education, and between environmental awareness and perceived social norms about others’ environmental awareness. We also find suggestive evidence that household income is positively associated with environmental awareness. Our main conclusion from these findings is that whilst environmental consciousness, environmental awareness, education, and income are positively related to environmental concern, religiosity, education, and income influence the decision to pay for a product with carbon emission reduction potential. There are a few implications in this regard; first, the study’s finding of a strong positive correlation between environmental consciousness and WTP for eco-friendly products suggests that raising environmental awareness in African communities could significantly increase demand for green products. Targeted public awareness campaigns highlighting renewable energy’s environmental and health benefits and green technologies could stimulate this demand. Second, the significant influence of religiosity on WTP for eco-friendly products indicates the importance of framing incentives around shared cultural and religious values. In North African countries, religious leaders hold significant sway; engaging them in promoting renewable energy and green products could be a powerful strategy. Messages emphasizing environmental stewardship as a moral imperative could resonate strongly. Third, we note that higher-income individuals demonstrated greater WTP. This suggests that incentive programs should consider income levels to tailor their approach. Subsidies and financing mechanisms targeted at lower-income households might be necessary to ensure equitable access to renewable energy and green products. Combining financial incentives with educational programs could further empower environmentally conscious purchasing. Based on the research findings highlighting the significant factors influencing environmental consciousness and the WTP for carbon emission reduction products, several policy recommendations can be made to promote sustainable practices and carbon emission reductions.

Firstly, environmental awareness campaigns in Qatar should consider the strong influence of both inter-group (across social strata) and intra-group (within households or communities) social norms. Given the observed correlation between income and WTP for eco-friendly products, public messaging should use culturally resonant narratives to reposition sustainability as a mainstream and socially desirable norm—especially among middle- and high-income Qataris.

Secondly, with a Muslim population of over 85%, Qatar is well-positioned to engage Islamic principles in environmental discourse. Religious leaders should be supported to:

• Incorporate environmental stewardship into khutbahs (sermons) and mosque teachings.
• Serve as role models by adopting green practices (e.g., solar lighting in mosques, water-saving ablution systems).
• Collaborate with ministries and NGOs to develop a localized “green theology” that links Islamic teachings with modern environmental ethics.
• Advocate for community-level eco-initiatives and national environmental policy reforms, such as conservation programs and energy efficiency regulations.

Thirdly, integrate environmental education into Qatar’s national curriculum at all levels, from primary to tertiary institutions. Educational campaigns should also include community-based workshops in both Arabic and English, targeting varied income groups with practical knowledge on reducing emissions, recycling, and sustainable consumption.

Fourthly, the research shows higher-income households (e.g., those earning over US $132,000 per annum) exhibit greater WTP for a premium (10–75%) for environmentally friendly products. The government should:

• Advocate for mandating green procurement policies across ministries, state-owned enterprises, and municipalities.
• Adopting sustainability labeling, stricter emissions standards, and resource-efficient technologies in public infrastructure projects.
• Funding R&D initiatives that promote green innovation aligned with Qatar National Vision 203

One notable limitation of this study is the underrepresentation of female respondents, who comprise only 7.8% of the sample. This gender imbalance stems from the data provided by KAHRAMAA, which only included the names and contact information of registered utility account holders. In the Qatari context, these accounts are predominantly registered under the names of male household heads due to prevailing cultural and administrative norms.

This limitation may affect the generalizability of the findings, particularly in light of evidence suggesting that women often play a critical role in shaping household environmental behaviors and decisions [77]. As such, the perspectives captured in this study may not fully reflect the range of household decision-making dynamics, particularly with regard to environmental awareness and WTP for sustainable technologies.

Also, while we included religiosity as a variable in our analysis, we acknowledge that our treatment of Islamic environmental ethics was limited and not fully integrated into the theoretical framework.

Future research should consider employing more inclusive sampling methods, such as household-level surveys or purposive gender-balanced recruitment, to ensure that both male and female perspectives are adequately represented. Also, future studies may explore incorporating Islamic environmental principles explicitly within the theoretical framework and survey instrument design.