Demand-side solutions to climate change mitigation consistent with high levels of well-being

Abstract Climate mitigation solutions are often evaluated in terms of their costs and potentials. This accounting, however, shortcuts a comprehensive evaluation of how climate solutions affect human well-being, which, at best, may only be crudely related to cost considerations. Here, we systematically list key sectoral mitigation options on the demand side, and categorize them into avoid, shift and improve categories. We show that these options, bridging socio-behavioral, infrastructural and technological domains, can reduce counterfactual sectoral emissions by 50-80% in end use sectors. Based on expert judgement and literature survey, we then evaluate 324 combinations of wellbeing outcomes and demand side options. We find that these are largely beneficial in improving wellbeing across all measures combined (76% have positive, 22% neutral, and 2.4% have negative effects), even though confidence level is low in the social dimensions of wellbeing. Implementing demand-side solution requires i) an understanding of malleable not fixed preferences, ii) consistently measuring and evaluating constituents of wellbeing, and iii) addressing concerns of incumbents in supply-side industries. Our results shift the emphasis in the climate mitigation solution space from supply-side technologies to demand-side service provision.